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) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

43–505 2008

CHILDREN WHO AGE 

OUT OF THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INCOME 

SECURITY AND FAMILY SUPPORT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JULY 12, 2007 

Serial No. 110–53 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means 

( 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
ii 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York, Chairman 

FORTNEY PETE STARK, California 

SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan 

JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington 

JOHN LEWIS, Georgia 

RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts 

MICHAEL R. MCNULTY, New York 

JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee 

XAVIER BECERRA, California 

LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas 

EARL POMEROY, North Dakota 

STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, Ohio 

MIKE THOMPSON, California 

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut 

RAHM EMANUEL, Illinois 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

RON KIND, Wisconsin 

BILL PASCRELL JR., New Jersey 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland 

KENDRICK MEEK, Florida 

ALLYSON Y. SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama 

JIM MCCRERY, Louisiana 

WALLY HERGER, California 

DAVE CAMP, Michigan 

JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota 

SAM JOHNSON, Texas 

PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania 

JERRY WELLER, Illinois 

KENNY C. HULSHOF, Missouri 

RON LEWIS, Kentucky 

KEVIN BRADY, Texas 

THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York 

PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin 

ERIC CANTOR, Virginia 

JOHN LINDER, Georgia 

DEVIN NUNES, California 

PAT TIBERI, Ohio 

JON PORTER, Nevada 

JANICE MAYS, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

BRETT LOPER, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INCOME SECURITY AND FAMILY SUPPORT 

JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington, Chairman 

FORTNEY PETE STARK, California 

ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama 

JOHN LEWIS, Georgia 

MICHAEL R. MCNULTY, New York 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland 

KENDRICK MEEK, Florida 

JERRY WELLER, Illinois 

WALLY HERGER, California 

DAVE CAMP, Michigan 

JON PORTER, Nevada 

PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania 

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public hearing records 

of the Committee on Ways and Means are also published in electronic form. The printed 

hearing record remains the official version. Because electronic submissions are used to 

prepare both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of converting 

between various electronic formats may introduce unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the current publication process and should diminish as the process 

is further refined. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
iii 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Advisory of July 5, 2007, announcing the hearing ................................................ 2 

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Dennis Cardoza, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California .......................................................................................................... 7 

Tyler Bacon, Florida ................................................................................................ 16 

Anthony Reeves, Georgia ........................................................................................ 20 

Nicole Dobbins, Oregon ........................................................................................... 25 

Jamaal Nutall, Illinois ............................................................................................ 29 

Cornelia Ashby, Director, Education, Workforce and Income Security, U.S. 

Government Accountability Office ...................................................................... 39 

Mark Courtney, Ph. D., Ballmer Chair in Child Well-Being, School of Social 

Work, University of Washington ......................................................................... 73 

Gary Stangler, Executive Director, Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative . 76 

Sam Cobbs, Executive Director, First Place Fund for Youth, Oakland, California ..................................................................................................................... 83 

Jane Soltis, Program Officer, Eckerd Family Foundation ................................... 87 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Child Welfare League of America, statement ........................................................ 102 

Everychild Foundation, statement ......................................................................... 106 

Jennifer Cole, letter ................................................................................................. 111 

Job Corps Partnering with the Foster Care System, statement .......................... 108 

Kevin Drollinger, statement ................................................................................... 109 

North American Council on Adoptable Children, statement ............................... 114 

Patricia K. Jennings, statement ............................................................................. 120 

Seattle University’s Fostering Scholars Program, statement .............................. 122 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
(1) 

CHILDREN WHO AGE 

OUT OF THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM 

THURSDAY, JULY 12, 2007 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INCOME SECURITY AND FAMILY SUPPORT, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., B–318, 

Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jim McDermott [Chairman of 

the Subcommittee] presiding. 

[The advisory announcing the hearing follows:] 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
2 

ADVISORY 

FROM THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

INCOME SECURITY AND FAMILY SUPPORT 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (202) 225–1721 

July 05, 2007 

ISFS–9 

McDermott Announces Hearing on 

Children Who ‘‘Age Out’’ of the Foster Care 

System 

Congressman Jim McDermott (D–WA), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Income 

Security and Family Support of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced that the Subcommittee will hold a hearing on children emancipating from 

the foster care system. The hearing will take place on Thursday, July 12, 

2007, at 10:00 a.m. in room B–318 Rayburn House Office Building. 

In view of the limited time available to hear witnesses, oral testimony at this 

hearing will be from invited witnesses only, including a number of former foster 

children. However, any individual or organization not scheduled for an oral appearance may submit a written statement for consideration by the Committee and for 

inclusion in the printed record of the hearing. 

BACKGROUND: 

Eligibility for federal foster care assistance generally ends at age 18, although 

some States extend this limit with their own funds. The number of children who 

emancipate from (or ‘‘age-out’’ of) the foster care system upon reaching this age has 

increased from 19,000 in 2001 to over 24,000 in 2005 (the most recent available 

data). This increase in the number of youth discharged from foster care has occurred 

at the same time that the overall number of children in the system has decreased, 

from 544,614 in FY2001 to 513,131 in FY2005. 

Studies indicate that youth who have ‘‘aged out’’ of foster care fare poorly relative 

to their counterparts in the general population on outcome measures related to employment, education, homelessness, mental health, medical insurance coverage, involvement with the criminal justice system, early pregnancy, and poverty. For example, research suggests that one in seven youth suffer from homelessness after 

they are discharged from foster care and over half lack health coverage. 

Children who are at risk of aging out of foster care, as well as those recently discharged upon reaching the age of 18, may receive services under the Chafee Foster 

Care Independence Program, including counseling, life-skills training, educational 

assistance, mentoring, job placement services, and a limited amount of housing assistance. While funding for this program was increased in 1999, its impact on outcomes for former foster children is still uncertain because an assessment and data 

collection system for the program has yet to be established in final form by the Department of Health and Human Services. 

In announcing the hearing, Chairman McDermott stated, ‘‘When most children 

reach the age of 18, their parents continue to support and help them during their transition into adulthood. As the de-facto parents of foster children, we should do no less. We need to evaluate whether we are meeting 

that obligation, or whether we are simply showing these kids the door 

without sufficient support, resources and skills to succeed. ’’ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
3 

FOCUS OF THE HEARING: 

The hearing will focus on services and outcomes for children who ‘‘age out’’ of the 

foster care system. 

DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: 

Please Note: Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit for the hearing record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page of the Committee 

website and complete the informational forms. From the Committee homepage, 

http://waysandmeans.house.gov, select ‘‘110th Congress’’ from the menu entitled, 

‘‘Hearing Archives’’ (http://waysandmeans.house.gov/Hearings.asp?congress=18). Select the hearing for which you would like to submit, and click on the link entitled, 

‘‘Click here to provide a submission for the record.’’ Once you have followed the online instructions, completing all informational forms and clicking ‘‘submit’’ on the 

final page, an email will be sent to the address which you supply confirming your 

interest in providing a submission for the record. You MUST REPLY to the email 

and ATTACH your submission as a Word or WordPerfect document, in compliance 

with the formatting requirements listed below, by close of business August 2, 2007. 

Finally, please note that due to the change in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol 

Police will refuse sealed-package deliveries to all House Office Buildings. For questions, or if you encounter technical problems, please call (202) 225–1721. 

FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS: 

The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing record. As always, submissions will be included in the record according to the discretion of the Committee. 

The Committee will not alter the content of your submission, but we reserve the right to format 

it according to our guidelines. Any submission provided to the Committee by a witness, any supplementary materials submitted for the printed record, and any written comments in response 

to a request for written comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any submission 

or supplementary item not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed, but will be 

maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the Committee. 

1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be provided in Word or WordPerfect 

format and MUST NOT exceed a total of 10 pages, including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised that the Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official 

hearing record. 

2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not be accepted for printing. 

Instead, exhibit material should be referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material 

not meeting these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use 

by the Committee. 

3. All submissions must include a list of all clients, persons, and/or organizations on whose 

behalf the witness appears. A supplemental sheet must accompany each submission listing the 

name, company, address, telephone and fax numbers of each witness. 

Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on the World 

Wide Web at http://waysandmeans.house.gov. 

The Committee seeks to make its facilities accessible to persons with disabilities. 

If you are in need of special accommodations, please call 202–225–1721 or 202–226– 

3411 TTD/TTY in advance of the event (four business days notice is requested). 

Questions with regard to special accommodation needs in general (including availability of Committee materials in alternative formats) may be directed to the Committee as noted above. 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. The meeting will come to order. 

Today we are going to have a hearing on children who age out 

of foster care, and at any given time, there are over half a million 

children in the foster care system. 

Ultimately, they will either return home or find an adoptive family, but some of these kids will stay in the system until they reach 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
4 

18, at which point they are turned out into the world with little 

support, few skills, and sometimes nowhere to live. 

It is like getting an eviction notice from the Government for 

doing nothing other than turning 18. 

I am going to ask everyone here today to remember your life 

when you were 18. Had you been raised in a safe and stable family 

up to that point? Were you receiving any kind of support and guidance from your family? Did they help you with a place to live and 

a way to pay for your education? 

Imagine if the answer to all those questions was a resounding no. 

How might that have changed the course of your own life? 

As the de facto parents of foster kids, all of us have an obligation 

to give these young people the best possible chance to succeed. 

To achieve this goal, we need to focus on three big targets. The 

first is ensuring stable, supportive and loving environments for 

children while they are in foster care. It goes without saying that 

a nurtured child is much more likely to mature into a productive 

adult. 

The second priority is to connect these children to a family. In 

a perfect world, that means adoption. A child is never too old to 

benefit from an adoptive family, but it also can mean finding relatives who may have lost touch with the child but who are willing 

to provide guidance and support during the child’s transition to 

adulthood. 

Of course, there also are other caring adults—mentors, case 

workers, teachers—who could make a huge difference in the life of 

a young person learning to find their way in the world. 

Finally, we need a support system for young people after they 

turn 18. While we all thought we were invincible when we were 18, 

we learned over time just how vulnerable we and every other 18 

year old really is. Let’s not forget that when we move ahead. 

The Chafee Foster Care Independence Program was partly designed to fulfill such a need, although it also focuses on young children who are at risk of aging out of foster care. 

The program provides counseling, life skills training, educational 

assistance, mentoring, job placement services, and a limited 

amount of housing assistance. 

Funding for this program was increased and made more flexible 

in 1999 but its impact on outcomes for former children is still 

somewhat uncertain in my view. 

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is at least 

partly to blame for our limited understanding in this area because 

the agency has yet to implement an assessment and data collection 

system for the Chafee program, nearly 8 years after being mandated by Congress to do so. 

As we consider this last issue of providing adequate support for 

foster youth when they turn 18, we ultimately have to ask the 

question of whether there is an appropriate age for Federal foster 

care to end. It is certainly not when most parents end support for 

their kids. You never get rid of them, I can tell you, even when 

they are 40 years old. 

In fact, one study found the average American youth receives 

about $38,000 from their parents after they reach the age of 18 for 

tuition and financial assistance. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
5 

We also need to consider that research is beginning to show that 

youth who stay in care longer have better outcomes than those who 

exit from foster care at age 18. Some States have actually taken 

it upon themselves to extend foster care beyond 18. 

Roughly 24,000 young people are pushed out of the foster care 

system every year when they reach their 18th birthday, and I hope 

today’s hearing begins a longer conversation about how we can better support these kids in foster care. They really are our children. 

Before yielding to the Subcommittee Ranking Member, Mr. 

Weller, I want to yield the remaining portion of my time to Mr. 

Stark for a few comments. Mr. Stark? 

Mr. STARK. Why do I not withhold, Mr. Chairman, until we 

have heard from our colleague, Mr. Cardoza, and Mr. Weller, and 

then I will chime in later. Thanks. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I will turn the mike over to Mr. 

Weller, the Ranking Member. 

Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. 

Today’s hearing explores the challenges faced by children who 

age out of the foster care system at age 18 and the effectiveness 

of assistance available to help them. 

In 2005, over 24,000 youth aged out of the nation’s foster care 

system. Among many serious challenges, these young people have 

lower high school graduation rates, higher rates of homelessness, 

and a higher rate of being incarcerated than other youth their age. 

The simple fact is that too many youth who age out of foster care 

stumble and fall on their way to adulthood. Some never recover. 

Others, including the young people we will hear from today, find 

their way through extraordinary personal effort, involvement of 

dedicated relatives, as well as other adults, a little luck, or all of 

the above. 

The odds against their success is not what any of us would want 

for our own children. It is equally unacceptable for kids in foster 

care whose care is our responsibility. 

Under current law, key support to help these young people make 

the transition to adulthood comes from the Chafee Foster Care 

Independence Program, which funds what are called ‘‘independent 

living services.’’ 

Today, the Federal Government provides States $140 million per 

year, which is twice what was provided a decade ago. Another $44 

million per year has more recently been added just for education 

and training vouchers for college and other postsecondary training 

expenses. 

We know funding has been going up to help youth aging out of 

foster care. What we do not know is whether this increased spending has had a positive effect. 

As the Government’s Accountability Office testimony says, little 

information is available to assess program outcomes. That is unacceptable. 

I urge the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to 

finalize whatever regulations or instructions are needed to help 

States report and analyze data about youth who access those services so that we know what is working and what is not. 

Despite these gaps in our knowledge, I am encouraged to learn 

of several promising demonstrations, especially involving the eduVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
6 

cation of youth in foster care. School stability and high school completion are strongly associated with better outcomes for young people making the transition to adulthood. We should do whatever it 

takes to ensure more foster youth complete at least high school. 

We are fortunate to have a panel of young people today who have 

aged out of foster care. One of them, Jamaal Nutall of Joliet, lives 

in the congressional district I represent, and is spending the Summer working in my office here in Washington as an intern. 

Jamaal and his peers will discuss their own experiences making 

the transition to adulthood, how current programs have helped and 

how they might do more. 

We will also hear from an array of other experts on these issues 

starting with my friend and colleague, Representative Cardoza of 

California. 

I look forward to all our witnesses’ testimony. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this hearing. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Stark? 

Mr. STARK. Let me add before our friend, Mr. Cardoza, enlightens us, that there is a cost to ignoring these young people. I hate 

to put this in dollar terms. If we think about crime, for instance, 

as a young person’s game, Dr. McDermott and I are probably not 

agile enough to be second story people any more. We could probably hardly walk up the stairs much less climb through the window. 

For those of you who worry about being mugged, you are not 

going to be mugged by people our age. This is a young person’s 

game, and we know that if a person is convicted of a felony before 

they are 20, the odds are that between 20 and 50, they will spend 

half of that time in some kind of system. In California, that costs $60,000 a year, if you want to put it in 

dollars. 

Whatever we can invest to prevent that transition into the justice system, to keep them in the standards of society, I think it is 

worthwhile. 

I wanted to just add to Mr. Cardoza’s suggestion one problem 

that we have. About 30,000 foster children are eligible for Social 

Security benefits either supplemental Security income or survivor’s 

benefits. 

Many States are sending private contractors out to mine the field 

of foster children and get their Social Security payments, and the 

States are taking that money and putting it into their general 

fund. 

For other children, that money is usually protected by a guardian 

appointed by the State or whomever is in charge of that child. If 

the money is because the child has a disability, that money should 

be used for extra medical care and treatment. 

If the child has that extra Social Security payment because a 

parent or parents have died, that money should be set aside for the 

child. That child has a worse or extra problem coming out of foster 

care, and that money could be set aside as it is for other children 

to be used when they mature. It could be used for college, for education, for transportation, buy a car to get to work. 

It is a small amount and really does not belong to the States. It 

belongs to those children. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
7 

My amendment would suggest that the States be required to find 

out where children are entitled and become the trustee for that 

child and see that the money is either used for the child’s particular needs or is there and saved for the time when they mature 

out of the system. 

I hope to talk with my colleagues about that legislation later. I 

want to thank Dennis for being here today. 

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you. Mr. Cardoza, welcome to 

the Committee. We are glad to have you here because you not only 

are a distinguished Member but somebody who has actually done 

the heavy lifting of having foster kids. We welcome your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DENNIS CARDOZA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Your whole testimony will go into the 

record, so if you want to try to stay within 5 minutes, we would 

appreciate it. 

Mr. CARDOZA. I will do my very best. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to just start today by thanking 

you very much for this hearing on behalf of all these young people 

and the people that have crowded this room today. This is a very 

important issue. 

I could not agree more with Mr. Weller and Mr. Stark that this 

is a compelling issue that needs attention. Your leadership, Mr. 

Chairman, on this has been fantastic and I appreciate your allowing me to testify today. 

As you say, I have a written statement that will also be submitted to the record. 

I have discussed this with many of you. I have a very personal 

interest in this issue. Seven years ago, my wife and I adopted foster children. They are not foster children any more. They are our 

children. 

Since then, I have advocated on behalf of adoption and foster 

children with the California legislature and here in Congress. 

Too many children in foster care sit waiting for permanent families. There are 118,000 children in foster care waiting to be adopted 

and numerous barriers keep them in limbo. Children often bounce 

from one system to another, from child welfare to juvenile justice, 

as Mr. Stark said, to mental health as their needs intensify. 

Moreover, each year 20,000 children age out of foster care without being adopted or reunified with parents. Often these youth 

have no permanent connection to a caring adult. 

When children turn 18, society considers them adults. For children lucky enough to have loving and caring parents, they have the 

luxury, as you said, Mr. Chairman, to turn to their parents in 

times of financial or emotional distress or in need of aid. 

Unfortunately, foster children who have aged out of the system 

do not have anyone to turn to. These children often have no one 

they can rely on as they make the difficult transition to adulthood. 

Foster care studies have shown that in the 4 years after leaving 

foster care, nationwide, 25 percent of aged out youth have been 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
8 

homeless at least a partial period of that time. Forty-2 percent 

have become parents themselves. Fewer than 20 percent are able 

to support themselves, and only 46 percent have graduated from 

high school. 

Since they lack the support systems most young adults take for 

granted, aged out foster care teens are at risk for substance abuse, 

domestic violence, poverty, and falling into the trap that Mr. Stark 

so well illuminated at the beginning of his State. 

In the face of these daunting statistics and challenges, the problems can seem overwhelming. However, there are concrete steps 

that we can take to improve the lives of these at risk youth. 

One of the bills that I have introduced this session is H.R. 1376, 

a bill which would extend Medicaid coverage for foster children 

who have aged out of the system, by encouraging State health care 

coverage through age 21. 

The Medicaid Foster Care Coverage Act of 2007 would provide 

health care coverage for emancipated foster children, many of 

whom face these daunting physical and emotional problems as they 

transition to adult life. 

I am particularly concerned about youth on mood stabilizing 

medications. Given the fact that a number of these young people 

are on these medications to cope with their challenges, and frankly, 

the post-traumatic stress of being in the system, the very day they 

turn 18 and society asks them to assume the obligations of adulthood, the rug is pulled out from under them by having their access 

to these vital medications taken away. 

This is simply unfair and frankly counterproductive, and as Mr. 

Stark said, it is not a good cost/benefit analysis if we take a close 

look at it. 

We need to rectify this situation and that is exactly what my bill 

will do. 

In addition, I am currently working on legislation to ensure that 

every child has a court appointed special advocate, Children and 

Adolescent Services Advocate (CASA). CASAs are trained community volunteers to speak for the best interest of abused and neglected children in court. All too often, the needs of children can 

get lost in judicial proceedings. CASA volunteers are there to ensure that the best interest of the child are safeguarded in these 

court proceedings. 

I would just like to mention to the Committee that my children 

were brought to us by an observing CASA volunteer, who was my 

children’s kindergarten teacher. They saw that my kids were under 

distress and were being abused a second time in the foster care 

system. She was able to remedy that because of her training and 

her vigilance. 

Moreover, other Members have introduced thoughtful pieces of 

legislation that address other aspects of the problems facing these 

disconnected youth: homelessness, helping runaways, lack of educational opportunities, and a myriad of challenges encountered by 

foster youth. 

However, the problem will not be solved by legislation alone. 

There needs to be a broader societal shift and understanding that 

we can simply not neglect these children any longer. Until we start 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
9 

to think of these children as Mr. Stark said, as our children, 

progress will be stymied. 

Unless we embrace these children as our own and start to think 

of their problems as our problems, we will be tackling this problem 

with one arm tied behind our back. 

I think we first and foremost must do everything possible to encourage adoption. There is simply no substitute for ensuring that 

these children are placed in stable and loving homes and we should 

support policies that enhance our ability to find qualified people to 

become adoptive parents and moreover, we should find ways to financially help these parents who are willing to assume this responsibility. 

I am going to leave the rest of my testimony for the record. I 

thank you for the opportunity. I stand ready to answer any of your 

questions about the trials and tribulations and the joy of adopting 

children. 

[The prepared statement of the Hon. Dennis Cardoza follows:] 

Prepared Statement of The Honorable Dennis Cardoza, a Representative in 

Congress from the State of California 

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to testify at this important hearing on 

the problems facing foster kids as they age out of the system. I have a written statement that I have also submitted for the record. 

I have a very personal interest in this issue. Seven years ago, my wife and I 

adopted two foster children. Since then, I have advocated on behalf of adoption and 

foster children in the California Assembly and in Congress. 

Too many children in foster care sit waiting for permanent families. There are 

about 118,000 children in foster care waiting to be adopted and numerous barriers 

keep them in limbo. Children often bounce from one system to another—from child 

welfare, to juvenile justice, to mental health—as their needs intensify. 

Moreover, each year about 20,000 children age out of foster care, without being 

adopted or reunified with their parents. Often these youths have no permanent connection to a caring adult. 

When children turn 18, society considers them adults. For children lucky enough 

to have loving and caring parents, they have the luxury of turning to their parents 

for financial and emotional support during this time. Unfortunately, foster children 

who have aged out of the system do not have this luxury. These children often have 

no one they can rely on as they make this difficult transition to adulthood. 

Foster care studies have shown that in just four years after leaving foster care, 

nationwide 25 percent of aged-out youth have been homeless, 42 percent have become parents themselves, fewer than 20 percent are able to support themselves, and 

only 46 percent have graduated from high school. Because they lack the support systems most young adults take for granted, aged-out foster care teens are at high risk 

for substance abuse, domestic violence and poverty. 

In the face of these daunting statistics and challenges, the problem can seem overwhelming. However, there are concrete steps we can take to help improve the lives 

of these at-risk youth. 

One of the first bills I introduced this session of Congress is H.R. 1376, a bill 

which would extend Medicaid coverage for foster children who have aged out of the 

system by encouraging state health coverage through the age of 21. The ‘‘Medicaid 

Foster Care Coverage Act of 2007’’ would provide health coverage for emancipated 

foster children—many of whom face daunting physical and emotional problems—as 

they transition to adult life. 

I am particularly concerned about the youth on mood stabilizing medications. 

Given the fact that a number of these young people are on these medications to cope 

with their challenges, the very day they turn 18 and society asks them to assume 

the obligations of adulthood the rug is pulled out from under them by having their 

access to these vital medications taken away. This is simply unfair and counterproductive. We need to rectify this situation and my bill will do that. 

Current law provides pathways that enable states to access federal funding to extend Medicaid coverage for youth who have aged out of foster care. Currently only 

18 states—including my home state of California—take advantage of this. My bill 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
10 

would mandate that every state offer coverage under Medicaid for foster children 

through the age of 21. 

Let’s give these children every opportunity to succeed. No child should be denied 

health care due to circumstances beyond their control; it is unfair and immoral. As 

you continue to debate the reauthorization of SCHIP, I urge you to carefully consider how my bill compliments these efforts and may be a salutary addition to a 

more comprehensive approach to children’s health care. 

In addition, I was proud to introduce and pass a resolution, H. Res. 263, recognizing May as National Foster Care month. By highlighting this fact and bringing 

more national awareness to this issue, it will hopefully make Congressional action 

to address these needs easier and self-evident 

Finally, I am currently working on legislation to ensure that every child has a 

Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA). CASA are trained community volunteers 

to speak for the best interests of abused and neglected children in court. All too 

often the needs of children can get lost in judicial proceedings and CASA volunteers 

are there to ensure that the best interests of the child are safeguarded in court proceedings. 

CASA has significantly grown and matured from its early roots in 1977. In the 

course of the last thirty years, CASA has grown to a network of more than 50,000 

volunteers that serve 225,000 abused and neglected children through 900+ local program offices nationwide. 

However, despite these impressive numbers, more needs to be done. We must do 

everything possible to ensure that EVERY child has a CASA volunteer. My bill, 

which I hope to introduce soon, will give incentives to states to guarantee that all 

children receive the special attention and care that only CASA volunteers can provide. 

Moreover, other Members have introduced thoughtful pieces of legislation that address other aspects of the problems facing these disconnected youth: homelessness, 

helping runaways, lack of educational opportunities, and the other myriad challenges encountered by foster youth. 

However, the problem will not be solved by legislation alone. There has to be a 

broader societal shift and understanding that we simply cannot neglect these children any longer. Until we start to think of these children as OUR children, progress 

will be stymied. Unless we embrace these children as our own and start to think 

of their problems as OUR problems, we will be tackling this problem with one arm 

tied behind our back. 

There are things we can do as policymakers and in our everyday lives to make 

the lives of these children just a little bit better. 

First and foremost, we must do everything possible to encourage adoption. There 

is simply no substitute for ensuring that these children are placed in stable and loving homes. We should support policies that enhance our ability to find qualified people to become adoptive parents and, moreover, we should find ways to financially 

help these parents who are willing to assume this responsibility. 

For the children we cannot place in permanent homes, we should do more to encourage people to be mentors. Mentoring relationships begun while foster care kids 

are in their mid-teens can be beneficial as the kids become more independent. 

There are many innovative programs that we can learn from. For instance, the 

City of Los Angeles in my home state of California has done some exciting work 

in this area and we can draw on their experience as we think about ways to encourage more people to be mentors. 

The challenge of helping foster youth is vast and daunting. However, if we can 

provide these children with the health care they desperately need; if we do everything in our power to place them in stable and loving homes or, in the alternative, 

help them find a mentor who they can look up to and learn from, we can make the 

lives of these children just a little bit better. 

There is no time to wait; these children need our help now. We must act now if 

we want to help ensure these kids a bright future and reverse some of these alarming and burgeoning social ills. 

I applaud this Committee for holding this series of hearings on the unique challenges facing our foster youth. As these hearings illuminate the plight of these kids, 

I sincerely hope we can build a consensus on a set of common-sense policies to help 

these children. Every child, no matter what station they may be born to, deserves 

a chance to be raised in a stable and loving home. Thanks again for holding this 

hearing and I look forward to working with the Committee on this issue. 

f 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
11 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. You skipped over part of your history 

in that it is not all roses. 

Mr. CARDOZA. It is not. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. To the extent you would be willing to 

talk about that, I think it would be useful for Members to hear 

what happens to somebody when they adopt kids. It is really about 

stories that make it so people understand what the issues are. 

Mr. CARDOZA. I would be very happy to tell our story. In fact, 

I have asked my children if it is okay with them to share their 

story. They understand that by telling their story, it may help 

other children, and they have asked me to do that. 

In fact, I shared with you earlier this year that they asked me 

to sponsor National Foster Care Month, and you graciously allowed 

me to take that bill to the floor, and thank you for that. 

The story of my children is this. They were living in a community in California. The children are of migrant farmworkers. The 

mother had mental health issues and correctional issues. She probably had suffered from some emotional issues that caused her to 

have these issues as I looked at the medical records that we got 

from the kids. 

They were placed in the care of a grandparent who had 12 children living in a one bedroom house. The grandmother was 80 years 

old. She could not take care of them, put them in foster care. They 

were removed from that home. 

They were in a second foster care family where they were being 

abused in the system. This kindergarten teacher who was a CASA 

volunteer recognized their stress and was able to get them to us. 

My wife and I had decided that we had one biologic child and we 

wanted to adopt some children. We had gone through the process 

of becoming adoptive parents. 

As we moved forward, we had a very difficult time. We are not 

people without understanding and means. We had the financial 

ability to go about the adoption process. My wife is a doctor, so she 

had the medical background and the knowledge necessary. Myself 

being a legislator, I knew how to work the bureaucratic process. 

Still with all that, there were significant hurdles to making the 

adoption happen. We had to fight hard. It took over a year to make 

it work. We finally got the custody and went through all the challenges. 

All those processes need to be examined and streamlined. Just 

getting the new birth certificates and the Social Security cards 

were significant challenges. 

To access the parental rights and all that were significant hurdles. If we were able to streamline that and give more guarantees 

to adoptive parents, I have a lot of my friends in the community 

who have asked me about adoption, and their biggest fear is going 

through this process, bonding with children, and then somehow 

having those children removed. 

If we can figure out a way to streamline these processes, that 

would be a tremendous advantage. 

As we move forward, I will tell you that there are challenges. 

Adoptive kids come with some baggage. All children have baggage. 

Parenting is the toughest thing that any of us will ever do, much 

tougher than being in Congress. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
12 

The reality is, and I know from personal experience, my wife and 

I talked about this just the other day, there are challenges with our 

children, but without their having gotten a permanent and stable 

home, there would be no chance for them with the issues they 

have. 

That is the one compelling message that I would like to leave 

with this Committee today, that we have to provide the support 

and we absolutely have to do everything we can to get them into 

permanent and stable families that can then help them for the rest 

of their lives. 

I will tell you one last thing, that is there has been no greater 

joy in my life than bringing these children into our lives. With all 

the challenges and all the hurdles that we have, from the minute 

I set eyes on them through the one way mirror in the Social Services Department in a county in California, they were our kids. 

Anyone who wonders whether or not they will bond with young 

people they bring into their home, they absolutely will. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you. Mr. Weller? 

Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Cardoza, 

thank you for your testimony but also thank you for your leadership on these issues. 

Recently, we had Michele Bachmann of Minnesota who has also 

been active on these issues before this Subcommittee. I know the 

two of you have worked together in a bipartisan way. For that, I 

salute you. 

You mention in your testimony, and I am going to ask you a couple of pretty practical questions here, you mentioned the legislation 

you propose, H.R. 1376, the Medicaid Foster Care Coverage Act of 

2007, which would require States to provide Medicaid coverage for 

children that age out of foster care until they reach the age of 21. 

Many States currently have the authority if they choose to provide this type of coverage. Does California currently provide this 

coverage? 

Mr. CARDOZA. Yes, I believe they do. 

Mr. WELLER. Do you know how many States currently provide 

the coverage? 

Mr. CARDOZA. Seventeen out of 33. 

Mr. WELLER. Unfortunately, I have not checked whether or not 

my home State of Illinois does, but maybe you know. 

Mr. CARDOZA. I do not. 

Mr. WELLER. From a practical standpoint, have you scored this 

legislation? 

Mr. CARDOZA. We have not. I would ask that the Committee assist us in receiving a score so we know exactly how much it would 

cost. I do not think it is that expensive, to be honest with you. 

While our rules do not allow it to be considered this way, the 

cost/benefit analysis of making sure these kids have every opportunity to stay out of the system, as Mr. Stark indicated, while our 

scoring mechanism does not allow us to look at that, I think it certainly is important for us to think about the bottom line cost to 

Government. 

Mr. WELLER. Since we have these PAY–GO rules that our Committee has to operate under, have you proposed your—— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
13 

Mr. CARDOZA. I have not. I will tell you this is one that is God 

sent, and we need to do everything we can to try and figure out 

how to pay for this. I was an advocate of PAY–GO, as I am sure 

you probably were as well. We need to find this offset. 

The reality is this is going to be budget dust in the greater 

scheme of things, but it is important to follow our rules and to 

honor PAY–GO. 

Mr. WELLER. I look forward to seeing your proposed God sent. 

Again, thank you for your leadership on these issues. What I really 

appreciate is that you work in a bipartisan way on so many issues. 

I want to thank you for coming this morning. 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Stark? 

Mr. STARK. Dennis, thank you. Thank you for sharing your experiences and those of your children with us. 

I think it is through efforts like yours that we can be encouraged 

to find, as you say, the budget dust, necessary for us to fulfill the 

PAY–GO requirements. 

I might just say that all of this type of legislation has perhaps 

the broadest bipartisan participation, if I can be allowed a little bit 

of political trivia. 

It is interesting to note that Tom Delay’s very last legislative act 

was the Delay/Stark bill which allowed foster children more convenience in traveling across State lines. It is probably a very little 

known fact that Tom and his wife were foster parents and designed 

in Texas an idea of foster parents living in cul-de-sacs so they could 

share babysitting. 

Tom Delay was one of the outstanding geometry tutors for foster 

children in his galaxy. As I say, this has a history of working together to achieve a wonderful result. I hope this Committee can 

continue that. I certainly will work with my colleagues to find 

whatever is necessary to fund the programs that we think will help 

improve the lives of these children. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Dennis, for your work. 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Herger? 

Mr. HERGER. I really do not have anything to add, but I do 

want to add in thanking you, Mr. Cardoza, for your work in this 

area. This is incredibly important to our country. There is no greater asset that we have as a nation than our young people. 

To see the tragedy that is taking place every day in the lives of 

so many tens of thousands of these young people who through no 

fault of their own are left out there. It is tough enough for the children that we raise that have two parents every day, as you mentioned. 

As a father of nine, what you are saying is so true. There is no 

tougher challenge we have than raising children, nor as you said, 

is there any greater joy that continues to grow than having children. 

Thank you for what you are doing. This is a bipartisan effort. It 

is something that behooves each and every one of us when we are 

setting the priorities in these tough budgetary times to find the 

means and make sure we can work this out. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
14 

Again, thank you for your leadership. I commend you and I commend all those on this Committee who have also been very involved in this area. Thank you. 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you, Mr. Herger. If I could just say in response that we have talked several times about this when you were 

Chair of the Committee and all. I appreciate working with you. 

I wanted to make one point that I forgot in my previous testimony. Mr. McDermott, with your prior background, you probably 

are much more experienced to talk about this than me. 

I am well aware even based on my own kids’ experience in foster 

care of the post-traumatic stress they go through and the problems 

of abandonment issues they will carry through the rest of their 

lives. 

I am told by psychological professionals that the post-traumatic 

stress is greater often times than troops in the field of combat. If 

you think about it in those kinds of terms, it speaks to how important it is. 

We have to help these young people through this process, much 

the same way that we are responsible for helping our own soldiers 

get through their experience. 

Mr. HERGER. That point is so well made. I have a daughter and 

son-in-law who have adopted, too. These are the most beautiful 

children, as are yours, that you could ever see. They adopted them 

at a young age, relatively young age. Yet, the challenges that these 

children have had and the counseling. Fortunately, they are in a 

position to afford to have the counseling that they have had to help 

grow these children. It is really a major undertaking. 

As you have mentioned, any child that goes through this traumatic time of being without parents or being in these troubled 

homes where their parents really did not possess the ability to be 

able to give them the attention is traumatic on them and is something that is engraved in their minds and their pscyhes for really 

the rest of their lives. 

It really takes working through this for them to be able to become the active, productive young people that they can be. 

Again, thank you. Very important. 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you. 

Mr. HERGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Lewis? 

Mr. LEWIS OF GEORGIA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I do not have any questions, but I want to 

thank our friend and our colleague, Mr. Cardoza, for being here 

today, for his leadership, for his commitment and dedication, and 

for telling his story. I admire you, my friend, for doing something 

I call from time to time getting in the way. Continue to get in the 

way. Thank you. 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you. You told my son that one day on the 

Floor of the House, on the day of the Voting Rights Act bill. I do 

not know if you recall that. 

Mr. LEWIS OF GEORGIA. I do recall. 

Mr. CARDOZA. He thinks very highly of you, Mr. Lewis, and so 

do I. Thank you for your State. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Camp? 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
15 

Mr. CAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Cardoza, 

for your testimony and for what you and Kathy are doing. It is tremendous. I do think, as we talk about foster care, adoption is such 

a critical part of the solution. Thank you for doing that and having 

been involved in these issues for a number of years. I am very impressed with what you have done. 

I do think there is an area that we need to look at, and that is 

when children are languishing in foster care, it is something that 

we have all tried to deal with. Obviously, this hearing today and 

your bill is an attempt to make that a little bit easier. 

I also think we have to look at the issue of when children have 

relatives in another State that are willing to take the kids but 

often are overlooked because of the laws. That is something that 

I think we need to address so that we can keep family members 

together, when there are suitable and willing family members 

available. I hope that is something that we can look at. 

Again, thank you for being here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Meek? 

Mr. MEEK. Thank you, Dennis. 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I just want to say in response to what 

you said about the post-traumatic issues for youngsters, I was the 

consultant at the Juvenile Detention Clearinghouse for the State of 

Washington for about 7 years. 

One of the standard questions you ask young kids is tell me your 

three wishes. I never met a kid whose first wish was not I want 

to go back to my mother. No matter what the chart would show 

me about the place they came from and what they had been 

through, that still was there and it never went away. I think you 

are absolutely correct, that is why you deal with the issues as long 

as you do. 

It is a pleasure to have you here and thank you very much. We 

will do what we can to improve the situation. 

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. For our next panel, we are very fortunate to have four young people. Come on up. 

[Applause.] 

These are young people who have navigated their way through 

the foster care system. Three of them are represented by Members 

of this Committee, so I would like to recognize Mr. Weller, Mr. 

Lewis, and Mr. Meek in a moment to acknowledge them. 

I also want to thank the National Foster Care Coalition for helping three of them make the trip to Washington, with special thanks 

to the ninth grade social studies class at North Eugene High School 

in Eugene, Oregon, which made a donation toward their travel. 

We will start with Tyler Bacon of Florida. Mr. Meek? 

Mr. MEEK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Being the only Member 

from Florida, I get the opportunity to introduce Mr. Bacon. 

Tyler is at the age of 22. He lives in Jacksonville, Florida. He 

was abandoned by his mother. Tyler entered the Florida foster care 

system at the age of 13. He struggled through a series of group 

home placements and never formed a supportive attachment needed for his success in life after foster care. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
16 

Homeless at 18, jobless and faced with many medical bills, Tyler 

is successfully overcoming these early difficulties. Tyler just secured an apartment a few weeks ago after approximately 1 year of 

being homeless. Today, he sits on local State and national boards 

working to improve the foster care system. 

His dream is to become a national public speaker for the improvement of foster care and 1 day starting a mentor program for 

kids and youth in care. 

Tyler was selected to serve as a Foster Club All American in 

2005 and is a board member of the National Independent Living 

Association. He is a member of the National Foster Youth Advisory 

Board. 

He was recently promoted to manager at Blockbuster. Hook me 

up. 

[Laughter.] 

He enjoys running, playing basketball, and participating in flag 

football tournaments. 

Mr. Chairman, as it relates to Tyler, we just met when we 

walked in the room. We tried to get together earlier today. I am 

glad, as I said in the past, that he is here along with the other 

young people that are here to share their personal stories, to be 

able to help us legislate and stand up for children and young people that are going through the system now. 

Thank you for being here before the Committee. 

STATEMENT OF TYLER BACON, FLORIDA 

Mr. BACON. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Weller, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for allowing 

me to come speak to you and share my experience of the foster care 

system, my knowledge and expertise on foster care. 

My name is Tyler Bacon and I am 22 years old. I entered the 

foster care system at the age of 13. I remember the day I entered 

as if it were yesterday. I was in a court because we were going 

through some family therapy. I remember the judge asking my 

mother what she wanted to do with me. My mother responded this 

is not my child, I do not want anything to do with him and I do 

not care what happens. 

He paused, looked over at my father and asked my father what 

he wanted to do. I turned and looked at my father as he said nothing, no response, not standing up for his own son and not knowing 

what to say or how to respond. 

That day, I was placed in the foster care system. 

While in the foster care system, I grew up in several group 

homes, attended several high schools and educational programs to 

try to succeed. While in the group homes, I was with 20 to 60 other 

young men at one home with staff, five per home. Under staffed 

and not able to ask questions or get the proper assistance that I 

needed to be able to learn how to be a successful adult, I struggled 

through the group homes. 

I did not know what to ask. I did not know how to ask, how to 

become a man, how to become an adult, what I needed to know 

when I turned 18. I thought when I turned 18 that I was going to 

be prepared. I thought I was going to be ready. I was looking forVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
17 

ward to my 18th birthday, because I was finally going to be on my 

own and I was finally going to be a man. 

My 18th birthday was the scariest day of my life. On my 18th 

birthday, I thought I was going to have a good birthday. I woke up 

to see my bags packed and told I was too old to be in the foster 

care system. I was an adult in the State’s eyes, that I had to go. 

I had nowhere to turn. No family. No friends. Nothing. While in 

the foster care system, I was not able to connect with a family. I 

was told I was unadoptable. No family wanted me because I was 

too old and I had too many family issues. 

On my 18th birthday, instead of a cake, I was walking to a 

homeless shelter so I had somewhere to live. I struggled but I was 

determined to be successful and get back on my feet. 

While I was homeless, I was still in high school, afraid to tell 

someone I was homeless because I was afraid they would kick me 

out of school and I would not finish my education. I was determined to succeed and graduate. 

I finally graduated in 2004 in the top 5 percent of my high 

school. Determined. I was finally able to get back on my feet and 

achieve my own apartment and have a house to call my own. I still 

struggled, still had obstacles that I had to face. 

I did not know how to do anything. I did not know how to pay 

bills, how to budget, basic stuff that normal every day people take 

advantage of. I did not know how to be a man and how to be a successful independent civilian in society. 

Again, because of financial issues, I needed someone to turn to. 

This caused me to want to turn back to my bio family, the family 

who gave me up. I thought everybody is talking about if you ever 

need help, you can turn back to your family. I tried to reconnect 

with my family but nothing changed. 

They still did not want me. In an altercation and a confrontation 

with my family, I was stabbed, ended up in the hospital having immediate surgery. Given that situation, I was unable to work. I was 

unable to pay for my bills, and I ended up once again homeless, 

evicted from my apartment because I was not able to pay my bills 

and I had no one to help me. 

I had no family to turn to. I had no one to go home to. I had 

no one to help me get back on my feet. Again, I was homeless. 

I struggled for a year, bouncing from friend to friend, whoever 

would let me stay, ending up in a hotel. I had nowhere else to go. 

I had to pay for my own hotel so I had a roof over my head while 

I was working at minimum wage at a part time job. The hotel cost 

me $1,200 a month, unable to save up some money to find my own 

apartment or fix the eviction notice that I had, to be able to pay 

off that. 

I had nowhere else to go. Fortunately, I had family and friends 

within the foster care system. My brothers and sisters that I looked 

to that are foster youth, I looked to them as brothers and sisters. 

They financially helped me and gave the opportunity to get back 

on my feet. They gave me financial support a family would give me 

and helped me get my own apartment. Again, I am thankful for 

them. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
18 

There are a lot of issues. No foster youth should have to go 

through the struggles that I went through in life. No one should 

have to go through these struggles. 

People in a family setting take advantage because they are able 

to go back to their family in times of economic need. If something 

were to come up, people who grew up in a family setting would be 

able to go back to them and live in that home. 

Foster youth do not have that family to turn back to. Instead, we 

fall back on homeless shelters, jail systems, or potentially if you 

are able to financially afford it, hotels. 

I ask and I push for Congress to take action now. I ask for simple things. I ask that we look into extending foster care up to the 

age of 21. 

I ask that because when you are 18, you are still struggling to 

learn how to be an adult, how to financially support yourself and 

take care of yourself. Most people who are 18 are still struggling 

through high school, not yet graduated, and we look at our success, 

the foster youth success of graduating and it is very, very low. 

This is because we are forced out at the age of 18 and struggling 

to maintain our own lives. Education is not our first priority. Our 

life and our shelter is our first priority. 

I can say that from experience. I have yet to attend college because my main priority was to get on my feet and find shelter for 

myself. 

I also ask that we help provide health insurance up to the age 

of 21. Most youth who live in a family setting still receive health 

insurance through their parents’ medical insurance up to the age 

of 21. I ask just because we are foster youth, why should we not 

receive the same? 

I also ask that we push for permanency for all youth in the foster 

care system. I ask that we try our best to set foster youth up with 

family. Family is a very, very important thing. I ask if we cannot 

find a family for them, we find a successful mentor to help them 

through the obstacles that everybody faces in life. 

Permanency is having someone to talk to and you do not need 

an appointment to talk to them. 

I ask Congress, when you look into the issues that foster youth 

face and look at what we need to change, I ask you to look at yourselves and ask what would you do if we were your child? If we were 

your child, would you help us and provide us with medical insurance, financial stability, and opportunities for us to be able to succeed in life? 

We do not ask for much. We just ask to be treated like every 

other kid. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bacon follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Tyler Bacon, Florida 

Chairman McDermott, Ranking Member Weller, and members of this Subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to appear before you today on behalf of the 

thousands of children and youth in foster care who can not be here in Washington 

to share their stories and to ask you to take action to help them. 

My name is Tyler Bacon and I am 22 years old. I entered Florida’s foster care 

system at the age of 13. I was placed in care after my mother told a judge I was 

not her child and she wanted nothing to do with me. Abandoned to the foster care 

system, I grew up in group homes with between 20 and 60 young men. I was never 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
19 

given the opportunity to enter a Foster Home or build a relationship with a mom 

or dad. I never had anyone to talk to or go to for my problems, no one who cared 

when I had an issue. 

At the age of eighteen I was told I was an adult and I aged out of the system. 

I ended up homeless on my 18th birthday. I had a bigger plan for myself, however, 

and I was finally able to get on my feet and get my own place. 

With no other people to call family, at age twenty one I tried to reconnect with 

my bio family, but nothing had changed. They still did not want me in their lives. 

The strain of the relationship led to an argument with a family member in which 

I was stabbed. I ended up in the hospital with no health insurance, adding to my 

financial strain. After being hospitalized I was unable to return to my warehouse 

job as I could not do the heavy lifting required by the position. Because I could not 

work and had no family support, I found myself evicted and I ended up homeless 

once again. I stayed with friends as long as possible because trying to get my own 

apartment proved too difficult. Even though I had access to housing funds from the 

state to help pay for an apartment, landlords didn’t want to rent to a young adult 

with an eviction on his record and I could find no one to co-sign or help with the 

application process. 

Because I had nowhere else to stay, I ended up in a hotel for four months. While 

this arrangement kept me from staying on the street, it was impossible to save 

money due to the expensive rate of $1,200 a month, and an impossible arrangement 

to maintain with my minimum wage job. 

The good news is that after a year of homelessness, I was finally able to save 

enough money to rent my own 1 bedroom apartment. I moved in last month. I am 

now employed full-time as a manager with Blockbuster Video and am excited that 

I once again am able to spend some of my time advocating for improvements of the 

foster care system. 

I take this opportunity to ask you to consider these goals for the foster care system to improve the odds for the thousands of young people who will celebrate, or 

fear, their 18th birthday this year: 

1. Extend foster care until age 21 

Foster youth deserve the same resources, tools and support that parents provide 

for their own child. The state serves as our parents. We are looking to policy makers 

to provide the safety net a family provides. By terminating assistance at age 18, the 

state abandons youth at a time when they are still in great need of supervision and 

support. My story is a single story which approximates the struggle facing over 

20,000 of my peers this year alone. 

2. Provide health coverage until age 21 

I urge Congress to extend health insurance to all youth from foster care to age 

21. Medical expenses to young person struggling to establish independence can be 

crushing. In my case, medical bills have proven to be a grave obstacle to establishing myself. 

3. Make permanency a priority for all youth 

Most importantly, I urge Congress to provide states with the incentives and flexibility in financing to assure that everything is done to provide permanence for 

young people before they leave foster care. We need more funding to help former 

youth get into a family setting. We must provide older youth with the lifelong support a family grants their own child. Foster youth are place in the system for their 

best interest. How is their best interest looked after if we are sending them unprepared into the world, vulnerable, and with no safety net? 

I believe the hardships I faced through my emancipation from foster care were 

avoidable. If I had experienced some form of permanency in my life before I left 

care, I know my transition would have been easier. Permanency is having someone 

there to help you when you need it, someone you don’t need an appointment to talk 

to. Permanency is having someone to lean on for support when obstacles come your 

way. Without some permanency, many foster youth face desperate options like 

homelessness, shelters, jail, or if they are fortunate to be employed like me, temporary and unstable refuge in hotels. 

I am determined to succeed despite the obstacles that have been placed in my 

path. But I implore members of Congress to act now, to make changes to improve 

the odds for my 513,000 younger brothers and sisters coming up through the system. 

Thank you for the opportunity to share my story and thoughts with you. 

Respectfully, 

Tyler Bacon 

f 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
20 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much. Mr. Lewis, 

would you like to introduce Mr. Reeves? 

Mr. LEWIS OF GEORGIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of 

all, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you very much for holding this 

hearing today. 

I am particularly proud and pleased to introduce Mr. Anthony 

Reeves from Atlanta, Georgia to the Committee. Mr. Reeves is a 

survivor, a leader, an inspiration to many in my district, the State 

of Georgia, and across the country. 

Mr. Reeves entered the Georgia foster care system at the age of 

11, when his grandmother was no longer able to care for him, and 

his mother could not be found. While in foster care, Mr. Reeves 

lived in five to six different foster homes and shelters before finally 

receiving permanent placement and stability with Families First, a 

non-profit agency in Metro Atlanta that offers individuals family 

counseling. 

Blessed by the support and guidance of two mentors, Mr. Reeves 

grew stronger and upon completing high school, he earned an associate’s degree in electronic engineering from DeVry University. 

He now works at Families First as a relief parent, where he 

gives back to children in the same way that his mentors did. 

Mr. Reeves is also an intern consultant for the Supreme Court 

of the State of Georgia, Office of Child Advocacy, and he works 

with Metro Atlanta Youth Opportunities. 

Last year, the First Lady of Georgia selected Anthony to help institute policies for foster care parents and foster care agencies. A 

few months later, Mr. Reeves was selected as a FosterClub AllStar. He now travels throughout the country as a foster care advocate and helps speak on behalf of youth in foster care. 

Two months ago, he was more than lucky but blessed to be recognized by the Georgia State legislature who passed a resolution commending his work with foster care. 

He is in the process of starting his own music group and music 

label and will focus on everything from rock and roll to rap. He is 

working on a Bachelor of Science in electronic engineering. 

Mr. Reeves finds time to volunteer with a youth counselor that 

I have for the young people in my district in Atlanta. 

Mr. Reeves, we are thankful that you are here today and we look 

forward to your testimony. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Reeves, thank you for coming. 

STATEMENT OF ANTHONY REEVES, GEORGIA 

Mr. REEVES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the Subcommittee, 

as well as Mr. Lewis and others, here in D.C. as well as in Atlanta. 

My name is Anthony Reeves. I am 23 years of age, actually 24 

now. I as well as some of my peers here, we have the experience 

of the foster care system. We work for it and we have also been 

through it. We understand everything that goes along with the foster care system. 

Growing up is a big challenge for everyone. I am pretty sure like 

a lot of you had your parents gritting their teeth because when 

transitioning out, they do not know if you are going to sink or 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
21 

swim, but they were still there to back you up. Even when going 

through your teenage phases, they still held on strong and they 

loved you and everything. 

Often we as foster youth, we are misunderstood when we go 

through our normal teenage phases, and sometimes we are either 

put on medication, just to calm us down, or ‘‘calm us down,’’ and 

that kind of takes away from the childhood experience. You are 

supposed to be kind of like out there but not too far. 

When transitioning out into life on your own, your parents are 

there to help you fill out those different applications, make sure 

that you are buying the correct car. I know I have ran through a 

couple of cars because I did not know what to buy. They are even 

there if you need food or if you want to go back and stick your 

hand in the refrigerator, you can grab food out of their refrigerator. 

We do not have that option. We do not have that luxury of like 

going back to our parents because we are in the foster care system. 

We cannot go back to our biological families. 

When we transition out, we are basically just put in the basic 

survival modes, fight or flight by any means necessary. 

I spent 12 years in foster care. After being abandoned by my 

mother, I was sent to live with my grandmother. At the time, she 

really was not able to care for me. I guess I was kind of like out 

of hand too much for her. She had already raised one so she could 

not go through another one. 

I was sent to a shelter. Upon entering the shelter, it is almost 

like being sent to a jail because when I walked through those 

doors, I heard the door shut and lock behind me meaning I could 

not go back out. It gave me a fear of being in enclosed spaces. 

The first couple of years, I moved around a lot. I went from shelter to foster home to foster home to shelter. It is a lot of different 

placements. Each time when moved around, you feel like you are 

being rejected by these different people and you really did not have 

anything to do with why you are in the system. You really do not 

understand, and sometimes we just buildup a big barrier, a big 

wall, we do not want to deal with anybody at all. 

I finally found placement, permanency, in a group home. I found 

stability. I found a whole lot of brothers. That is what we called 

each other, we called each other family. I called them my family. 

I still had not seen my brother for quite a bit of time, and that 

is even before I was sent in the system. I had not seen my brother 

for like probably three or 4 years. Just to let you know how valuable or how important that is to me, the times I could remember 

living with my mother, I was basically a father figure to my little 

brother. 

I would clean up the house. I made sure he had something to eat. 

I cleaned up everything from the dishes to even picking up drug 

needles and pipes so that he would not stick himself or put his 

mouth on it because he was just a little baby. At the time, I was 

only like five or something like that. 

As I transitioned, as I grew up, my social worker there, he finally 

took the time, he said I am going to go ahead and find your little 

brother for you. He did all the research and work and come to find 

out, my little brother stayed a couple of exits down the highway 

from me. It was kind of crazy because we were both in the same 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
22 

system and he only stayed a couple of exits down, and I had not 

seen him for at least 4 years. 

Me not seeing my brother is like you not seeing your son or seeing your daughter or someone like that. It did not make too much 

sense to me. That is when I found out the value of siblings being 

together, sibling separation. 

I was lucky enough to have different mentors as well as the social worker to instill in me to keep going to school and go on to college. I did not like school or whatever. 

When I was transitioning out, I had to make a choice of like college, like most people, they choose what is the best college to go 

to. My decision was based on who offered year round school. Let 

me tell you, I did not like school at all. 

To try to figure out who has year round school was hard in itself 

because of the fact if I chose a traditional college that had summers 

off, that means I had to find some place to stay during the summer 

or else I would be homeless, and I have an extreme fear of being 

homeless. 

Besides that, I really wanted to go to Georgia Tech because of 

the fact that I love basketball and I wanted to play basketball. 

During the summertime, what was I going to do then. 

I chose to go to DeVry because I loved electronics as well. I obtained my associate’s degree and I kind of transitioned out with the 

help of my mentors and through like a program with Metropolitan 

Area Youth Opportunities Initiative, I was able to get my apartment. That was a big ordeal in itself. My mother had like past due 

bills in my name. When I go to get my electricity and stuff turned 

on, I had these high deposits as well as a past due bill of $150, and 

I did not know. 

I was kind of stuck. That almost left me homeless. If I had not 

had my mentors there to help me through my financial crisis, I 

would be stuck on the streets because of the fact that I could not 

afford the $179 deposit plus the $150 past due payments and everything else that goes along with that. Luckily, I had that support. 

When my brother grew up in the system, he really did not have 

those supports. Nobody told him that he could go to college or what 

have you. When he turned 18, he had his bags and left. He was 

homeless for a good bit of time. 

I let him stay with me at the college which was against all policies there. Eventually, it was like fight or flight. He ended up in 

jail for doing some things that he needed to do to survive, and even 

during that time, he fathered a child. She’s beautiful. She always 

calls me uncle. 

I guess what I would like to say today is that this decision or 

any decision that is made today will not affect me, it will not affect 

Tyler, because we have already transitioned out, but for our 20,000 

other brothers and sisters that come behind us, we would like to 

see them have a very successful transition. 

I believe we are obligated to help them because of the fact that 

we did not ask to be put in these situations. When you drop your 

little kids off at the day care center and they are grabbing and 

screaming and pulling on you, that just symbolizes they do not 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
23 

want to be taken away or they do not want to be separated from 

you. 

We did not want to be separated from our families. We wanted 

that connection. For many of us in foster care, we spent our whole 

lives crying for that connection. 

Some things that we could do is extend foster care to the age of 

21. I watch the news often. A lot of times you see like when a 

youth does something bad, they say if there was something that I 

could do to help him, I would have done it. This is something you 

can do, to help the youth, so you do not have to say that, if I could 

have or what would happen if I would have. 

I just appeal to extend the support service to age 21 for all our 

young people in foster care. I would like the States to have more 

flexibility and Federal funding to support families who stay together and can share placement and recruit caring foster parents 

and encourage adoption while establishing permanency for youth. 

I ask that you also help siblings to stay together because that is 

a big deal for me. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Reeves follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Anthony Reeves, Georgia 

Chairman McDermott, Ranking Member Weller, and members of this Subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to appear before you today on behalf of my 

brothers and sisters in foster care who need your help to make a successful transition from foster care to adulthood. 

My name is Anthony Reeves. I am 23 years old and live in Atlanta, Georgia. I 

have worked with the First Lady of Georgia, instituting policies for foster parents 

and foster agencies through the First Lady’s Children’s Cabinet and Project Embrace. In 2006–07, I was selected to serve as a FosterClub All-Star intern, traveling 

the country to motivate and educate my younger peers in foster care. Now I work 

for Families First as a Relief Parent (the same organization I grew up with), and 

with Metro Atlanta Youth Opportunities Initiative (M.A.Y.O.I.), an organization 

that helps current and former foster care clients that are transitioning out of the 

foster care system. I am working with Georgia’s Supreme Court bettering life for 

youth transitioning from foster care. I am also in the process of starting my own 

music label and music group. 

Growing up is a big challenge for everyone; you have your rebellious stages and 

your experimental stages, which I’m sure had many of your own parents gritting 

their teeth—but your parents were always there to forgive you. And then when you 

get ready to transition out of their home into a life on your own, you know that 

they are going to be there to help you with your rental applications and job applications, moving in to your first apartment and giving you the old pots and pans and 

the couch from the family room, just little things that make a big difference. Most 

importantly, your parents are there for you to make sure that you have food or to 

help if you need transportation or can’t figure out how to run the dishwasher. 

Whether the challenges are big or small, your mom or dad will try and help you. 

Growing up in foster care is so much harder because when we foster youth go 

through our normal teenage phases, we are usually living with people who do not 

know us very well, or we might even be in a placement where our caretakers or 

staff may be quite disconnected from us. We are often punished for doing the things 

that most teenagers do, and may even be put on medication as a means to calm 

us down or as a consequence. 

Then, when we are transitioning out of care into a life on our own, we have to 

be nothing short of perfect, because we don’t have our parents to help us move in 

and show us how to fill out applications. Most of us aren’t allowed to get a drivers 

license, so we are stuck without transportation if we are in rural areas. Life is tough 

because we are really put in the most basic of survival modes, ‘‘fight or flight,’’ ‘‘by 

any means necessary.’’ 

I spent 12 years in care. I entered foster care after being abandoned by my mother and having a grandmother unable to adequately care for me. The first couple of 

years I moved around a lot and led a very lonely and unstable life growing up. Then 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
24 

I was placed in a group home which was bitter sweet. I found some stability, but 

I lost all contact with my little brother for who I served as a parent to during our 

younger years. During that time, I would clean the house, do dishes, make sure we 

had food, and even cleaned up drug paraphernalia to make sure the home was safe 

for us. I was only 5 years old. 

It took the social worker of the group home—now a mentor and permanent father 

figure in my life to me—to finally do everything in his power to locate my brother. 

After a diligent search by mentor, I came to find out my brother had lived just a 

few exits down the highway from me for at least three years. When I finally found 

my little brother, I began to understand the importance of staying connected to my 

sibling. 

With the support of my mentor, I was motivated and encouraged enough to graduate high school and go on to college. After high school, I had to make a choice of 

which colelge to attend. Unlike most youth or teenagers who transition out of their 

family’s house, their decision is mainly based on who has the best school. Mine, on 

the other hand, was based on who offered school year round. The reason? If I went 

to a traditional college then I would have to worry about where I was going to sleep 

for the summer (I have an extreme fear of being homeless). It was a tough decision, 

because in addition to a talent a technology, I also had a love for basketball and 

I really wanted to wear the gold and black colors for Georgia Tech. 

I achieved my Associates degree at DeVry University and now I am working on 

my Bachelors degree in Electronic Engineering. I have my apartment—which was 

drama in itself—because I was unaware and ill prepared for the expenses that come 

with getting your first apartment, and because my biological mom has past due bills 

that she had placed in my name. These challenges almost left me homeless. With 

the help pf my mentor, I was able to overcome these obstacles and get my own 

apartment. 

However, when I re-connected with my brother, I realized how truly dangerous 

transitioning is for some foster youth who cannot make their way safely to adulthood. Some of us get lucky and can find the support and resources we need when 

transitioning out of care, but some of us don’t. 

When my brother transitioned out at 18, he had not found the stability I had 

found or connected with supportive adults in his life that could provide the type of 

mentorship that I relied on. With no guidance, he never attained his high school 

diploma or G.E.D. He fathered a child. From there, things kind of fell apart for him, 

and then he became homeless. With a criminal record and no education, it is now 

almost impossible for him to get a decent job. 

We are two brothers in foster care with different experiences and luck and very 

different outcomes. What is important to me now is not to take chances with all my 

other brothers and sisters—about 20,000 this year alone— transitioning out of foster 

care. While my transition won’t be affected, I hope to improve the odds for successful transitioning for all foster youth coming up behind me. 

Changes must be made because we, young people in foster care, do not ask to be 

put in the system. When you drop your child off at the day care, they usually cry 

their lungs out, signifying that most children don’t want to be away from their family. For many of us in foster care, we spent our childhood quietly crying for family. 

Life is tough enough when transitioning out of care, and it is even tougher if you 

don’t have the support that you need from people who care about you, or if you don’t 

have resources and skills packed along with the rest of your belongings as you are 

shown out the door. 

The child welfare system—the people who decide to place us in foster care for our 

own good—have a responsibility to help guide us into a stable adult life. I think 

that if we were able to receive support up until age 21, or even until we finish a 

college education or a training program, that transition to adulthood would be way 

more successful for many of us. 

I appeal to Congress to extend support services to the age of 21 for all young people in foster care across the country. I recommend that Congress extend eligibility 

for the Chafee Foster Care Independence Program to youth under age 25, which 

should include eligibility for room and board and for education and training vouchers. 

It is also my dream that every young person in foster care is provided with support from adults in their lives like I was. I believe it made all the difference in my 

life, and led to the divergent paths between my brother and me. I would like states 

to have flexibility in federal funding to support families staying together in the first 

place or to reunite families that can safely and healthily be back together. Flexible 

funding could support kinship placement for children within their families, recruit 

caring foster parents, and encourage more adoptions—establishing permanency for 

our youth. Providing states with more flexibility in federal funding would help famiVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
25 

lies stay together or be created—so siblings, like my brother and me—could walk 

the same successful path to adulthood together. 

Thank you for opportunity to speak with you today. 

Anthony Reeves 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you very much. Nicole Dobbins 

is from my area of the country. You have already been introduced 

by your school that gave some money to get you here, and we welcome you here. 

Nicole has been in and out of foster care for six years. She is 24. 

In June 2006, she graduated from Oregon State with a Bachelor’s 

degree in exercise and sports science. 

I suspect you are an athlete more or less. We welcome you here 

and it is your turn to tell your story. Thank you for coming. 

STATEMENT OF NICOLE DOBBINS, OREGON 

Ms. DOBBINS. Chairman McDermott, thank you for making us 

so welcome. Ranking Member Weller and Members of the Subcommittee, I thank you for hearing my testimony on behalf of the 

24,000 teens aging out of the foster care system each year. 

Good morning. My name is Nicole Marie Dobbins. Like Chairman 

McDermott said, I am 24 years old. I am a former foster youth and 

a life long resident of Portland, Oregon. 

I spent a total of 6 years on and off in the State foster care system, entering at the age of two with my younger sister, due to my 

mother’s drug addiction and inability to care for us. 

My sister and I were reunited after a couple of years with my 

bio mom, but only to be put back in foster care at the age of 14 

due to other issues, and again, drug abuse on my mother’s behalf. 

Foster care is where I remained for the next 4 years until only 

1 day after graduating high school, I was kicked out of my foster 

home, a place I had been living in for 2 years prior. I was forced 

to hand over my key with no explanation of what was going on 

other than now I was 18, graduated, and not allowed to stay any 

longer. 

I did not attend any closing court hearing nor did I receive any 

farewell from my caseworker. I recall having a meeting a week or 

so later in which they asked me what I planned to do, as if I were 

to have all the answers at that time. 

This is how I exited the foster care system, and on that note, I 

was expected to be an adult. Sadly, the State played no active role 

in my transition. I was 18 years old and homeless, without any permanent connections to adults in my life, I had no one and there 

was no one to understand my struggle. I was forced to find a way 

all on my own. 

The difficult part was not that I was homeless or that I was 

kicked out. The difficult part was I thought I had found someone 

in my foster mother that would be there for me beyond foster care 

and be there for me in the long run through trials and tribulations. 

I was wrong, and now I had to figure it out on my own. At 18, 

I was not prepared for the loss of adult support. 

Growing up in and out of the system provided me with little stability and poor connections to people who cared about me. I left fosVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
26 

ter care hurt and angry. I longed for someone to be that person I 

could rely on. I longed for a healthy family. I longed for what every 

child longs for. I longed to be loved. 

I found hope and stability and education because when I had 

nothing else, I always turned to that for an escape. 

When I was only 10 years old, I was in the fourth grade. I knew 

I wanted to go to college, not because I wanted to be anything special or because of any one particular thing fascinated me. I wanted 

to go to college so that I could support my family and be a role 

model to my younger sister. Mostly, because I did not want to end 

up like my mother. 

I knew I had to take a path my mother did not. She never graduated from high school, which made me the first in my family to 

get a high school diploma. 

At the age of 18, I made the transition from foster care to what 

caseworkers call ‘‘independence.’’ With the plan in mind to attend 

college, I was accepted into Oregon State University. However, 

there was one huge problem. I was now a graduate of high school 

and homeless. 

It was only June and school did not start until September. Before 

I would ever see college, I had to get through the Summer. It was 

a struggle that I managed to tackle. 

In some ways, education saved my life. I felt very blessed to have 

my financial needs for school met. I am thankful for the resources 

such as Chafee educational training vouchers, which was a huge 

help to me and lessened my stress in receiving that each year. 

However, these resources were not given to me at the time of 

transition. I had to seek them out after my sophomore year in college. 

Education alone was never enough. I was a freshman in dorms 

with many new friends and excited about the opportunity to start 

a new life. Externally, I appeared to be happy, but what I kept 

from everyone was how I felt inside. 

I was sad and lonely and hurting and often cried myself to sleep. 

I was too scared to ask for help and too proud to say I needed any. 

My peers did not understand me. They had family visiting and care 

packages arriving when I barely had people calling and checking 

in on me. 

It was not long before I was diagnosed with depression. I dealt 

with depression without any medication because I had no health 

coverage. I was diagnosed by the Student Health Services and allotted five free counseling visits based on the student health fees 

that I paid to go to Oregon State. 

I purchased a month’s worth of medication but chose not to take 

them based on knowing that I would not have the financial commitment to continue the education, so I did not want to cause more 

harm to the depression than already was there. 

I am one of the youth that could have benefited from Representative Cardoza’s bill for health insurance to be used in foster care. 

That is something I would like to see put in place so that youth 

like myself will not have to struggle as much as I did. 

Take this journey with me, as I recall one of the hardest times 

in college. Being kicked out of the dorms for the holidays. Thanksgiving came around and I did not realize I was going to have to 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
27 

leave until a week beforehand. My new friends all had family plans 

and I was not about to be anyone’s burden by asking to join. 

On holidays, I waited. I waited to be asked over to friends’ 

houses. Looking back, I was thankful that I always was asked. 

Now I cannot help but wonder and I hope you do, too, where do 

youth go when they do not get asked? 

I owe great gratitude to organizations such as FosterClub and 

the National Foster Care Coalition for offering an outlet for me to 

make change in the child welfare system. 

Before my work with FosterClub, I never heard of permanency. 

I have now learned what permanency means and because of that, 

I have been given the chance to establish it in my own life. 

Permanency just does not appear. It is nurtured. As foster youth, 

we do not know what healthy relationships look like. It is up to 

someone to teach us. 

I have been given the divine opportunity to change child welfare 

professionals around the importance of permanency, as well as 

share my own experience with thousands of foster youth around 

the Nation because of these organizations. 

Now I have acquired a huge network of supportive people in my 

life and I can honestly say that today, I would not be sitting here 

a college graduate, an educated professional, without the support 

and love from adults currently in my life. 

I pose this question or these questions. What about the youth 

currently in care scheduled to transition without permanent families, without support, without health care, without education, and 

without a plan or worse, without anyone at all? 

What will we do for them? I want to remind you this is only my 

story. 

I want to thank you for listening to my testimony and I want to 

thank you on behalf of all the foster youth transitioning. You have 

the chance to make a difference. I just want to thank you again for 

hearing us. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Dobbins follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Nicole Dobbins, Oregon 

Chairman McDermott, Ranking Member Weller, and members of this Subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to appear before you today on behalf of the 

24,000 teens who will age out of foster care this year without a family or the supports and services they need to make a successful transition to adulthood. I hope 

my story helps inform the subcommittee on ways that Congress can improve the 

system. 

My name is Nicole Dobbins. I am 24 years old and a lifelong resident of Portland, 

Oregon. At age 2, I entered the State foster care system. I was reunited with my 

biological family only to reenter the system again at the age of 14. While in foster 

care, I adjusted to my new living arrangements and persisted with my studies until 

I became first in my family to graduate from high school. My sights and hopes were 

set on a college degree. Applications made, I was accepted to Oregon State University and looking forward to beginning my freshman year in higher education. 

Then, my great shock: at age 18, only one day after graduating high school, I was 

kicked out of my foster home without warning. My relationship as a ‘‘ward of the 

State of Oregon’’ was over. This is how I exited the foster care system. Sadly, my 

state played little role in my transition, although I was very grateful to receive 

Chafee Educational And Training Voucher funds for college. I spent my senior year 

in high school focusing on my studies and had not focused on what life on my own 

would be like. I had made no preparations. I had little support and no place to call 

home. 

Age 18, college bound, and completely on my own, I made my way to college. I 

found myself in a new place with no one I knew. I had little guidance for what the 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
28 

process of college was like and how lonely my journey was going to be. The most 

difficult part of it all was that I had no connections to any supportive adults in my 

life. I had no relationship with my biological family and my only sibling stayed in 

the same foster home I was kicked out of, which made it difficult to stay in contact 

with her. I was focused on school, but I soon learned that life for an 18 year old 

wasn’t easy without support. School was hard; I was lonely, and very unhappy. 

As a sophomore I was diagnosed with depression. I had no health insurance and 

worse off, I had no one to turn to. The only support I had was from my peers, who 

couldn’t help or offer the support I needed. For the most part they just didn’t understand. I was feeling like my life had no direction, and no purpose. Being depressed 

in college was debilitating and very difficult for me to manage alone. I wish that 

I could have had better support through this time of difficulty. I waited in limbo 

for a friend to extend an invitation as I wondered where I would go for Holidays 

and school breaks. 

It would have been very beneficial if I had been given help in establishing some 

sort of permanency before my transition into adulthood. At eighteen, I was not prepared for the loss I had to face, the loss of the adult supports in my life. I felt very 

blessed to have most of my financial needs for school met, but at the same time I 

needed love, support, and encouragement as well, just like any young adult, and especially as a young adult transitioning from foster care. 

Somehow along the way I had the good fortune to find FosterClub who took me 

in as an All-Star intern. Along with the National Foster Care Coalition, FosterClub 

offers encouragement and an outlet for me to make change in the child welfare system. Before my work began with these organizations I hated the system and felt 

ashamed to say that I was ever apart of it. However, through training and adult 

support, I have now learned what permanency means and I have established it in 

my own life. I presently have many support systems and I am now a college graduate! 

In my experiences advocating for foster care reform, I have had the opportunity 

to share my story with thousands of youth around the nation and to speak with people who can improve life for my younger peers still coming through the system. Recently, I went to Capitol Hill, along with over thirty of my peers from foster care, 

and met with Members of Congress. I spoke at an event sponsored by the Kids Are 

Waiting, a project of The Pew Charitable Trusts, as part of its campaign calling for 

reform of the federal financing system for foster care. The Campaign and Jim Casey 

Youth Opportunities Initiative recently released a report which reveals how flexible, 

reliable federal funding, would enable States to keep families together, recruit more 

foster and adoptive parents, or subsidize guardianships for relatives and others. 

As a nation, we must do a better job of making certain that youth in foster care 

have family relationships and are prepared for adulthood. As people with the power 

to make change, I ask that you take an active interest in the need for foster youth 

to establish permanency before they exit foster care and ensure that they have support and services as transitioning young adults so that they can have a less risky 

and less despondent transition than I did myself. Every day we fail to act, 67 children like me leave foster care without a safety net. 

Thank you for this opportunity and for taking the time to hear my testimony. 

Respectfully, 

Nicole Dobbins 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you for telling your story. 

Mr. Weller. 

Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Do you want to introduce Mr. Nutall? 

Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure for me 

to welcome and introduce Jamaal Nutall before our Subcommittee. 

As I noted in my opening state, Jamaal is a resident of Joliet, the 

largest city in the congressional district that I have the privilege 

of representing. 

He has been an intern in our Washington office this Summer, 

and I am proud to say he has made a terrific contribution to our 

Congressional office. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
29 

He is a great intern. He is a young man with tremendous potential. He currently attends University of St. Francis where he will 

receive a degree in social work in May of 2008, after which he 

plans to pursue a Master’s degree in school social work. 

He is a member of the University’s football team, a member of 

Phi Beta Sigma Fraternity, and an active member of the Student 

African American Brotherhood. 

I want to welcome Jamaal and thank him for agreeing to appear 

before our Subcommittee this morning. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to your testimony, 

Jamaal. 

STATEMENT OF JAMAAL NUTALL, ILLINOIS 

Mr. NUTALL. Chairman McDermott, Ranking Member Weller, 

and Members of the Committee, good morning. 

It is an honor for me to testify before the Committee today on 

child welfare. 

My name is Jamaal Nutall and I live in Mr. Weller’s Congressional district. I know a lot about the foster care system because 

I was a part of that system for about 10 years. In addition, I attend 

the University of St. Francis where I plan to receive my Bachelor’s 

degree in social work in May of 2008. 

I also plan to work in the system to help kids by advising, mentoring, coaching and setting a good example. I would do so by receiving my Master’s degree in school social work the following year 

after graduation. 

Imagine for a moment being a kid at age 8 one day playing with 

your toys at home and wake up the next day in someone else’s 

house. How would this make you feel? That is what happened to 

me. 

Before that day, I was living with my grandmother, as I had 

been for most of my life, and there were problems between my 

grandmother and my mother, which was my mother actually suffered from post-partum depression after giving birth to her first 

child, which was a baby girl, my only sister, which now I am the 

only child because my mother actually killed my sister, but I always forgave her for that. My father was never in my life. 

Overnight, I was placed in a foster care situation. In hindsight, 

my grandmother was trying to protect me. However, the foster care 

system could have done a better job. For one thing, they could have 

reached out to my extended family to see if I could have lived with 

any of them. 

The foster care home I was placed in, Henry and Dorthea Burton, they did the best they could. They fed me, tried to instill good 

values, and took me to church. What they could not do was change 

the environment outside the house. 

On the south side of Chicago, kids can stay in the house or 

choose friends. Friends can be a positive or negative influence. The 

friends I chose at the time were not a very good influence. I made 

some bad choices like not going to school and not studying at all, 

and pretty much depending on myself at the time, which is tough 

for a young kid. 

The street life corrupted me to the point that I was stealing, involved in robberies, burglaries, and even selling drugs. I can that 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
30 

I was money hungry at that age. I was so bad that I was out of 

control. 

During sixth grade, a social worker told me that we were going 

to her office to wrap Christmas presents. That is not what happened. Instead, I was taken to a group home and once again was 

in one home one day and another home the next day. 

At the group home, I was fortunate to meet up with a counselor 

who had faith in me and a teacher who told me I was smart and 

I was going to do good things. I also was able to take advantage 

of an reward system in place at the group home that gave more responsibility and freedom to those who had good behavior. I did 

more, more than most. 

During all this time, my mother was appearing in court trying 

to regain custody. My aunt and other family visited at holidays and 

brought me items like shoes and clothing. I was not completely cut 

off from my family although most of the other foster kids never saw 

or heard from family members. 

After a couple of years in the group home, one of my aunts became my legal guardian. I would like to express my gratitude to 

her for that. She was determined to make me a better person. She 

told me what to do and what not to do. She taught me how to wash 

clothes, manage money, and reach goals. 

She took me to church and helped me find my first job. Her 

daughter, which is my cousin, became my older sister, who has 

helped me so much over the past few years. 

It was in high school that sports became a big part of my life. 

This really was a positive experience for me as I learned about 

team work, responsibility, leadership, and made very good friends. 

Sports also helped me with college, as I was awarded a football 

scholarship. Being in sports kept me busy and kept me from hanging out with the wrong people. All kids need an opportunity to keep 

busy, whether it is an after school program, Young Men’s Christian 

Association, Boys and Girls Club, or interested parents. 

By the time I transitioned into adulthood, I was depending on 

myself, my family and my friends. This combination of support 

helped keep me motivated and contributed to my knowing that I 

can do anything I want. 

That is a great feeling. One day and one time I never knew I 

would have. I feel blessed by my experiences. Most kids growing up 

like I did do not make it. I was able to learn from each of my experiences and allow them to contribute to who I am today. 

Now I am looking forward to changing the world. I started with 

myself first and will take it one person at a time. 

As I look over my life, I would not change many things but some. 

My struggles only made me stronger as a person. I learned how to 

become a man the hard way. Through these challenges I learned 

responsibility, respect, hard work, dedication and I learned from 

my mistakes. I also developed lifelong friendships with many. 

I would like to express my gratitude to those who have given me 

the opportunity to better myself. 

I have a lot of suggestions for improving the foster care system 

that would include treating foster care kids as people rather than 

as cases that need to be moved along quickly to clear off a desk. 

Placing foster care kids with family members if at all possible. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
31 

Better screening of foster parents, trying to keep kids in the 

same school rather than bouncing them around from school to 

school, and I encourage foster parents to monitor kids in their care. 

Thank you for this opportunity. I am glad to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Nutall follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Jamaal Nutall, Illinois 

Chairman McDermott, Ranking Member Weller and Members of the Committee, 

good morning. It is an honor for me to testify before the Committee today on foster 

care. My name is Jamaal Nutall and I live in Mr. Weller’s Congressional district. 

I know a lot about the foster care system because I was part of that system for 

about 10 years. In addition, I attend the University of Saint Francis where I plan 

to receive my Bachelor Degree of Social Work in May of 2008. I also plan to work 

in the system to help kids by advising, mentoring, coaching, and setting a good example. I would do so by receiving my Masters Degree in school social work the following year after graduation. 

Imagine for a moment being a kid at age 8 who one day is playing with his toys 

at home and wakes up the next day in someone else’s house. How would you feel? 

That’s what happened to me. 

Before that day I was living with my grandmother, as I had been for most of my 

life, and there were problems between my grandmother and my mother. Overnight 

I was placed in a foster family situation. In hindsight, my grandmother was trying 

to protect me. However, the foster care system could have done a better job. For 

one thing, they could have reached out to my extended family to see if I could have 

lived with any of them. 

In the foster care home I was placed in Henry and Dorthea Burton did the best 

they could. They fed me well, tried to instill good values, and took me to church. 

What they couldn’t do was change the environment outside the house. On the south 

side of Chicago, kids can stay in the house or choose friends. Friends can be a positive or a negative influence. The friends I chose at that time were not very good 

influences. I made some bad choices—like not going to school and not studying at 

all—and pretty much depended on myself at that time, which is tough for a young 

kid. 

The street life corrupted me to the point that I was stealing, involved in robberies, 

and selling drugs. I can say that I was money hungry. I was so bad that I was out 

of control. 

During 6th grade, a social worker told me we were going to her office to wrap 

presents. That’s not what happened. Instead I was taken to a group home and once 

again was in one ‘‘home’’ one day, another ‘‘home’’ the next day. 

At the group home I was fortunate to meet up with a counselor who had faith 

in me and a teacher who told me I was smart and I was going to do good things. 

I also was able to take advantage of a reward system in place at the group home 

that gave more responsibility and freedom to those who had good behavior. I did 

more, more than most. 

During all this time, my mother was appearing in court, trying to regain custody. 

My aunt and other family visited at the holidays and brought me items like shoes 

and clothing. So I wasn’t completely cut off from my family, though most of the 

other foster kids never saw or heard from a family member. 

After a couple of years in the group home, one of my aunts became my legal 

guardian. I would like to express my gratitude to her for that. She was determined 

to make me a better person. She told me what to do and what not to do. She taught 

me how to wash clothes, manage money, and reach goals. She took me to church 

and helped me find my first job. Her daughter, my cousin, became my older sister 

who has helped me so much over the past few years. 

It was in high school that sports became a big part of my life. This really was 

a positive experience for me as I learned about teamwork, responsibility, and leadership and made very good friends. Sports also helped me with college as I was 

awarded a football scholarship. Being in sports kept me busy and kept me from 

hanging out with the wrong people. All kids need an opportunity to keep busy, 

whether it be in an after school program, a YMCA, a boys and girls club, or interested parents. 

By the time I transitioned into adulthood, I was depending on myself, my family, 

and my friends. This combination of support helped keep me motivated and contributed to my knowing that I can do anything I want. That’s a great feeling—one that 

at one time I never knew I would have. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
32 

I feel blessed by my experiences. Most kids growing up like I did don’t make it. 

I was able to learn from each of my experiences and allow them to contribute to 

who I am today. Now I am looking forward to changing the world. I started with 

myself first and will take it one person at a time. 

As I look over my life I would not change many things but some. My struggles 

only made me stronger as a person. I learned how to become a man the hard way. 

Through these challenges I learned responsibility, respect, hard work, dedication, 

and I learned from my mistakes. I also developed life long friendships with many. 

I would like to express my gratitude to those who given me the opportunity to better 

myself. 

I have a lot of suggestions for improving the foster care system. That would include treating foster care kids as people rather than as cases that need to be moved 

along quickly to clear off a desk, placing foster care kids with family members if 

at all possible, better screening of foster parents, trying to keep kids in the same 

school rather than bouncing them around from school to school, and encouraging 

foster parents to monitor kids in their care. 

Thank you for this opportunity. I’ll be glad to answer any questions you may 

have. 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. We want to thank all four of you for 

your stories. I have just one question I would like to ask all four 

of you and you can think while somebody else is answering. 

Who was the person and what did they do that had the most impact on stabilizing you coming out of foster care or living through 

foster care? Any one of you can start. I would like to hear who the 

person was and how you got in touch with them. 

Mr. NUTALL. For me, I believe my family, my aunt, my biological aunt, which took me out of the system, which I appreciate so 

much. I had many coaches and mentors in my life that preached 

to me positive, be positive and you will prosper from your positive 

actions. 

Just taking me out of the system, I was encouraged to actually 

do better for myself instead of hanging around the streets and 

doing wrong all the time, I was encouraged to read a book, actually 

do better for myself, or play sports, so I can utilize my talent. I 

ended up being very talented at any sport I tried. I was naturally 

athletic. 

When I got to college, I had many older fraternity members 

which recruited me and gave me the opportunity to network and 

brotherhood and draw me in and became my immediate family. 

That’s pretty much it. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Tell me who was the person that 

turned you around? 

Mr. REEVES. My situation is kind of two people plus myself. In 

the group home, the social worker there helped find my brother. I 

call him all the time now because I work for the same agency that 

I grew up with. He is like my father. I call him. He actually helped 

me furnish my apartment and everything. I still call him to this 

day. We sit down and talk about anything. He helped motivate me 

to go on through high school or to finish high school and go on to 

college. He was even there at all of my graduations. 

There was another lady that I met. She was my mentor. She took 

the place as my mother. She was also there. She helped me with 

my deposits, the security deposit that was $250. She told me what 

to do as far as my identity from my biological mom for the $150. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
33 

They also instilled in me that I have to set an example for not 

only the brother that my mentor found but my other two siblings 

that I did not know that I had. They said I had to set that example 

for myself as well as for them. 

They really became like my driving force and they still are pushing me. As a matter of fact, they probably are going to call me right 

after this. 

Ms. DOBBINS. For me, it was never just one person. I just cannot help but think about it takes a village to raise a child. There 

were different people along the way, but there was not one consistent person. 

Definitely some of the things that helped were being placed with 

my sister in the same foster home. It was a familiar face. It was 

someone who helped me through the times, even though we were 

not the best of sisters through foster care, she helped me through, 

just being placed with someone I knew. 

There were various people through high school and friends’ parents. It was never one consistent person. I think had it been, it 

could have been an easier transition. I think a lot of us said a lot 

of things that were a struggle because that is the way to make the 

system better, we reported our struggles, but I think a lot of people 

played a part in supporting us or supporting me at least during different times. It just was not a consistent thing. 

Mr. BACON. I do not know if I can say one person. When I grew 

up in foster care, I struggled with trust issues. I had that wall, that 

barrier, that I put up because I was afraid that people would come 

into my life and leave me. I figured if my family left me, other people would leave me. 

I contribute a lot of my success to my advocacy that I do. I go 

out and I speak and I advocate for foster youth because that helps 

me understand what I am going through and helps me deal with 

what I am going through. 

I am able to go out there and make a difference for those growing 

up under me so they do not have to struggle. I contribute a lot of 

the success to a lot of the agencies that I work with, and a lot of 

the other foster care alumni, such as Nicole and Anthony, that advocate with me because I know in the middle of the night, if I have 

an issue, if I am dealing with some type of problem, I know I can 

pick up the phone and call one of them, no matter what time it is, 

they will pick up the phone. They may have to wake up a little, 

but they will be there to pick up the phone. 

That is how all foster youth feel. We feel that natural connection 

with aeach other. As soon as we find out you are a foster youth, 

it is that natural bond. It is a family bond. 

I contribute my success to my advocacy and all the foster youth 

that I have been in touch with and that I advocate for and the 

agencies that give us such support and fulfilling our passions in life 

and helping us move forward, giving us that little tough love sometimes when we need it and that push to keep us moving forward 

instead of staying in one spot. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Weller? 

Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Jamaal, you stated in 

your testimony that you suggest children in foster care should be 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
34 

living with family members whenever possible. You shared some of 

your experience. 

Can you elaborate a little more on the difference you feel from 

speaking with your peers as well as from your own personal experience about the difference between being with family members and 

outside the family? 

Mr. NUTALL. I think the family system is a more genuine support system than a foster care system. The foster care system is basically based on stipends paying for individuals to actually stay in 

your home. You get parents who do not really care about the kids 

at all, all they care about is that payment and do not really take 

care of these kids. 

In a blood line family, they will do to their best ability, not even 

your mother and father, you have cousins, aunts, many relatives 

that will look out for you because you are a part of their blood line. 

Family structure is basically based on like a long life line, you 

always have your family to look back on. If you can call anybody, 

it is your family. If all else fails, your family is going to be there 

for you through anything. 

Like the saying says, blood is thicker than water. That is true. 

Your blood will never lead you astray. That is the reason why kids 

are aging out of the system at 18, these foster parents are afraid 

to adopt kids. All they really care about is these payments. I am 

not going to say that for all foster parents. There are some excellent foster parents out there. 

Everyone is not fortunate to actually have a foster parent that 

will actually take care of them and make sure they go through college, connect with them, and adjoin them to their family. It seems 

like they are afraid of foster care. 

Same reason why younger kids are most likely to be adopted 

than older kids. They feel like they can actually connect with 

younger kids and kind of manipulate them to be a part of their 

family instead of an older kid that is stubborn, knows their family 

and wants to go back with their family. 

Mr. WELLER. Jamaal, in your experiences, you talked about 

moving around. When you moved around, did you move from one 

school to another, you were changing schools while you were 

young? 

Mr. NUTALL. Yes, I did. Numerous schools. I felt like that really 

affected my education. I feel like I really did not become more educated until I reached college. The college level actually opened up 

my mind to different areas and kind of exposed me to grammar 

and all this stuff that I was kind of lacking. 

Just from switching schools, you go to a school that really does 

not teach you as much and then move to a school that is really 

grounded in grammar, emphasis of educating you strong, but you 

lack the skills that you should have learned earlier. 

I ended up failing one of the grades when I was younger because 

I lacked the understanding of how to actually read fully, how to understand words. 

Mr. WELLER. In your life time, how many schools did you attend during the age of eight and when you entered St. Francis University? 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
35 

Mr. NUTALL. I do not know if it is accurate, six/seven, could be 

eight. 

Mr. WELLER. Did you find every time that you began attending 

another school, it took a while just to get established there and develop relationships and figure it out? 

Mr. NUTALL. Yes, it is a major problem. You lose your friends 

that you try to create a bond with, and then you move along to 

somewhere else, you create new friends, and then you move on 

again. Do I keep these friends or should I just toss them. You are 

never going to see them again. 

It is hard on kids to go through this process. It is one of the 

hardest things you could do. 

Mr. WELLER. Would you think it is a good idea for us to find 

ways to help ensure that children in foster care are able to continue attending the same school that they were in previously, so 

they do not have to go through that transition? 

Is that something you think is a good idea? 

Mr. NUTALL. Definitely. I think that would help. From coming 

from different hearings, I heard different proposals as grants being 

proposed to schools like private schools or public schools that actually allow foster youth to attend that same school even if they are 

moved or something like that. 

Get the structure right. That would help tremendously in the future of a youth. They will get a chance to actually bond with 

friends they want to bond with, and get the support system they 

need at a school, instead of moving around to different schools. 

Then you start losing faith and trust. 

That is why you have kids that do not really trust their teachers 

or do not listen because they really do not care. They moved from 

this part and this part. It really does not matter. 

Until recent, school was not a big thing for me. I really did not 

like school. School was never—I never saw myself going to college. 

I always thought that maybe I would do something else with my 

life, but I got into sports, and that kind of opened the door for 

choices. 

Even when I applied to colleges, I never thought that I could actually get in the colleges I got into. I got into at least nine different 

schools. I was very impressed by that. Six was because of academics and three was because of football. 

I had my options to actually choose a school to go to, which my 

family really disapproved of St. Francis because it was still in Joliet, but I really thought the smaller environment would be better 

for me. I had time to actually study and be coached, and actually 

listen to people, instead of going somewhere big where there was 

the possibility I could drop out because of partying at big schools 

is more dominant. 

Mr. WELLER. Jamaal, you have done a great job. I am very 

proud of you and how you presented yourself today. Thank you for 

appearing before the Subcommittee. 

Mr. NUTALL. Thank you. 

Mr. WELLER. I know my time has expired. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Lewis, do you have a question? 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
36 

Mr. LEWIS OF GEORGIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am not 

so sure that I have any questions. I do not feel adequate really to 

ask questions. 

I want to thank each of you for being here today, for telling your 

story with such courage. It is my hope that it will help educate and 

sensitize all of us. I know it will help me a great deal. 

The four of you are really heroes for being able to survive and 

not giving up, not giving in. You do not appear to be bitter or hostile. I do not know what I would have done if I had to go through 

what you have gone through. 

I just want to thank you for being here today. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you all four for coming. We 

want you to know that what you tell us, we will try to deal with. 

It is important for you to come and publicly say it. You have done 

us a real service. Thank you. 

Mr. MEEK. I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Excuse me. 

Mr. MEEK. No. I stepped in when you were making closing comments. I was in the back here. I am sorry. You know how it is, trying to juggle meetings here. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Go ahead. 

Mr. MEEK. I know there were a couple of recommendations that 

were made and I know there are two States that have extended 

foster care assistance beyond 21 to 23. I think it is Colorado and 

another State which escapes me at this time. 

I think it is important as we look at this extended care, and Mr. Chairman, you talked in your opening comments about the $36,000 

that an average kid receives. I was jokingly saying I just got that 

last year. 

[Laughter.] 

I think it is important as it relates to young adult care. I know 

many of the Members, and I overheard as I was back here in a 

meeting in another room, many of the Members commending you 

for coming before the Committee. I think it is important to open 

your lives up and share so we can learn, so we can avoid the situations that you all have gone through. 

As it relates to the health care that was mentioned in all of your 

testimony, extension of health care, and also making sure there 

was assistance for like some sort of family assistance after the age 

of 18, how do you legislate. It is very difficult for us to kind of legislate that process. 

The unification with family, need it be cousins or nephews or 

nieces, and I know in some instances, Tyler, you tried to do it and 

it did not work out the way it was supposed to. 

What are some best practices? I am sorry. Maybe it was already 

answered and I was out of the room. What are some of the best 

practices that you all have found talking to other folks in other 

parts of the country? 

You have an opportunity that I have not had even as a Member 

of Congress to come before Congress and share your thoughts and 

ideas. 

Hearing some of the people that you have talked to after they are 

18, after they go through that kind of sink or swim effect in the 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
37 

deep water, what have been some of the things that have worked 

for others that have not worked for you that you wish could have 

worked for you or that we can endorse? 

Ms. DOBBINS. I would like to say that I have done 25 trainings 

in the State of Oregon around permanency, and this is something 

I get asked often, and I would like you to take a look at not all 

or nothing, so necessarily you cannot place a youth with a family 

member or if you cannot establish some sort of family, that does 

not mean that you do not nurture the relationship still. 

For me, I had relatives living 20 minutes away. For whatever 

reasons, I was not placed with them. Nurturing those relationships 

and even with my grandmother who was out of State could have 

been possible support for me as I exited the foster care system. 

Looking at it as not all or nothing is a very good approach in figuring out what ways to nurture the relationships that do exist with 

family members that are healthy members of the family. 

Mr. MEEK. Presently today, I guess you would say that there is 

not a system in place, and I know many States are doing different 

things, a system in place when they see 18 approaching, someone, 

a caseworker, someone identifying family members. 

Now this person is kind of an adult, you can brush your own 

teeth and do all those kinds of things, and you do not have to 

worry about the guardian, do not leave the house after 8:00 kind 

of thing. 

These are young adults, matching them up with blood relatives. 

I take it that does not exist today and is something that can be explored? 

Ms. DOBBINS. Not as much as it should. It did not exist in my 

case. 

Mr. BACON. I just want to speak on that, too. A lot of situations, 

the option of putting them back in the family is not a safe situation, in my instance. One of the things we need to look at is developing programs to set up foster youth with mentors before they 

turn 18. 

A lot of the situations, they wait until they turn 18 and we forget 

in years growing up, at 16/17, you learn more. That is the age that 

you learn more. You are more able to take more in and you are 

more acceptable to help. 

We need to look at those ages as providing help for youth at 

those ages. We need to set youth up with if not supportive adults, 

supportive foster care alumni. I know there are several, like myself, foster care alumni, that would willingly go in and help develop 

mentoring programs for foster youth. 

That is one of the things that we need to look at, getting the foster care alumni into the mentoring stages for foster youth because 

again, like I said, previously when a foster youth meets another 

foster youth, they have that automatic bond. 

When you set up a foster youth with a mentor who has not experienced the foster care system, the first thing in the foster youth’s 

thoughts is you do not know where I am coming from, how can you 

help me. 

When you set them up with a foster youth, that thought may 

come up but we are able to say, hey, I have been through the foster 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
38 

care system. I know what you are going through and I am a prime 

example of how you can succeed. 

We can also provide tough love for foster youth. A lot of foster 

youth when they are set up with a mentor who has not experienced 

the foster care system, they give excuses. When they give excuses 

to other foster youth, no, that is not an excuse. We have been 

through that, too, look, we have made it and this is how you make 

it through. 

I am a big advocate and I think until we get foster care alumni 

in as mentors and to assist and work within the foster care system 

and the child welfare agencies within each State, the major 

changes will not be done. We need to get foster care alumni. 

We do not need to wait for foster care alumni to come to us. We 

need to seek them out and give them an invitation to come and 

help us in the foster care system to make the change. 

When a foster youth is given the opportunity to make a difference, they are more than willing to accept it. A lot of foster 

youth struggle to make a change because they do not know how to 

and they are waiting for someone to ask them. 

Mr. MEEK. Thank you all very much. Mr. Chairman, this is kind 

of the two outfielders and the ball falling between the two outfielders kind of situation. 

This is my first time on the Committee on Ways and Means, 

after being here three terms, but I think it is important as we start 

to look at how we can make life better, there has to be incentives 

for not only those that have gone through it with different kinds 

of experiences—I have been a State legislator in Florida when you 

were in the system. 

Knowing what I needed to know, just having one house down 

from where I grew up a foster home, and meeting and playing with 

all the friends as I was coming up as a young person does not qualify me to know all I need to know. 

I think the young adult mentoring piece is very, very important, 

and also making sure that we provide that opportunity. Many parents and young professionals say I can barely take care of myself, 

how can I go—maybe with a young adult, it is a different kind of 

experience and something that I think we could possibly work with. 

Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. We thank you very much for coming. 

Unfortunately, you have heard the bells go off and we are going to 

have to go over and vote. We have three votes which should bring 

us back around 12:30. 

I would ask the panel if they would go get a little lunch and we 

will see you back at 12:30. Thank you very much. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. We will come back to order. Thank 

you for waiting. I hope you enjoyed a sumptuous and elegant lunch 

in the Longworth Dining Room. Maybe you went to the Rayburn 

one where they have carpeting. 

We are back here to finish. We have lost the crowd, unfortunately. We are glad to have you here because you can give us some 

practical suggestions about what needs to be done. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
39 

We have Cornelia Ashby, who is the Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security at the U.S. Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) that goes out and sorts out what is going on. 

Dr. Courtney, who is the Ballmer Chair in Child Well-Being at 

the School of Social Work at the University of Washington. 

Gary Stangler, who is Executive Director of the Jim Casey Youth 

Opportunities Initiative, and Sam Cobbs, Executive Director of 

First Place Fund for Youth in Oakland, and Jane Soltis, who is the 

Program Officer for the Eckerd Family Foundation. 

We want to thank you all for coming. Your full state will be put 

in the record. We would like you to try and hold to 5 minutes for 

whatever comments you want to make out of your full states. 

Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF CORNELIA ASHBY, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION, 

WORKFORCE AND INCOME SECURITY, U.S. GOVERNMENT 

ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Ms. ASHBY. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Weller, thank you for inviting me here today to discuss services for youth who age out of the 

foster care system without the support of an adoptive or other permanent home. 

Overall, Federal funding for State independent living programs 

doubled with the passage of the Foster Care Independence Act. 

While we could not determine the exact amount of funding States 

had available to spend on each eligible youth because of the lack 

of data on eligible youth emancipated from foster care, data available at the time of our 2004 report indicated that States’ maximum 

funding allocation for each eligible youth in the foster care system 

ranged from between $476 and $2,300. 

Some States were not able to spend all of their Federal allocations in the first 2 years of increased funding under the program. 

For example, in 2001, 20 States returned nearly $10 million in 

Federal funding to HHS, and in 2002, 13 States returned more 

than $4 million. Data provided in A July 2007 Congressional Research Service Memo to Congress shows that nine States returned 

less than 1 percent of total Chafee funding in 2004. 

While States expanded and improved independent living services, 

under the Chafee program, States differed in the proportion of eligible youth served. In our 2004 survey, 40 States reported serving 

about 44 percent of eligible youth in their States. About one-third 

of reporting States were serving less than half of their eligible foster care youth while an equal percentage was serving three-fourths 

or more. Certain gaps in the availability of critical services were reported, which may explain at least in part why more eligible youth 

were not served. For example, States continued to be challenged in 

providing youth with a smooth transition between the youth and 

adult mental health systems. Of the four States we visited in 2004, 

three cited difficulties due to more stringent eligibility requirements in the adult system, different levels of services and long 

waiting lines for services. Challenges with mental health services 

remained in 2006. Thirty-two State child welfare directors responding to our survey reported dissatisfaction with the level of mental 

health services. There is also a housing gap. Youth we spoke with 

in the four States we visited in 2004 said that locating safe and 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
40 

stable housing after leaving foster care was one of their primary 

concerns in their transition to independence. 

This service gap was also identified in our 2006 survey when 31 

State child welfare directors reported dissatisfaction with the level 

of housing for foster care youth transitioning to independence. 

Under the Chafee program, many States began offering new services to support youth who had emancipated from foster care, including education and training vouchers for postsecondary education and Medicaid health insurance. In July 2007, Congressional 

Research Service (CRS) data showed that 26 States did not spend 

all of their fiscal year 2004 ETV funding with one State returning 

almost all of its funds and 14 other States returning over 20 percent of their funding allotment. Overall, more than 14 percent of 

fiscal year 2004 ETV funding was returned to the U.S. Treasury. 

In 2007, the American Public Human Services Association reported 

that 22 States planned or have already started using the Chafee 

option to offer Medicaid coverage to youth who age out of foster 

care. The study also found the remaining 28 States and the District 

of Columbia were reported to be using other methods, such as the 

State children’s health insurance program or the Medicaid waiver 

demonstration program to extend coverage to youth. 

Usage of existing Federal social service programs outside the 

child welfare system could help reduce the gap in available services 

for youth aging out of foster care. While in our 2004 survey 49 

States reported increased coordination with Federal as well as 

State and local programs that can provide or supplement independent living services, barriers hindered access to services across 

programs. In our 2006 survey, States revealed that they were least 

likely to address challenges in providing services such as those pertaining to mental health, services that are typically provided outside of the child welfare system. Access barriers include the lack 

of information on the array of programs available in each State or 

local area, and differences in program priorities. In the November 

2004 report and May 2007 testimony before this Subcommittee, we 

recommended that HHS make information available to States and 

local areas about other Federal programs that may assist youth in 

their transition to self sufficiency. HHS continues to disagree with 

our recommendation. 

Services provided to youth aging out of the foster care system 

must be effective in preparing these youth for self sufficiency. However, how well the Chafee program has worked to improve outcomes for emancipated youth is still unknown 8 years after passage 

of the Foster Care Independence Act, and HHS has not yet implemented its information system that is intended to meet the Act’s 

requirements for monitoring State performance. 

Further, while regional staff conduct much of the Federal oversight of the Chafee program, their current oversight tools do not 

provide standard information needed to measure performance. 

Our 2004 report includes a recommendation that HHS develop a 

standard reporting format for State plans and progress reports and 

implement a uniform process regional offices can use to assess 

States’ progress in meeting the needs of youth in foster care and 

those recently emancipated from care. These recommendations 

have not been implemented. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
41 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be happy 

to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ashby follows:] 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
42 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.001
43 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.002
44 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.003
45 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.004
46 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.005
47 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.006
48 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.007
49 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.008
50 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.009
51 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.010
52 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.011
53 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.012
54 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.013
55 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.014
56 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.015
57 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.016
58 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.017
59 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.018
60 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.019
61 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.020
62 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.021
63 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.022
64 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.023
65 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.024
66 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.025
67 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.026
68 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.027
69 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.028
70 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.029
71 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.030
72 

f 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING43505A.031
73 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you. 

Dr. Courtney. 

STATEMENT OF MARK COURTNEY, PH.D., BALLMER CHAIR IN 

CHILD WELL-BEING, SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK, UNIVERSITY 

OF WASHINGTON 

Dr. COURTNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am here to share 

the findings of a study being conducted by my colleagues and I in 

the States of Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa of young people aging 

out of foster care in those three States. 

Our study involves three interviews with young people. We interviewed 732 young people when they were 17 to 18 and still in care 

in those three States back in 2002/2003. We followed up in 2004 

with about 82 percent of them when they were on average about 

19.5 years old. 

The information I present today comes from those interviews. We 

just finished last year interviews when they were 21, but the Committee beat me to the punch, and we will not be releasing those 

results for a few more weeks, but later this Summer, we will. 

Our study informs child welfare policy, I believe, in at least three 

ways. First, it provides the first comprehensive view of how foster 

youth are faring in the transition to adulthood in the wake of the 

Foster Care Independence Act. 

Second, it provides a natural experiment regarding the effects of 

allowing young people to remain in care past 18. 

Illinois allows youth to remain in care through their 21st birthday whereas Iowa and Wisconsin generally discharge youth around 

their 18th birthday and almost never after their 19th birthday. 

Third, our interviews include questions used in nationally representative studies allowing us to compare outcomes of foster youth 

to youth generally. 

I will focus on four study findings I believe help inform policy 

and practice. 

First, although some of the young people we were following are 

faring reasonably well, more of them are having significant difficulties during the transition to adulthood. 

I will give you a few examples. More than one-third had neither 

a high school diploma nor a general equivalency degree compared 

to one-tenth 19 year olds nationally. Whereas 57 percent 19 year 

olds nationally are enrolled in a two or 4 year college, this was true 

for less than one quarter of the young people we are studying. 

Only about two-fifths of our study participants were employed at 

age 19 compared to nearly three-fifths of their peers, and even 

among those who were employed, 75 percent earned less than 

$5,000 in the last year. 

Foster youth in transition were twice as likely as other 19 year 

olds to report not having enough money to pay their rent or mortgage or being unable to pay an utility bill. They were one and a 

half times more likely to report having their phone service disconnected. 

Of the young people who had already left care—a lot of them in 

Illinois stayed in care—14 percent had been homeless at least once 

since leaving care and most of them had only been out of care less 

than a year. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
74 

Compared to other 19 year olds, foster youth in transition were 

more likely to report that health conditions limited their daily functioning and reported more emergency room visits and hospitalization. 

About one-third of our participants suffered from mental health 

problems, nearly half of the young women in our study had been 

pregnant by age 19, that is twice the rate of their peers, about one 

quarter reported having children, and while both males and females were more than twice as likely as their peers to have children, they were much less likely to report being married or cohabiting. 

Many of the young people in our study had experienced trouble 

with the law. Thirty percent of the males and 11 percent of the females reported being incarcerated at least once between 17 and 19. 

Many more had been arrested. 

A second major study finding is that receipt of independent living 

services during the transition to adulthood is arguably spotty at 

best. We asked the young people questions about the services they 

received between our first and second interviews in areas of education, vocational training and employment, budgeting, health education, housing, and youth development. The only domain in which 

at least half of the young people reported at least one service was 

education, and that was only slightly more than half. 

The third finding is that we found that a majority of young people, and this is probably the most relevant to you, the other ones 

might not sound that new to you, the majority of young people 

would remain in care past 18 if given the opportunity, and doing 

so appears to convey significant benefits to young people. 

Among study youth in Illinois, that is the State that allows 

young people to stay in care past 18, the vast majority remained 

in care past their 19th birthday and over half remained in care 

past their 20th birthday. 

About half of the young people remaining in care, however, did 

not live in traditional foster homes or kinship foster homes or 

group care. They had actually moved into some kind of supervised 

independent living setting. Illinois has massive investment in transitional housing. 

Remaining in care past 18 was associated with increased receipt 

of independent living services, better access to health and mental 

health care, a double likelihood of being enrolled in school and a 

triple likelihood of being in college, and a one quarter reduction in 

the risk of pregnancy between ages 17 and 19. It was also associated with a decreased risk of some forms of criminal justice system 

involvement. 

Fourth, our study provides evidence and supports what the 

young people said earlier of the need for practitioners and policy 

makers to focus much more on the family relations of foster youth 

given the importance of these relationships to most if not all of 

these youth. 

Over one-third of our study participants actually lived with a relative at the time of our follow up interview with them, and the vast 

majority, over 75 percent, reported feeling very close to one or more 

members of their family of origin. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
75 

In summary, many of the young people are not doing well. The 

glass is still less than half full with respect to the independent living service provision. Most young people, at least from what we can 

find, would choose to stay in care, affiliated with a system, connected to the system, if they had the choice, staying in care conveys 

significant benefits to them. 

Lastly, we really need to pay more attention to family relations. 

I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Courtney follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Mark Courtney, Ph.D., Ballmer Chair in Child WellBeing, School of Social Work, University of Washington 

Today I share with you the findings of a study being conducted by the Chapin 

Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago and the state public child welfare agencies in Illinois, Iowa and Wisconsin, following young people as they ‘‘age 

out’’ of the foster care system. Our study involves three interviews with young people. We interviewed 732 youth in 2002 and 2003 who were 17 or 18 years old and 

still under the jurisdiction of the child welfare agency and followed up in 2004 with 

603 (or 82 percent) of these young people when they were on average about 19 and 

a half years old. The information I present today comes from these interviews. Reports from a third wave of interviews conducted last year when the respondents 

were 21 will be available later this summer. 

Our study informs child welfare policy in at least three ways. First, it provides 

the only comprehensive view of how foster youth are faring in the transition to 

adulthood since the Foster Care Independence Act became law. Second, it provides 

a natural experiment regarding the effects of allowing youth to remain in foster care 

past age 18; Illinois allows youth to remain in care through their 21st birthday, 

whereas Iowa and Wisconsin generally discharge youth around their 18th birthday 

and almost never later than their 19th birthday. Third, our interviews include questions used in nationally representative studies, allowing us to compare experiences 

of foster youth to those of other young people. I will focus on four study findings 

that I believe help inform policy and practice. 

First, although some of the young people are faring reasonably well, more of them 

are having significant difficulties during the transition to adulthood. Few of them 

are obtaining the education necessary to succeed in today’s economy. More than one 

third had neither a high school diploma nor a general equivalency degree compared 

to one-tenth of 19 year olds nationally. Perhaps most troublingly, whereas about 57 

percent of 19 year olds nationally are enrolled in a two—or four-year college, this 

was true for less than one-quarter of the current and former foster youth in our 

study. Only about two-fifths of our study participants were employed at age 19, compared to nearly three-fifths of their peers; over three-quarters of those who had 

worked in the past year had earned less than $5,000. Foster youth in transition 

were twice as likely as other 19-year-olds to report not having enough money to pay 

their rent or mortgage (12 percent) or to be unable to pay a utility bill (12 percent) 

and 1.5 times more likely to report having their phone service disconnected (21 percent). Fourteen percent of those discharged from care reported having been homeless at least once since leaving care. Compared to other 19 year olds, foster youth 

in transition were more likely to report that health conditions limited their daily 

functioning and reported more emergency room visits and hospitalizations. About 

one-third of our study participants suffered from mental health problems we assessed, including post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, and depression. 

Nearly half of the young women in our study had been pregnant by age 19, twice 

as many as their peers. About one-quarter of the young people reported having children. While both males and females were more than twice as likely as other 19 year 

olds to report having a child, they were less likely to report being married or cohabiting. Many of the young people in our study had experienced trouble with the law; 

30 percent of the males and 11 percent of the females reported being incarcerated 

at least once between our first and follow-up interviews. They were more likely than 

other 19 year olds to report engaging in criminal behavior and being victims of 

crime. 

A second major study finding is that receipt of independent living services during 

the transition to adulthood is arguably spotty at best. We asked the young people 

questions about the services they received between our first and second wave of 

interviews in six domains: education; vocational training and employment; budgeting and financial management; health education; housing; and services to promote 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
76 

youth development. The only domain in which at least half of the young adults reported receiving at least one service was educational support. 

Third, we found that a majority of young people would remain in care past age 

18 if given the opportunity and that doing so appears to convey significant benefits. 

Among study youth in Illinois, the vast majority remained in care past their 19th 

birthday and over half remained past their 20th birthday. About half of the young 

people remaining in care lived in traditional family foster care, kinship care, or 

group care, but about half moved on to various forms of supervised independentliving. Remaining in care past 18 was associated with increased receipt of independent living services, better access to health and mental health care, a doubled 

likelihood of being in school and tripled likelihood of being in college, and a onequarter reduction in the risk of pregnancy between ages 17–18 and 19. It was also 

associated with a decreased risk of some forms of criminal justice system involvement. 

Fourth, our study provides evidence of the need for practitioners and policymakers 

to focus more on the family relations of foster youth, given the importance of these 

relationships to foster youth in transition to adulthood. Over one-third of our study 

participants lived with a relative at the time of their follow-up interview and the 

vast majority of all the young people reported feeling very close to one or more members of their family of origin. 

I look forward to answering your questions and discussing the policy implications 

of our study’s findings. 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you. 

Mr. Stangler. 

STATEMENT OF GARY STANGLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, JIM 

CASEY YOUTH OPPORTUNITIES INITIATIVE 

Mr. STANGLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Gary 

Stangler. I am Executive Director of the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative. We are a national foundation devoted exclusively 

to the issue of youth aging out of foster care. We were formed by 

the Annie E. Casey Foundation out of Baltimore and Casey Family 

Programs out of Seattle. 

We have been doing this work for 6 years and prior to this, I was 

the Director of the Missouri Department of Social Services under 

both Republican and Democratic Governors. 

I was the Commissioner during the nineties when we did welfare 

reform, with the passage of the Temporary Assistance to Needy 

Families. 

I would say that at that time, the creativity, the innovation, the 

ideas that were bubbling up in the States and that were promoted 

in the Federal Act is something that we have not seen in Chafee. 

As the GAO report just noted, the States have been pretty slow 

to even spend the money that Congress made available. They have 

been slow to exercise the Medicaid option. 

I would say in my experience over the last couple of years, this 

has really begun to change. I think the States lacked good practice 

models. They lacked good notions of what to do with this difficult 

population. 

Since then, we have had Mark Courtney’s research, Peter 

Pecora’s, Casey Family Programs, alumni studies, and I think as 

GAO just noted, you have seen the States increasing the uptake of 

the spending. 

What I would argue is what we need for Congress to do to capture the momentum we are just beginning to see over the last 2 

years in the States in several areas. The first, Mr. Chairman, you 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
77 

started by saying you have not met a foster kid who did not want 

to go home or who did not want to stay connected to their parents 

or family. I would say I have not either, in the 25 years I have 

been doing this. 

I have come to believe that the drive for family is hard wired in 

us and that it should be national policy and a national goal that 

no child leaves foster care that does not have a connection to an 

adult, a supportive adult, preferably a legal relationship, guardianship, kinship, reunification, adoption, something that has a sense 

of forever and unconditional support attached to it. 

You heard it eloquently from the young people earlier. I think 

the States are starting to make progress in this area for a couple 

of reasons. One innovation is paying attention to what the youth 

themselves have to say. We have largely ignored them over the 

past years in child welfare practice and ignoring the fact that they 

often knew who the family members were, who the relatives were 

that could provide support and be a permanent placement. 

I think second we should for those kids who cannot be reunited, 

that we need to move quickly on termination of parental rights, but 

there are going to be kids who are going to be considered—Tyler 

sat up here and said I was considered unadoptable. There are going 

to be kids for whom adoption is not an option. 

For them, we need kinship care. We need guardianship. We need 

Federal subsidies, and we need to extend Title IV–E reimbursement to the States for foster care to 21. Stopping at age 18 is arbitrary in my opinion, and as you heard eloquently from them, we 

need to extend this to 21 on a voluntary basis, but importantly, I 

think, with a clear right of return. 

Again, citing Tyler. He thought he was going to be 18. He 

thought he was going to be a grown up. He was going to be a man 

now. He was going to go out there. He quickly found it ain’t so 

great out there and it’s a little harder than he thought. 

We need to allow kids to come back into care and for many 

States after discharge, that is it, case is closed. There is no right 

of return. We need to allow a right of return. 

I believe all States should exercise the Medicaid option under 

Chafee that Congress has provided. In the past 6 months, I think 

you have seen Michigan, Florida, Washington State, Missouri following now to exercise the Chafee option. I think States are starting to move toward it. I think any incentive or push that can come 

from Congress would be a good thing. 

The progress with the education and training vouchers, this is an 

area where the States had great difficulty. I think we have seen 

great progress there through innovations in marketing, in reaching 

out to kids. 

I would cite a case in Northern Michigan where they assigned a 

part time worker to exclusively work with this population. She 

alone was able to triple the number of kids moving to postsecondary education. 

Finally, in the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities ten projects, we 

have what we call an Opportunity Passport. It is a matched savings account. We are just now getting data from 2,000 kids who 

have had these matched savings accounts. What we are finding is 

that foster kids can save. In our IDA, they can save for a car or 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
78 

a security deposit on an apartment in addition to the normal educational expenses, medical expenses. 

Anthony Reeves mentioned that he was able to save a security 

deposit. That is how he did it, with this Opportunity Passport. It 

is a critical way to overcome the barrier of not having the financial 

resources to buy a car, that allows you to go to school and work 

in this country. 

I think that is a critical necessity if you are going to do that, and 

our data is beginning to show that not only kids can save, but they 

can save for assets that lead to better economic and educational 

outcomes. 

I would urge the Congress as you explore other options a demonstration project with IDAs that would include this. It may be relevant to Mr. Stark’s notion of a trust fund for foster kids because 

anything that a kid can save whether it would come from child 

support payments or other payments on his behalf could be suitable for this kind of model. 

I thank you for inviting me and I would be happy to answer your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Stangler follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Gary Stangler, Executive Director, Jim Casey Youth 

Opportunities Initiative 

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Representative Weller, and members of the Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today. 

The Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative is a national foundation focused 

solely on helping states and communities assist older youth in foster care make successful transitions to adulthood. We are a grantmaking foundation, supporting demonstration projects in both rural and urban areas in 10 States from Michigan to 

Georgia to Maine to California. Our strategies focus on improving the outcomes of 

transitioning youth, outcomes that ultimately build into two key areas that we know 

will help these young adults thrive: providing opportunities to achieve economic success and helping them build permanent relationships in their lives. We were created 

by the Annie E. Casey Foundation and Casey Family Programs, the nation’s two 

largest foundations devoted to disadvantaged youth and their families. 

Our foundation has been doing this work for six years, and I have been involved 

in child welfare for 25 years. Prior to this position, I was the director of the Missouri 

Department of Social Services, appointed first by Republican Governor John 

Ashcroft and re-appointed to office by Democratic Governor Mel Carnahan. 

We have learned a great deal about older youth in foster care these past several 

years. Out of more than half a million kids placed in foster care due to parental 

abuse or neglect, more than 100,000 are over age 16. Roughly 24,000 young people 

‘‘age out’’ every year—that means they are discharged from the child welfare system 

when they turn 18. In fact, the number of young people leaving foster care without 

a permanent family is at an all-time high, according to a new report by The Pew 

Charitable Trusts’ Kids Are Waiting campaign and the Jim Casey Initiative. Even 

though the total number of children in foster care has decreased, the number who 

‘‘age out’’ of the system has grown by 41 percent since 1998. In total, more than 

165,000 young people aged out of foster care between 1998 and 2005—nearly 25,000 

in 2005 alone. At the same time, that study also found that those young adults who 

‘‘age out’’ spent more time in the foster care system: nearly five years, compared to 

the national average of 21⁄2 years. 

These young people, unlike mine or yours, lack a stable family foundation from 

which they can move into adulthood. Many of these youth have not had the typical 

experiences growing up that teach skills for self-sufficiency, especially those youth 

emancipating from group care. Suddenly, at age 18, they’re on their own. As a result, they often have trouble finding a place to live, finding and keeping a job, getting health insurance, continuing their education, avoiding financial trouble and 

making good decisions. For these youth, there are no parents there to advise them 

or help them recover from the bad judgments that teenagers are prone to make. 

Imagine your old 18-year-old trying to make it alone. What state your child lives 

in determines what choices and options are available. In most states, there will be 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
79 

financial aid for college; in some states a waiver of tuition at public colleges that 

mimics the absent parental support. In a few states, there will be health insurance 

available under Medicaid. For a limited number of youth, there will be some financial assistance for a place to live. 

With our own children, we don’t tell them they can have college help, but no 

health insurance. For many of us, our employer-based health insurance covers our 

dependents into their twenties. And, most important, we would be there to cheer 

their successes and console them during the inevitable crises of growing up. 

The picture for youth who have aged out of care is fairly bleak, according to recent 

research at the Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago. Those 

who left foster care by age 18 were nearly three times more likely than their peers 

to be out of work and school. They were twice as likely to be unable to pay their 

rent and were four times as likely to be evicted. Fewer than half had bank accounts. 

Nearly half of the young women had been pregnant at least once by age 19. Significant numbers were incarcerated or homeless at some point. 

Only half of youth in foster care finish high school, which is not at all surprising 

considering that most youth are discharged at age 18, an age when most kids are 

likely to still be in high school. Only 20 percent who are qualified for college actually 

go on to post-secondary education. And only 5 percent of those in college finish their 

degrees. Low educational attainment guarantees poor economic and financial outcomes. 

Clearly, this is one of our nation’s most vulnerable populations of young people, 

with high social costs for homelessness, unemployment, and, for some, correctional 

costs. As you well know, in 1999, Congress provided assistance for these young 

adults through the Foster Care Independence Act. The act doubled federal funding 

to $140 million for the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program, which 

provides funds for states to help youth in foster care with life skills training, education and employment supports, connections to adults, and housing assistance. 

States are required to contribute a 20 percent match for Chafee funds. Overall, the 

amount of funding available isn’t enough to provide a comprehensive array of services to all emancipating youth. States find themselves patching together additional 

educational, mental health, and job training services across various agencies, but 

often, these services are not well coordinated. Many youth are left to navigate multiple bureaucracies on their own. 

During the years since passage of Chafee, states have had difficulty taking advantage of these flexible funds. I was the Missouri state director and chair of the National Council of State Human Services Administrators during the years when welfare reform was launched. At that time, new ideas and innovations were widespread, and they led to significant improvements on a national scale. I have not 

seen that kind of innovation and creativity with Chafee, until very recently. 

I believe that the difficulty for the states arose because states lacked good practice 

models and good policies for helping this population. With the research from studies 

like Mark Courtney’s Midwest Evaluation and Peter Pecora’s alumni studies, we 

have a clearer picture of the difficulties faced by this group of young people. And 

with advances in helping youth connect to families and build for economic success, 

this picture is beginning to change. 

Part of this change is better understanding of what it takes to improve the bleak 

outcomes. The Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative has five strategies that, we 

believe, taken together will improve the outcomes in education, employment, health, 

housing, personal connections, and community engagement for this population. We 

are learning that actively engaging youth, increasing opportunities, building community partnerships and resources, collecting the research data and communicating 

effectively, and building public will to improve state policy and practice must all 

take place for progress to be achieved. As is the case for our own children, we weave 

together the stability of permanent family and building the skills to be successful 

in modern society. 

This work has shown us repeatedly that what these young adults want most is 

permanence. They want a family relationship—reunified with their parents, safely 

living with relatives, legal guardians, or adoptive families, but certainly living in a 

relationship that has a strong sense of ‘‘forever.’’ For many of these youth, their closest relationships are ephemeral, professional ones with social workers and attorneys. This is not a family. 

We no longer accept that teens in foster care do not need permanent connections 

as they enter adulthood. On the contrary, we know that preparation for adulthood 

is inextricably linked to permanence. 

It should be national policy, and a nationally measured goal, to ensure that every 

youth leaving foster care be connected to a family for ongoing support. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
80 

In policy terms, the federal government should set this clear expectation for the 

States. I also strongly support the recommendation of the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care that the federal government should provide financial incentives 

for all forms of permanency: reunification, kinship, guardianship, and adoption. 

In addition to this primacy on permanence, the federal and state governments 

should: 

• strongly encourage the states to take advantage of the option under Chafee to 

extend Medicaid to age 21; • extend Title IV–E reimbursement for foster care to age 21, including the right 

to return to foster care after discharge or case closing; and • provide reimbursement to subsidize kinship and guardianship. 

These are the basic building blocks of health, safety, and permanence, which are 

the goals for children taken into our custody. 

If there is one clear finding that emerges from the Midwest Evaluation, it is that 

those young adults who could remain in foster care past age 18 until 21 had better 

outcomes. This is intuitively obvious given what we understand about the importance of permanence. But states have been very slow to extend foster care past age 

18. Only a handful have made progress in this area, largely due to the fact that 

the federal government stops sharing in the cost. We need to extend the availability 

of federal support and incentives for foster care to age 21 in all states with reimbursement from Title IV–E. This must include the right to return to foster care after 

discharge or case closing. For many teenagers, the need for such support becomes 

clear only after being on their own for a period of time. We must allow them the 

opportunity to return to foster care for critical supports. 

States are beginning to innovate on ways to connect youth to supportive family 

members. Perhaps the single most important ‘‘innovation’’ has been to listen to the 

youth themselves, who are often the best resources on who might be appropriate 

family members. Youth are often excluded even from the judicial processes that direct their lives, many not even aware that they have legal representation. The move 

to engaging youth directly in decisions that affect their lives is an overdue and critical change in policy, practice, and in how we approach casework training. 

Recently, 60 Minutes featured a software service called Family Finding, which 

searches public databases to identify extended family members. Oklahoma has colocated child welfare and child support enforcement staff to increase the potential 

connections to family. Many jurisdictions are using intensive Team Decision Making 

practice models to identify and prepare family members to support youth aging out. 

Let me give you additional examples of state innovation. With most youth emancipating at age 18, continuing their education is essential to their chances of life and 

economic success. Congress created the Education and Training Vouchers (ETV) to 

help address this issue, but the states have been slow to take advantage of this federal support. This has begun to change. In Michigan, only 127 youth received the 

supports of the Education and Training Vouchers in FY2004. In fact, Michigan had 

only been asking for half of the funds available to the state. In FY2006, the number 

of youth had doubled to almost 300, and in the first eight months of this year, already 220 youth have received ETVs. 

How did they do this? They accomplished this through significant increase in marketing, plus lots of education by youth panels and professionals targeted to Department of Human Services staff, college financial aid officers, high school counselors, 

foster parents, court staff, guardians ad litem, multi-agency state permanency task 

force, and foster youth. Of course the efforts of all the Michigan Youth Opportunities 

Initiative sites to get the word out had an impact. 

In the ten-county area in the rural north of the state, having a part-time education planner (10 hours/week for 10 counties) more than tripled post-secondary enrollments in one year. This caseworker began working with the youth in junior and 

senior years of high school to help make sure they had a plan to graduate from high 

school, identify financial resources, and fill out paperwork for financial aid and applications. 

Ashley, from northern Michigan, says: ‘‘Without Kallie (caseworker) I just 

wouldn’t have gone to college. I probably would have stayed home and taken a couple of classes from the community college but I didn’t ever think I could be a real 

student at a 4-year college. She helped me believe that I could do it, but most of 

all helped me get through all the paperwork I needed to do, like FAFSA and the 

things I need for ETV, and applications just to get in. I just finished my freshman 

year and I can’t wait to go back in the fall.’’ 

Arrica (Macomb County, near Detroit): ‘‘For me, ETV has been a major financial 

contributor to me being able to go to college. I will be graduating from Oakland University next spring and it would not be possible if it was not for the ETV. I no 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
81 

longer worry about being able to pay for college, along with the Pell grant and TIP 

all my worries are gone, now I’m able to focus on contributing to society in a positive 

way and not focus on my past that may result in a cycle (of foster care) for my family.’’ 

Michigan is a good example of innovation to help kids continue post-secondary 

education. The creative deployment of a part-time caseworker tripled the number 

of youth continuing their education. 

Michigan is not alone in helping youth continue their education. Florida just 

eased restrictive polices to allow part-time school attendance, and extended the age 

of assistance through the 23rd birthday. Iowa just passed legislation greatly expanding the amount of aid available, and extended it to private colleges and universities 

as well as state schools. These innovations have also led to clearer notions of what 

it takes to promote educational success for youth lacking traditional family supports, such as the expenses of off-campus housing, child care to attend school, and 

things as simple as where one can go during school breaks when other young people 

head home to their families. 

And recently, the number of states exercising the option under Chafee to provide 

Medicaid has increased. Yet still, fewer than half of the states have taken advantage of this option and the matching funds. But just this year, Colorado, Florida, 

Michigan, Washington, and Missouri have extended Medicaid to youth aging out of 

foster care to age 21. In Colorado, the expansion included better coordination with 

the state mental health services system. 

States have also developed innovations recognizing the importance of sibling connections. The disruption of sibling relationships is the most frequently expressed 

concern by young people across the Initiative’s sites. In Maine, the local youth leadership board led the successful effort to pass legislation for sibling visitation rights. 

Iowa’s legislature recently funded a demonstration project to promote sibling relationships. Colorado just passed legislation creating a statewide task force on permanence and foster care. 

We must also continue to develop and support innovations and promising ways 

to help these young adults achieve independence successfully. Our goal must be to 

integrate family permanency and preparation for adulthood, which is what we do 

as parents for our own kids. Economic success in modern society requires post-secondary education, financial literacy, and building personal and financial assets. 

We have several key components we believe will provide opportunities for both 

economic success and permanence for these young people. To date, the communities 

in our Jim Casey Youth Opportunity Initiative have worked with more than 2,100 

young people, ages 14 to 23, who have or will transition from foster care. One key 

component is the Opportunity PassportTM which is designed to organize resources 

and create opportunities for young people leaving foster care. The Opportunity Passport? has three distinct elements: 

• A personal debit account to be used to pay for short-term expenses; 

• A matched savings account, also known as an Individual Development Account 

(IDA), to be used for specific assets, such as education expenses and housing 

down payments/deposits. 

• Door openers, a host of opportunities to be developed on a local basis. Examples 

include pre-approval for registration for community college courses or expedited 

access to job-training or adult education courses. 

The Opportunity PassportTM helps participants learn financial management; obtain experience with the banking system; save money for education, housing, health 

care, and other specified expenses; and gain streamlined access to educational, 

training, and vocational opportunities. 

Through the Opportunity PassportTM, young people are trained in financial literacy: money matters, such as how to budget, how to balance a checkbook, how to 

use credit wisely, how to avoid the predatory lending system, and getting a loan 

that they can repay. All Opportunity PassportTM participants have bank accounts, 

compared to only half of young people who have aged out of care in the Midwest 

Evaluation. Saving is encouraged with a one-to-one match in an Individual Development Account, or IDA, that they can use to buy assets that build future economic 

success, such as educational expenses, housing, and cars to get to work and school, 

medical expenses or to start a business. 

The Opportunity PassportTM IDA differs from that in the Assets for Independence 

Act (AFIA). This design provides match for the purchase of cars and security deposits for rental apartments or houses, not just down payments for home purchase. The 

security deposit is often the barrier to being able to find a place to live. The match 

for their savings for down payment or purchase of a car includes licensing fees and 

insurance. A car is an absolute necessity to have a job and/or continue going to 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
82 

school. Consider rural northern Michigan, or the state of Maine, where transportation to school and work is nearly impossible without a car. Transportation is no 

less a barrier in Atlanta or Denver. Being able to save for a car is also a motivator 

to continue saving, thereby learning money management skills. 

We have seen a level of success: One in four of Opportunity PassportTM participants have purchased assets with the most common purchases being cars, housing 

and education expenses. To date, these young people have saved more than $1.33 

million and have bought 715 assets, including, 363 vehicles, 144 home or apartment 

security or down payments, 119 education expenses, 45 investments, 23 medical expenses and 21 starting businesses. That’s actually more than low-income adults who 

participated in the American Dream Demonstration, the national IDA evaluation. 

In three years and with a two-to-one match, those adults saved $1.31 million and 

bought 631 assets. 

The Opportunity PassportTM has helped Bill Schramm, 21, start a very successful 

DJ business in Traverse City, Michigan as well as buy a 1985 Toyota and pay off 

some medical bills. In Nashville, it has helped Dakota Irsik, 20, invest his savings 

to build a reserve fund. And several young people in Atlanta, Detroit, and elsewhere 

have used it to buy their very own homes. In some of those cases, our sites work 

with the local United Ways who support IDAs and have funds under AFIA. They 

are able to raise the level of match to 4–1 for home purchases, an approved asset 

under the federal program. 

I urge Congress to enact authorization for matched savings accounts, or IDAs, for 

youth transitioning from foster care that would include assets such as a car and security deposits for housing rentals. Particularly in rural areas, there is no alternative to a car to get work or school. And at least one research project, Wheels to 

Work, has shown significant increases in income for people able to buy a car. States 

also can support an IDA that would match savings, child support payments made 

on behalf of the youth, and any other income for youth in foster care, and use the 

Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative model of approvable assets for purchases 

with the match. 

It is important to stress that our experience in 10 sites across the country confirms the necessity to integrate connections and permanence with financial and economic strategies. We conclude from our data that a stand-alone IDA is unlikely to 

succeed. The ability to build assets and manage financially is closely linked to connections and supports. 

As I mentioned earlier, a cornerstone of the work of the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative is youth engagement and youth leadership. All 10 of our sites 

have youth leadership boards. These have proven to be remarkable and invaluable 

sources of connections, peer support, and leadership development. 

We firmly believe that youth voices need to be heard in decisions affecting their 

case deposition and that youth engagement permeates policy and legislative decision-making. Youth boards in Michigan and Georgia have become national models 

that others seek to emulate. In Michigan, for instance, the youth board published 

a set of policy recommendations to policymakers, called Voices, and presented it to 

Department of Human Services Director and key DHS staff. Youth board members 

also met with their legislators as well as key committee members and chairs. Governor Jennifer Granholm invited them to meet with her and her Cabinet to present 

Voices. That meeting resulted in top government officials volunteering to be mentors 

for older youth in and out of care and in several departments giving priority to foster youth for paid internships and summer jobs. The Michigan youth boards from 

Detroit and the northern counties are now working on a second edition, noting that 

16 of their 21 recommendations have been achieved or seen significant improvement. Georgia has produced a similar document called Empowerment. 

We need better data about what states are doing with their independent living 

programs under Chafee. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) finally has proposed rules about this, that if adopted may require states to report 

data next year to the National Youth Transition Database. Still, the HHS proposal 

has shortcomings: States will have to report on outcomes for 60 percent of youth 

who have left care (or for all youth in small states). The challenges of data collection 

are immense, but the penalties for noncompliance are nominal. We are concerned 

that states will risk the penalties rather than track down youth who have left care. 

Without this data, we have no measure of how our funding, policies, and practices 

are impacting the life outcomes for these youth. These long-awaited rules for a National Youth Transition Database should be implemented soon. 

To summarize, I would respectfully ask the Congress to adopt the following recommendations to make major progress in improving the bleak outcomes that we see 

in the population of young people aging out of foster care: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
83 

1. It should be the national policy, and a nationally measured goal, that every 

child emancipating from foster care have a connection to a supportive family. 

2. Federal financial participation should be available to the states for kinship, 

guardianship, and adoption, and the financial incentives to the states should be for 

all forms of permanence. 

3. Reimbursement under Title IV–E should be available to the states for foster 

care up to age 21, on a voluntary basis and with a clear right to return to foster 

care. 4. All states should exercise the Medicaid option under Chafee for youth emancipating from foster care to age 21. 

5. Congress should recognize the progress made by the states by continuing the 

Education and Training Vouchers, with incentives to the states to recognize the 

flexibility needed for this highly vulnerable population, allowing part-time school attendance, extending the age of eligibility to 25 to allow for college completion, and 

recognizing the unique needs of this population for housing, child care, and options 

for housing during school vacations. 

6. Congress should recognize the need for financial literacy and assets for this 

population and authorize Individual Development Accounts demonstration projects 

for youth emancipating from foster care, including more flexibility to include cars 

and rental housing as assets necessary to economic success and as incentives for 

participation. Traditional youth IDAs have a poor record, and must be altered for 

those lacking the support of family members. 

There is momentum building among the states to implement innovative strategies 

to improve the outcomes for this population. I urge Congress to capture this momentum, and exert national leadership. Our knowledge base on what we need to do has 

grown greatly the past few years, and the opportunity to make substantial progress 

is at hand. The net benefit, and the net savings, are measurable and within our 

reach. 

Young people in transition display a remarkable spirit of resiliency. They have a 

powerful drive for family—one that I believe is hard-wired in our beings. They show 

it in every setting and in every way. Resilience is amazing. Resilience based on stability and permanence in their lives is priceless. And it is the base for the success 

in life that we want to see for all our children. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity to address the committee. 

This concludes my testimony, and I welcome your questions. 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Cobbs? 

STATEMENT OF SAM COBBS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FIRST 

PLACE FOR YOUTH 

Mr. COBBS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My name is Sam Cobbs. I am the Executive Director of First 

Place for Youth. I would once again like to thank you for the invitation to appear this prestigious body. 

First Place for Youth is a community based social service agency 

located in the San Francisco Bay area, whose mission is to support 

youth in their transition from foster care to adulthood by promoting choices and strengthening individual and community resources. 

First Place works to ensure that all foster youth have the opportunity to experience a safe supported transition from care. 

Before I continue on, I would actually like for you to take a trip 

down memory lane with me. 

Please think back to your 18th birthday or your high school graduation, whichever trip is shorter. Think back, what was that like 

for you? Did your parents throw you a big party? Was it a quiet 

day with a few family and friends? What presents did you receive? 

What was next for you? College? Taking a year off to travel. How 

excited were you about what your future held? How confident were 

you that you could do anything that you wanted and that you had 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
84 

people who were a part of your life that would help you accomplish 

it? 

Now, put yourself in the shoes of transitioning foster care youth 

and think about those days again. The same days that most of us 

just thought about with feelings of happiness and excitement are 

the same days that former foster youth describe as having a huge 

knot in their stomach from anticipating a pending doom, because 

it is on a foster youth’s birthday that we tell them happy birthday, 

and now get out and fend for yourself. 

A year ago I received a phone call from a young lady that illustrates the conflict of emotions youth have leaving the foster care 

system. The call from this young woman started on a happy note 

because she had received news that she had enough high school 

credits to graduate in 2 weeks. The call ended with her in tears. 

She realized that her social worker would have no other choice but 

to release her from their care and that she had nowhere to go. 

Cheryl, now a participant in the First Place program, reported 

that she was so angry on her graduation night because she had to 

pack her bags in preparation to move from her foster home instead 

of hanging out with her friends and enjoying her accomplishments. 

Then she added that at least she had luggage. It was not like the 

other friends exiting foster care that moved the year prior who had 

to pack their belongings in black plastic bags. I will come back a 

little later to tell you about that luggage. 

As I have so often heard Karen Bass, an Assembly member in 

the California State legislature say in regards to this issue ‘‘It is 

not just wrong what we do to your foster youth in this country, but 

it is morally unacceptable.’’ 

At First Place, we pick up where our Government system abruptly ends its responsibility for youth it once removed from their families and homes and agreed to care for. 

We provide critical services for transitioning youth for the first 

time when they need it most, when they are attempting to make 

the critical transition from adolescence to adulthood. 

First Place provides support services that at their core offers permanency, provides safe affordable housing, and the opportunity for 

true self sufficiency through vocational and education support. 

‘‘Permanency’’ is a word that you will hear thrown around as you 

research this issue. You may have a hard time understanding what 

this word means in the context of transitioning youth as I once did. 

However, I think I can spare you a lot of time by telling you what 

I found when I stopped reading the literature and started looking 

around me and listening to the youth. 

‘‘Permanency’’ to them means having their picture on somebody 

else’s wall in their house. ‘‘Permanency’’ means having someone to 

call, not only when you need support, but to also share important 

occasions in your life, like your wedding, your graduation from college, or because you have just spearheaded policies that will improve the lives of America’s foster youth. 

Connecting young people to adults that they choose to be a part 

of their life versus someone else choosing for them is a critical element of the success of the First Place program. 

However, if I had to give you the key ingredient to the First 

Place secret sauce of success, it would be that for the first time in 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
85 

these youth’s lives, it is all up to them. They now have the opportunity to take control of their own lives and whatever happens 

from that day that they walk into our building to a future where 

their potential is limitless, this is a very important aspect to consider as you propose legislation and move policy changes forward. 

Please do not duplicate the ‘‘luggage solution.’’ Remember my 

story about Cheryl? She recalls seeing other foster care youth move 

their belongings out to the streets of our cities in plastic garbage 

bags that were chosen because they were big enough to fit the contents of their entire lives. 

After independent living skills programs and child welfare officials found out about this, they began to buy luggage for youth who 

were leaving care. However, I contend they were shortsighted and 

missed the point. Cheryl and other youth took their luggage to 

homeless shelters when they left the system. 

I ask that you not enact legislation whether or not it is the extension of Title IV–E funding until age 21, which provides critical 

support to foster youth at this critical transition, but do it in a way 

that replicates what we do at First Place, through an unique partnership with State, social service, and private resources. We give 

the youth the chance to practice being interdependent, to make 

mistakes that they can learn from, and to have reference points 

and supporters to come back to in the future. 

Policy reform must seek to integrate youth in a positive safe community that is diverse and does not relegate them to the former 

foster youth compound. 

Create a way that they are not only being cared for and supported, but that there are also high expectations for them that they 

can and will live up to. 

We often talk in the field that foster youth are our children and 

that we must treat them as we would our own children. We must 

then have the same expectations for foster youth that we have for 

our own children, in the unwavering commitments all parents have 

to help their children achieve their dreams and create a future 

where they are safe, healthy, and feel valued by society in their 

community. 

Our laws and how we allocate funds must reflect this widely felt 

and often repeated commitment. By cutting them off from meaningful support on the day they leave care rather than contemplating 

a bright future that they are in charge of, they are concerned with 

where they will sleep that night. 

We know how to facilitate a successful transition for youth. It is 

very cost effective. It costs First Place about $20,000 a year to provide these services. I would hope that you would do this not only 

because it is a financial savings, but because we are morally obligated to support our youth. 

Thank you. I am sorry I went over. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cobbs follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Sam Cobbs, Executive Director, First Place Fund 

for Youth, Oakland, California 

Hello. I am Sam Cobbs, Executive Director of First Place for Youth and I would 

like to thank you for the invitation to appear before this prestigious body today. 

First Place for Youth is a community-based social service agency located in the San 

Francisco Bay Area whose mission is to support youth in their transition from foster 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
86 

care to adulthood by promoting choices and strengthening individual and community resources. First Place works to ensure that all foster youth have the opportunity to experience a safe supported transition from foster care. Before I continue, 

I would like you to indulge me in a trip down memory lane. 

Please think back to your 18th birthday or your high school graduation, whichever 

trip is shorter. Think about what that was like for you. Did your parents throw you 

a big party or was it a quiet day with just a few family and friends? What presents 

did you receive? What was next for you—college or taking a year off to traveling? 

How excited were you about what your future held? How confident were you that 

you could do anything that you wanted and that you had people who were a part 

of your life that would help you accomplish it? Now, put yourself in the shoes of 

transitioning foster care youth and think about those days again. The same days 

that most of us just thought about with feelings of happiness and excitement are 

the same days that former foster youth describe as having a huge knot in their 

stomach from anticipating a pending doom. Because it is on a foster youth’s 18th 

birthday that we tell them happy birthday and now get out and fend for yourself! 

A year ago, I received a phone call from a young lady that illustrates the conflicted emotions youth leaving foster care face. The call from this young woman 

started on a happy note because she had received the news that she had enough 

high school credits to graduate in two weeks. The call ended in tears because she 

realized that her social worker would have no other choice but to release her from 

their care and that she had no place to go. ‘‘Cheryl,’’ now a participant in the First 

Place program, reported that she was angry on her graduation night because she 

had to pack her bags in preparation to move from her foster home instead of hanging out with her friends and enjoying her accomplishment. Then, she added that at 

least she had luggage and was not like her other friends exiting foster care that 

moved the year prior and had to pack their belongings in black plastic bags. I will 

come back a little later to tell you more about that luggage. 

As I have so often heard Karen Bass, a Senator in the California State legislature 

say in regards to this issue . . . ‘‘It is not just wrong what we do with to our foster 

youth in this country but that it is morally unacceptable.’’ At First Place we pick 

up where our government system abruptly ends its responsibility for the youth it 

once removed from their families and homes and agreed to care for. We provide critical services for transitioning foster youth at the time that they need it most—when 

they are attempting to make the critical transition from adolescence to adulthood. 

First Place provides support services that at their core offers permanency, provide 

safe affordable housing, and the opportunity for true self-sufficiency through vocational and educational support. 

‘‘Permanency’’ is a word that you will hear thrown around as you research this 

issue. You may have a hard time understanding what that word means in the context of transitioning youth as I once did. However, I think I can spare you a lot of 

time by telling you what I found when I stopped reading the literature and started 

looking around me and listening to the youth. Permanency to them means having 

their picture on someone else’s wall in their house. Permanency means having someone to call not only when you need support but to also to share important occasions 

in your life like your wedding, your graduation from college, or because you have 

spearheaded policies that will improve the lives of America’s foster youth. Connecting young people to adults that they choose to be a part of their lives versus 

someone else choosing for them is a critical element of the success of the First Place 

Program. 

However, if I had to give you the key ingredient to the First Place secret sauce 

of success, it would be that for the first time in these youths’ lives, it is all up to 

them. They now have the opportunity to take control of their own lives and whatever happens from the day that they walk into our building to a future where their 

potential is limitless. This is a very important aspect to consider as you propose legislation and move policy changes forward. Please do not duplicate the ‘‘luggage solution.’’ 

Remember my story about Cheryl? She recalled seeing other former foster care 

youth moving their belongings out to the streets of our cities in plastic black garbage bags that were chosen because they were big enough to fit the contents of their 

entire lives. After Independent Living Skills Programs and child welfare officials 

found out about this they began to buy luggage for youth who were leaving care! 

However, I contend they were shortsighted and missed the point because Cheryl and 

the other youth took their luggage to a homeless shelter when they left the system. 

I ask that you enact legislation, whether or not it is the extension of Title IV–E 

funding until age 21, which provides meaningful support to foster youth at this crucial transition, but do it in a way that replicates what we do at First Place through 

a unique partnership between state social services and private resources: we give 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
87 

youth the chance to practice being interdependent, to make mistakes that they can 

learn from, and have reference points and supporters to come back to in the future. 

Policy reform must seek to integrate youth into a positive safe community that is 

diverse and does not relegate them to the former foster youth compound. Create a 

way that they are not only being cared for and supported but that there are high 

expectations for them that they can and will live up to. We often talk in the field 

that foster youth are our children and that we must treat them as we would our 

own children. We must then have the same expectation for foster youth that we 

have for our own children and the unwavering commitment all parents have to help 

their children achieve their dreams and create a future where they are safe, healthy 

and feel valued by society and their community. Our laws and how we allocate 

funds must reflect this widely felt and often repeated commitment. By cutting them 

off from meaningful support, on the day they leave care, rather than contemplating 

a bright future that they are in charge of, they are concerned with where they will 

sleep at night and how they will support themselves. Nice luggage does little to remedy the reality of many of these youths’ futures. By embracing these principles 

wholeheartedly First Place youth are achieving positive outcomes: 

• 80% of First Place graduates maintained permanent, safe, affordable housing 

after exiting the program. • 83% obtained employment at an average wage of $9.73 per hour • 100% of youth who are parents retained custody of their children, ending the 

often intergenerational cycle of foster care involvement 

• 95% of young mothers did not have another child 

• 94% of participants maintained health insurance and sought out wellness care 

• 70% enrolled in post-secondary education 

We know what we need to do to facilitate the successful transition of foster youth 

to adulthood. The financial costs to achieve these outcomes are reasonable and 

should be seen by all of us as a bargain. It costs about $20,000 a year for us to 

house and provide services to former foster youth. We are able to do this in an area 

that has one of the highest costs of living in the country. We truly believe that if 

it can be successfully done here, it can be done anywhere. This cost is minimal in 

comparison to the cost of long term shelter stays, institutional care, public benefit 

use, and incarceration, which foster youth who exit care without support are at 

higher risk for experiencing than their peers. It is a wise and necessary investment 

that has great returns in the creation of productive, educated, and responsible citizens that contribute to our communities. You may be persuaded that youth leaving 

foster care need and deserve support as they leave state care because it is a financially sound and cost-saving decision. I hope that you are also persuaded that we 

as a society are morally obligated to provide support and opportunities to these 

youth who are our responsibility and our most valuable resources. 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you. 

Ms. Soltis. 

STATEMENT OF JANE SOLTIS, PROGRAM OFFICER, ECKERD 

FAMILY FOUNDATION 

Ms. SOLTIS. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Representative 

Weller and Members of the Committee. It is my pleasure to be here 

today. 

The Independent Living Services Advisory Council is a legislatively mandated council in Florida that advises the legislature as 

well as the Department of Children and Families on the status of 

independent living services. I am privileged to Chair this Council. 

The Eckerd Family Foundation, which I also represent, has invested more than $20 million over the last 8 years in Florida, 

North Carolina, and Delaware to enhance foster care, juvenile justice, and education programs. 

Youth aging out of foster care is one of the Foundation’s priorities. We have piloted a successful set of strategies called Connected by 25 in Hillsborough County, Florida, and are replicating 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
88 

this project in two other counties with our partners, Jim Casey and 

countless other individuals, civic and private funders. 

I want to emphasize that this investment of private resources is 

not designed to replace government’s essential responsibility for 

child welfare services, but rather to enhance independent living 

services so that the outcomes for these youth are improved. 

In our Connected by 25, we have learned that when the ordinary 

citizen is educated about the reality of life for these young people, 

that they have been very responsive. They see them as our children, that we should do no less for them than we do for our own. 

As a result, we have seen unprecedented public/private partnerships developed within our community based child welfare system, 

and we need to support those partnerships. 

Private philanthropy has also risen to the challenge. This is not 

just Government’s problem. This is our problem, and we all pay for 

the consequences of not addressing the problem through costs to 

our quality of life, our prisons, entitlements and ultimately our future. 

It just makes good economic as well as good moral sense to support and prepare these young people. 

A word of caution, however. Private investors will expect to see 

results or outcomes. They will expect a return on their investment. 

They will expect real data in real time, and they will expect policies to be driven by data. They will expect that the public side of 

the partnership is doing its job and is accountable for its responsibilities. 

Data results and spending the taxpayers’ dollars wisely, especially on established effective programs, is in our best interest here 

in Washington and at home. 

We must have clear and measurable outcomes for the services 

and funding provided, and everyone must be held accountable to 

those measures. 

The Foster Care Independence Act mandatory data collection and 

performance assessment requirements must be a priority. 

It is clear that educational achievement is one of the most reliable predictors of future economic success. If you do not finish high 

school, you do not go to college, you do not go to technical school, 

and without that base, your earning potential is severely compromises. 

We know that without a high school diploma, foster youth have 

limited access to Chafee and ETV or waivers that allow them free 

tuition to a State school in Florida. We also know there is an intricate web of factors that influence these poor educational outcomes, 

stability, permanent families, and transportation are a few. 

When we asked a group of young people at Connected by 25 in 

Tampa how to make a dent in their high school attendance and 

completion rates, which were ten times worse than the normal 

young person in that county, they were able to provide solutions. 

Give us one guidance counselor who understands the issues of 

foster care and who will be there for us no matter which school we 

are attending. If we have dropped out of school, give us a place 

where we can get individual tutoring, work at our own pace, open 

end hours that accommodate our work schedules and on the bus 

lines. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
89 

The child welfare and the education systems listened and saw a 

200-percent increase in school attendance, graduation, and enrollment in post-secondary education in 1 year. They learned that 

$50,000 privately funded for the first year for a dedicated guidance 

counselor is a modest investment for such great outcomes, and 

have since embedded the position in their system and expanded the 

strategy to middle school. 

However, we need more aggressive and flexible support for postsecondary education. Youth who age out of foster care need to support themselves and attend school. They should ensure that the use 

of Chafee and vouchers support part time employment and part 

time school attendance more strongly. 

Safe and affordable housing, we have already talked about, and 

has been clearly identified as an issue. There are barriers and rules 

that preclude access to safe and affordable housing options. 

We can identify youth aging out of foster care as a designated 

special population eligible for all Federal housing programs, Section 8. We can change the definition of ‘‘homelessness’’ to include 

foster care youth on discharge from legal custody. We can remove 

all language that prohibits full and part time school attendance if 

aged out of foster care. 

We can increase the cap on Chafee funds for housing and increase the amount of ETV for postsecondary students, and then we 

can make sure that eligibility criteria is in language that young 

people can understand because they are really sometimes the only 

ones who are advocating for themselves. 

We need to listen to the young people who tell us willingly and 

publicly their stories and to help explain the solutions that we 

need. They are our best hope for solutions. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity. I would be happy to 

answer questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Soltis follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Jane Soltis, Program Officer, Eckerd Family 

Foundation 

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. It is my pleasure 

to be here today. 

The Independent Living Services Advisory Council (ILSAC) is a legislatively mandated council of interested and committed volunteers in Florida that advises the 

Legislature as well as the Department of Children and Families on the status of 

independent living services in Florida. I am privileged to chair this Council. 

The Eckerd Family Foundation, which I also represent, is a time-limited family 

foundation. Founded by Mr. Jack Eckerd and his wife Ruth Eckerd it is committed 

to improving the lives of vulnerable and disconnected young people so that they may 

become successful adults. Eckerd Family Foundation has invested more than $20 

million over the last 8 years in Florida, North Carolina and Delaware to enhance 

foster care, juvenile justice and education programs. 

While there are a number of issues related to youth aging out of foster care, I 

will focus my testimony on public-private partnerships, the need for data and outcomes, education and housing. My esteemed colleagues Gary Stangler and Mark 

Courtney can speak more articulately about some of the other strategies that we 

all concur are key to changing the outcomes for these youth. 

Youth aging out of foster care is one of the Eckerd Family Foundation’s primary 

priorities and we have piloted a successful set of strategies, ‘‘Connected by 25,’’ in 

Hillsborough County, Florida and are replicating that project in 2 other counties of 

Florida with our partners Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, the Annie E. 

Casey Foundation, the Lumina Foundation for Education and countless other individuals, civic and private funders. 

The strategies of Connected by 25 include: 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
90 

• Advocating and supporting educational achievement 

• Facilitating and creating access to workforce development opportunities 

• Providing financial literacy education 

• Encouraging savings and asset accumulation 

• Creating entrepreneurship opportunities 

• Accessing safe, stable and affordable housing 

• Ensuring that no child leaves our system without a permanent connection or 

‘‘family’’ 

The Stuart and Walter S. Johnson Foundations, private funders in California, are 

implementing the same set of strategies in that state. 

I want to emphasize that this investment of private resources is not designed to 

replace government’s essential responsibility for child welfare services to children in 

the care and custody of the state, but rather to enhance independent living services 

so that the outcomes for these youth are improved. These children like any others 

in our country have the skills, abilities and heart to be great citizens in our communities. They must be given the guidance and support that allows them to flourish. 

As Chairman McDermott so aptly stated, ‘‘as the de facto parents of foster children we should do no less.’’ In our Connected by 25 sites, we have quickly learned 

that the majority of citizens believe that the government is taking care of preparing 

these young people with the supports, resources and skills necessary for economic 

self-sufficiency and success. When the ordinary citizen is educated about the reality 

of life for many of these young people, they have been quick to rise to the occasion. 

They see this as a manageable number of kids that we should be able to successfully 

help transition to adulthood and that these young people are ‘‘our children.’’ That 

we should do no less for them than we do for our own children. As a result of that 

public awareness campaign, we have seen unprecedented public-private partnerships with our community-based child welfare system. Organizations such as the 

Rotary, Kiwanis, United Way, Junior Leagues, 100 Black Men, the Bar Association 

and faith-based communities have come forward to partner in this effort. The private philanthropic community has also risen to the challenge. This is as it should 

be. This is not just government’s problem . . . this is our problem and we pay for 

the consequences of not addressing the problem through the cost to our quality of 

life, our prisons, entitlements and ultimately our future. It just makes good economic as well as good moral sense to support and prepare these young people. This 

sort of public-private partnership is one that needs to be encouraged and supported. 

The child welfare system is not equipped to do this alone. Our collective challenge 

is to stimulate more of these partnerships, invite others to the table and consider 

incentives to ensure that they have a meaningful seat at that table. It is also clear 

that youth must have a central seat at the table and are viewed not as the problem 

but experts in solution building. 

A word of caution however. Private investors will expect to see results or outcomes. They will expect a return on their investments. They expect real data in real 

time. They will expect policy to be driven by data. They expect that the public side 

of the equation or partnership is doing its job and is accountable for its responsibilities. As the background information on this hearing states, ‘‘the impact on the outcomes for former foster youth is still uncertain because an assessment and data collection system for the program has yet to be established in final form by the Dept. 

of Health and Human Services.’’ At this time it appears that May 2008 is the target 

date for the first collection of data. 

States like Florida, Michigan and California, have taken the initiative to address 

this unconscionable lack of accountability for the public dollars they disburse. While 

there is no state that has found the magic software or reporting system that captures everything we want or need to know, those that are working to base their decision on sound data and evidence of what works should be commended for their 

efforts. The recent National Governors Association Institute for Best Practices Policy 

Academy on youth transitioning out of foster care served to highlight this issue. 

Data and the collection and analyzing of outcomes should be driving each state 

in the development and implementation of policy and practice about what is working to change the results for these young people. Mark Courtney and his work at 

Chapin Hall, Gary Stangler and the work of the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative in their Opportunity Passport and our own Connected by 25 sites in Florida 

and California, and programs in other states, clearly demonstrate some workable solutions. We need to cease putting dollars in programs that have proven they do not 

work despite their best intentions, begin holding public and private providers and 

our courts accountable for what we know works and change the tides here. But as 

any private investor will tell you, we need real data in real time and measurable 

results on which to base those decisions. The Eckerd Family Foundation has reVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
91 

cently commissioned Child Trends to provide us and the policymakers of the state 

of Florida the data on the numbers of the disconnected youth in our state so that 

we have an accurate database on which to craft system solutions. 

Establishing and finalizing the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999, mandatory 

data collection and performance assessments requirements for states should be a 

priority of the Congress, the Administration and the Deptment of Health and 

Human Services. We must have clear and measurable outcomes for the services and 

funding provided and states as well as communities and providers need to be accountable to those measures. 

Economic success depends on education and we need to set our expectations and 

sights as high for these young people as we do for our own children. 

It is very clear that educational achievement is one of the most reliable predictors 

of future economic self-sufficiency. If you cannot finish high school, you cannot get 

into college or vocational/technical training. Without that base, your earning potential is severely compromised. Most foster youth do not have the ability to hold parttime jobs before they turn 18 and age out. Our licensing requirements are an obstacle for foster families and group homes in this regard, and we know that youth who 

work part time are much more likely to graduate from high school, develop good 

work skills and ethics and are more likely to acquire and maintain employment as 

adults. 

We also know that without a high school diploma, foster youth have limited access 

to Chaffee and Educational and Training Vouchers. They cannot utilize the waivers 

that allow them free tuition to a state school in Florida. We know that youth aging 

out of foster care have poor high school graduation rates. We also know that there 

is an intricate web of factors that influence these poor outcomes including safety, 

stability, permanency, transportation and the ability to attend their ‘‘home’’ school. 

These factors cross the systems of child welfare, education, transportation and workforce. When we asked a group of young people at Connected by 25 in Tampa, Florida 

how to make a dent in their high school attendance and completion rates which 

were 10 times worse than the normal young person in the county, they were able 

to provide a solution. Give us one guidance counselor who understands the issues 

of foster care and will be there for us no matter which school we are attending. If 

we have dropped out, give us a place where we can get individual tutoring, work at 

our own pace, which is open at hours that accommodate our working schedules and 

is on the bus line. 

The child welfare and education systems listened and saw a 200% increase in 

school attendance, graduation and enrollment in postsecondary education in one 

year. The child welfare system and the school system have learned through this privately funded pilot idea that $50,000 for a dedicated guidance counselor/educational 

advocate is a modest investment for such great outcomes and have since embedded 

the position in their system and have expanded the strategy to middle school. 

However, we need more aggressive and flexible support for post secondary education. 

Youth who age out of foster care need to support themselves economically and attend school. States should ensure that the use of Chaffee and Educational Training 

Vouchers support part-time employment and part-time school attendance more 

strongly. 

Safe and affordable housing continues to be a primary issue for many of the 

youth. Most are forced to leave their foster home or group home placements on their 

18th birthday. 

Can you imagine your child worrying about where they will sleep at 18 years of 

age? We know in Florida that 40% of former foster youth experience homelessness 

within 18 months of leaving foster care. And we know that without housing, former 

foster care youth cannot access education, employment or training services. 

While federal funding from the Foster Care Independence Act has given us the 

ability to wrap our hands around many of the services required for this population, 

there are barriers and rules that are forcing many of our youth to slip through our 

fingers. 

The reality is that most of the 18 year olds we are talking about are in 11th and 

12th grade in high school. As you know, most youth from intact families can expect 

ongoing support well into their early twenties; however, for foster care youth the 

legal obligation for continued services ends at age 18. 

Our work is not about entitlement, but investment in our foster youth. It is our 

call to action to create a continuum of care services on the federal, state and community level. As part of this call to action, we are requiring safe, affordable and stable housing options. 

We can remove barriers by advertising and informing on every level of the eligibility of foster care youth for these programs. Communicating eligibility criteria in 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
92 

language a young person can understand, because often they are the only ones advocating for themselves—the only ones trying to find a way for themselves. 

Together we can identify youth aging out of foster care as a ‘‘designated special 

population’’ eligible for all federal housing programs. 

• Section 8: Foster Youth will be eligible for Section 8 housing immediately upon 

discharge from foster care, even if the youth is single and a full-time student. 

Eligibility will continue as long as the youth is eligible to receive Chaffee funds 

and/or Educational and Training Vouchers (ETV). 

• The definition of ‘‘homeless’’ for all federal programs should include—foster care 

youth upon their discharge date from legal custody. 

• For all federally funded housing programs: Remove all language that prohibits 

full and/or part-time school attendance if the youth aged out of foster care— 

legal custody of the state at the age of emancipation. 

• Increasing the cap on Chaffee funds for housing: Currently no more than 30% 

can be used on Room and Board—Increase that amount to 50% for youth still 

in high school or obtaining their GED. 

• Increase the amount of ETV for postsecondary students from $5,000 to $7,500. 

Youth across the nation who have aged out of care, through California Youth Connection, Foster Care Alumni Assn, or our own Florida Youth Shine, have demonstrated a willingness to volunteer, to give back and help fix the problems for those 

younger. They willingly publicly tell their stories in an effort to help explain the solutions needed. Their resilience and caring in the face of all that has befallen them 

should serve as an inspiration. We ask you to expand provisions empowering the 

youth and supporting them in becoming their own best advocates, for their futures 

and for the success of those who come after them. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity. This concludes my testimony and I 

would be happy to answer questions. 

f 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Thank you. Thank all of you for your 

testimony. 

One of the interesting things that I picked up from listening to 

this is this whole question of permanency and how you deal with 

that. I would like to hear first of all if any of you have any knowledge about a State that is doing the best job in all the factors 

around this issue of aging out, what State it is and what kind of 

things they have in place. 

Also, your ideas about if a kid is 15 or 16 and is out of control, 

as one of these young men suggested, it is hard to adopt. Older 

kids are hard to adopt. Everybody knows that. The statistics are 

very clear. 

Adoption may not be the issue. Perhaps a court appointed guardian ad litem forever. What is the mechanism by which you tie a 

kid to somebody? Some of them found voluntary ones. Some found 

family members. What are the mechanisms or what are the programs people are using to try to give that connection. Is it just the 

program itself that you are tied to, such as the Jim Casey Foundation or to the Eckerd Foundation, so you go back to whoever your 

contact was there? 

I would like to hear the best practice States and then whatever 

you think about this whole business of giving kids permanency. 

Dr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, two things. One is I do not 

think any State is doing the best at all of these things in terms of 

permanency and preparing kids for adulthood. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Give me the range. Give me the ones 

that are doing good in this and the ones that are doing good in 

that. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
93 

Mr. STANGLER. I would say the State that is doing very well 

in permanence, including identifying family members and using 

things like family finders and team decisionmaking, et cetera, 

Michigan and Iowa would be two States I would put up there in 

that regard. 

In terms of preparation for adulthood, many of the things I have 

talked about, in terms of economic success, I would look at Colorado. I would look at Florida. Those would be the States. Connecticut. Those would be the States that I think are doing a good 

job. Maine has greatly lowered the number of kids in foster care 

by finding permanent families along the lines you have talked 

about. Oklahoma is co-locating child welfare and child support enforcement staff to identify families for these kids. 

There are a number of innovations going on. Those are the ones 

I would throw out. 

Ms. SOLTIS. I will just add that often times there are adults in 

communities who hear about this, who get educated about these 

issues, and they may not have the capability of adopting, but they 

certainly may be interested in becoming guardians, being that support, being connected to them. 

They cannot sometimes financially afford to send another young 

person to college and unfortunately, our laws in the past have dictated that if you are adopted, then you sometimes do not qualify 

for some of the educational vouchers that we have made available, 

so you have to choose between adoption or the tuition assistance. 

There are people who are willing to become guardians and become that person, that permanent connection. I think we need to 

support and provide incentives for that as well. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Is that in a legal way? 

Ms. SOLTIS. It can be. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. A guardian? It could be court appointed? 

Ms. SOLTIS. It could be court appointed. Often times if you talk 

to the young people, they can tell you the important people in their 

life. It might be a coach. It might be a friend’s mother. It might 

be a whole series of people. It is not the traditional foster family 

that we think about. 

Mr. COBBS. Mr. Chairman, I would also like to respond and just 

tell you a little bit about a pilot program that we are running for 

the State of California, where we are really trying to attack this 

issue of permanency for those young people who are 18 and 

transitioning out of the foster care system. 

Very simply what we have done is we have asked them who is 

that permanent connection. We ask the question if you were in 

trouble, if you needed someone to call, if you were sick and you 

needed someone to bring you soup over to your house, who would 

that person be. 

They come up with answers. We go to that person and ask would 

you be willing to allow this young person who is transitioning to 

stay in your household, and we will help facilitate that relationship, work out the rules of that relationship. 

We have had some success. What we found is that the only reason these community supporters will not step up is because they 

have not been asked to step up. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
94 

We do not recruit people, special appointments. We go to the 

young people and say who are these people. We have not been 

turned down when we have gone to coaches and community leaders 

and people in churches and things like that that the youth have 

also identified. 

Dr. COURTNEY. I guess I would like to maybe reframe your 

question in the following way. I think the question for me is how 

do we get States to do all these wonderful things that people are 

talking about. Why do we think States would actually do these 

things if they are no longer legally responsible for these young people. 

Which is what happens when we say they age out at 18. That 

is really what we are talking about. We are saying the State child 

welfare agency is no longer legally responsible for the care and supervision of that young person. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Let me just stop you there. Mr. Stark 

asked a question of me, the answer to which I did not know. What 

did we do when adulthood was 21? Did we age out at 18 then or 

did we take them all the way to 21? 

Part of bringing down adulthood to 18 was we aged them out 

quicker. 

Dr. COURTNEY. I think that is right. It was a long time ago, 

but I think that is right. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Is that correct? 

Dr. COURTNEY. That predated—the Federal child welfare program really grew out of the welfare program before 1980. It was 

not as clearly legislated as it was after 1980. Yes, that is basically 

what happened. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. At 18, we really dumped kids. We 

gave them the vote and we said they could go to war and they 

could be on their own when they were 18. 

Dr. COURTNEY. We abdicated our responsibility as parents. 

That is right. Essentially, legally, what we do is we say we are 

going to remove you from your home—it was interesting. You have 

taken us from our home. We did not really want that, so do not 

abandon us. That is essentially what we do. We take on the parental role and unlike any parent these days, we essentially end that 

at 18. 

I think the challenge for the handful of jurisdictions that do 

maintain and allow young people to make the choice to stay in 

care—Illinois being the most obvious one, but the District of Columbia does that. Puerto Rico does that. 

There are a handful of jurisdictions that do it. They have had to 

struggle with what does it mean for us to be a parent after 18, between 18 and 21. It is different, obviously. 

Permanency, you do not want to give up on permanency, but you 

have more young people for whom it is less likely but still possible. 

The courts are involved. This was driven in Illinois by the courts. 

The courts basically found themselves in a position where the statute allowed them to ask the child welfare agency, ‘‘wait a minute, 

you are coming here and telling me you are going to discharge this 

young person, they have no money to their name, they have not 

graduated high school, they have a mental health problem, and you 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
95 

are asking me to say we are not going to be their parent any 

more.’’ 

The courts over time basically refused to do that. What has happened over the last 15 to 17 years is the State has become a parent. 

I guess I would just frame that question. I think it is a crucial 

policy question. It is very difficult for me to see how just kind of 

tweaking a program that gives money to States without actually 

building some accountability in, and re-thinking the notion that we 

going to parent them after age 18, what that really will accomplish. 

It allows the States—it gives them some money. They may or may 

not do something. 

I think there are some interesting things going on out there but 

somebody in the room, I will not mention his name, actually said, 

who was a former child welfare administrator if I am not legally 

responsible for them, they are pretty low on my list of priorities, 

compared to all the kids under 18 who I have to care for. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Mr. Weller? I have gone beyond my 

point. 

Ms. ASHBY. I cannot help you in terms of a specific State. I 

think these individuals are correct. There probably is no one State 

that has all the answers. 

What I wanted to say was it seems to me the issue is the supports that are in place to help the youth themselves and to help 

the families that have the youth in their households as they turn 

16/17 years old, prior to aging out. Even if the age were raised to 

21, would we not have the same issues, but 3 years later? 

What is needed for all young people, and I have a 25 year old 

son who I am still talking to and telling him what he should be 

doing, what people need are various types of support. Certainly, 

young people who are in the situations of the young people we 

heard earlier need a number of different types of services. 

Whether or not this means more money, I do not know. What we 

need to do is be able to assess the situation in terms of what services are available. Speaking just for the Federal Government, there 

are lots of services offered in terms of housing and substance abuse 

services and health services, but the issue seems to be how does 

an individual get access to those. 

How do you know about them in the first place. 

The young lady who was here earlier said she was in her second 

year of college before she found out about the education and training vouchers. That should not be. 

Her guidance counselors in high school or her social worker when 

she was in care should have told her. We would not expect for her 

to know enough to seek out that information. There were a number 

of individuals who should have been in her life that could have told 

her about that. 

We have services available but people do not know about them. 

We do not know whether we have enough because no one has really evaluated the services that are there. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I am going to stop and let Mr. Weller 

have 10 minutes. 

Mr. WELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As the one who controls the gavel, you certainly have all the time you wish, particuVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
96 

larly since there are only two of us here. I appreciate your generosity. 

I also want to thank our panel for your patience and what I 

thought was wonderful testimony by the young people this morning. Of course, being interrupted by the vote. 

I appreciate your patience and those who stayed in the audience 

as well in attending. 

Ms. Soltis, you had talked about the challenges and benefits of 

foster kids in finishing high school, getting a high school degree. 

What are the challenges that you see in the ability of these young 

people to be able to finish high school? 

The young man from Illinois said he had gone to eight different 

schools by the time he finished high school. 

What are the challenges? 

Ms. SOLTIS. For some people, eight is not a lot, let me tell you. 

There are young people who will tell you they have been to 30 and 

40 schools in their time in foster care. 

Mr. WELLER. I have been told it takes a child about 6 months 

to get acclimated if that is an accurate figure. 

Ms. SOLTIS. In many places, we still have a situation where a 

young person changes placement and then they have to change 

their school. The school may be on a different kind of schedule, 

they have different expectations, they have different kinds of blocks 

versus scheduled times for classes. 

Every time they move, that becomes an issue. We have heard 

many times from young people in foster care that when they 

change a school, their records do not necessarily always go with 

them. Their birth certificates, their health certificates, their Social 

Security cards, all of that information, and often times that precludes them from starting right up in that school system. 

Transportation is sometimes an issue. If they want to stay in the 

school they are in, getting there is certainly sometimes not a possibility. 

The McKinney/Vanto Act allows kids who are in homeless shelters to hopefully stay in the same schools that they are in when 

they become homeless. That is not the case for kids in foster care. 

That could be changed very easily. 

Mr. WELLER. How can we change it? I have seen as we have 

seen, regardless of demographic background, that young people or 

any citizen of our country who has a high school diploma has a 

much better opportunity for life as well as economic advancement. 

Specifically, what changes would you suggest? 

Ms. SOLTIS. I think the example of Connected by 25 where no 

matter what high school that young person in foster care was in, 

we know who those young people in foster care are, no matter what 

high school they were in, they had one guidance counselor who 

made sure their records transferred. Sometimes it was really just 

going to the systems and saying this young person is really attached in this school, part of clubs, let us find a way to keep them, 

maybe getting bus transportation, to let them stay in their own 

schools. 

If they are staying in their own schools, then they are more likely to finish. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
97 

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Cobbs, do you agree with that assessment 

about if they stay in the same school, the more likely they are to 

finish and do better? Is that your perspective as well? 

Mr. COBBS. Yes, that is my perspective as well. We actually 

have a portion of our program at First Place that does exactly what 

they are doing in Florida, where we assign a social worker, not 

within the school system, but to follow that young person. 

We have had tremendous success from that program. 

Mr. WELLER. What type of initiative would you suggest that we 

in Congress should consider that would help or allow that child to 

stay in the same school, where they have friends and involvement 

in clubs and involvement in communities and have peers and mentors that they have developed relationships with? 

What specific recommendation would you make? 

Mr. COBBS. I think some specific recommendations that I would 

make would be to go a little bit deeper. I think starting with allowing young people and requiring that they have the ability to stay 

in the same school. Sometimes when it is legislation enacted or 

that is a policy, then people will follow that. 

I also think, she mentioned the moving around and how young 

people move. In the State of California, the average foster care kid 

moves nine times. If it is just nine times, that is probably nine different schools. 

What happens is even though in California it is part of the legislation that says this young person can go to school, but if you move 

50 miles, you may be in the same county, but if you move 50 miles 

from where your old school is, then I do not care how many bus 

transportation vouchers they gave you, eventually that transportation back and forth to school is going to be burdensome for you. 

I think placing young people who are in foster care in their communities and working hard on permanency and keeping them 

where they are placed at, then we will begin to see some better outcomes toward education. If they are in the same communities, they 

are going to be going to the same schools. That is the way that I 

would begin to kind of approach that issue. 

Mr. WELLER. Others on the panel, do you agree it is in the best 

interest of the child to find ways to keep them in the same school 

system? 

Mr. STANGLER. I would say it is important to try to keep them 

in the same school system, but the underlying issue is the real 

problem. Even if you are in the same school, if you are moved to 

eight different sets of strangers in that area, your schooling is 

going to suffer regardless. 

I think my recommendation would be we have to address the 

permanency issue to stop the moving around to really change the 

outcomes. 

Dr. COURTNEY. I think an elegant solution would be to have 

HHS actually implement the well-being parts of the Adoption and 

Safe Families Act 1997 (P.L. 105–89)—remember, they set up outcomes for permanency and safety and they have yet to promulgate 

any with respect to well-being, the most obvious well-being outcome, along with health perhaps, would be some measures around 

education. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
98 

It seems to me as a nation we should know whether kids in foster care are attending school, whether they are moving, there are 

some simple outcome measures you could ask States to track. We 

are not doing that. If you do that, then they know what they need 

to do in order to get kids educated, but they are not held accountable for the basic outcomes. 

Mr. WELLER. Not necessarily creating a new program, they just 

need to implement the one they have already been directed to create. 

Dr. COURTNEY. Exactly. 

Mr. WELLER. Do you agree with that, Ms. Ashby? 

Ms. ASHBY. That is what I was going to say. Part of the Foster 

Care Independence Act was a data system that would record services to children, outcomes, characteristics of youth aging out, and 

that has yet to be implemented. 

HHS still has not put forth any regulations, for example, to collect data from States. Several States have data. There is no mechanism for that data being populated into the data system that was 

envisioned and actually mandated by the law. 

Dr. COURTNEY. The irony of my study is it came from those 

three States wanting to get ahead of the curve back in 2000 to sort 

of pilot really how States would collect data. 

A number of States, Michigan, for example, were going to participate but waited because they wanted to see what the Federal Government was going to put out in terms of regulations. They are still 

waiting. 

Implement the law that is there and we would get a long way. 

Mr. WELLER. Congress’ job on oversight, is it not, Mr. Chairman? I have another question I want to ask Ms. Soltis. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. You are suggesting another hearing. 

Mr. WELLER. I know you like hearings. I do, too, Mr. Chairman. 

[Laughter.] 

As we look at hearings, we may want to look at strategies to 

keep kids in school and give them the opportunity to stay within 

the same school system if they can, recognizing there is a geographic issue. To me, that would be a worthwhile hearing. 

Ms. Soltis, we discussed earlier and Mr. McDermott raised the 

issue of the idea that many have advocated today about extending 

foster care to the age of 21, beyond the age of 18. My State is one 

of those which already does it. 

Every State and union currently has the option today, do they 

not, to provide or give children the opportunity to stay within the 

foster system until age 21; is that correct? 

Ms. SOLTIS. I believe they have the option. There are very few 

that—I am not sure how many do. I am not sure that often times 

young people are aware that they can do that. It is a difficult issue 

when someone is 18. 

Gary, you might be able to talk more articulately about which 

States allow that. 

Mr. WELLER. I think there are 17, that I was told, that currently have implemented programs where it is very clear you can 

stay within the foster care system until age 21; is that correct? 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
99 

Mr. STANGLER. I do not know the exact number, Mr. Weller. 

I would say it is a handful. I would say fewer than I can count on 

my hand that actually do a good job of extending that option. 

The States are all over the place on this. You have the court 

issues involved in terms of does the State law allow the court to 

retain jurisdiction after age 18. 

It is a more complicated answer than I could probably give you 

off the top of my head. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I think the fact is that there is no 

Federal money for them to grant but there is the option to use 

Medicaid, which is partially Federal money. I think the States have 

that option. Is that a correct analysis of it? 

Ms. ASHBY. That is correct. That is the 17 States you mentioned. Seventeen have adopted what is known as the Chafee option for Medicaid. Five others, as we understand it, are planning 

to do that, and there may be one within the last week or so that 

has done so. 

As I understand it, the State legislatures have to meet in the 

other five States to finalize this. The remaining 28 States have 

other options, such as SCHIP or something else where these youth 

can get medical services. 

Mr. WELLER. The Chairman has been generous with the time 

for me. Let me just ask in very simple terms, could each of you just 

tell me why have the States not exercised, those who do not allow 

foster care until age 21, why have they not exercised the option 

when they clearly have the authority today? In simple terms. 

Mr. COBBS. Money. The Federal Government shares all the way 

up to age 18 and then stops. I would say that is the biggest thing. 

As Mark pointed out, the fact that they have no legal responsibility 

past age 18. It is hard to make a case for why you should spend 

money. 

Dr. COURTNEY. They go hand in hand. You do not get Federal 

reimbursement unless the court has jurisdiction, except for short 

voluntary placements. 

They are tied in Federal law right now up to age 18. After 18, 

you cannot get Federal reimbursement. You can actually look at 

the history. A number of States that used to have statutes that allowed young people to stay in care until 21 actually moved them 

back when the Federal reimbursement stopped, so their legal jurisdiction ends at 18. 

You need both. Some States did it voluntarily. That is what Illinois did. Illinois law allows it, and the courts weigh in and decide 

whether it is in the best interest of the youth. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Give us the explanation for how it 

happened in Illinois. Somebody brought a lawsuit. Who was it, on 

whose behalf, and what agency? How did it happen? 

Dr. COURTNEY. My understanding—I used to think that, too. 

Illinois has done this for a long time, way back to the 19eighties. 

My understanding is the statute was not definitive with respect to 

when. There was no end date. The statute says ‘‘with just cause,’’ 

you could keep kids in care after 18 through 21, and the question 

was what is ‘‘just cause.’’ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
100 

What happened over time was an evolution toward the best interest standard. In other words, you cannot kick somebody out if 

it is clearly not in their interest and they want to remain in care. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Who brought the suit? Did the State? 

Dr. COURTNEY. I do not know there was a specific lawsuit. I 

think the statute was there and over time, the courts became more 

active. The Department used to go and say we want to discharge 

this young person and the courts would say okay. In Cook County, 

the Public Guardian’s Office, which is the defender of the kids, all 

the kids have attorneys, started to go to court and say wait a 

minute, make a case for this. Why do you want to discharge this 

person, they are going to be homeless tomorrow if you discharge 

them. 

The judges started acting within the statute in keeping young 

people in care. It is still the case in Cook County, it is 85 percent 

of young people in care at 17.5 are still in care at 19.5. Downstate, 

it is more like half and half. Half and half is still far in excess of 

anywhere else in the country. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. It is on the State buck or the county 

buck? 

Dr. COURTNEY. It is a State run system, so the State is paying 

for all of that. 

Mr. WELLER. You have to be a little sensitive to too much litigation. Catholic Charities used to provide foster care services in 

Cook County. They folded their tent and left that. They were one 

of the largest providers and was a loss as a result of litigation. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Can I ask finally the question that is 

laying here on the table without an answer, why has HHS not implemented this piece of legislation? 

You people are part of the system. You must at least be able to 

give me a guess. I am Irish and I was raised in Chicago. I have 

an idea. Tell me what is your best guess? 

It is simply no interest or if we found out the data, we would 

then have to do something about it? 

Ms. ASHBY. I have done several studies, as you know, involving 

child welfare. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. You chuckle to yourself when you see 

the new letter coming over from Congress saying would you please 

look at the foster care system. You have done it enough times. 

They see you coming. 

Ms. ASHBY. We have made numerous recommendations. The result, I will have to say, the result is usually the same. I am hesitating here because this is not a GAO answer. It is not a GAO answer. 

In order to get things done, you have to have people that care, 

and the whole idea of people in States who will not do things to 

help young people because they are not required to, well, these are 

not the people who should be in those positions. 

At HHS, the people I have worked with in child welfare, they 

just do not seem to be very proactive in terms of feeling they have 

much, if any, responsibility. It is a State issue, they will tell you. 

They do not want to burden the States. That is quite often their 

answer. Or they just allow the slow—— 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. Gathering data is burdensome? 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
101 

Ms. ASHBY. If they require the States to do certain things in 

order to collect the data and collect it in certain ways that are consistent across the States. 

They sort of allow these slow mechanisms of bureaucracy to not 

work and years go by. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. The Congress changes and the Chairmen change, and the appropriators change, and it never happens. 

These kids are really forgotten, is what you are saying. They know 

they are like school administrators who know this class is going to 

be gone at graduation and we will have another bunch. They will 

be gone shortly. That is basically what you are saying. 

Ms. ASHBY. That is part of what I am saying, but at the same 

time, it is hard for me having sat here this morning and hearing 

the stories of these young people and having gone out to States on 

site visits and met with people involved in the child welfare system 

to believe most people, if they really understood the situation, understood the issues, (and there were some people that were being 

hurt, because these children are innocent) that they would not do 

all they could to make things better. 

Maybe the people in Washington at HHS need to get out in the 

field and see what is going on. I do not know. 

Chairman MCDERMOTT. I want to thank all of you for coming 

and staying through the break. Although there are two Members 

here, this is an issue that many Members are concerned with. We 

are working on Iraq over on the Floor. It is a little bit of an explanation why people are not here, but I want to thank you for giving 

us some ideas. 

I want to ask one other question. How many people in the audience are foster kids or were foster kids once? 

[Show of hands.] 

We have a few. I would hope that you would as you watch feel 

free to talk to us about what kinds of things you have ideas about, 

how we might change this. 

I realize sitting here, I did a lot of this. I did child dependency 

questions in courts and I did decisions in divorces, who should get 

the kids and all that kind of stuff. 

I did it, but when you are on the ground doing it day to day a 

lot more about it than you do when you sort of drift away up to 

some other level. 

You can be very useful to us by giving us information. I hope 

that you will not consider the 15 minutes you spent talking here 

as being the sole contribution you can make to this. 

Thank you all for coming. 

[Whereupon, at 1:37 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
102 

1 Children who aged out of foster care are captured by the AFCARS emancipation data element. Children who exit care to emancipation are those who reached the age of majority; CWLA, 

Special tabulation from AFCARS. 

[Submissions for the Record follow:] 

Statement of Child Welfare League of America, Arlington, Virginia 

The Child Welfare League of America (CWLA), representing public and private 

nonprofit, child-serving member agencies across the country, is pleased to submit 

testimony to the Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support. CWLA 

commends the Subcommittee and its members for focusing on the issue of youth 

transitioning out of foster care to adulthood. We appreciate the Subcommittee’s continued focus on youth. This hearing is an important follow up a to your hearing on 

June 19, on disconnected and disadvantaged youth. 

Many issues confront young people as they transition from foster care to adulthood. Aside from the challenge of becoming independent, they face higher levels of 

unemployment, no health insurance, substance abuse and homelessness and many 

other serious obstacles. These young people leave care not because they have been 

reunified with their families, have been adopted, or found another form of permanency, but simply because there is an age limit on federal funding. 

Youths Leaving Foster Care Due To Age 

Certainly there is no group of America’s youth more deserving of Congress’ attention than those in foster care or those who leave foster care after turning age 18. 

Every year 20,000–25,000 young people exit the foster care system.1 These young 

people leave care simply because there is an age limit on federal funding. While 

some states may extend this support beyond age eighteen and the Chaffee Independent Living Program offers limited funding for transitional services to these 

young people, all too often the end result is that foster children find themselves on 

their own at age eighteen. 

Barriers to a Secure Adulthood 

Adolescents constitute a major segment of the youngsters the child welfare system 

serves. In 2005, 29 percent of children in care were 15 years of age or older.2 Most 

youth enter out-of-home care as a result of abuse, neglect, and exploitation. Others 

have run away from home or have no homes. Young people transitioning out of the 

foster care system are significantly affected by the instability that accompanies long 

periods of out-of-home placement during childhood and adolescence. These young 

people often find themselves truly ‘‘on their own,’’ with few, if any, financial resources, no place to live, and little or no support from family, friends, and community. The experiences of these youth place them at higher risk for unemployment, 

poor educational outcomes, health issues, early parenthood, long-term dependency 

on public assistance, increased rates of incarceration, and homelessness. The resulting harm to the youth themselves, their communities, and the society at large is 

unacceptably high. 

Housing Needs 

Young people aging out of the foster care system need economic security and affordable, safe and stable housing. The 2000 Census reported that nearly 4 million 

people between the ages of 25 and 34 live with their parents due to economic realities—jobs are scarce and housing is expensive. This phenomenon has been identified 

as ‘‘adultolescence’’, an extended period of adolescence during which it is has become 

common and expected for young people to live with their parents. Unfortunately, 

youth in foster care do not always have the option of turning to their families for 

financial support. Former foster youth are often prematurely confronted with the 

harsh reality of the gap between the wages they earn and the cost of housing. As 

a result, young people aging out of the foster care system are becoming homeless 

at disconcerting rates. 

Twenty-five percent of foster youth stated they have experienced homelessness at 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
103 

3 Cook, R. (1991). A national evaluation of Title IV–E foster care independent living programs 

for youth, phase 2. Rockville, MD: Westat. 4 Roman, N.P., & Wolfe, N. (1995) Web of failure: The relationship between foster care and 

homelessness. National Alliance to End Homelessness. 5Wolanin, T. (2005). Higher education opportunities for foster youth: A primer for policymakers. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy. 6McMillen, C., Auslander, W., Elze, D., White, T. & Thompson, R. (2003). Educational experiences and aspirations of older youth in foster care. Child Welfare, 82, 475–495. 7 Census Bureau data underscore value of college. (October 2006). Available online at http:// 

www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/education/007660.html. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Census Bureau. 8Pecora, P.J., Kessler, R.C., Williams, J., O’Brien, K., Downs, A. C., English, D., White, J., 

Hiripi, E., White, C. R., Wiggins, T., & Holmes, K. (2005). Improving family foster care: Findings 

from the Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study. Available online at http://www.casey.org/Resources/Publications/NorthwestAlumniStudy.htm. Seattle, WA: Casey Family Programs. 

least one night within 2.5 to 4 years after exiting foster care.3 In fact, three in ten 

of the nation’s homeless adults report foster care history.4

Education Needs 

Similarly, the correlation between out-of-home care and low academic performance has been documented nationwide. For children in foster care, schools should 

offer an opportunity at continued stability while most of that child’s life is being 

turn inside out. In addition to the abuse and neglect they experience, these children 

must deal with the consequences of being removed from their homes and communities. This often times includes separation from siblings and may include making 

several moves from home to home. For these children and youth their lives now include dealing with a child welfare agency and court system. 

Schools should be safe havens for children during times of transition and instability, but poor coordination and communication between schools, agencies and other 

parties may result in added instability and at times, no school at all. With no federal law to ensure school stability and access to supportive services for children in 

foster care there is often as much movement among schools as there is in living arrangements. 

There are many challenges for these children. A child who moves to a different 

home may all of a sudden find they are now in a new school district. This all too 

often means they must wait for a transfer of school records before a new school allows them to continue their education. In some instances, a child may have to wait 

for a transfer of medical records to document they meet any health care requirements such as immunizations. All of these barriers mean a delay in meeting their 

education needs, and these foster children are being left behind not just in education, but in the stability they vitally need. These children and youth not surprisingly fall behind academically, cognitively, and socially. They often need to repeat 

courses and are unable to access the support services that could improve education 

outcomes. 

Although all children are entitled to education services under federal, state, and 

local laws, the specific educational needs of children and youth in care often go 

unmet. The rate at which foster youth complete high school (50%) is significantly 

below the rate at which their peers complete high school (70%). The rate at which 

college-qualified foster youth attend postsecondary education (20%) is substantially 

below the rate at which their peers attend postsecondary education (60%).5 However, it is important to note that 70% of former foster youth express the desire to 

attend college.6 The impact on future earnings is enormous. The census Bureau reports college graduates make $24,000 more per year than those with high school diplomas.7

Health Needs 

In addition, for young people leaving foster care, lack of health care poses a substantial challenge. According to a recent study, approximately twenty-five percent 

of foster care alumni or adults who had experienced foster care later experienced 

post traumatic stress. The general population by comparison experienced post traumatic stress at a rate of four percent.8 Earlier this year at a briefing conducted by 

CWLA and sponsored by the Subcommittee Chair, Representative Jim McDermott, 

Dr. David Rubin, MD, MSCE, Director of Research and Policy, Safe Place, Center 

for Child Protection and Health Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, indicated that 

only half of children with behavioral problems in foster care receive services, up to 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
104 

9 CWLA briefing, May 21, 2007. Sources: GAO, 1995; Burns et al. JAACAP, 2004; Rubin et 

al. Pediatrics 2004; Hurlburt et al. J Gen Psychiatry 2004; Harman et al. Arch Ped Adol Med 

2000; Halfon et al. Pediatrics 1992 MD MSCE 

one-third of children failed to receive appropriate immunizations, and one in eight 

were not receiving preventive care.9

The Chafee program allows states to extend Medicaid coverage to former foster 

children between ages 18 and 21. Despite Medicaid’s tremendous advantage for 

youth in foster care, only 17 states had implemented the extension as of December 

2006. 

Given the high rates of physical and mental health problems extensively documented among children and youth in foster care, access to health services is a critical factor as young people transition to adulthood. Because most children and youth 

in foster care are covered by Medicaid, use of the expansion option would allow a 

state to readily facilitate the transfer of a youth’s Medicaid eligibility from one category to another without any gap in coverage as they exit foster care. Medicaid coverage should continue for all youth in foster care until at least age 21. 

Keeping medical records up to date and accessible is another challenge for young 

people involved with child welfare. Advances have been made in electronic record 

keeping, but more are needed. 

Legislative Recommendations 

Support Through Age Twenty-One 

The 110th Congress has an opportunity to make significant progress in improving 

the lives and outcomes for this segment of disconnected and disadvantaged youth. 

Senator Barbara Boxer (D–CA) introduced the Foster Care Continuing Opportunities Act, S. 1512. This legislation would simply amend the current law that defines 

foster children to age eighteen. States would have an option to extend this to age 

twenty-one. This extension would allow these youth more time to appropriately prepare for transitioning to adulthood. It is imperative that youth work in partnership 

with their caseworker to create an effective plan for transitioning out of foster care. 

An effective transition plan focuses on the development of independent living skills, 

including securing housing, developing a financial plan, obtaining and maintaining 

employment, continuing education, and creating social networks and connections. 

In an effort to close the gaps that allow so many youth to fall through the cracks, 

it is necessary to have effective collaboration and coordination. Creating connections, 

developing effective transition plans and integrating services will prevent the intersection of foster care with homelessness, health issues, incarceration, unemployment, pregnancy and early parenthood. Instead, these partnerships along with a 

solid transition plan, will allow these resilient youth to become thriving, productive, 

and contributing members of society. 

Support Independent Living 

For youth transitioning out of foster care, expanding eligibility for critical support 

for independent living services will ensure a successful transition to independence 

and self-sufficiency, and reduce the numbers of young people who become homeless, 

unemployed, incarcerated, and/or at high risk of becoming victims and victimizers. 

To accomplish this improvement and expansion, funding for the Chafee Foster Care 

Independence Program needs to be increased significantly. 

McKinney-Vento Homelessness Assistance Act/Education Reform 

The reauthorization of the McKinney-Vento Homelessness Assistance Act as part 

of the reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act provides an opportunity to better address the needs of children and youth in foster care. McKinneyVento provides access to essential federal education protections and rights for children and youth who are homeless. Children and youth who are eligible for McKinney-Vento have access to supports for school success that many children involved 

in child welfare lack: school stability or immediate enrollment if stability is not possible, school staff charged with ensuring their prompt enrollment, and more. While 

these protections currently apply to a subset of children involved in foster care, the 

current definition is not clear and states provide coverage differently and in a limited way for children in foster care. The reauthorization of McKinney-Vento provides 

an opportunity to ensure these protections are available to all children in foster 

care, with special accommodation for the needs and family dynamics that face children in foster care. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
105 

10Pecora, P.J., Kessler, R.C., Williams, J., O’Brien, K., Downs, A. C., English, D., White, J., 

Hiripi, E., White, C. R., Wiggins, T., & Holmes, K. (2005). Improving family foster care: Findings 

from the Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study. Available online at http://www.casey.org/Resources/Publications/NorthwestAlumniStudy.htm. Seattle, WA: Casey Family Programs. 

Funding for Tuition Vouchers 

The Education and Training Voucher (ETV) program provides assistance of up to 

$5,000 per year for the cost of attendance at an institution of higher education for 

youth who age out of foster care or are adopted after age 16. Funding for this program has never reached the amount requested by President Bush—$60 million— 

which itself is not enough to meet the need. The ETV program began receiving 

funds in 2003 and was set at $42 million, and has been increased slightly in subsequent years. The benefits of a college education are significant. Funding for the ETV 

program should be expanded to at least the level proposed by the President. 

Further improvements to the ETV program are needed, including requiring technical assistance for states to make sure the funds are fully utilized. Also, it should 

be required that any ETV funds not used in one state be transferred to other states’ 

ETV programs rather than being returned to the federal treasury. 

Access To Health Care 

The Medicaid Foster Care Coverage Act of 2007, H.R. 1376, has been introduced 

by Representative Dennis Cardoza (D–CA–18). This bill addresses a critical issue 

for young people leaving foster care, lack of health insurance. As stated previously, 

given the high rates of physical and mental health problems, access to health services is a critical factor as young people transition to adulthood. While some states 

have taken the option to extend Medicaid coverage to age 21, we agree with the 

growing number of advocates that the best way to assure this coverage is simply 

to require Medicaid coverage for these former foster youth. 

Studies have revealed that when compared to the general population, in addition 

to severely lower rates of graduation from college and employment and higher instances of homelessness, foster care alumni experienced a disproportionate amount 

of both physical and mental health issues, including post-traumatic stress disorder 

and major depression. Compounding this problem is the fact that 33% of foster care 

alumni lack health insurance—a rate almost twice as high as the general population.10

Current law does provide mechanisms by which to cover this vulnerable population with the support needed as they leave the care of the child welfare system. 

Some states, for example, have implemented the Chafee option to extend Medicaid 

to youth aging out through the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999. Strides have 

been made, but because young people who age out of the system often lack financial 

resources and a place to live, and have little or no support from family, friends, and 

the community there is much more work to be done. By extending Medicaid coverage to former foster youth until the age of 21, we would be guaranteeing a critical 

piece of the equation that would help them make a successful transition to adulthood—comprehensive health care. 

In addition, actions over the past several years have undercut the state’s ability 

to use Targeted Case Management services (TCM). CWLA has great concerns about 

these actions and we feel it undercuts access to care to the entire child welfare population. This is not a cost saving issue, but is rather an issue of access to health 

care. We are also concerned about future regulatory action that may restrict state 

Medicaid systems use of rehabilitative services. We urge Congress to be vigilant and 

in fact to take action to stop any regulations that overreach and have the effect of 

restricting access to care by youth and all children in foster care. 

Data Collection Needs 

Congress should provide the resources necessary for the implementation of the 

National Youth in Transitions Database. This new initiative is a tremendous opportunity to provide valuable information that will inform future improvements in services to young people. The funds for this implementation should be a priority for Congress and should not come at the expense of existing services or supports or reduce 

services to adolescents receiving Chafee and ETV funding. 

Support for Kinship Care 

Finally, CWLA would be remiss if we did not highlight one legislative solution 

which is showing growing bipartisan support, kinship care. Kinship care is an important permanency option for child welfare systems. In some instances, support for 

these grandparent and other relative families can provide a vital support for these 

youth. In 1997, the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) was adopted by this 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
106 

1http://www.covdove.org/Inside/Statistics.htm, Covenant House California Statistics (retrieved 

February 2006). 2http://www.financeproject.org/Publications/foster%20care%20final1.pdf 

Subcommittee and many of the members of this Congress voted for it. It recognizes 

kinship placements as a critical permanency option. We now have bipartisan bills 

in both houses, S. 661 in the Senate and H.R. 2188 in the House, to extend Title 

IV–E funding to these kinship placements. CWLA strongly believes that extending 

Title IV–E support in this way can play a vital role in assisting young people leaving the foster care system and can help before they reach the age of eighteen. 

CONCLUSION 

CWLA appreciates the opportunity to offer our comments to the Subcommittee in 

regard to youth transitioning out of foster care. As this Subcommittee moves forward, we look forward to a continued dialogue with its members and all Members 

of Congress. We hope this hearing serves as a building block for future efforts that 

will create the means for reforms that result in increased successful transitions for 

these youth. 

f 

Statement of Everychild Foundation 

The Problem: The ‘‘Transition Cliff’’ 

• Many children with abuse and neglect histories never reunite with their families or find alternative permanent homes; this population of abused children 

graduate or ‘‘emancipate’’ from the child welfare system 

• Children who emancipate from the foster care system face disproportiately higher rates of: 

• Unemployment 

• Lower Educational Attainment 

• Incarceration 

• Dependence on public assistance 

• Substance abuse 

• Non-marital childbirth 

• Other high-risk behaviors.1

• The lack of a ‘‘safety net’’ for these former foster youth—now young adults— 

means that they truly struggle to ‘‘make ends meet’’ often ultimately becoming 

a more burdensome and larger cost to society than if a much smaller, up-front 

investment had simply been made to better prepare and advise them during 

transition and the years preceding it. 

• One shocking statistic best explains how the system has failed them: over 

70% of all State Penitentiary inmates have spent time in the foster care 

system according to the May 12, 2006 Select Committee Hearing of the California Legislature. (This includes group homes and informal out of home placements/arrangements.) 

• The public knows little or nothing about the difficulties facing this group of 

young adults. 

• The population of emancipated foster youth face unique challenges such as: 

• Lack of stable or affordable housing leading to homelessness 

• Lack of employment opportunities 

• Lack of medical care / coverage 

• Mental health problems 

• Early or unplanned pregnancies 

• When provided with information about the poor prospects for this population, 

most people say that the age at which the average young person is completely 

on their own is 23; 1/3 of respondents say it is 25 or older.2

This presentation includes a compilation of recent statistics (by no means exhaustive) to illustrate the significant ramifications of failing to assist these young adults. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
107 

3http://www.casey.org/MediaCXenter/MediaKit/FActSheet.htm, Child Welfare Fact Sheet published by Casey Family Programs (based on data from a period ending September 30, 2001). 4 Child Welfare Service Reports for California (2005). Retrieved in February 2006 from University of California at Berkeley Center for Social Services Research Website. URL: http:// 

cssr.berkeley.edu/CWSCMSreports/. See also, http://calwv.org/jjds/chap6.html, Juvenile Justice 

in California, Part II: Dependency System, Chap. VI, Prepared by the League of Women Voters 

of California, July 1998. 5 April 2003 Press Release from the Office of the Governor of California, reprinted on http:// 

www.buildingc3.com/item.asp?id=196. See also Finessa Ferrell, Life After Foster Care, http:// 

www.ncsl.org/programs/pubs/slmag/2004/04OctNov_Fostercare.pdf (2004). 6 Issue Brief, Ensuring Access to Healthy Young Adults Program for Transitioning Youth, citing a California Department of Social Services 2002 Study: Report of the Housing Needs of 

Emancipated Foster/Probation Youth; California Department of Social Services. (2002) Report on 

the Survey of the Housing Needs of Emancipated Foster/Probation Youth. Independent Living 

Program Policy Unit, Child and Youth Permanency Branch. 7 U.S. General Accounting Office. (1999) Foster Care: Effectiveness of Independent Living Services Unknown. (GAO/HEHS–00–13). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. See also, 

Juvenile Justice in California Part II: Dependency System, 1998, http://calwv.org/jjds/ 

chap6.html. 8 Covenant House of California statistics available at http://www.covdove.org/Inside/Statistics.htm (2004). 9Los Angeles County Economy and Efficiency Commission. (2002) A Review of Emancipation 

Services. Los Angeles, CA: Author. Available online at http://eec.co.la.ca.us/pubfiles/cntyops/ 

0202_EmancipationServices.htm. 10 Id. 11Finessa Ferrell, Life After Foster Care, http://www.ncsl.org/programs/pubs/slmag/2004/ 

04OctNov_Fostercare.pdf (2004). 

Our position is that there are steps that the government and community 

can take to help ensure that these youths make a smooth transition and 

become productive member of the community. 

The direct public expense of not doing so is enormous, according to various 

experts the authors queried who work closely with emancipated foster 

youth. consider these typical annual costs they cited: 

• Housing an emancipated foster youth in a program providing support 

services (mental health, educational and vocational counseling, job placement, 

financial literacy and life skills training, mentoring) such as Hillsides in Pasadena—$20,000—$25,000. 

• Incarceration for the same young adult—between $55,000 and $115,000 (depending upon the type of facility), according to the State’s Safety and Welfare 

Remedial Plan filed in April of this year. 

• Residence in a mental health facility—$215,000. 

• The Basics: 

• Nationally, about 20,000 youth aged 16 or older make the transition from foster 

care to legal emancipation each year.3

• From January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004, 4,255 children emancipated from 

foster care in California.4

• Of these 4,255 emancipating youth 1,402 were located in Los Angeles. 

• Children who emancipate from the child welfare system are unlikely to find 

safe, affordable housing. 

• Within 2–4 years of emancipation, 25% of emancipated youth have been homeless for at least one night.5

• In California, 65% of youth leaving care do so without a place to live.6

• Nearly 40% of transitioning youth will be homeless within eighteen months of 

discharge.7

• In Los Angeles and Alameda counties, 50% of emancipated youth will be homeless within six months.8

• Without housing, youth are less likely to complete their education, find employment, and gain access to health care, all of which jeopardize their ability to 

make a successful transition to independence.9

• Studies found that between 44–77% of emancipating youth have completed high 

school as compared to 93% of non-foster care youth 10

• Research shows that only 1% to 5% of foster youth ever graduate from college.11

Employment Problems: Children who emancipate from the child welfare system 

are unlikely to find employment opportunities. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
108 

12 April 2003 Press Release from the Office of the Governor of California, reprinted on http:// 

www.buildingc3.com/item.asp?id=196. One study showed that 23% of California former foster 

care youth were unemployed within a 13-month period. 13http://www.familiesforchildren.org/statistics/htm. 14See http://www.lao.ca.gov/1995/050195_juv_crime/kkpart6.html. 15 Id. 16 April 2003 Press Release from the Office of the Governor of California, reprinted on http:// 

www.buildingc3.com/item.asp?id=196. 17See http://www.teenpregnancy.org/resources/reading/pdf/Fostering_Hope.pdf. 18 Youth Emancipating from Foster Care in California: Findings Using Linked Administrative 

Data, July 31, 2002, Summary of Findings by the Research and Evaluation Branch, Research 

and Development Division of the California Department of Social Services. 

• Studies show that approximately 51% of youth are unemployed within 2–4 

years of emancipation.12

• According to the California Department of Social Services, as of December 2001, 

about 50% of emancipated foster youth were not employed.13

• If employed, former foster care youth earn significantly lower wages than their 

low-income peers. • aOne study found that emancipated foster youth earned an average of $6000 

per year, which is well below the national poverty line of $7890. • Over a three-year period, no more than 45% of these foster youth reported earnings in any one quarter. 

The Impact of Failing Our Emancipated Youth: The Cost of Benefits and Incarceration 

• The State must bear the following significant economic and other costs of youth 

who end up incarcerated: 14

• Criminal justice costs (i.e., operation of criminal justice system in terms of police, prosecution, courts, probation, incarceration, parole etc.) 

• Medical costs borne by the government 

• Property damage 

• Loss of productivity to society 

• Loss of work time by victims, their families and the offender 

•

• Loss of property values in areas of high crime 

• Pain and suffering of crime victims and society 

The Impact of Failing Our Emancipated Youth: The Cost of Benefits and Incarceration 

• 40% of former foster youth are a cost to the community.15

• The cost to the community occurs within 2–4 years of emancipation because 

40% of emancipated youth have been on public assistance or incarcerated by 

that time.16

• Several studies reveal that girls who emancipate from foster care are far more 

likely (approximately 3×) than their peers to have a child by 19.17

• Approximately 50% of females in the foster care system receive AFDC/TANF 

Medi-Cal within one to six years of emancipation. In contrast, approximately 

6% of all females age 19–29 in California received TANF in 1999.

f 

18

Statement of Job Corps Partnering with the Foster Care System 

This statement is submitted on behalf of the Job Corps program which, as authorized by the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998, is charged with providing education and training for economically disadvantaged youth ages 16-24, who face multiple barriers to employment. One such group is homeless, runaway, or foster care 

youth (section 144(3)(C), Subtitle C). The most recent data from the Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS) show that over 500,000 American children live 

in foster care. Each year, it is estimated that between 19,000 and 25,000 of these 

children, ages 18–21, ‘‘age out’’ of the foster care system, and are forced to live on 

their own. 

Job Corps is an open entry, open exit residential national education and training 

program. The program has been in existence for 43 years and serves approximately 

60,000 youth annually. There are 122 Job Corps centers located in 48 states, the 

District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Job Corps is legislatively mandated to maintain a capacity of approximately 44,000 youth. Currently Job Corps has approxiVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
109 

mately 4,000 slots annually that go unfilled in the program. This presents an unparalleled opportunity for both the Job Corps program and emancipated foster care 

youth. For eligible foster care youth, Job Corps can provide transitional housing, job 

training, primary health care, and referrals to community organizations and state 

agencies. 

Job Corps has been actively involved with making connections with the foster care 

system and is ideally suited to service foster care youth in need of additional education and training. Job Corps Outreach and Admissions offices have been directed 

to access the foster care system in their area by connecting with state agencies and 

programs. Each Outreach and Admissions operator has been provided with a state 

by state directory of Foster Care programs which includes state coordinators, child 

welfare Youth Advisory Boards (YAB) and resources to educate Job Corps staff on 

the various assistance programs in their area. Currently Job Corps has approximately 166 foster care students enrolled in the program and is actively engaged in 

efforts to increase foster care youth enrollment. 

In addition to educating Job Corps staff on partnering opportunities with the foster care system, outreach and admissions providers educate eligible foster children 

about Job Corps. The program has also tried to ease the transition of current students who were foster children upon separation from the program. Foster children 

that separate from the Job Corps program, who are eligible for placement services; 

have a special case note placed in their electronic file, which helps their career transition specialist work to obtain additional federal funds and grants for assistance 

with independent living, known as the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independent 

Living Program. 

To date Job Corps has strengthen its relationship with the foster care system by 

accomplishing the following: 

• Established a relationship with Casey Family Programs 

• Casey Family Programs presented at the Job Corps National Conference, November 6, 2006 

• Job Corps had an exhibit at the Casey Family Programs Conference, Oct 29– 

31, 2006 

• Job Corps released a Program Instruction Notice, September 8, 2006, providing 

guidance to the Job Corps field on connecting to the Foster Care system 

• Presented at the Independent Living Conference in Indiana in June 2007 

• Scheduled to speak at the September 2007 It’s My Life Conference 

Job Corps continues to explore new ideas to better connect to the foster care youth 

system. Job Corps’ future plans to better connect are: 

• Continue developing and strengthening the partnership with Casey Family Programs and other foster care organizations 

• Develop a Technical Assistance Guide for Job Corps field staff 

• Develop a list of best practices and model programs to replicate 

• Continue to conduct and expand outreach activities to all foster care youth 

• Explore MOU possibilities between DoL & HHS 

Over the years, Job Corps has helped to guide more than two million youth to 

opportunity and success. As a result of our commitment to achievement, training, 

and education, Job Corps has helped young Americans establish their place in the 

workforce and become contributing citizens in their communities. Job Corps stands 

ready to work with the foster care system, Congress and local communities to provide assistance and program services to emancipated foster care youth. 

f 

Statement of Kevin Drollinger, Epworth Children and Family Services, 

St. Louis, Missouri 

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: 

As the Executive Director of Epworth Children and Family Services in St. Louis, 

Missouri, I am pleased to see Congress addressing the critical issues facing foster 

care youth around the country. For more than 100 years, Epworth has provided a 

wide array of services to at-risk youth and their families—first as an orphanage in 

the late 1800s and now providing education, therapeutic services, intensive and day 

treatment programs, and transitional living, independent living, family support and 

crisis shelter services. 

In our region, the critical issues facing youth about to age out of foster care are 

widely apparent. As of March 2007, the Missouri Department of Social Services reVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
110 

ported 9,818 children in the state’s foster care system. Of those, an estimated twenty-two percent—just over one out of every five children—are age 16 or older. Paralleling national statistics, these teens face monumental challenges as they become 

emancipated adults. Half of all foster teens in the St. Louis region age out of foster 

care either homeless or become homeless in later life. Less than half possess a high 

school diploma or its equivalent and more than 80 percent of former foster care females become pregnant and have children before the age of 21. 

While we help many of these teens navigate the complex foster care system and 

develop the daily living skills needed to become contributing adults in the community, they often express feelings of frustration and isolation, not knowing where to 

turn for guidance and further resources. Many have changed temporary homes, residential treatment centers or group homes multiple times, have transferred to several schools throughout the course of their education (and even throughout a single 

school year), and are passed from one case manager and therapist to another 

throughout their time in foster care. These teens, expected to be fully independent 

and thriving after leaving foster care at age 18 or even 21, are faced with the difficulties of finding jobs and a place to live, understanding basic finances, and obtaining regular medical care. 

In December 2004, nine visionary philanthropic organizations came together to 

see if pooled resources and collaborative efforts could ‘‘re-invent’’ the wheel and provide foster teens with centralized resources and guidance to help them acquire the 

daily living skills necessary to thrive as adults. With an initial investment of 

$600,000 over three years, these organizations then brought together nonprofit organizations such as Epworth and began to identify the gaps in services for older foster 

teens. 

After working for more than 18 months, the St. Louis Aging Out Initiative 

debuted in late 2006, with Epworth serving as the lead service agency. The initiative establishes a youth-friendly, centralized resource center for older foster teens 

where they can learn about the many resources available and talk with teen peer 

advisors about their concerns. Starting with teens as young as 16 years old, the 

Center will provide guidance up to age 25. Referral information is available via on 

onsite computer and individual services are provided monthly in groups and individual meetings. The Center also operates a 24-hour helpline. With a positive youth 

development approach of ‘‘nothing about us, without us,’’ the Center also has a 

Youth Advisory Board and encourages foster youth to collectively determine the 

services needed and how to best address concerns. Among the goals identified—to 

assist the majority of youth involved in the Center to obtain a GED or high school 

diploma; to create ‘‘Life Binders’’ for all participants that include important documents such as a birth certificate, immunization records, family and personal medical history, and school transcripts; and to educate youth so that they are adept at 

self-advocacy skills that enable them to self-direct their own care and placement, secure a job or enrollment in post-secondary education; and handle personal finances. 

National literature and research shows promise for this approach. If true independence is measured by age 25, instead of age 16 or 18, foster youth have a better 

chance to thrive. By linking and prioritizing the services that foster youth desire 

and need, we provide a critical service to the community at large. 

Our local approach to this national issue has already sparked national attention. 

In July 2007, we were awarded a $500,000 matching grant from the prestigious 

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to further establish the Aging Out Project. Efforts 

already are under way to link more service providers into the Center so that foster 

youth have an increasing number of resources to help them become independent. 

Through the St. Louis Aging Out Initiative, our eyes are on education, employment, and independent living. We also have worked with other social service organizations throughout Missouri and advocated for expansion of healthcare benefits for 

older foster care youth. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services (AFCARS Report, 2005a), fewer than one-third of all states offer former foster youth ages 18 to 21 access to Medicaid coverage. In July 2007, Missouri Governor Matt Blunt signed a bill expanding healthcare coverage to Missouri foster care 

youth up to age 21. Now efforts are under way to have all states pass similar measures. 

Federal and state governments spend significant monies on supporting foster care 

youth until age 18. The notion that these teens, who have been through so much 

in their lives already, are able to magically become adults with no support, is simply 

not realistic. Stronger mentor programs, improved transferability of educational 

services and records, and collaborative community efforts such as the St. Louis 

Aging Out Initiative should be encouraged across the country. And because national 

and local statistics already document the challenges facing older foster teens, comVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
111 

prehensive programs to help improve graduation levels and teach sustainable daily 

living skills should be encouraged and supported. 

As Congressman Jim McDermott (D–WA), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support noted in mid-July, federal and state governments 

function as ‘‘de-facto parents of foster children.’’ It is prudent that Congress as well 

as state leaders regularly evaluate whether or not these children need guidance 

even after they are emancipated from state care. Congressman McDermott says a 

concerted effort should be made to determine whether programs meet ‘‘that obligation, or whether we are simply showing these kids the door without sufficient support, resources, and skills to succeed.’’ 

If we are to believe in the initial premise for bringing children into state custody—for their safety, health, and stability—then all of us should be mindful of our 

duty to support them into adulthood. 

It is our experience at Epworth as well as in the start of the Aging Out Initiative, 

that foster youth do, indeed, need support, resources and skills development after 

age 18. The sad facts are that foster youth who are not supported and guided as 

they find their place in society become new entrants into social welfare system as 

adults. With Congress focusing on the ‘‘no child left behind’’ axiom in education, it 

is just as important to focus on the ‘‘no child left behind’’ in foster care. As de-facto 

parents, we should do our utmost to ensure they have the chances and resources 

they need to find their own individual strengths and thrive. 

I thank you for this opportunity to add my written comments to the oral testimony given to the subcommittee on this crucial foster care issue. 

Headquartered in Webster Groves, Epworth Children and Family Services has offered therapeutic and education services for at-risk youth and their families since it 

was founded more than 140 years ago. Originally a Methodist-founded orphanage 

based in Warrenton, Mo., Epworth has grown to offer a full array of services, including intensive residential and day treatment services, educational programs, and individualized and family therapy. The organization also operates acclaimed transitional 

living and independent living programs and has a 24-hour youth emergency service 

hotline and shelter for teens. Epworth is accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) and is a charter member of the 

Missouri Coalition of Children’s Agencies (MCCA). In 2000, Epworth was the first 

social service agency in Missouri to be honored with the Missouri Team Quality 

Award. 

f 

Kids Are Waiting: Fix Foster Care Now 

July 12, 2007 

Dear Chairman McDermott, and Members of the Subcommittee: 

The Kids Are Waiting: Fix Foster Care Now campaign thanks you for the opportunity to submit this written statement for your July 12, 2007 hearing’s record, on 

the subject of services and outcomes for children who age out of the foster care system. Kids Are Waiting (KAW), a project of The Pew Charitable Trusts, is a national, 

nonpartisan campaign dedicated to ensuring that all children in foster care have the 

safe, permanent families they deserve by reforming the federal financing structure 

that governs our nation’s foster care program. The campaign applauds the Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support for your dedication to our nation’s abused and neglected children. This hearing—indeed the series of hearings 

you are holding—contribute greatly to identifying the areas in need of reform, as 

well as providing the essential forum in which to consider meaningful solutions. 

At the heart of supporting teens who age out of the foster care system, must be 

a determined, relentless effort by policy makers, service providers, and community 

members to find a safe, permanent, loving family for each of them. In the case of 

the 24,000 teens who age out each year, never was it more true, that ‘‘an ounce of 

prevention is worth a pound of cure.’’ 

As the Members of the Subcommittee are aware, there are more than 513,000 

children in foster care. Each year, thousands are exited from the system to face life 

on their own without the benefit of belonging to a permanent family. Tragically, despite an over all decrease in the number of children entering foster care in recent 

years, the number of teens aging out is increasing. 

In May of this year, KAW, in partnership with the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, published a new report on the very topic the subcommittee is addressing today. ‘‘Time for Reform: Aging Out and On Their Own’’ reports a 41% inVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
112 

iKids Are Waiting and Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative. Time for Reform: Aging Out 

and On Their Own. May 2007. Accessed July 11, 2007: http://kidsarewaiting.org/reports/files/ 

AgingOut.pdf iiMark E. Courtney, Amy Dworsky, Sherri Terao, Noel Bost, Gretchen Ruth Cusick, Thomas 

Keller, and Judy Havlicek. Midwest Evaluation of the Adult Functioning of Former Foster 

Youth: Outcomes at Age 19, Chapin Hall, 2005. iii Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study, Casey Family Programs, 1998. iv Courtney, M.E. & Dworsky, A. (2005).Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former 

foster youth: Outcomes at age 19. Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for Children. vPecora, P.J., Kessler, R.C., Williams, J., O’Brien, K., Downs, A.C., English, D., White, J., 

Hiripi, E., White, C.R., Wiggins, T., and Holmes, K. (2005). Improving family foster care: Findings from the Northwest foster care alumni study. Seattle, WA: Casey Family Programs. vi National Census Bureau. ‘‘Educational Attainment in the United States: 2004.’’ Accessed 

April 12, 2007: http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/04eductableA.xls 

crease in the number of teens aging out of foster care from 1998 to 2005—more than 

24,000 for the last year in which government statistics are available.i

Outcomes for youth who age out of foster care are grim, and transitions to adulthood and independence are often rocky. As our report details: 

• One in four will be incarcerated within the first two years after they leave the 

system.ii

• Over one-fifth will become homeless at some time after age 18.iii

• Approximately 58 percent had a high school degree at age 19 compared to 87 

percent of a national comparison group of non-foster youth.iv

• Of youth who aged out of foster care and are over the age of 25, less than 3 

percent have their college degrees v

• compared with 28 percent of the general population.vi

Despite the good intentions and sometimes valiant efforts of most social workers, 

judges, foster parents and others, the reality remains that the foster care system 

is plagued with issues that conspire to keep children in the system too long, and 

away from the permanent, loving families they deserve. 

As today’s hearing points out, much more needs to be done to ensure that adequate support is in place for those who may age out of the system without a permanent family. A number of policies have been identified to better serve young adults 

who age out of foster care, including: extending foster care and Medicaid eligibility 

up to age 21 for all youth and providing services under the Chafee Foster Care Independence act to all youth who leave care, not just youth aging out between ages 18 

and 21. 

While KAW appreciates the enormous importance of benefits to help foster youth 

transition successfully to adulthood, our campaign’s main focus is to highlight the 

urgent need for reform of federal financing policies, namely Section IV–E of the Social Security Act. Current policies are far too complex and outdated. All too often 

they work against what’s best for children and families. These rules can prevent 

case workers and other professionals from connecting children and families with the 

services to help them stay together, to keep children from entering care in the first 

place. 

Under the current financing structure, 61% of all federal money allocated for child 

welfare services is mandated to be used for out-of-home foster care payments and 

related administrative and training costs. This leaves less than 40% of federal funds 

available to assist states in providing essential services tailored to meet the needs 

of their communities—services such as foster care prevention, family reunification, 

foster and adoptive parent recruitment, subsidized guardianship and post-placement 

services. 

Federal policies should make certain those who do enter the system don’t grow 

up in foster care. No child should age out of the system on their own. Congress can 

be part of the solution. By changing the way the federal government pays for services, we can help states prevent some children from entering foster care, while helping others leave the system more expeditiously to families that have been reunited, 

or, when that is not possible, to new families through adoption, or sometimes permanent guardianship. 

In 2004, the national, non-partisan Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care 

recommended a reliable federal financing system with both increased flexibility and 

accountability as a means to prevent children from languishing in foster care. New 

federal financing policies, combined with recently enacted state court improvements, 

would provide professionals who serve children and families with better tools to help 

more families stay together, ensure children in foster care exit the system for safe, 

permanent families, and reduce the number of youth who age out each year. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
113 

Specifically, KAW promotes the following policy options, recommended by the Pew 

Commission, to address the problem of growing numbers of youth aging out of our 

foster care each year: 

1. Establish a federal foster care financing system that States can rely on 

to be sufficient and flexible. Today’s federal IV–E financing incentives favor foster care over other services that could keep families together, reunify them quickly 

and safely, and, when that is not possible, help children leave foster care to join 

safe, permanent families through adoption or guardianship. Addressing the inflexibility of current federal IV–E funding is critical to ensuring that case workers and 

other professionals can deliver services that are tailored to meet the needs of each 

child and family they serve. For example, services such as family counseling or referrals for drug treatment programs can both prevent the need for foster care or 

help some children reunify with their families. 

With more flexible funds, states and tribes could help find more children permanent families through activities such as increased and improved foster and adoptive 

parent recruitment, or help new permanent families be successful when reunification is not possible by providing more post-placement supports. 

2. Help more children leave foster care by supporting federal guardianships for relatives and other caregivers. In most states, relatives and others 

who become permanent, legal guardians for a child in foster care lose federal financial assistance and services once the child exits foster care (some adoptions receive 

federal support). Although some relatives decide to adopt their kin, adoption is not 

a viable option for others. For example, it may not be appropriate to terminate parental rights for a parent with significant disabilities who physically cannot parent, 

but wants to remain in the lives of the children who love her. Or an older youth 

who maintains close ties with his or her birth parents may not want those parental 

rights terminated. An estimated 20,000 children living in long-term arrangements 

with relatives today could leave foster care if federal foster care funds could be used 

to support guardianship. Legislation to address support for relatives has been introduced in the 110th Congress: The Kinship Caregiver Support Act (S. 661/ H.R. 

2188). 

3. Reward states for reducing the number of children in foster care and 

achieving all forms of permanence. States should be rewarded for reducing the 

number of children in foster care, rather than punished by losing federal funds for 

case workers. Under the current system, states lose money for caseworkers when 

the caseload declines. States should be allowed to reinvest savings from safely reducing their foster care case loads into their child welfare programs. 

4. Make all children eligible for federal foster care support. The link between eligibility for federal foster care support under Title IV–E to eligibility for the 

now-defunct Aid to Families with Dependent Children program should be removed. 

Social workers should be focused on helping children find safe, permanent families, 

rather than wasting hours chasing down paperwork related to a parent’s eligibility 

for a program that hasn’t existed for 10 years. Native American children under the 

jurisdiction of a tribal government are also not eligible to receive the benefits of 

Title IV–E, since tribes are not eligible to apply for this federal program. Tribal governments should be allowed to apply for Title IV–E funds directly and operate the 

program for children under their care. 

Each day we wait for foster care financing reform, 67 additional children leave 

the system, entirely alone, because we have failed to find them families they can 

count on. Foster children are America’s children. They deserve our best efforts to 

provide them with loving, supportive families, for a happy and safe childhood, and 

a brighter future. 

We reiterate our gratitude to the Chairman and other Members of the Subcommittee for their leadership on behalf of children in foster care. The KAW campaign stands ready to be of assistance to you and your staff as foster care financing 

reform solutions are considered during this session of the 110th Congress. 

Respectfully submitted, 

JENNIFER COLE

f 

Campaign Director 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
114 

1Generations United. (2006). All children deserve a permanent home: Subsidized 

guardianships as a common sense solution for children in long-term relative foster care. Washington, DC: Author. 2 Children and Family Research Center. (2004). Family ties: Supporting permanence for children in safe and stable foster care with relatives and other caregivers. Urbana-Champaign, IL: 

School of Social Work, University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign. 

Statement of North American Council on Adoptable Children, 

St. Paul, Minnesota 

As Chairman McDermott stated in an announcement of today’s hearing, ‘‘When 

most children reach the age of 18, their parents continue to support and help them 

during their transition into adulthood. As the de-facto parents of foster children, we 

should do no less. We need to evaluate whether we are meeting that obligation, or 

whether we are simply showing these kids the door without sufficient support, resources and skills to succeed.’’ 

We absolutely have an obligation to support youth who age out of foster care. But 

first and foremost, we have a responsibility to ensure that they have a permanent 

family who will be there to help them with their transitions and with the joys and 

challenges of their young adult and adult lives. If we are able to ensure that more 

children can leave foster care quickly and safely to join permanent, loving families— 

or to provide preventive supports and services that can keep families together and 

prevent children from entering foster care in the first place—then we will have 

fewer young people who age out of foster care on their own. 

Youth who age out of care face enormous challenges. Pennsylvania resident Jessica has a sadly typical story. Jessica’s mom was a drug addict and prostitute whose 

boyfriends abused Jessica. As a young teen she entered foster care and was placed 

in a group home. ‘‘No one ever talked about adoption,’’ Jessica remembers. ‘‘I wanted 

a family and I would have considered adoption, but no one ever asked.’’ 

‘‘The scary part was when I turned 18,’’ explains Jessica. ‘‘I had nowhere to go. 

They told me, ?When you turn 18, basically, you’re done.’ ’’ Jessica adds, ‘‘When I 

left, I was unprepared to be on my own. I didn’t know anything about finances. I 

had gone to independent living classes, but I couldn’t remember anything.’’ Jessica 

spent several years working and drinking, and soon became pregnant. It wasn’t 

until Jessica’s daughter’s paternal grandparents took her under their care as a 

young adult that she finally had the family she needed and deserved. 

We at the North American Council on Adoptable Children (NACAC) believe that, 

of the many barriers that keep children and youth from achieving permanence, the 

following are some of the most significant. First and foremost, the federal child welfare financing system relies too heavily on funding and placing children in foster 

care rather than investing in preserving and rebuilding families or better supporting 

new permanent families for children who cannot return safely home. Below we detail four ways to invest in families to prevent youth from aging out of care: (1) implement federally supported guardianship; (2) provide support to birth families; (3) 

increase access to adoption assistance; and (4) fund post-permanency support. 

Over the past three years, NACAC has worked with youth from across the country to tell their stories about experiences with the foster care system. The stories 

about what these youth have endured have guided our thinking and understanding 

about the federal solutions that would work best to ensure that no youth leaves care 

without the connections that they say make a difference in their lives and their futures. In general, the system at every level—local, state and federal—should do a 

better job of listening to and respecting the voices of youth and their ideas about 

ways to improve their individual and collective situations. We’ve had the privilege 

of working with some of the most resilient youth imaginable, yet we know that there 

are countless others who have no voice and no future. The following four recommendations would go a long to change the trajectory of bad outcomes of youth 

aging out of care. 

Implement Federally Supported Subsidized Guardianship 

About one-quarter of foster children are cared for by grandparents or other relatives.1 Right now, almost 20,000 of these children cannot return to their birth families and have been with their relatives for at least a year.2 These stable, loving kin 

families could provide a perfect permanent family for many foster children, but the 

children remain stuck in foster care simply because adoption is not the right choice 

for their family. These youth will age out of foster care unless we offer them a better 

permanency option. 

Illinois resident Rob knows firsthand the value of guardianship. Placed in foster 

care due to his mother’s mental health, he and his two sisters eventually ended up 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
115 

3Personal communication with Leslie Cohen. (March 2007). Children and Family Research 

Center. 4 U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means. (2004). 2004 green book: Section 11,—child protection, foster care, and adoption assistance. [Online]. Available: http:// 

frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/multidb.cgi?WAISdbName=108_green_book+2004+Green+Book 

+%28108th+Congress%29&WAISqueryRule=%28%24WAISqueryString%29+AND+%28repttype 

%3D%24sect+OR+repttype%3D%24sect1+OR+repttype%3D%24sect2%29&WAIS queryString 

=duration+of+foster+care+placements&WAIStemplate=multidb_results.html& Submit.=Submit 

&WrapperTemplate=wmprints_wrapper.html&WAISmaxHits=40. [Retrieved May 7, 2006.] 

in a subsidized guardianship placement with his aunt. One of the first children 

served through Illinois’ guardianship waiver, Rob found safety, stability, and love 

with his aunt while maintaining ties to the mother he loves. For Rob, guardianship 

was a lifesaver that should be available to more children and youth. He explains, 

‘‘I was able to find my miracle through subsidized guardianship, but other foster 

children are not so lucky. The federal government should provide funding to states 

for children who leave foster care to live permanently with grandparents, aunts, uncles, or other guardians. In many cases, if relatives choose to become legal guardians rather than foster parents, they lose federal foster care assistance, which pays 

for things like food and clothing. That just isn’t right.’’ 

California resident Anne is raising her two teenaged grandsons, who will soon age 

out of care. She would love to become their legal guardian, but relies on the support 

she gets in foster care. One of the boys has moderate hearing loss, sensory motor 

integration problems, difficulty in school, and Asperger’s syndrome. The other was 

sexually abused and remains angry and traumatized today. Although she is committed to caring for the boys forever, Anne doesn’t want to adopt them because they 

are—and will always be—her grandsons. Guardianship under California’s KinGAP 

program wasn’t a good option because the boys would lose the extra supports and 

services that meet their special needs. So, they remain in foster care, and the family 

contends with ongoing court visits and caseworker oversight. ‘‘I would have loved 

to have taken the boys out of foster care and become their guardian,’’ explains Anne. 

‘‘But I could only have done that if the boys would have been able to continue to 

receive support for their special needs. I couldn’t have afforded to pay for all those 

services on my own.’’ 

Subsidized guardianship allowed Rob to leave care with a place to call home, both 

legally and emotionally. Unfortunately, Anne’s grandsons will not experience this 

legal permanency and will transition to adulthood knowing that they spent their 

teenage years as foster children. All children deserve the option of federally supported guardianship so they do not have to age out of care without legal permanency. 

Recommendation: Federal waivers have proven the efficacy of subsidized 

guardianship. In the nine years since Illinois implemented its guardianship 

program, 9,596 children have left foster care to legal, supported 

guardianships.3 While waivers allow states to experiment with needed innovations, they are merely temporary solutions. We now need subsidized 

guardianship to be an approved permanency option, included in the Title 

IV–E program like adoption assistance. Children in stable foster placements with relatives and other committed caregivers would benefit from 

greater federal support for guardianship, allowing children to leave care, 

eliminate costly caseworker visits, and reduce unnecessary court oversight. 

A federally supported guardianship program—such as the one proposed in 

the Kinship Caregiver Support Act—could help almost 20,000 children 

leave foster care to a permanent family right now. Thousands more could 

be served each year in the future. 

Provide Support to Birth Families 

Many youth who age out of foster care return to their birth families—the only 

families they have ever known. For a significant proportion of children and youth 

in foster care, a return home is the right permanency option. Their families, however, often need supportive services to address the issues that brought them into 

the child welfare system in the first place. The Green Book states: ‘‘It is generally 

agreed that it is in the best interests of children to live with their families. To this 

end, experts emphasize both the value of preventive and rehabilitative services and 

the need to limit the duration of foster care placements.’’ 4 Federal funding does not 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
116 

5 In FY 2006 the appropriation for Title IV–E foster care and adoption assistance programs is $6.48 billion while the funding for Title IV–B Parts 1 and 2 (Safe and Stable Families Program) is only $721.7 million. 6 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2006). AFCARS report #10 (Preliminary 

FY 2005 estimates). [Online]. Available: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/ 

afcars/tar/report13htm [Retrieved February, 2007]. 7 National Center on Child Abuse Prevention Research. (2001). Current trends in child abuse 

prevention, reporting, and fatalities: The 1999 fifty state survey. Chicago: Prevent Child Abuse 

America. 8 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999). Blending perspectives and building 

common ground: A report to congress on substance abuse and child protection. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Government Printing Office. 9 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999). (See complete citation above.) 

reflect this priority—90 percent of federal funding can be used by states only after 

Title IV–E-eligible children have entered foster care or been adopted.5

Since so much federal funding is for children who have entered care, states do 

not have sufficient resources to invest in birth family support and reunification. In 

recent years, we have seen the percentage of foster children who reunite with their 

birth families go down—from 62 percent in 1998 to 54 percent in 2005.6

This lack of support can translate into slow or non-existing support to struggling 

birth families, and certainly contributes to youth aging out of care. Michael of West 

Virginia was separated from his brothers and sister and moved more than 18 times 

during six years in care. At 18, Michael aged out of foster care with no permanent 

family, as did one of his brothers. His sister was adopted and his youngest brother 

remains in care. Michael reflects, ‘‘In my opinion, foster care destroyed our whole 

sense of family in the end. We can’t sit down together and feel like we are siblings. 

It becomes more like, ‘Oh, I know that person’ but it’s not like, ‘Oh, he’s my brother.’ ’’ 

Now 21, Michael wishes the state had done more to help his mom keep the family 

together: ‘‘If the state had invested the same money they spent putting us in all 

those placements into weekly visits with our mother and had given her skill lessons, 

it might not have escalated to us needing to go into permanent foster care.’’ 

Stephanie from Washington State was placed in foster care because of her mother’s addiction to drugs. Recalls Stephanie, ‘‘It was hard not knowing if I was safe, 

walking the streets at midnight because my mom was worried somebody was after 

her, having to look after my little brother because my mom was on house arrest, 

trying to find something to eat.’’ 

While Stephanie and her brother were in foster care, Stephanie’s mother received 

extensive services. She participated in in-patient and out-patient drug treatment, 

self-esteem classes, anger management, parenting and nutrition classes, AA meetings, Bible study, daily shelter meetings, and group and individual counseling. 

Once Stephanie was reunited with her mom and brother, her life got better: ‘‘I 

became more outgoing, I was more comfortable with myself, and my grades improved. I was in plays and musicals at church.’’ Stephanie says, ‘‘If I could wish for 

anything it would be that our family could have gotten help sooner. I don’t know 

what life would have been like if I had stayed in foster care or been adopted, but 

I know if I didn’t have my family around me—my mom, my brother, my grandparents, and my cousins—I would be devastated. My family means everything to 

me.’’ 

Kelly of Maryland is the mother of three young children who are thriving today. 

Life was not so good five years ago: Kelly was addicted to drugs and her children 

entered foster care as a result. After struggling to kick her habit, Kelly found a program that helped her put her life back together. Kelly explains, ‘‘I had everybody 

pulling for me as far as my social worker and my counselors at the program trying 

to help me get immediate Section 8 housing.’’ She continues, ‘‘They also funded my 

counseling, and they got me parenting classes. Life in recovery is so good and so 

wonderful,’’ Kelly says. ‘‘Honestly, I don’t have any desire to go back to that way 

of life. I’m grateful for my life today.’’ Today, Kelly works with other birth parents 

to ensure that they can be reunified with their children 

Kelly and Stephanie, sadly, are not typical in that their families were able to receive the comprehensive services they needed in order to be safely, permanently reunited. A recent survey of child welfare administrators found that substance abuse 

and poverty are the most critical problems facing families being investigated for 

child maltreatment.7 In some areas, substance abuse is an issue for one-third to 

two-thirds of the families involved in child welfare.8 Unfortunately, only 10 percent 

of child welfare agencies report that they can find drug treatment programs for clients who need it within 30 days.9 Almost no drug-addicted parents can access drug 

treatment programs with a mother-child residential component, and few are able to 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
117 

10 National Coalition for Child Protection Reform. (2004). Who is in ‘‘the system’’ and why [Online]. Available: http://www.nccpr.org/newissues/5.html [May 7, 2006]. 11 U.S. General Accounting Office. (2002). Recent legislation helps states focus on finding permanent homes for children but long-standing barriers remain. Report to Congressional Requestors. [Online]. Available; http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02585.pdf. [Retrieved May 7, 2006]. 12 Usher, C., Wildfire, J., Brown, E., Duncan, D., Meier, A., Salmon, M., Painter, J. & Gogan, 

H. (2002). Evaluation of the Title IV–E waiver demonstration in North Carolina. Chapel Hill, 

NC: Jordan Institute for Families, University of North Carolina. 

participate in comprehensive programs that address issues of parenting and housing 

along with substance abuse. For families dealing with poverty and housing issues, 

support is also hard to come by. As the National Center for Child Protection Reform 

notes, ‘‘Three separate studies since 1996 have found that 30 percent of America’s 

foster children could be safely in their own homes right now, if their birth parents 

had safe, affordable housing.’’ 10

Investing in at-risk families has been shown to work. Indiana had a federal IV– 

E waiver through which counties provided community- and home-based alternatives 

that sought to reduce foster care usage. The waiver demonstration showed that such 

investments work: 45.6 percent of children assigned to the waiver group never entered placement compared to 38 percent of children in the control group, and 77 percent of children in out-of-home care in the waiver group reunified with a parent 

compared with 66 percent of children in the control group. 

Also using a IV–E waiver, Delaware demonstrated that investing in substance 

abuse treatment had positive outcomes for children: the project’s foster children 

spent 14 percent less time in foster care than similar children who did not participate in the waiver, and total foster care costs were reduced.11 Certain counties in 

North Carolina used a federal child welfare waiver to cut down on out-of-home 

placements by investing in court mediation, post-adoption services, intensive family 

preservation services, and other interventions.12

Recommendations: Currently, for every dollar that the federal government spends on family preservation and post-permanency support, nine 

dollars are spent on IV–E children who are in foster care or who have been 

adopted from care. The federal government must significantly increase its 

investment in Title IV–B Parts 1 and 2, and provide states with increased 

flexibility in how they spend federal child welfare monies. Many of the foster children aging out of care today can attest to the fact that if the state 

had spent more money on keeping their families together, they could have 

saved on costly and unnecessary foster care placements. 

In addition, if states successfully reduce the use of foster care, they 

should be able to reinvest saved federal dollars into preventive and postpermanency services to ensure that more families—whether reunited, 

adoptive, or guardianship—can stay together. Currently, when states reduce the number of IV–E eligible children in foster care, the federal government reduces its payment to the state. We recommend that the federal 

government provide states with an amount equal to the money saved in 

Title IV–E maintenance payments, training, and administration. this would 

provide an incentive to keep or move children out of care, while also beginning to address the vase imbalance in federal funding. 

Protect and Expand Adoption Assistance 

Adoption from foster care can be a bright light for the future for many of the 

young people who otherwise would have aged out of care. Between 1998 and 2004, 

more than 330,000 foster children were adopted into loving, caring families. But 

adoption is not the end of the story. Children who have been abused or neglected— 

and bounced from foster home to foster home—do not emerge unscathed. The government has a moral obligation to make a long-term commitment to adoptive and 

guardianship families who take into their homes foster children who have languished in care for far too long, many of whom are older and have multiple special 

needs. 

Adoption assistance (or subsidy) is one critical support for families who adopt children with special needs from the foster care system. Subsidies help strengthen these 

new families and enable many foster parents to adopt children already in their care 

by ensuring that they do not lose support as they transition to adoption. 

Michigan resident Vernard adopted his son Alex when he was three. ‘‘Alex had 

been in 10 placements before I got him,’’ says Vernard. Because of Alex’s diagnosis 

of reactive attachment disorder and other special needs, Vernard recalls, ‘‘I made 

absolutely sure I received adoption medical subsidy prior to the adoption, because 

I knew accepting even a minimum amount of subsidy would be in Alex’s best interest. I knew that if Alex required residential treatment or out-of-home placement— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
118 

13Kids Are Waiting. (2007). Fix the Foster Care Lookback. 14 Barth, R., Lee, C., Wildfire, J., & Guo, S. (2006). A comparison of the governmental costs 

of long-term foster care and adoption. Social Service Review, 80 (1). 15 Hansen, M., & Hansen, B. (2006). The economics of adoption of children from foster care. 

Child Welfare, 85(3) 16 Barth et al. (2006). (See complete citation above.) 

due to his multiple placements, and the neglect and physical and sexual abuse he 

experienced—there was no way I could afford $300 to $400 a day or even trained 

respite support.’’ Alex receives a $300 monthly subsidy, but during their first four 

years together, Vernard spent more than $850 per month to meet Alex’s needs, including four different therapies to help Alex. 

Currently, the federal government shares in a portion of adoption assistance costs 

only for children whose birth family income is below the 1996 Aid to Families with 

Dependent Children income standards. In contrast, states are obligated to provide 

protection to every abused or neglected child, regardless of family income. Unfortunately, a funding system that ties adoption assistance to outdated income guidelines 

has resulted in a system in which far fewer children are eligible for Title IV–E federal support. In 1998, 53 percent of foster children were eligible for federal support, 

but by 2005, the percentage had dropped to 46 percent—or 35,000 fewer Title IV– 

E eligible children. This number is projected to decline by another 5,000 per year.13

The loss of IV–E eligibility often translates into the eventual loss of IV–E adoption 

assistance eligibility. 

As a result of this declining federal support, states and localities must share a 

greater burden for foster care and adoption. In some states, this has severely limited 

the amount of funding that can go to prevention or adoption support. Recent state 

legislation demonstrates the need for rapid federal action on this issue. In 2005, as 

allowed by federal regulations, Missouri enacted legislation that would have instituted a means test for state-funded adoption assistance agreements and would have 

ended more than 1,000 existing adoption assistance agreements. Although a federal 

district court found the law unconstitutional on May 1, 2007, other states may follow Missouri’s example in an attempt to save funds. Such short-sighted policies will 

relegate more children to foster care, rather than helping them leave care to a permanent family. 

A recent study by Barth et al. suggests that such adoption assistance cuts are not 

cost-effective: ‘‘[C]uts in subsidy amounts could reduce the likelihood of adoption and 

ultimately increase costs for foster care.’’ 14 In contrast, a new study suggests that 

a small increase in adoption assistance would result in increased adoptions, again 

saving money by reducing higher foster care costs.15

In the long run, adoption—even well-supported adoption—saves money and ensures that young people don’t age out of care without a place to call home. The 

Barth et al. study demonstrates that the 50,000 children adopted each year save the 

government from $1 to $6 billion, when compared to maintaining those children in 

long-term foster care. Savings result from reduced administrative costs, medical 

courts, court expenses, compared to the costs of seeking adoptive families and providing adoption assistance.16

Recommendations: Since 1988 NACAC has advocated for an elimination of 

the link between birth parent’s income and eligibility for Title IV–E adoption assistance. It makes no sense to tie a child’s eligibility to the financial 

status of parents whose parental rights have been terminated. State and 

federal assistance should be required to ensure support after adoption for 

every abused and neglected child—not just every child born into a poor 

family. As proposed by Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Adoption Equality Act 

of 2007 would extend Title IV–E adoption assistance to every child with 

special needs adopted from foster care. The House should pass a companion bill. Such legislation would also save states money currently spent 

on costly income-eligibility determinations. The savings could then be invested in supporting families after permanency or preventing foster care 

placements in the first place. 

Adoption assistance is designed to help an adoptive family meet as child’s 

needs without creating an undue financial burden on the family. Therefore, 

a program in which the federal government provides support to all children with special needs adopted from foster care must maintain the federal 

prohibition against using the adoptive family’s income to determine eligibility. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
119 

17 Babbs, A., & Laws, R. (1997). Adopting and advocating for the special needs child: A guide 

for parents and professionals. Westport, CT; Bergin & Garvey. 18Groze, V., & Gruenewald, A. (1991). Partners: A model program for special-needs adoptive 

families in stress. Child Welfare, 70 (5), 581–589. 19 Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare. (1998). CASCW practice notes # 4: Post-adoption services. [Online]. Available: http://ssw.che.umn.edu/img/assets/11860/PracticeNotes_4.pdf 

[Retrieved: May 7, 2006]. 20 National Adoption Information Clearinghouse. (2006). Postadoption services: A bulletin for 

professionals. [Online]. Available: http://naic.acf.hhs.gov [Retrieved May 2006]. 

Fund More Intensive Post-Permanency Support 

Adoption from foster care can ensure that young people do not age out of care 

without a permanent and loving family. Unfortunately, some youth who age out of 

care today are coming from disrupted adoptive placements that did not receive 

enough support. Adoption assistance is a necessary support for children adopted 

from foster care, but it is often not enough. As Babb and Laws detail, children 

adopted from foster care face a variety of special needs: mental illness, fetal alcohol 

spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, emotional disabilities, attachment disorder, as well as physical disabilities.17 Groze and Gruenewald agree 

that ‘‘[f]amilies face enormous challenges and strains in adopting a special-needs 

child.’’ 18

While adoptions doubled from 1997 to 2004, the federal investment in post-adoptive services failed to keep pace. More people are adopting more children, and the 

children are often older, have been in care longer, and face daunting special needs. 

The Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare notes that older children and 

children with disabilities are at highest risk for adoption disruption.19 Few states 

or counties have the comprehensive services necessary to meet parents’ needs as 

they raise children who have been abused and neglected and have resulting physical 

and emotional special needs. We at NACAC have met far too many families who 

are deeply committed to their adopted children, but are unable—or barely able—to 

meet their children’s mental health needs. 

In 1998, Pam and Tom from Louisiana adopted two-and-a-half-year-old Danielle 

from foster care. Because of the horrible abuse she had suffered, Pam explains that 

by age four Danielle ‘‘was doing things like biting the upholstery leather out of my 

van, growling at me, destroying furniture, and trying to hang herself with a clothes 

hanger in the closet.’’ 

Danielle was on a waiting list for mental health services for more than six years. 

A few months ago, Danielle was admitted to a psychiatric hospital and was diagnosed bipolar-manic and psychotic. ‘‘I am willing to do whatever it takes to care for 

my children,’’ says Pam. ‘‘But I know now I can’t do it alone.’’ Danielle’s adoption 

subsidy is not nearly enough to cover her expenses. The family could use a trained 

personal care attendant, in-home therapy, family therapy, and short-term respite 

care. Unfortunately, due to lack of funds, many of these services are not currently 

available through Louisiana’s adoption assistance program. 

Corvette of New York adopted nine-year-old Malik from foster care. ‘‘He hallucinates and sees spiders even though there are no spiders,’’ says Corvette. When 

Malik starts to see spiders, he panics and loses control. Not long ago, Malik needed 

to be admitted to hospital in-patient treatment for more than two weeks. Corvette 

has a deep, abiding love for Malik, but knows love isn’t enough to heal his past 

hurts and meet his special needs. She relies on Medicaid, monthly adoption assistance, and other services to provide medication, therapy, a medical school setting for 

Malik, training for her, and more. These services enable her to keep Malik at home, 

which is considerably less expensive than the residential treatment he might otherwise need. 

Post-adoption and post-permanency supports cut down on the risk of disruption 

and dissolution. Most adoptions succeed, but as many as 10 to 25 percent of public 

agency adoptions of older children disrupt before finalization, and a smaller percentage dissolve after adoption finalization.20

Recommendations: Funding of Title IV–B must be increased, and the new 

funding should cover post-permanency support. Currently, good post-adoption programs are providing basic information, support, training, and 

other services to families in many areas. It is not enough. More resources 

are needed for adoption-competent mental health services and case management programs that will ensure that children with difficult histories 

and current mental health and behavior problems do not needlessly return 

to foster care or devastate their new families. If we want adoption and 

guardianship to be truly permanent, and to prevent children from aging 

out of care with no permanent family, we must find the resources to proVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
120 

vide in-depth, sometimes intensive support to these permanent families. It 

is far more economical—not to mention better for children and families— 

to provide these services now to ensure that children don’t return to foster 

care. 

Conclusion 

Much needs to be done to provide supportive services to youth who are leaving 

foster care with no connection to a family. The government that has taken responsibility for them must continue to meet its obligation to ensure that these youth are 

ready for life on their own, and to provide supportive services for those youth who 

are not yet ready. But the best way to ensure that youth are going to make it successfully into young adulthood is to make sure that they have a permanent, legal 

family of their own. As we all know, families are there for youth long after age 18, 

and can do much more than a bureaucracy ever could to help youth handle the 

stresses of their lives to come. 

It is time to reform the federal child welfare financing system to facilitate the 

achievement of the goal we all have for children and youth—that they have a safe, 

loving family to be there for them forever. 

f 

Statement of Patricia K. Jennings, Roswell, New Mexico 

I am a mother of 5, the wife of State Senator Tim Jennings (D), Co-Chairman of 

Senate Finance Committee and Chairman of Tax and Revenue Stabilization Committee, an advocate for people with disabilities, and the Executive Director of the 

New Mexico Medical Insurance Pool and past-chairman of the National Association 

of Comprehensive Health Insurance Programs (NASCHIP). I authored the Pool legislation in 1987 when I could not purchase health insurance coverage for my oldest 

child, Courtney, who has Down’s Syndrome. I have also lobbied the New Mexico 

Legislature and successfully lowered the school age to three for children with disabilities prior to the federal legislation passing. I have assisted in writing IDEA regulations and have been very involved in policymaking for the past 29 years. 

In my spare time, I volunteer as a mediator between families of children with disabilities or at-risk needs, and the state or other systems. In 1991, the Roswell Independent School District requested that I assist them in negotiating with a very difficult family with an extremely difficult child. That is when I met the cute little second grader named Josh. However cute he might have been, Josh was in no way like 

the typical second grade boy. He had serious behavior and learning issues and acting out included trying to stab a bus driver with a pair of scissors he had hidden 

in his socks. Negotiations between the family and the schools had failed, so the 

schools and family agreed that I would serve as the treatment guardian for Josh, 

and I was appointed by the courts by Judge Chip Johnson. 

After a few months, the family finally agreed to place this extremely troubled 

child into the Children’s Psychiatric Unit at the University of New Mexico Hospital. 

After months of work, Josh was released to a therapeutic foster treatment center 

in Albuquerque. While there, he was sexually abused by another young boy in the 

center. It was quite a while before anyone learned of this, though, and he had already moved into another setting before we found out. Josh was moved to a therapeutic foster treatment home in Belen, much to his parents’ dismay. However, the 

setting was the best part of Josh’s troubled life to this day. After many months, the 

provider and the therapeutic foster family began inquired about the possibility of 

adopting Josh. Everyone who knew Josh and his family were in full agreement that 

the worst possible outcome for Josh’s success would be for him to return home, ever. 

With the parent’s horrible emotional treatment of Josh, and refusal to get any assistance from anyone in order to learn more appropriate ways to parent, there was 

no hope for Josh’s future within the family. 

This simple inquiry caused the biological parents to begin to threaten and constantly harass the provider agency until the agency decided to remove Josh from 

the therapeutic treatment home in Belen to another provider in Roswell where 

Josh’s family lived. This was against the wishes of the therapists, the foster family 

and myself, but the agency wanted to wash their hands of this very difficult family. 

The new foster family had to participate with visitation schedules with the biological family, which was extremely disruptive to Josh’s progress and the therapeutic 

foster family was not able to work with Josh. His behaviors worsened. 

Eventually, the second therapeutic foster family failed and Josh had to be moved 

to yet another setting. He was never placed in a family with children. Josh was also 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
121 

now being educated in a building separate from all other children. He was well 

known to the school system as the most dangerous child in Roswell. 

As Josh became older, his contacts with other children gave me concern that he 

would act out sexually toward another child if given the right opportunity. A psychological evaluation was ordered for Josh to determine his potential for sexually abusive behaviors toward other children. The psychologist determined that he posed no 

threat to others in that regard. However, I disagreed, and Josh was receiving therapy to address these concerns. 

Within a few weeks of the evaluation, Josh was at a therapy session at a counseling office where the secretary’s seven or eight year old son was playing in the 

waiting room while waiting for his mom to get off work. Josh was the last patient 

and the two boys ended up alone together in the men’s restroom where Josh proceeded to sexually assault the young boy. 

Josh was arrested and eventually placed in the New Mexico State Hospital in a 

program that I had recommended to the Judge. It was another excellent placement 

for Josh where he truly learned more appropriate behaviors and responded well 

with not only the staff, but with other boys from across the state that were very 

similar to Josh. He was there for a number of years, which was the only stable environment he had experienced since leaving his family’s home at seven. 

Shortly before Josh’s eighteenth birthday, the hospital released him back to his 

parents. This was done with no notice to the schools, the mental health system in 

Roswell, or anyone else. Once a child lands in the criminal justice system, the rest 

of the systems in a state that are designed to work with such a child are completely 

disregarded. 

Josh’s family had not lived with Josh for over eleven years. He was quickly 

thrown out of the house and onto the streets of Roswell. He had nothing but the 

clothes on his back. I had no notice that any of this had occurred. I was with my 

children when we saw Josh on the street one day. We stopped to visit and see how 

he was doing. We were appalled. He was thin, hungry, dirty, sick and depressed. 

My children begged me to take him home, but I could not risk their safety for Josh. 

My husband and I have tried for 4 years now to get help for Josh. We have him 

in an apartment and on SSDI and Medicaid. He can not work without intensive supported employment services, which he is not eligible for. He did not qualify for the 

Developmental Disabilities Waiver because his IQ is about 70, too high to be determined DD. His learning disabilities and inability to read or write well enough to 

fill out a job application still did not help him to qualify. We have accessed independent living centers, the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, the Children Youth 

and Families Department, the Department of Health and the Human Services Department. No one can help. 

Today, Josh remains in a little run down apartment. We have provided him with 

furniture and the necessities of living. He can not work, has no friends, walks for 

miles to get anywhere and is frequently beaten and robbed of coats, bikes or whatever he is in possession of. We at least have him in a place that is safe. He comes 

by our office and we take him grocery shopping and deliver him and his groceries 

to his apartment. We provide him with phone cards for his cell phone so he can call 

us if he needs us. We have tried to get him to get appointments with the Division 

of Vocational Rehabilitation, but he is unable to remember to keep his appointments. He needs someone with him to help him do the day to day living tasks, although he can manage to heat up food and clean his apartment to some degree. 

Josh is the perfect example of why we need services for those who age out of the 

foster care system. He is a young man waiting for the next tragedy to happen to 

him. Our community has invested so much in this young man during his pre-eighteen years with high dollar therapy, therapeutic foster care, hospitalizations, and 

education. One could say it has been successful since he has never killed anyone 

and is not now in jail. That was what we most worried about when Josh was little. 

He has not abused a child since turning eighteen, and maybe he won’t ever again. 

He has not stolen or injured anyone that we know of. But the state has failed Josh. 

He has potential, just as my daughter with Down Syndrome. With supported employment and assisted living, Josh’s life after his sentence to the state hospital could 

have turned out completely different. He could be gainfully employed, healthy and 

most of all, not a danger to himself or others in this community. 

In a recent trip to China, our delegation asked to see a home for children who 

have no families. We found that China is taking care of these children until they 

are gainfully employed. They do not release them from the ‘‘welfare house’’ until 

they have been educated and in a job where they can support themselves, and they 

must have a roof over their head. This is vastly different than here, where we release them to fend for themselves. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
122 

I think we in the United States of America can and should do better. If you need 

ideas on what to do, I would be happy to provide some. 

If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please feel free to contact me. I truly wish I could have been there in person, but I did not know about 

this hearing until tonight when I was reviewing schedules regarding risk pool funding. Thank you for this opportunity to submit this information on this very critical 

issue. 

f 

Statement of Seattle University’s Fostering Scholars Program, 

Seattle, Washington 

The Fostering Scholars Program at Seattle University welcomes the opportunity 

to submit written testimony for the Committee Hearing on Children Who Age Out 

of the Foster Care System. 

Seattle University 

With just over 7,000 students, Seattle University is the largest independent university in the Northwest. With a 29 percent student of color population, it is also 

one of the most diverse universities in the West. Seattle University is guided by its 

mission: 

Seattle University is dedicated to educating the whole person, to professional formation, and to empowering leaders for a just and humane world. 

Through its Fostering Scholars Program, Seattle University supports one of the 

most underrepresented and underprivileged groups in higher education—youth who 

age out of the foster care system. In Washington State, where only three out of ten 

foster youth graduate from high school before emancipating from foster care and 

only 25 percent of foster youth enroll in a postsecondary program immediately after 

high school (Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) 

Performance Report, 2005), the need for higher education to improve its outreach to 

and support of these students is obvious. By developing an integrated program of 

support for former foster youth at Seattle University, the Fostering Scholars Program works to improve the prospects of foster youth, and to transform the poor outcomes we often witness from children emancipating from our nation’s foster care 

system. 

Foster Youth and Higher Education 

The nation’s support of the growing population of youth in foster care is lacking 

by any measure and as a result, thousands of young people are not reaching the 

educational and life outcomes that they each deserve. The sobering statistics on 

former foster youth employment confirm the narrow scope of opportunity that 

awaits undereducated youth. In a recent study, within one year of emancipation, 43 

percent of former foster youth were employed and 45 percent were looking for work. 

Of those employed 47 percent were making wages at or below the poverty line. The 

prospects for this group do not improve with time: at four years after emancipation, 

50 percent of former foster youth were unemployed. (Foster Youth Transition to 

Independence Study, Office of Children’s Administration Research, DSHS, 2004). 

Despite these grim statistics however, there are many indications that these 

young people intrinsically understand the value of education. Their educational aspirations do not mesh with their record of low academic achievement. In one survey, 

researchers found that despite little promotion of college in the foster care system, 

more than half of all Washington foster youth surveyed had plans to obtain either 

a bachelor’s or associate degree (Foster Youth Transition to Independence Study, Office of Children’s Administration Research, DSHS, 2004). Nationally, foster youth 

face a similar predicament: high aspiration coupled with the reality of low achievement. Seventy percent of the 20,000 young adults who emancipate from foster care 

each year want to go to college. If we do not change the way we support the ambitions of former foster youth, the vast majority of our most vulnerable young people 

will never have the benefit of a college education. 

Why Former Foster Youth Need Extra Support to Attend College 

It is well documented that because they experience high rates of school instability 

and other risk factors associated with school failure (such as early childhood maltreatment and neglect and learning disabilities), foster youth often perform poorly 

in school and are rarely well prepared for college. As Burley and Halpern documented in a 2001 study of foster youth in Washington State, compared with non 

foster youth twice as many foster youth repeated a grade, changed schools during 

the year, or enrolled in special education programs (Educational Attainment of FosVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:08 Sep 09, 2008 Jkt 043505 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\43505.XXX 43505

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING
123 

ter Youth: Achievement and Graduation Outcomes for Children in State Care, Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2001). Of those foster youth exiting care in 

2004, 35.4 percent received some type of special education services (DSHS Performance Report, 2005). 

In addition to academic needs, foster youth also have unique social, emotional 

health needs. In their ten-year study of 479 foster care youth and review of 659 case 

records, Pecora and his colleagues report that a disproportionate number of former 

foster youth have clinical levels of depression, social phobia, panic disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, or drug dependence. Overall, former foster youth are 

twice as likely as youth not in foster care to have mental health problems (Pecora 

et al, 2005). 

Beyond the academic and health related barriers to obtaining a college education, 

there are several other unique barriers that arise for foster youth who aspire to attend college. For example, it is not uncommon for students who have aged out of 

foster care to become discouraged or drop out when their on-campus residence or 

dining facility closes for the holiday or summer break and they are left with nowhere to go. Understanding and addressing this and other complexities of a foster 

youth’s life is critical for institutions of higher education who seek to promote college success for former foster youth. 

Fostering Scholars Program 

In June, 2006, Seattle University welcomed its first seven Fostering Scholars and 

will welcome four additional Scholars in 2007. Once on campus, scholarship recipients receive year-round room and board; full tuition and fees; health insurance; personal support; a program of cohort and leadership development; work-study jobs; access to tutoring, therapy and counseling as needed; and the benefit of an emergency 

fund. Students also receive guidance from the Fostering Scholars Director in accessing the myriad of student development programs on campus, ranging from Office 

of Multicultural Affairs programs to intramural sports and from student academic 

support services to community service opportunities. While enrolled at Seattle University, Fostering Scholars are expected to make progress toward a degree and the 

attainment of life and leadership skills needed for independent and fulfilled living. 

Private donations and a generous grant from the Stuart Foundation, a national 

leader for children and youth, make these program components possible. Additionally, Seattle University’s partnerships with state leaders in foster care advocacy, 

Treehouse and the College Success Foundation, are critical to the program’s success. 

In order to create viable options in higher education for former foster youth, Seattle 

University is committed to forging community and governmental partnerships to 

help prepare foster youth for attending and graduating from college. Seattle University recognizes how important educational access is for all young people today, and 

is committed to making the college dream possible for the most vulnerable of our 

youth—those exiting the foster care system. The Seattle University Fostering Scholars Program urges Congress to affirm its commitment to children and youth in care 

by strengthening and expanding programs, such as the Education and Training 

Voucher (ETV), aimed at supporting the college aspirations of youth aging out of 

foster care. 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit a written statement on behalf of Seattle 

University’s Fostering Scholars Program. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HEARING