AB 12: California Fostering Connections to Success ActPolicy Overview and Implications for THP-Plus

Presentation to THP-Plus Institute July 28, 2009

Origin of AB 12 Demographic changes in foster care Federal legislation

Overview of Major Provisions Possible Implications for THP-Plus

Overview of Presentation

Change in Number of Youth Who Aged Out Annually: United States

17,310

20,35820,174

24,407

23,121

22,432

19,03918,964

15,000

16,000

17,000

18,000

19,000

20,000

21,000

22,000

23,000

24,000

25,000

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

40% increase since 1998

Over 26,000 youth “aged out” in 2006

Change in Number of Youth Who Aged Out Annually: California 38% increase

since 1998

3,076

4,249

4,448

4,2324,107

3,805

4,063

3,724

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Top Ten States Aging Youth out of Foster Care in US: 2005

1,332 1,293

735 731 667 624

1,481

1,0201,025

4,535

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

CA NY FL OH PA IL TN MA MI MN

Changing Family Dynamics

Pew: over half receive economic support from their parents until age 40 at an average amount of $3,410 annually.

Michigan & Chicago: most adult children receive considerable financial support from their parents, particularly during the early years of young adulthood through age 26.

Chapin Hall Study: The Empirical Basis Five-year longitudinal study Followed foster youth from Iowa, Illinois and

Wisconsin Collected detailed information about

education, employment, income, health, criminal justice involvement

Very high response rate Confirmed that FFY are doing worse than

general population

Former Foster Youth Fare Worse Educationally

At age 21… Midwest Study Add Health

No high school diploma/GED 23.0 10.8

High school diploma only 37.6 29.7

GED only 9.7 6.6

One or more years of college but no degree

27.9 43.0

Age 21, in past 12 months… Midwest Study Add Health

Not enough $ to pay rent 26.5 8.6

Not enough $ to pay utility bill 26.5 10.9

Phone service disconnected 32.8 19.1

Evicted 8.3 1.4

Mean number of hardships 1.02 0.46

Former Foster Youth Fare Worse in Economically

Males Females

Midwest Study

Add Health

Midwest Study

Add Health

Ever arrested 77.0 20.1 54.0 4.3

Arrested since age 18 55.3 7.5 29.6 .5

Ever incarcerated 69.3 --- 40.7 ---

Incarcerated since age 18 54.0 --- 24.5 ---

Former Foster Youth Fare Worse in the Criminal Justice System

Effect of Remaining in Care Past Age 18 High School Completion: Two times more

likely to be working towards completion of a high school diploma (20.9% vs. 10.1%);

College Enrollment: Three times more likely to be enrolled in college(37.2% vs. 11.7%);

Arrest: Sixty-five percent less likely to have been arrested (21.9% vs. 33.8%);

Incarceration: Over fifty percent less likely to have been incarcerated (14.4 vs. 23.7).

Provisions of AB 12

Eligibility Court Oversight Child Welfare Support Re-Entry Provision Placement Options

H.R. 6307: Fostering Connections to Success Act (McDermott & Weller) Voluntary State option to extend to age 19, 20 or 21 Redefines a child-care institution to include, “a

supervised setting in which the individual is living independently.”

Requires juvenile court oversight State option to extend adoption assistance and

guardianship payments up to age 19, 20, or 21 for children adopted or entering guardianship after attaining the age of 16.

Federal Implementation date: 10/1/10

H.R. 6307: Fostering Connections to Success Act (McDermott & Weller)

Youth must be…(1) Completing secondary education or a program

leading to an equivalent credential,

(2) Enrolled in an institution which provides post-secondary or vocational education

(3) Participating in a program or activity designed to promote, or remove barriers to, employment

(4) Employed for at least 80 hours per month.

Who is Eligible to Receive Support After Age 18?

Foster youth (~3,000) Probation youth (~150) Youth who exited to Kin-GAP & AAP after age 16

(~500)

There will be an estimated 3,650 youth age 18 to 21 in foster care at full implementation in the third

year

Why Not More?

Youth on runaway status (15%) Youth that won’t meet eligibility criteria (20%) Youth who elect to exit (20% 40%)

Re-entry: Approximately 4% re-enter annually in New York

Current language allows youth to petition to re-enter if aged-out after implementation.

Rate of Participation for 18 to 21: IL & NY

54%

0%0%

69%

81%

60%

39%

30%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

18 19 20 21

IL

NY

Child Welfare & Court Oversight Required by Title IV-E Likely monthly child welfare visits, unless

waiver allowed as with certain minors currently

Court hearing every six months

Placement Options

All of the existing options FFH, Kin, Residential, THPP

Two new options: Supervised Independent Living Placement (SILP) & THP-Plus

Different Levels of Autonomy for Different Levels of Readiness

THPP

THP-Plus

SILP

Experience living

independently

Level of education

THP-Plus in the AB 12 Context Option 1: No Change

Continue to serve non-dependents, age 18 to 24

Option 2: Serve dependents & non-dependents, age 18 to 24 Possibly be licensed using newly developed adult

standards

Option 3: Serve dependent & non-dependents, age 16 to 24 Possibly be licensed using newly developed adult

standards & standards for minors

Why THP-Plus Providers Are Essential to the Success of AB 12 THP-Plus providers have:

Experience serving young adults Experience with alternative housing models Experience teaching applied independent living

skills