⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 38 findings
F01
An estimated 19,000 youths age out of foster care in the U.S. each year, most without a permanent family to support them. [Ref-10]
No recommendations for this finding
F02
According to numerous studies, youth emancipating or exiting foster care are unprepared for adult living. [Ref-04, Ref-05, Ref-09]
No recommendations for this finding
F03
Extending foster care beyond the age of 18 reduces the risk of teenage pregnancies by 38% and reduces the likelihood of being arrested by 65%. When compared with youth exiting at 18, those in care past the age of 18 are three times more likely to enroll in college. [Ref-11]
No recommendations for this finding
F04
Extending foster care until the age of 21 increases estimated lifetime earning potential by $84,000 - with some college, a return of $2.00 for every dollar spent; and by $92,000 - with completion of college, a return of $2.40 for each $1.00. [Ref-12]
No recommendations for this finding
F05
PL 106-169, the National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD) Initiative requires the Administration for Children and Families, under the Department of Health and Human Services, to develop a data collection system to: Youth in Shadow 3 • track the number and characteristics of children receiving independent living services • track the type and quantity of independent living services provided by the states • develop outcome measures to assess states’ performance States are required to begin collecting data by October 1, 2010, with first submission of data by May 15, 2011. [Ref-13] California
No recommendations for this finding
F06
Data submitted to the Children’s Bureau indicates that the number of children entering, exiting, and presently in foster care has been decreasing. Data further shows that the State, with 12% of the population, serves 13% to 15% of the foster care population. [Ref-14] Foster Care in California FY 2006 - FY 2008 Entries, Exits, and Number of Children in Care on the Last Day of Each Federal Fiscal Year (FY) Exiting Foster Care during In Foster Care on Last Entering Foster Care the Year Day of FY Year FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY 2006 2007 2008 2006 2007 2008 2006 2007 2008 Calif. 41,090 41,316 36,162 41,068 42,446 41,479 76,405 73,998 67,323 U.S. 303,236 293,301 273,132 293,434 293,233 285,196 504,855 490.693 463,333 Calif. % 1 3 . 56% 14.09% 13.24% 14.00% 14.48% 14.54% 15.13% 15.08% 14.53%
No recommendations for this finding
F07
The Status of child welfare in the State (as reported January 2010): [Ref-15, Ref-16] • number of children/youth (Att-01) in foster care: 76,129 in child welfare and supervised placements: 75,587 placed in Kin-GAP – 13,734 emancipating from child welfare and supervised care: 5,027 (Att-02) • Child Welfare Spending (Att-01) FY 2006: $4,399,479,000 Title IV-E Foster Care Expenditures FY 2008: $1,241,459,464
No recommendations for this finding
F08
State youth age out of foster care at the age of 18.
No recommendations for this finding
F09
Dependency can be extended to the age of 19 if the youth are on track to receive a high school diploma.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
In 2008-09, approximately 4,500 foster youths ages 18 and older aged out of foster care in the State. [Ref-17] 4 Youth in Shadow
No recommendations for this finding
F11
A significant problem for young women coming out of foster care is early or unwanted pregnancy: [Ref-18] • approximately two-thirds of women emancipating from child welfare had at least one birth within five years of leaving care, nine percent had births while in care, 10 percent in the first year after care, and 11 to 14 percent each succeeding year • the more foster placements for a young woman, the greater the likelihood she will become pregnant before emancipation
No recommendations for this finding
F12
Dependency is dismissed by the court when a child returns home, is adopted, guardianship is granted by the court, or the child reaches the age of 18.
No recommendations for this finding
F13
The California Department of Social Services, Children and Family Services, Foster Care (CDSS) provides a host of programs, services, assistance, and information to foster youth who emancipate, exit, or age out of foster care and transition to independency. Programs offered include employment, financial, and housing assistance. [Ref-19] (Att-03 for a full list)
No recommendations for this finding
F14
The average estimated cost (per youth, per year) to extend foster care in the State to the age of 21 is $37,948, with the federal government expected to pay $13,282, the State $9,866, and the placing county $14,800. [Ref-20]
No recommendations for this finding
F15
Existing research on emancipation from foster care relies almost exclusively on interviews of former foster children. [Ref-21]
No recommendations for this finding
F16
Youth aging out of foster care face many problems. [Ref-22] • although not unique to foster children, because of the nature of their early upbringing and lack of family connection, former foster children experience ongoing problems with mental health issues, drug and substance abuse, and sexual orientation (Att-04) • few have access to transportation, which results in difficulty getting to medical appointments, job interviews, and school
Related Recommendations (1)
R02
BOS should continue to financially support and provide appropriate programs and assistance for older foster youth. (C-01, C-04, C-10, C-12, C-13)
F17
California is one of only four states (as of 2006) that terminates foster care at the age of 18. Other states and termination ages are: [Ref-23] • 18 years old in California - plus FL, LA, RI • 19 years old in four states - NE, UT, VT, WI • 20 years old in four states - AK, IA, MI, NH • 21 years old in 32 states - AL, AR, AZ, CO, DE, GA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, ME, MD, MO, MN, MT, NC, ND, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK OR, PA, SC, SD, VA, WA, WV, WY, and DC • 22 years old in two states - MA, TX Youth in Shadow 5 • 23 years old in one state - CT • information not available - HI, MS, TN, and PR County
Related Recommendations (1)
R01
BOS and HSA should support and encourage legislation extending foster care services to the age of 21 or older by vigorously advocating passage of AB 12 by the State Senate. (C-01, C-04, C-10 through C-14)
F18
Status of child welfare in the County as of March 30, 2010: • number in foster care: 632 in family-type settings: 303 in group homes: 62 in Relative or Non-related Extended Family Care: 200 in court-specified or medical facilities: approximately 67 • number placed in Kin-GAP: 106 • number of youth emancipating from child welfare and probation supervised care: 27 • Child Welfare Funding FY 2008-09: $34,467,729; Title IV-E Foster Care Expenditures FY 2008-09: $23,392,547 • Child Welfare Budget FY 2009-10: $35,744,430; Title IV-E Foster Care Budget FY 2009-10: $24,115,384 • there are 211 licensed Foster Homes in the County
No recommendations for this finding
F19
The cost for foster care in the County for the six months, July 2009 through December 2009, was approximately $6.2 million.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
The County leverages every $1.00 received from local funding into $5.00 from state or federal funding.
No recommendations for this finding
F21
Some of the recently introduced programs for Foster Care have been underfunded.
No recommendations for this finding
F22
As of March 30, 2010, there were 795 children in foster care dependency in the County. As of December 2009, of the 654 youths in out-of-home foster care or in relative care in the County, 42 were 17 years-old and 14 were 18 years-old.
No recommendations for this finding
F23
Between 2007 and 2009, 164 youths over 16 years of age exited County foster care programs. Ventura County Youth Ages 16-19+ Exiting Foster Care Age Perma- Aged- Year 16 17 18 19+ Total nency out 2008-09 21 20 57 2 100 30 58 2007-08 17 14 31 2 64 19 30
No recommendations for this finding
F24
In FY 2008-09, 521 County children and youth (all ages) exited foster care, and 505 exited in FY 2007-08 (including exits for emancipation, adoption, guardianship, and family reunification). Youth in Shadow
No recommendations for this finding
F25
On the average, 50 youths emancipate in the County each year.
No recommendations for this finding
F26
CFS has 97 social workers in 108 full-time positions as of March 30, 2010.
No recommendations for this finding
F27
The current HSA caseload is 22 children per social worker, occasionally 25 to 27. To determine its caseload standard, HSA relies on a study performed 10 years ago which determined that a ratio of 22 to one was desirable.
Related Recommendations (2)
R06
HSA-CFS should reduce caseloads utilizing AB 12 funds when available by hiring more caseworkers, reorganizing resources, and/or re- evaluating priorities. (C-11, C-12)
R07
HSA-CFS should acknowledge that a caseload of 22:1 or higher is not necessarily ideal. (C-11, C-12) Responses Responses Required From: Board of Supervisors, County of Ventura (R-01 through R-07) References Ref-01. San Pasqual Academy, California Connected, KCET (Public Television), Los Angeles, CA, May 26, 2006. http://www.californiaconnected.org/tv/archives/386 Ref-02. Ellington, Careth. The Shadow Children, Chicago, IL: Topaz Books, 1967. Youth in Shadow 11 Ref-03. Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Springfield, MA: Merriam Webster, Inc., Publishers, 1984. Ref-04. Lenz-Rashid, Sonja. A BASSC Policy Monograph: Emancipating from Foster Care in the Bay Area, San Francisco, CA. Zellerbach Foundation, 2006, p.10. http://www.calyouthconn.org/files/cyc/PDF/TransitionBASCCFinalRepo rt.pdf Ref-05. Gardner, Deseree, Research Associate. Youth Aging out of Foster Care, Identifying Strategies and Best Practices, National Association of Counties (NACo), Washington, DC, February 2008, p.3. www.naco.org Ref-06. AB 12 Fact Sheet, California Fostering Connections to Success Act, Office of Assembly Member Jim Beall, Jr., March 5, 2009. http://www.caichildlaw.org/Misc/AB12FactSheet-02.13.09.pdf Ref-07. Dworsky, Amy and June Havlicek. Review of State Policies and Programs to Support Young People Transitioning Out of Foster Care, Chicago: Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago, 2009, p. 16. www.chapinhall.org Ref-08. Los Angeles Times, “Fixing foster care in California,” March 12, 2009, http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-foster12- 2009mar12,0,2914771.story Ref-09. “Improving the Futures of Foster Youth, New Report Finds Benefits Outweigh Costs,” Press Conference, Sacramento, CA, Press Kit March 9, 2009, California Fostering Connections, San Francisco. http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/news.html Ref-10. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, AFCARS report, 2003. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report 10.htm Ref-11. Courtney, Mark E., Amy Dworsky, and Clark M. Peters. California’s Fostering Connections to Success Act and the Costs and Benefits of Extending Foster Care to 21, Seattle, WA: Partners for Our Children, March 2, 2009, p. 8. http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/pdfs/Courtney,%20Dworsky,% 20&%20Peters%20(2009)%20FC%20to%2021.pdf Ref-12. Ibid, p.16. Ref-13. About NYTD (the National Youth in Transition Database), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Family Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W. Washington, DC, February 26, 2008. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/systems/nytd/about_nytd.htm Ref-14. Foster Care FY 2002 – FY 2008 Entries, Exits, and Numbers of Children in Care on the Last Day of Each Federal Fiscal Year, a service of the 12 Youth in Shadow U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Children’s Bureau, Tulsa, OK, 2010. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/statistics/ entryexit2008.htm Ref-15. Children’s Defense Fund: “Child Welfare Financing State Fact Sheets 2010”, United States, Washington, DC, January 19, 2010. http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data- publications/data/state-data-repository/child-welfare-financing-state- factsheets-2010.html Ref-16. “Foster Care Populations and Youth Potentially Impacted by AB 12 County Data Chart,” California Fostering Connections, San Francisco, CA, Press Kit March 19, 2009. http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/news.html Ref-17. Danielson, Caroline. Foster Care in California, Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA, March 2010, www.ppic.org Ref-18. Needell, Barbara, Stephanie Cuccaro-Alamin, Alan Brookhart, William Jackman, and Aron Shlonsky. Youth Emancipating from Foster Care in California: Findings Using Linked Data, Center for Social Services Research, University of California at Berkeley, School of Social Welfare, Berkeley, CA, 2002, pp. 35-40. http://cssr.berkeley.edu/childwelfare/pdfs/youth/ffy_entire.pdf Ref-19. California Department of Social Services, Children and Family Services, Foster Care, http://www.cdss.ca.gov/cdssweb/PG59.htm Ref-20. Supra, Ref-11, p. 1. Ref-21. Supra, Ref-18, p. 6. Ref-22. Supra, Ref-04, pp. 20-21. Ref-23. State by State (AFCARS 2006 data), National Resource Center for Youth Development, a service of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Children’s Bureau, Tulsa, OK, 2010. http://www.nrcyd.ou.edu/state_pages.html Ref-24. Guidelines for Computing Caseload Standards, Child Welfare League of America, Washington, DC. http://www.cwla.org/programs/standards/caseloadstandards.htm Ref-25. Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson, W., Magruder, J., Exel, M., Cuccaro-Alamin, S., Williams, D., Zimmerman, K., Simon, V., Hamilton, D., Putnam-Hornstein, E., Frerer, K., Lou, C., Peng, C. & Moore, M. (2010). Child Welfare Services Reports for California. Retrieved 5/16/2010, from University of California at Berkeley Center. http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/C3M1.aspx Attachments Att-01. Child Welfare in California and the United States Youth in Shadow 13 Att-02. Foster Care Populations and Youth Potentially Impacted by AB 12 County Data Chart Att-03. California Department of Social Services Programs, Services, and Information Provided for Foster Youth Transitioning to Independency Att-04. Recent Studies and Findings on Youth Aging Out of Foster Care Acronyms AB – Assembly Bill AFCARS − Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System BOS – Board of Supervisors, Ventura County CDSS – California Department of Social Services CFS – Children and Family Services, Ventura County CSW – Child/Children’s Social Worker CYC – California Youth Connection GED – General Educational Development test HSA – Human Services Agency ILP – Independent Living Program Kin-GAP – Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment Program LGBTQ – Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning gender NACo – National Association of Counties NREFM – Non-Related Extended Family Member NYTD – National Youth in Transition Database PL – Public Law (as PL 110-351) State – State of California THPP – Transitional Housing Placement Program THP-Plus – Transitional Housing Program Plus Glossary Aging out − a youth ages out of foster care in California when they turn 18 years old Caseload − the number of cases assigned to one caseworker at any one time Dependency − a child is in dependency when he is removed from the home and is placed in foster care Draw-down – to get funding, to reduce levels, to deplete by consumption or heavy spending 14 Youth in Shadow Emancipation − is a legal process that gives a person who is 16 or older legal independence from his or her parents or guardians. It refers to both the emancipation of minors (i.e., youth below the age of majority) and youth who age out of foster care between 18 and 21, depending on State policy. Foster care − 24-hour substitute care for children outside their own homes Independent living − when a youth has emancipated or aged out of the foster care system and is living on his/her own Permanency – when a youth is in a permanent situation with at least one adult who is committed to providing a safe, stable, and secure parenting relationship and lifelong support Youth in Shadow 15 Attachment-01 Child Welfare in California and the United States 16 Youth in Shadow (This page intentionally blank) Youth in Shadow 17 [Ref-15] 18 Youth in Shadow Youth in Shadow 19 20 Youth in Shadow Youth in Shadow 21 [Ref-15] 22 Youth in Shadow Attachment 02 Foster Care Populations and Youth Potentially Impacted by AB 12 County Data Chart Youth in Shadow 23 (This page intentionally blank) 24 Youth in Shadow [Ref-16] Youth in Shadow 25 (This page intentionally blank) 26 Youth in Shadow Attachment-03 California Department of Social Services Programs, Services, and Information Provided for Foster Youth Transitioning to Independency Youth in Shadow 27 (This page intentionally blank) 28 Youth in Shadow California Department of Social Services Programs, Services, and Information Available for Foster Youth Transitioning to Independency http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/default.htm California Ombudsman for Foster Care Office, an independent voice for foster children and youth for filing, investigating, and resolving complaints. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/OMBprog.html Foster Youth Rights (including dealing with the courts). www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/rights2.html Ten Facts Every Foster Youth Should Know. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/10facts.html College/education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/pf/fy/resources.asp Drivers license information. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/drivers.html Employment assistance - includes tutoring, GED help, summer employment, skills training, internships and job shadowing http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Employment.html Financial assistance - includes emancipation stipends for housing, education, and living expenses; and Welfare to Work funding for former foster 18-25. www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/money.html Health and medical assistance - (Medi-Cal coverage until 21, Mental Health Services, Diagnosis and Treatment Services). http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Needs2.html Housing and housing assistance after emancipation. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Housing.html Important documents assistance and information (birth certificate, social security card, driver’s license, background, and contact information for siblings). http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/ImportantDocs.html Job seeking information: • entry-level jobs, www.entry-level.net • job search by California regions, http://jobstar.org/index.php • California Employment Development jobs, www.edd.cahwnet.gov Independency information http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Indep.html Permanency information http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Permanency.html Ventura County Human Services Agency, Children and Family Services website for youth in Independent Living www.vchsa.org/ilp [Ref-19] Youth in Shadow 29 (This page intentionally blank) 30 Youth in Shadow Attachment-04 Recent Studies and Findings on Youth Aging Out of Foster Care (problems encountered) Youth in Shadow 31 (This page intentionally blank) 32 Youth in Shadow Recent Studies and Findings on Youth Aging Out of Foster Care (problems encountered) Area Study Finding Housing/ CDSS (2002) 65% needed affordable housing at the time of Homelessness Courtney et emancipation al. (2004) 25% were homeless at least one night Shelter In Los Angeles County, an estimated 45% of youth Partnership emancipated each year go directly on to the streets or end up on the streets within six weeks of emancipation Employment Barth (1990) 53% reported they had serious money troubles George et al. 23% did not find employment 13 months after (2002) leaving care in California Education Courtney et 36% did not have a high school diploma or GED al. (2005) Financial Self- Courtney et al 36% had received food stamps, 22% were currently Sufficiency (2005) receiving food stamps, and 15% reported being Pecora et al hungry (2003) 33% had incomes at or below poverty level, 17% were receiving cash assistance, and 33% had no health insurance Mental Health AFCARS 80% of foster care youth have received mental (2003) health services Courtney et al 10% had a lifetime diagnosis of Major Depressive (2005) Disorder Substance Courtney et al 15% had a lifetime diagnosis of Substance Abuse, (2005) 5% Abuse Substance Dependence, and 14% Alcohol Abuse Incarceration Courtney et al 34% had been arrested, 17% convicted of a crime, (2005) and 24% had spent at least one night in jail; they are more likely to become involved in crime and victims of crime LGBTQ Youth Courtney et al 15% of former foster youth reported being LBGTQ (2005) (20% female and 10% males) Lenz-Rashid 35% of homeless former foster youth reported being (2005) LBGTQ Other Courtney Are more likely to have children outside of marriage; (April 2005) if married, they are more likely to have marital problems; and they are more socially isolated than their peers [Ref-22] Youth in Shadow 33
F28
Recommended caseloads: [Ref-24] • the Child Welfare League of America recommends 12 to 15 children per worker for foster care • the Oregon Project recommends a maximum caseload for foster care of 15 children per worker • a study in Idaho and Washington State suggested that, when caseloads were reduced to no more than 10 children per worker, permanency for children was accomplished in a “timely manner”
Related Recommendations (2)
R06
HSA-CFS should reduce caseloads utilizing AB 12 funds when available by hiring more caseworkers, reorganizing resources, and/or re- evaluating priorities. (C-11, C-12)
R07
HSA-CFS should acknowledge that a caseload of 22:1 or higher is not necessarily ideal. (C-11, C-12) Responses Responses Required From: Board of Supervisors, County of Ventura (R-01 through R-07) References Ref-01. San Pasqual Academy, California Connected, KCET (Public Television), Los Angeles, CA, May 26, 2006. http://www.californiaconnected.org/tv/archives/386 Ref-02. Ellington, Careth. The Shadow Children, Chicago, IL: Topaz Books, 1967. Youth in Shadow 11 Ref-03. Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, Springfield, MA: Merriam Webster, Inc., Publishers, 1984. Ref-04. Lenz-Rashid, Sonja. A BASSC Policy Monograph: Emancipating from Foster Care in the Bay Area, San Francisco, CA. Zellerbach Foundation, 2006, p.10. http://www.calyouthconn.org/files/cyc/PDF/TransitionBASCCFinalRepo rt.pdf Ref-05. Gardner, Deseree, Research Associate. Youth Aging out of Foster Care, Identifying Strategies and Best Practices, National Association of Counties (NACo), Washington, DC, February 2008, p.3. www.naco.org Ref-06. AB 12 Fact Sheet, California Fostering Connections to Success Act, Office of Assembly Member Jim Beall, Jr., March 5, 2009. http://www.caichildlaw.org/Misc/AB12FactSheet-02.13.09.pdf Ref-07. Dworsky, Amy and June Havlicek. Review of State Policies and Programs to Support Young People Transitioning Out of Foster Care, Chicago: Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago, 2009, p. 16. www.chapinhall.org Ref-08. Los Angeles Times, “Fixing foster care in California,” March 12, 2009, http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-foster12- 2009mar12,0,2914771.story Ref-09. “Improving the Futures of Foster Youth, New Report Finds Benefits Outweigh Costs,” Press Conference, Sacramento, CA, Press Kit March 9, 2009, California Fostering Connections, San Francisco. http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/news.html Ref-10. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, AFCARS report, 2003. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report 10.htm Ref-11. Courtney, Mark E., Amy Dworsky, and Clark M. Peters. California’s Fostering Connections to Success Act and the Costs and Benefits of Extending Foster Care to 21, Seattle, WA: Partners for Our Children, March 2, 2009, p. 8. http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/pdfs/Courtney,%20Dworsky,% 20&%20Peters%20(2009)%20FC%20to%2021.pdf Ref-12. Ibid, p.16. Ref-13. About NYTD (the National Youth in Transition Database), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Family Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W. Washington, DC, February 26, 2008. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/systems/nytd/about_nytd.htm Ref-14. Foster Care FY 2002 – FY 2008 Entries, Exits, and Numbers of Children in Care on the Last Day of Each Federal Fiscal Year, a service of the 12 Youth in Shadow U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Children’s Bureau, Tulsa, OK, 2010. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/statistics/ entryexit2008.htm Ref-15. Children’s Defense Fund: “Child Welfare Financing State Fact Sheets 2010”, United States, Washington, DC, January 19, 2010. http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data- publications/data/state-data-repository/child-welfare-financing-state- factsheets-2010.html Ref-16. “Foster Care Populations and Youth Potentially Impacted by AB 12 County Data Chart,” California Fostering Connections, San Francisco, CA, Press Kit March 19, 2009. http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/news.html Ref-17. Danielson, Caroline. Foster Care in California, Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA, March 2010, www.ppic.org Ref-18. Needell, Barbara, Stephanie Cuccaro-Alamin, Alan Brookhart, William Jackman, and Aron Shlonsky. Youth Emancipating from Foster Care in California: Findings Using Linked Data, Center for Social Services Research, University of California at Berkeley, School of Social Welfare, Berkeley, CA, 2002, pp. 35-40. http://cssr.berkeley.edu/childwelfare/pdfs/youth/ffy_entire.pdf Ref-19. California Department of Social Services, Children and Family Services, Foster Care, http://www.cdss.ca.gov/cdssweb/PG59.htm Ref-20. Supra, Ref-11, p. 1. Ref-21. Supra, Ref-18, p. 6. Ref-22. Supra, Ref-04, pp. 20-21. Ref-23. State by State (AFCARS 2006 data), National Resource Center for Youth Development, a service of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Children’s Bureau, Tulsa, OK, 2010. http://www.nrcyd.ou.edu/state_pages.html Ref-24. Guidelines for Computing Caseload Standards, Child Welfare League of America, Washington, DC. http://www.cwla.org/programs/standards/caseloadstandards.htm Ref-25. Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson, W., Magruder, J., Exel, M., Cuccaro-Alamin, S., Williams, D., Zimmerman, K., Simon, V., Hamilton, D., Putnam-Hornstein, E., Frerer, K., Lou, C., Peng, C. & Moore, M. (2010). Child Welfare Services Reports for California. Retrieved 5/16/2010, from University of California at Berkeley Center. http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/C3M1.aspx Attachments Att-01. Child Welfare in California and the United States Youth in Shadow 13 Att-02. Foster Care Populations and Youth Potentially Impacted by AB 12 County Data Chart Att-03. California Department of Social Services Programs, Services, and Information Provided for Foster Youth Transitioning to Independency Att-04. Recent Studies and Findings on Youth Aging Out of Foster Care Acronyms AB – Assembly Bill AFCARS − Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System BOS – Board of Supervisors, Ventura County CDSS – California Department of Social Services CFS – Children and Family Services, Ventura County CSW – Child/Children’s Social Worker CYC – California Youth Connection GED – General Educational Development test HSA – Human Services Agency ILP – Independent Living Program Kin-GAP – Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment Program LGBTQ – Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning gender NACo – National Association of Counties NREFM – Non-Related Extended Family Member NYTD – National Youth in Transition Database PL – Public Law (as PL 110-351) State – State of California THPP – Transitional Housing Placement Program THP-Plus – Transitional Housing Program Plus Glossary Aging out − a youth ages out of foster care in California when they turn 18 years old Caseload − the number of cases assigned to one caseworker at any one time Dependency − a child is in dependency when he is removed from the home and is placed in foster care Draw-down – to get funding, to reduce levels, to deplete by consumption or heavy spending 14 Youth in Shadow Emancipation − is a legal process that gives a person who is 16 or older legal independence from his or her parents or guardians. It refers to both the emancipation of minors (i.e., youth below the age of majority) and youth who age out of foster care between 18 and 21, depending on State policy. Foster care − 24-hour substitute care for children outside their own homes Independent living − when a youth has emancipated or aged out of the foster care system and is living on his/her own Permanency – when a youth is in a permanent situation with at least one adult who is committed to providing a safe, stable, and secure parenting relationship and lifelong support Youth in Shadow 15 Attachment-01 Child Welfare in California and the United States 16 Youth in Shadow (This page intentionally blank) Youth in Shadow 17 [Ref-15] 18 Youth in Shadow Youth in Shadow 19 20 Youth in Shadow Youth in Shadow 21 [Ref-15] 22 Youth in Shadow Attachment 02 Foster Care Populations and Youth Potentially Impacted by AB 12 County Data Chart Youth in Shadow 23 (This page intentionally blank) 24 Youth in Shadow [Ref-16] Youth in Shadow 25 (This page intentionally blank) 26 Youth in Shadow Attachment-03 California Department of Social Services Programs, Services, and Information Provided for Foster Youth Transitioning to Independency Youth in Shadow 27 (This page intentionally blank) 28 Youth in Shadow California Department of Social Services Programs, Services, and Information Available for Foster Youth Transitioning to Independency http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/default.htm California Ombudsman for Foster Care Office, an independent voice for foster children and youth for filing, investigating, and resolving complaints. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/OMBprog.html Foster Youth Rights (including dealing with the courts). www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/rights2.html Ten Facts Every Foster Youth Should Know. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/10facts.html College/education. http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/pf/fy/resources.asp Drivers license information. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/drivers.html Employment assistance - includes tutoring, GED help, summer employment, skills training, internships and job shadowing http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Employment.html Financial assistance - includes emancipation stipends for housing, education, and living expenses; and Welfare to Work funding for former foster 18-25. www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/money.html Health and medical assistance - (Medi-Cal coverage until 21, Mental Health Services, Diagnosis and Treatment Services). http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Needs2.html Housing and housing assistance after emancipation. http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Housing.html Important documents assistance and information (birth certificate, social security card, driver’s license, background, and contact information for siblings). http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/ImportantDocs.html Job seeking information: • entry-level jobs, www.entry-level.net • job search by California regions, http://jobstar.org/index.php • California Employment Development jobs, www.edd.cahwnet.gov Independency information http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Indep.html Permanency information http://www.fosteryouthhelp.ca.gov/Permanency.html Ventura County Human Services Agency, Children and Family Services website for youth in Independent Living www.vchsa.org/ilp [Ref-19] Youth in Shadow 29 (This page intentionally blank) 30 Youth in Shadow Attachment-04 Recent Studies and Findings on Youth Aging Out of Foster Care (problems encountered) Youth in Shadow 31 (This page intentionally blank) 32 Youth in Shadow Recent Studies and Findings on Youth Aging Out of Foster Care (problems encountered) Area Study Finding Housing/ CDSS (2002) 65% needed affordable housing at the time of Homelessness Courtney et emancipation al. (2004) 25% were homeless at least one night Shelter In Los Angeles County, an estimated 45% of youth Partnership emancipated each year go directly on to the streets or end up on the streets within six weeks of emancipation Employment Barth (1990) 53% reported they had serious money troubles George et al. 23% did not find employment 13 months after (2002) leaving care in California Education Courtney et 36% did not have a high school diploma or GED al. (2005) Financial Self- Courtney et al 36% had received food stamps, 22% were currently Sufficiency (2005) receiving food stamps, and 15% reported being Pecora et al hungry (2003) 33% had incomes at or below poverty level, 17% were receiving cash assistance, and 33% had no health insurance Mental Health AFCARS 80% of foster care youth have received mental (2003) health services Courtney et al 10% had a lifetime diagnosis of Major Depressive (2005) Disorder Substance Courtney et al 15% had a lifetime diagnosis of Substance Abuse, (2005) 5% Abuse Substance Dependence, and 14% Alcohol Abuse Incarceration Courtney et al 34% had been arrested, 17% convicted of a crime, (2005) and 24% had spent at least one night in jail; they are more likely to become involved in crime and victims of crime LGBTQ Youth Courtney et al 15% of former foster youth reported being LBGTQ (2005) (20% female and 10% males) Lenz-Rashid 35% of homeless former foster youth reported being (2005) LBGTQ Other Courtney Are more likely to have children outside of marriage; (April 2005) if married, they are more likely to have marital problems; and they are more socially isolated than their peers [Ref-22] Youth in Shadow 33
F29
Five CFS staff recruit, license, investigate, and perform background checks for all Foster Homes.
No recommendations for this finding
F30
Each County-licensed Foster Home is visited at least once per year. (The State requires they be reviewed only once every five years.)
No recommendations for this finding
F31
In addition to State programs and services, CFS under HSA oversees or coordinates several programs for foster and transitioning youth: • Independent Living Program (ILP) for youth 16 to 21 which assists with transportation - driver’s licenses, bus passes, bicycles, education, housing, mentoring, basic living skills • After Care Services Program for youth over 18 includes information on obtaining food stamps and MediCal • California Youth Connection (CYC) forum provides leadership, advocacy, support, and empowerment, as well as an opportunity to address foster youth issues at the legislative level • Transitional Housing Placement Plus (THPP) provides housing assistance and support for up to six former foster or probation youth ages 18-24 • Transitional Housing Placement Plus (THP+) provides affordable housing assistance and supportive services to emancipated foster and probation youth. It is a voluntary program for emancipated youth ages 18-24 for up to 24 months. May include a $500 stipend for one year towards housing costs • Transitional Housing Placement Program (also referred to as THPP) assists youth 16-18 years-old with semi-independent living – a service provider external to HSA Youth in Shadow 7 • Aspiranet, a non-profit social services agency provides assistance with family services, adoption, foster care, education, after-school programs and community collaboration • Interface Children Family Services provides classes on life skills training, budgeting, and educational and vocational opportunities • Kin-GAP - Kinship Guardianship Program youth live with relatives in a guardianship relationship - dependency has been dismissed and CFS does not provide ongoing case management • Wraparound Program provides intensive support for children with emotional and behavioral needs, allowing them to remain with their families when otherwise they would be placed in a group home • Foster Family Agencies - Aspiranet and Koinonia for children requiring more intensive care • Small Family Homes are licensed by the State and are typically for children requiring a higher level of care; employment outside the home is prohibited for caregiver • Non-Related Extended Family Member (NREFM) can act as a caregiver, e.g. a neighbor with a pre-existing relationship; however, they must pass same background checks and home inspections as required for a foster home or a relative home • a transition program for youth approaching the age of 18 • a foster care Support Group for youth leaving foster care • a Juvenile Court with one judge • a website for ILP youth - www.vchsa.org/ilp
No recommendations for this finding
F32
CFS maintains working relationships with local nonprofit agencies in supporting former foster youth and providing assistance: • Path Point, Catholic Charities, and Salvation Army for assistance with rent • Path Point for assistance with security deposits • Path Point and Salvation Army for assistance with paying for utilities • Catholic Charities, Food Share, and HSA Food Stamp Program for assistance in obtaining food • ACTION and Kiwanis Club for assistance with obtaining furniture
No recommendations for this finding
F33
Due to confidentiality and privacy laws, any follow-up contact with former foster care children and youth is voluntary for the youth. They are private citizens and, as such, cannot be required to report back to CFS on their lives. Therefore, HSA cannot collect real data regarding their progress or lack of accomplishments. Youth in Shadow
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
Within the limitations of privacy and confidentiality laws, HSA-CFS should investigate ways to collect, store, and analyze summative data on youth who have exited foster care in the County. (C-07 through C-09)
F34
No statistically significant data is collected on the effectiveness of program(s).
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
Within the limitations of privacy and confidentiality laws, HSA-CFS should investigate ways to collect, store, and analyze summative data on youth who have exited foster care in the County. (C-07 through C-09)
F35
There is no regular, systematic method for collecting empirical data for research on the effectiveness of program(s).
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
Within the limitations of privacy and confidentiality laws, HSA-CFS should investigate ways to collect, store, and analyze summative data on youth who have exited foster care in the County. (C-07 through C-09)
F36
The following information, when requested by the Grand Jury, was unavailable from HSA/CFS: • What percentage of former County foster youth is living independently? • What percentage of former County foster youth is homeless? • What percentage of former County foster youth is gainfully employed? Unemployed? • What percentage of former County foster youth is currently receiving welfare assistance? • What percentage of former County foster youth is now in college or has graduated from college? • What percentage of former County foster youth is in the military? • What percentage of former County foster youth is now incarcerated or has been incarcerated? • What percentage of former County foster youth is relatively happy with their life and present situation? • What percentage of former County foster youth is married? Has had a child? • What percentage of former County foster youth may be considered to be social isolates?
Related Recommendations (1)
R04
Within the limitations of privacy and confidentiality laws, HSA-CFS should investigate ways to collect, store, and analyze summative data on youth who have exited foster care in the County. (C-07 through C-09)
F37
The County’s score on Federal Permanency Measure C-3.1: Exits to Permanency (the percent of children in foster care for two or more years who exited to a permanent home), for July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009 was 28.3%. This is higher than the 23.3% State attainment and slightly less than the 29.1% national score. For the period October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2009, the County score increased to 30.1%. [Ref-25]
No recommendations for this finding
F38
Because of privacy and confidentiality issues, the Grand Jury was unable to observe an Emancipation Conference, nor to interview youth formerly or presently in foster care. Conclusions C-01. In the long term, AB 12 will save the State dollars by allowing the State to access federal funds to recover up to 50% of the costs for kinship-guardianship programs. Money saved could be used to extend services to older youth and to lower CFS caseloads. (F-01, F-03, F-04, F-14, F-19 through F-21, F-26 through F-28) Youth in Shadow 9 C-02. It is not going to be easy for youth aging out of foster care. (F-02, F-03, F-11, F-16) C-03. History cautions that many youth exiting the out-of-home foster care system as adolescents are likely to need and receive services as adults through welfare, as a resident of a homeless shelter, or through incarceration. (F-02, F-11) C-04. Extending foster care past the age of 18 has long-term benefits for youth: higher standards of living, less homelessness, greater self- sufficiency, improved health, reduced chemical and alcohol dependency, fewer unwanted pregnancies, less involvement with the courts, and better education. (F-03, F-04) C-05. The transition to living independently will be difficult for those with a history of abuse, neglect, and multiple foster care placements. (F-02, F11, F-16) C-06. Foster youth, as a result of being abused, neglected, victimized, and moved from placement to placement (sometimes on very short notice), have learned to be defensive and on guard, wary of offers to help, socially mistrustful, and leery of adult intervention; making it difficult for them to be reached and to reach out. (F-02, F-11, F-16) C-07. Having accurate and current past performance information would improve program planning and delivery of services. Child Welfare agencies, and Social Service and Child Welfare Directors need to know how many youth are in foster care: their ages, how many leave the system each year, and how they are doing. Many counties must rely on old information and rough estimates about the youth they serve in terms of needs, issues, strengths, and experiences. (F-05, F- 15, F-33 through F-36, F-38) C-08. The inability of states to accurately report the number of youth currently in care or who age out each year, and the inability to determine how well they are doing two, three, or four years after leaving care is discouraging and dissuades accountability. NYTD requirements, with which states will soon be forced to comply, are constructive steps to take. (F-05, F-15, F-33 through F-36) C-09. More research data is needed to quantify the efficacy of County services for youth who have exited care. Best practices can be identified and replicated when empirical research shows that programs have been successful. (F-05, F-15, F-33 through F-36, F-38) C-10. Passage of AB 12 should ease the financial burden on the State, resulting in better service for foster children and youth by improved delivery of services, fewer changes in placement, shorter lengths of stay in foster care, and enhanced movement into permanency – the ultimate goal. (F-03 through F-05, F-14, F-19 through F-21, F-37) 10 Youth in Shadow C-11. Hiring more case workers will result in smaller caseloads and will improve foster care with respect to delivery of services, length of stay in foster care, and move to permanency. (F-26 through F-28, F-37) C-12. The State lags behind many states in extending foster care beyond the age of 18. (F-17) C-13. County foster care children and youth are appropriately served through a broad range of programs offered by HSA/CFS – Foster Care, and the State. (F-13, F-20 through F-21, F-29 through F-32, F-36) Recommendations
No recommendations for this finding
Conclusions 3
-
CL1 Page 11C-01. In the long term, AB 12 will save the State dollars by allowing the State to access federal funds to recover up to 50% of the costs for kinship-guardianship programs. Money saved could be used to extend services to older youth and to lower CFS caseloads. (F-01, F-03, F-04, F-14, F-19 through F-21, F-26 through F-28) Youth in Shadow 9
-
CL2 Page 12C-02. It is not going to be easy for youth aging out of foster care. (F-02, F-03, F-11, F-16) C-03. History cautions that many youth exiting the out-of-home foster care system as adolescents are likely to need and receive services as adults through welfare, as a resident of a homeless shelter, or through incarceration. (F-02, F-11) C-04. Extending foster care past the age of 18 has long-term benefits for youth: higher standards of living, less homelessness, greater self- sufficiency, improved health, reduced chemical and alcohol dependency, fewer unwanted pregnancies, less involvement with the courts, and better education. (F-03, F-04) C-05. The transition to living independently will be difficult for those with a history of abuse, neglect, and multiple foster care placements. (F-02, F11, F-16) C-06. Foster youth, as a result of being abused, neglected, victimized, and moved from placement to placement (sometimes on very short notice), have learned to be defensive and on guard, wary of offers to help, socially mistrustful, and leery of adult intervention; making it difficult for them to be reached and to reach out. (F-02, F-11, F-16) C-07. Having accurate and current past performance information would improve program planning and delivery of services. Child Welfare agencies, and Social Service and Child Welfare Directors need to know how many youth are in foster care: their ages, how many leave the system each year, and how they are doing. Many counties must rely on old information and rough estimates about the youth they serve in terms of needs, issues, strengths, and experiences. (F-05, F- 15, F-33 through F-36, F-38) C-08. The inability of states to accurately report the number of youth currently in care or who age out each year, and the inability to determine how well they are doing two, three, or four years after leaving care is discouraging and dissuades accountability. NYTD requirements, with which states will soon be forced to comply, are constructive steps to take. (F-05, F-15, F-33 through F-36) C-09. More research data is needed to quantify the efficacy of County services for youth who have exited care. Best practices can be identified and replicated when empirical research shows that programs have been successful. (F-05, F-15, F-33 through F-36, F-38) C-10. Passage of AB 12 should ease the financial burden on the State, resulting in better service for foster children and youth by improved delivery of services, fewer changes in placement, shorter lengths of stay in foster care, and enhanced movement into permanency – the ultimate goal. (F-03 through F-05, F-14, F-19 through F-21, F-37) 10 Youth in Shadow
-
CL3 Page 13C-11. Hiring more case workers will result in smaller caseloads and will improve foster care with respect to delivery of services, length of stay in foster care, and move to permanency. (F-26 through F-28, F-37) C-12. The State lags behind many states in extending foster care beyond the age of 18. (F-17) C-13. County foster care children and youth are appropriately served through a broad range of programs offered by HSA/CFS – Foster Care, and the State. (F-13, F-20 through F-21, F-29 through F-32, F-36)
Agency Responses 5
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.