Meeting the Educational Needs of Children and Youth Who Are in Foster Care

1. Meeting the Educational Needs of Children and Youth Who Are in Foster Care McKinney Vento State Coordinators Kathleen McNaught February 4, 2009

2. Who are the children and youth in out-of-home care? Over 800,000 youth a year (1% of all US youth); over 500,000 on any day. Disproportionately children of color. 71% school age; 29% under age 5. 20,000-25,000 young people emancipate from the foster care system each year. 2

3. The Whirlwind of Out-of-Home Care Removed from home/parents/siblings May not have had chance to say goodbye Uncertain about where parents/siblings are Living with strangers In strange house/room/bed Different customs/routine Other children in home Few or none of your possessions Lucky to have trash bag of belongings Uncertainty about future Where will I live? Will I return home? Where will I go to school?

4. What are the educational experiences of students in out-of-home care? Of more than 1,000 foster care alumni surveyed in a Casey Family Programs national study, 68% attended 3 or more elementary schools; 33% attended 5 or more. A New York study found 42% of children did not start school immediately upon entering care; half of those did not start due to lost or misplaced records. Even after statistically controlling for a variety of factors, a youth that enters foster care is 57% less likely to graduate high school, twice as likely to repeat a grade, and twice as likely to be in special education. 4

5. Children in Foster Care and Eligibility for McKinney Vento • Currently, some children who are, or who have been, in out-of-home care are eligible for the benefits of the McKinney-Vento Act. • Youth who have run away from foster placements and are living in a homeless situation. • Youth who have been abused or neglected and are living in a homeless situation, but have not been placed in the custody of the child welfare system. • Youth who have aged out of foster care and are living in a homeless situation, but have not graduated from high school. • The definition of children eligible under the McKinney-Vento Act includes children “awaiting foster care placement.”

6. Variety of interpretations of AFCP: CONTINUUM OF ARGUMENTS: • When child is in foster care they are not “awaiting foster care placement” and therefore are not McKinney eligible • Children in foster care in certain particularly unstable placements (such as shelter placements) are considered McKinney eligible • All children pre-adjudication or disposition are considered McKinney eligible • All children pre finalization of permanency plan (e.g. adoption; guardianship; reunification) are McKinney eligible • All children in foster care are McKinney eligible

7. State examples of McKinney application • Delaware defines “awaiting foster care placement” as all children in foster care. • Massachusetts and Connecticut have reached state level agreements between their education and child welfare agencies to include certain children in foster care under McKinney Vento. • Other states and local jurisdictions have chosen to have informal policies to determine when a child in foster care is eligible under McKinney Vento.

8. Creating State Foster Care/Education Policies • Some states continue to debate which children in care are eligible under McKinney’s “awaiting foster care placement” and others have limited eligibility to certain subset of children in care (like Mass. And Conn.) • However, almost all agree that similar protections are NEEDED for all children in care. • Many states have sought other means of establishing these McKinney-like protections for all children in care. (Example: California AB 490- Jan. 2004) • Now with Fostering Connections, expect a new wave of state foster care/education legislation

9. Other Examples For a full chart of state foster care/education laws and policies around enrollment see: http://www.abanet.org/child/rclji/education/fostercareeducation_legislation_draft1.doc For a full chart of states with clear McKinney Vento policies around children “awaiting foster care placement” see: http://www.abanet.org/child/education/AFCPchart.pdf

10. Foster Care and McKinney-Vento What we know: • Many children in the foster care system are being served under McKinney-Vento, but the numbers and the child’s situation vary by state. • All children in foster care need the kinds of protections provided in McKinney-Vento • McKinney-Vento is not currently designed to serve all youth in the foster care system

11. Child Welfare Law and Education Placement Stability • Fostering Connections to Success Act (HR 6893) is a new child welfare law, passed in October 2008 • Has many requirements related to school enrollment and stability. • Does not provide all the same protections as McKinney-Vento but includes some key provisions • First federal law to provide strong mandates for child welfare system to focus on education

12. HR 6893 and Education Placement Stability (cont.) • Every foster child’s case plan must include assurances that the placement of the child in foster care takes into account the proximity to the school of origin. The case plan must also consider the appropriateness of the current education setting. • Child welfare agency must coordinate with school to ensure child remains in the school of origin if in the child’s best interest. • Child welfare agency may use federal funds to provide reasonable travel for children to remain in their school of origin. 42 U.S.C. 675(1)(C)

13. What does this permissible use of IV-E dollars to support school of transportation really mean? • It is at the option of the state to use • Whether it makes sense to pursue these dollars will depend on the state • If a state does pursue, still may vary how a state may design their system of reimbursement • Still need some additional clarification from HHS to know for sure how these funds can be used by states

14. DIFFERENT KINDS OF IV-E FUNDS • IV-E Administrative Dollars • Guidance from December 2007 clarified that states could use IV-E administrative dollars to support school or origin transportation for IV-E eligible children. All states can get a 50% federal match under IV-E Admin. • IV-E Maintenance Dollars • Depending on the state, federal match rates can vary from 50-71%. So in some states, possibility for higher match rate. However, there are additional administrative issues that accompany maintenance dollar, so depending on how far above the 50% match, whether makes sense for a state to pursue OUTSTANDING QUESTION NEEDING FEDERALR ESPONSE: Do states have the option to pick either/or

15. IF USING IV-E MAINTENANCE, HOW WOULD THIS HAPPEN? • Much will depend on how a state has structured their IV-E maintenance payments • Potential options include: • Addressed in direct foster care maintenance payments to foster care provider for a child • Addressed in separate payment for a particular child (i.e. to a particular transportation service provider) • Addressed for a category of children using an appropriate apportionment methodology to ensure tied to IV-E eligible children. OUTSTANDING QUESTION NEEDING FEDERAL RESPONSE: Can a state use an apportionment methodology for transportation to original school?

16. HR 6893 andEnrollment and Attendance • Child welfare agencies and schools must ensure immediate enrollment in a new school for youth who will not remain in their school of origin. • Child welfare agencies must ensure that all education records are provided to the new school. • Child welfare agencies must also ensure that all IV-E eligible children are enrolled and attending school (this must be documented in their state plan)

17. Other Fostering Connections Provisions that Impact Older Youth and Education Needs • New required transition plan to be completed 90 days prior to youth exiting care (federal law already required planning for independence for all youth in care 16 and older • Permits states to expand Chafee programs to youth who were adopted or placed in permanent guardianship over the age of 16. • Permits state to extend eligibility for Education and Training Vouchers to children who are placed in guardianship over the age of 16 (already allows eligibility for youth adopted over 16). • Permits states to extend care up to age 21.

18. State Implementation of Education Provisions of Fostering Connections • Many states will need to pursue legislation or other policy changes to be in compliance with Fostering Connections • Provides an opportunity to incorporate some of the known strengths of McKinney-Vento into child welfare/education state policy; such as: • Creation of a liaison or key point of contact in both child welfare and education agencies • Requirement for education agency to coordinate • Consider state funding streams to support school of origin transportation for children in foster care who are not McKinney eligible • Creation of protocols for best interest determinations as well as process for dispute resolution • Identifying role of the court in these processes given the children in care are court involved.

19. Collaboration between ABA and Casey Family Programs, in conjunction with the Juvenile Law Center and Education Law Center. A national technical assistance resource and information clearinghouse on legal and policy matters affecting the education of children and youth in out-of-home care. Website: www.abanet.org/child/education Listserv, Conference Calls, Publications, Searchable Database

20. Contact Information ABA Center on Children and the Law Legal Center for Foster Care and Education www.abanet.org/child/education Kathleen McNaught Project Director mcnaughk@staff.abanet.org