NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR EMANCIPATING FOSTER YOUTH
A Project
Presented to the faculty of the Division of Social Work
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK
by
Nicole Theresa Stiving
SPRING
2012
© 2012
Nicole Theresa Stiving
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ii
NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR EMANCIPATING FOSTER YOUTH
A Project
by
Nicole Theresa Stiving
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair
Teiahsha Bankhead, Ph.D., L.C.S.W.
____________________________
Date
iii
Student: Nicole Theresa Stiving
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to
be awarded for the project.
__________________________, Division Coordinator
Dale Russell, Ed.D, L.C.S.W.
Division of Social Work
iv
___________________
Date
Abstract
of
NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR EMANCIPATING FOSTER YOUTH
by
Nicole Theresa Stiving
This study examined the need for services of transitioning foster youth, in Northern
California. The 13 youth members, 2 adult supporters and 1 staff member of California
Youth Connection’s Northern and Bay Area/Central Valley Regions participated in a
confidential phone interview. This descriptive qualitative study used thematic analysis to
explore the need for services of emancipating foster youth. Several participants
responded that the following areas were needed; 1) having a mentor or supportive figure;
2) having resources that are available and accessible; 3); stable housing; and 4) knowing
how to budget and manage finances. Future services should address these services areas
for foster youth among other vital services.
______________________________, Committee Chair
Teiahsha Bankhead, Ph.D., L.C.S.W.
______________________________
Date
v
DEDICATION
I want to thank my mother for all of her support. I could not have made it this far without
all of her love. I also want to thank Dr. Bankhead for all of her guidance and support
throughout this school year. Love, Nicole Theresa Stiving
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication .......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter
1. THE PROBLEM ............................................................................................................1
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem .................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Research Problem ........................................................................ 4
Purpose of Study ..................................................................................................... 5
Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................... 6
Definitions of Terms ............................................................................................... 8
Assumptions.......................................................................................................... 10
Justifications ......................................................................................................... 10
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .............................................................................11
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 11
Historical Background and Legislation ................................................................ 12
Outcomes of Emancipated Foster Youth .............................................................. 17
Challenges Associated with Emancipation from Foster Care............................... 17
Resiliency Factors ................................................................................................. 20
Studies on Independent Living Programs ............................................................. 22
Housing Programs ................................................................................................. 28
Mentorship and Interpersonal Relationships ........................................................ 31
Needs Assessment ................................................................................................. 37
Goals of Present Study .......................................................................................... 38
3. METHODS ..................................................................................................................40
Purpose.................................................................................................................. 40
Design ................................................................................................................... 40
vii
Procedures ............................................................................................................. 41
Materials ............................................................................................................... 41
Participants ............................................................................................................ 42
Analysis................................................................................................................. 43
Human Subjects Protection ................................................................................... 43
4. RESULTS ....................................................................................................................45
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 45
Emergent Themes ................................................................................................. 45
Participants Demographics ................................................................................... 46
Mentors and Supportive Figures ........................................................................... 51
Resources .............................................................................................................. 53
Housing ................................................................................................................. 55
Budgeting and Managing Finances ....................................................................... 56
Additional Findings .............................................................................................. 57
Life Skills Findings ............................................................................................... 59
Summary ............................................................................................................... 64
5. DISCUSSION ..............................................................................................................65
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 65
Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 65
Recommendations ................................................................................................. 71
Implications for Future Research .......................................................................... 74
Implications for Social Work Practice and Policy ................................................ 75
Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 77
Appendix A Letter of Consent ...........................................................................................79
Appendix B Recruitment Script .........................................................................................81
Appendix C Demographic Questions ................................................................................82
Appendix D Needs Assessment Interview Questions ........................................................85
References ..........................................................................................................................91
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Tables
Page
1.
Table 1 County of Residence………………………………………………………. 46
2.
Table 2 CYC Involvement…………………………………………………………. 47
3.
Table 3 Gender…………………………………………………………………… 47
4.
Table 4 Ethnicity…………………………………………………………………… 48
5.
Table 5 Education Level of Former Foster Youth………………………………… 48
6.
Table 6 Major of Former Foster Youth……………………………………………..49
7.
Table 7 Marital Status of Former Foster Youth……………………………………. 49
8.
Table 8 Employment of Former Foster Youth…………………………………… 50
9.
Table 9 Participation in ILP of Former Foster Youth........................................……50
10. Table 10 Participation in THP Program of Former Foster Youth………………….51
11. Table 11 Shopping, Budgeting & Money Management Skills…………………… 60
12. Table 12 Basic Self-Care Skills……………………………………………………. 60
13. Table 13 Social Skills……………………………………………………………… 61
14. Table 14 Cooking and Cleaning Skills…………………………………………….. 61
15. Table 15 Time Management Skills………………………………………………… 62
16. Table 16 Job Skills…………………………………………………………………. 62
17. Table 17 Interpersonal Relationships Skills……………………………………….. 63
ix
1
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM
Introduction
Everyday children and adolescents are subject to trauma. Some of these children
end up in the child welfare system in foster care, due to neglect, emotional, sexual or
physical abuse. In 2010 approximately 408,452 youth were placed into protective custody
(Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System, 2010). Although, many
people are aware of the tribulations faced by foster youth many people are unaware of the
struggles that teenage youth face. Despite the efforts of the court, attorneys and social
workers to keep youth in foster care no longer than 18 months countless youth linger in
care for a more extended time period. Often adolescent foster youth (12%) must begin to
prepare for emancipation when their case plan goal is long term foster care or
emancipation (Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System, 2010).
Unfortunately, the child welfare system only adequately meets the housing and
relationship needs of foster who emancipate. The outcomes for these youth are
overwhelmingly poor ranging from homelessness to incarceration due to inadequate
preparation for independent living. Not only is it essential that foster youth are provided
with more sufficient preparation for independent living, but supportive adults and
adequate housing before facing the fast pace lifestyle of the average independent adult.
Background of the Problem
Researchers over the years have begun to study these negative outcomes for
emancipating foster youth and how they can be prevented in the future. Courtney and
2
Dworsky (2006) conclued that youth transitioning out of foster care lack proper guidance
and support to successfully adapt to living independently. As anyone completes a major
life transition, it is imperative that there is guidance and support from loved ones to
transition successfully. With insufficient support over the years, it appears inevitable that
foster youth face the transition into adulthood with various challenges and risk factors.
Kirk and Day (2011), McMillen and Tucker (1999), Choca, et al. (2004) and
Reilly (2003) have identified several areas in which emancipating foster youth face
challenges. Bennedetto (2005) reported between 54 and 58 percent of foster youth graduate
from high school by age 19 (as cited in Kirk and Day, 2011). McMillen and Tucker (1999)
concluded that 45% of young adults left foster care without completing their high school
education or obtaining employment. Choca, et al. (2004) describes the Foster Youth
Alliance (FYA) as a program that serves Alameda County. FYA found that 60% of
emancipated foster youth were homeless by the sixth month after exiting foster care.
Reilly (2003) found that 38% of emancipated foster youth had children. From their
studies, researchers found that emancipating foster youth have poor outcomes in various
aspects of independent living. If resolutions are not put into place to assist with
preventing negative outcomes for foster youth this could lead to a continuous cycle of
detrimental outcomes for foster youth. The youth are the future of America and it is vital
that they are assisted through the transition to independence so they can assist others.
Spencer, Collins, Ward, and Smashnaya (2010) found that resiliency for
emancipated foster youth is dependent upon the support they receive in strong, healthy,
and stable relationships. This would indicate that emancipated foster youth are more
3
likely to have successful outcomes when they have relationships that create reliable and
strong attachments. Daining and DePanfilis (2007) found that other resources are also
vital to a youth’s resilience, such as permanency. It was found that extended involvement
creates stronger attachments. After interviewing youth, Scannapieco, Connell-Carrick,
and Painter (2007) identified that positive youth development, collaboration and
permanent connections were significant ways to work with youth transitioning out of
foster care.
According to Spencer, Collins, Ward, and Smashnaya (2010) a strong social
support network is vital to a youth’s successful transition into independent adulthood.
These relationships could be developed through a mentorship program. Although
currently mentorship programs exist, many are not successful due to program design
flaws and lack of empirical evidence (Spencer, et al., 2010). Spencer and colleagues
added that program flaws include consistency, duration, and emotional attachments.
Having consistent mentorship programs are vital because if mentorships are inconsistent
it will only further develop foster youth’s mistrust in others. Likewise, the duration of
mentorship programs are often too short to allow foster youth to develop a strong
attachment to the mentor. In addition, mentorships lasting longer than a year had more
successful outcomes than those lasting less than a year. Spencer, et al. (2010) cite
Grossman and Rhodes (2002) who discuss that youth report more successful outcomes
when they have developed strong emotional attachments with mentors.
Therefore, a significant program flaw is when strong emotional bonds are not
developed through mentorships. In addition, mentorship relationships, if not carried out
4
correctly can have a more harmful impact on youth. This is true in the aspect of trust in
others. If a mentorship fails for an emancipated youth this, can signify another failed
relationship for a youth and contribute to a lower self-esteem and a lower ability to trust
others. Perhaps this may be more harmful to youth than not having a mentorship
relationship. Spencer, et al. (2010) concluded that to avoid these errors and detrimental
impacts of mentoring relationships there is a need to illustrate the importance of program
administration and policies.
Statement of the Research Problem
The research problem consists of housing and mentoring needs of emancipating
foster youth failing to be addressed entirely for the emancipating foster youth in various
counties throughout California. Independent living programs (ILP) were created to
decrease the negative impacts of foster youth being forced to live on their own
(California Department of Social Services, 2007). The hope was that ILPs would assist
youth in gaining the independent living skills so that they could be self-sufficient in the
society. Developing self-sufficiency would reduce the barriers foster youth face when
striving for successful futures. ILPs are meant to create an environment where youth are
able to build relationships and gain the skills to function as a successful adult in the
community. ILPs often fail to meet the employment, health and mental health needs of
the 20,000 foster youth who emancipate out of foster care annually in the nation
(Courtney & Dworsky, 2006). Independent living programs are provided to youth 16 to
21 years old. This age range may also be a concern to those who wish to be involved in
ILP services before they reach 16 years of age.
5
The intentions of such programs were to give youth access to various services
(Georgiades, 2006). According to Georgiades (2006) some ILPs give youth who are
living in appropriate housing the ability to receive a stipend for living expenses, in some
counties. Despite the intentions of ILPs, Georgiades’ (2006) research indicated that youth
who are assisted have lower levels of employment than youth who are not participating in
ILP. Likewise, youth participating in ILP still encounter high levels of criminal
involvement. Regardless of the efforts of ILPs to create an environment where youth are
able to build relationships and gain the skills to live as a prosperous adults there still
continues to be a gap in services provided and the needs of emancipating foster youth
being met.
Purpose of Study
It is important to assess the unmet needs of emancipating foster youth that most
and how to more effectively meet these needs in the future. Researchers have drawn
conclusions regarding several variables that promote resiliency in youth transitioning out
of foster care. Daining and DePanfilis (2007) have concluded that a young adult’s ability
to live independently is impacted by social and spiritual supports along with a stable
home environment. However, programs are most rewarding if they are consistent because
this ensures foster youth of what is to be expected in the future (Scannapieco, ConnellCarrick & Painter, 2007). In addition, permanency is also important for foster youth when
it is not forced. Permanency in this instance would pertain to a sense belonging to a
community through formal and informal lasting connections with others. These
relationships would provide support to youth.
6
The purpose of this study is to explore the needs of emancipating foster youth
pertaining to transitional services, transitional housing services and mentoring services
for emancipating foster youth throughout California. The present study focuses on what
services foster youth transitioning out of care need and how these services can be
implemented successfully. It is also significant to explore what makes services available
to foster youth are successful. The use of such findings could help to prevent problematic
outcomes for young adults who turn eighteen and are forced to live on their own with
little preparation.
Theoretical Framework
This study used several theoretical frameworks that have assisted in describing
and providing a resolution for the research problem of youth emancipating out of care
without their independent living needs being met. The first theoretical framework used
for support was the attachment theory (as cited by Samantrai, 2004). The attachment
theory as proposed by John Bowlby in 1951 (Franzblau, 1999) can assist in explaining
human behavior by noting the significance of quality affectionate relationships.
Ainsworth as cited by Bretherton (1992) discussed as a sense of security that infant’s get
from their mother. Bowlby theorized that if attachment was disrupted or formed
inadequately children would later encounter struggles surrounding anxiety (Bretherton,
1992). As discussed by Samantrai, attachments are demonstrated to change over time due
to the relationships that children have with their primary care givers.
Therefore, it is important to take into consideration the attachments formed by
foster youth prior to emancipating. Many youth transitioning out of foster care may have
7
not developed secure attachments or may have been separated from those that they were
most attached to. This may lead to feelings such as; anxiety, avoidance, insecurity, and
resistance to others as youth exit foster care (Samantrai, 2004). This could lead to
emancipating foster youth’s hesitance with attaching to others in the future by way of
developing social skills and interpersonal relationships with others.
The second framework guiding this study was the strength based perspective.
According to Walsh (2010) strength oriented social work focuses on clients’ capacities,
talents, competencies, visions, values, and hopes. This perspective derives services from
a place where clients’ strengths are recognized in order to promote client resiliency,
empowerment, and change. This framework also promotes greater quality relationship
between service providers and clients by creating collaboration and joint responsibility.
This framework is applicable to working with most youth “aging out” of foster
care because in order for one to become resilient it is first important to focus on the skills
in which one has sufficiently developed. In addition, services provided to foster youth
should be focused on foster youth needs. Services would be more effective if the needs of
foster youth were heard. In addition, it is important that social workers, community
members, mentors and politicians collaborate with foster youth to provide services that
are most needed in the community and how such services can be implemented most
effectively.
The third framework guiding this study was the client empowerment perspective,
which is similar to the strengths based perspective. This model according to Walsh
(2010) focuses on increasing the client’s sense of empowerment through personal,
8
interpersonal, and political sources. A sense of self-empowerment can avoid adapting
learned helplessness and alienation from one’s community. By gaining empowerment at a
personal level clients are able to gain more control over their lives. This aspect is vital to
those youth “aging out.” By doing so youth are able to develop their life structure. This
generates self-efficacy for the client which is vital for youth starting out in the world
independently. Therefore, throughout this paper the author will use these three
frameworks in discussing youth and the services that need to be in place when they age
out of the child welfare system.
Definitions of Terms
Foster Care: Out of home care provided to children and adolescents 0-18years in
a variety of placements including; relative, kin, foster family agency licensed family
homes, licensed county foster homes, group homes and other settings.
Emancipation: Youth leave foster care due to reaching the age limit in the state to
remain a dependent of the court.
Resiliency: The ability to produce successful outcomes when subjected to various
risk factors.
Protective Factors: “are those influences, characteristics, and conditions that
buffer or mitigate a person’s exposure to risk.” (Jenson & Fraser, 2011, p. 11)
Independent Living Program: Federal program in which are services available to
youth who are from a variety of out of home placements. The purpose of these services is
to help adolescents with their transition into independent living. (Scannapieco, M.,
Shagrin, and Scannapieco, T, 1995) Services in Sacramento County include but are not
9
limited to “independent life skill classes, education and career planning, assistance with
applications for student aid, assistance with acquiring, help in getting a job and help in
leasing an apartment.” (ILP Staff, http://www.sacdhhs.com/article.asp?ContentID=226,
2006 )
Transitional Housing Placement Program (THPP): A program designed for youth
16-18 who are currently involved in child welfare through foster care or probation. The
goal of the THPP is to assist youth in developing independent living skills before exiting
the child welfare system. (California Department of Social Services, 2007)
Transitional Housing Program-Plus (THP-PLUS): A program designed for youth
ages 18-24 emancipated from the child welfare system or the juvenile justice system.
This housing placement program hopes to enhance these young adults’ independent
living skills. (California Department of Social Services, 2007)
Transitional Independent Living Plan (TILP): A plan created to promote
independent living skills in youth as they prepare to exit the child welfare system. This
plan can be developed by the youth and a team of professional and non-professional
supportive members in a youth’s life. (California Department of Social Services, 2007)
Interpersonal Relationship: The relationship a person has within themselves and
their internal process.
Intrapersonal Relationship: Relationships with others made up of connections
and interactions.
Mentor: An older adult who has been paired with a child or youth to provide
emotional support and guidance.
10
Assumptions
This research project is based on several assumptions. The first assumption is that
foster youth have experienced trauma. This trauma may be related to the initial separation
from their family and/or the circumstances that have led to their removal. The second
assumption is that those foster youth preparing for emancipation do need both
intrapersonal and financial support. The third assumption is that without adequate support
from others emancipating youth will face many struggles as they attempt to develop their
independent living skills. The final assumption made by the researcher is that those youth
members, adult supporters and staff members interviewed provided truthful and accurate
statements as to their experience as an emancipating foster youth and/or working with
emancipating foster youth.
Justifications
The use of findings from this study could help to prevent problematic outcomes for
young adults who turn eighteen and are forced to live on their own with little preparation.
In addition, findings from this research project will contribute to the researcher’s personal
career development. Specifically, this study’s findings will further inspire the
researcher’s desire to open a 501(c)3 non-profit that works with emancipating foster youth.
11
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
A needs assessment is the best process to evaluate the current services offered to
emancipating foster youth. A needs assessment is an approach in which the precise
strengths and weaknesses of a sample, community, or group of interest are measured in
order to develop services to assist with alleviating current and future gaps in services
(Needs Assessment, 2007). This section reviews the literature on foster youth who head
towards emancipation and youth who have emancipated. The emancipation of foster
youth will be defined. The challenges experienced by these youth will be assessed. It is
also important to evaluate resiliency factors of youth. The purpose of this review is to
evaluate the literature on mentorship programs and support systems available to foster
youth, as well as, Independent Living Programs (ILP) and Transitional Living and
Housing Programs (TLP or THP). From this review the author will be able to draw
conclusions on what makes some mentorships, ILPS, TLPs, and THPs beneficial to foster
youth. The expectation is to evaluate which services are most needed by foster youth and
how current services can be implemented in an effective and efficient manner.
Emancipation and “aging out” are two terms that are often used interchangeably
throughout the literature when discussing foster youth (Choca, et al., 2004; Courtney,
Piliavin,Grogan- Kaylor & Nesmmith, 2001; & Scannapieco et al. 2007). Throughout this
study these terms will be used to refer to youth who were dependents of the juvenile court
and on their 18th birthday or upon high school graduation stop receiving services from the
12
Department of Health and Human Services, including being able to stay in their current
home environment through funding of their county and state (Mares, 2010). This pertains
to youth who do not have a permanency plan with their family before their 18th birthday
and those who do not have an adopted parent or guardian. The Adoption and Foster Care
Analysis and Reporting (AFCARS) provides statistics pertaining to foster youth and is
helpful in further describing the foster youth population numerically.
According to the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (FY
2010) there were 408,425 children in foster care in 2010 nationally and of this eight
percent or 33, 993 were 17 year old foster youth (AFCARS, 2010). This age group had a
higher number of foster youth than all other age groups of foster youth. Emancipation
was the goal of six percent of all foster youth in 2010 (AFCARS, 2010). Likewise,
AFCARS reported that 11% of children and youth exiting care in 2010 were exiting due
to emancipation (AFCARS, 2010). According to these numbers, it is evident that many
foster youth are exiting foster care due to reaching the age limit of eligibility to remain in
care. Since the data demonstrates that foster youth frequently exit care it is vital that
legislation and policies are continued to be introduced and implemented to benefit foster
youth. Services should support these youth through the challenging transition into young
adulthood.
Historical Background and Legislation
The first national program developed to support foster youth during their
transition to adulthood was the Title IV-E Foster Care Independent Living Initiative of
1986. This program provided 70 million dollars in funds to assist this population of foster
13
youth with the transition into adulthood (Mech, 1988). The Title IV-E Independent
Living Program of 1986 (Mares, 2010) was replaced by the John Chafee Foster Care
Independence Act of 1999 (Courtney, 2005a). This act significantly impacts youth
emancipating from foster care because it allocated twice the funding of the Foster Care
Independent Living Initiative. In addition, it created greater eligibility criteria, created
more variability with the design and content of independent living programs and created
vouchers for the education and training of foster youth (Fernandes, 2006). This program
impacted emancipating foster youth, because the 140 million dollar funding serves youth
18-21 (Mares, 2010). Although funding can assist eligible youth with receiving the
following services: life skills, mentorship, and housing; two-fifths of youth are not
receiving these or other needed services (Courtney, 2005a). Funding made available for
services is not enough for the substantial number of youth who “age out” of care yearly.
Courtney (2005a) reasons that even if funding was completely allocated to housing for
foster youth, needs would still be unmet as this would only amount to $700 a year per
youth which is inadequate in today’s economy.
In addition to The Foster Care Independence Act of 1999, there have been several
bills that have been passed that impact foster youth. AB 1979 the Independent Living
Program (Cal. Stat. ch. 271, 2001-2002) addressed the need for counties to provide
independent living services to foster youth including, life skills training, assisting with
housing and assisting with writing a transitional independent living plan. This includes
assisting foster youth in obtaining a high school diploma, GED or vocational training.
Likewise, job preparation assistance could be provided including, job readiness training,
14
job preparation, placement services, building work experience, and employment skills
(Cal. Stat. ch. 271, 2001-2002). Other training provided would pertain to life skills,
money management, housing and career development. Although this bill proposes that
the State Department of Social Services work with each county to implement these
services, emancipating foster youth continue to have poor outcomes. Poor outcomes are
in regards to high school completion, homelessness, housing, pregnancy, obtaining
supportive relationships, and career development (Courtney, 2001, Courntney 2005a, &
Mares, 2010). Perhaps, the reason for this may be as Maher, et al. (2009) point out,
services are more beneficial to foster youth when they are implemented in a way that
integrates services.
Still, other legislation attempts to review services available to emancipating foster
youth. SB 436 Foster care: transitional housing (Cal. Stat. ch. 629, 2005-2006) requires
yearly statistics comparing the ratio of transitional housing available compared to the
number of emancipating foster youth who need these resources. In addition, this senate
bill proposes to define outcomes of foster youth involved in independent living programs.
Housing for emancipating foster youth has also been addressed in AB 1303:
Foster Youth (Cal. Stat. ch. 391, 2009-2010). This bill proposed that community colleges
and state universities offer current foster youth and former foster youth housing ahead of
other college students. In addition, this bill proposes that those schools who have dorm
facilities be open year round to give placement priority to foster youth. Although, this
provides more housing opportunities to some foster youth, it is still unclear how many
foster youth pursue higher education at the age of 18.
15
One of the most recent pieces of legislation which will impact 18 year old
emancipating foster youth is AB 12: California Fostering Connections to Success Act
(Cal. Stat. ch. 559, 2009-2010). This bill went into effect January 1st 2012. Under AB 12
youth can decide to voluntarily (Cal. Stat. ch. 559) extend their stay in the foster care
system and also extend the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. The first year of
implementation (2012) foster care services extends to age 19 and in the second year
(2013) services can be extended to age 20. It is anticipated that funding will continue the
third year (2014), until youth are age 21.
It was expected that foster youth who turned 18 before January 1st, 2012 would
not be able to reap the potential benefits of AB12. However, from the author’s personal
experience in Sacramento County youth were able to gain access to this legislation, even
being 18 prior to January 1st, 2012. This was accomplished by referees continuing a
youth’s hearing until after their 18th birthday, in other words, keeping the youth’s case
open past their 18th birthday so they remained eligible to reap the benefits of AB12. The
youth who do qualify and choose to participate in extended services are referred to as
non-minor dependents (Cal. Stat. ch. 559, 2009-2010).
There are further eligibility requirements in addition to age for youth to remain in
care under AB12. Initially, foster youth must sign a mutual agreement to extend care.
Foster youth must also meet one of the five the participation requirements; completing
secondary education, enrolled in post-secondary or vocational education, participating in
a program to remove barriers to employment, employed at least 80 hours a month or
unable to do one of the following due to a medical condition. The last requirement is
16
youth must remain in a supervised placement that has been approved by their social
worker. (Parker, K, 2012).
There are seven options for supervised housing placements for emancipating
foster youth. The first option is with extended family members. This option does not
include the family members that the youth were originally removed from. The second
option is non-related legal guardian. The third option is a licensed foster family. This
could consist of the family whose home youth were residing in before turning 18 or a
new family that better fits youth’s independent living needs. The fourth option is an
apartment with or without a roommate. The fifth is room and board arrangements. The
sixth option is post-secondary housing options. This includes college dorms on or off
campus. The last option that will only pertain to some youth is a group home. In order to
stay in a group home youth have to meet additional requirements. (County of Sacramento
Dependency and Court Services Program Highlights, 2012).
This legislation is promising since it may present greater stability and permanency
to youth as they transition into young adulthood, yet the impacts of this bill on foster
youth and child welfare employees will not be evident until the implemented.
Correspondingly, Courtney and Dworsky (2006) state that there have been remarkable
enhanced outcomes for the youth who are allowed to stay in the care of the Child Welfare
System past the age of 18 compared to those who leave care at 18. However, the goal of
this legislation similarly to previous legislation is to improve the outcomes of foster
youth who emancipate from care.
17
Outcomes of Emancipated Foster Youth
Although policies have attempted to improve the outcomes of foster youth as they
transition into independence (Cal. Stat. ch. 271, 2001-2002; Fernandes, 2006; Fernandes,
2008; Mares, 2010; & Mech, 1988) many policies fall short of supporting foster youth
adequately (Osterling & Hines, 2006). Not only do foster youth face the transition of
living on their own and being financially independent, they also face transitioning from
adolescence to young adulthood alone. Benson, Scales, Hawkins, Oesterel and Hill
(2004) discussed transitions in life as often being impacted by circumstances that have
happened earlier in life. This implies the idea of risk and protective factors. Risk factors
increase the likelihood of youth struggling to transition into independent living and
protective factors serve as buffers to assist youth in transitioning into adulthood. Those
who have more protective factors in turn have a smoother transition into young adulthood
(Daining & DePanfilis, 2007). Therefore, since many foster youth have encountered
many negative conditions this makes the transition into young adulthood extremely
difficult. Benson et al. (2004) further state that young parents have an especially
challenging time transitioning into young adulthood. This is significant because authors
state that one in five female foster youth are parents when exiting foster care (McMillen
& Tucker, 1999). This only further exhibits probable struggles for foster youth.
Challenges Associated with Emancipation from Foster Care
Many authors have found similar results when discussing the challenges that
foster youth who are emancipating face. Courtney, Piliavin, Grogan-Kaylor and Nesmith
(2001) explored the transition that foster youth make into adulthood in a longitudinal
18
study. The purpose of this study was to track the experiences of young adults aging out of
care. The study’s design consisted of three waves of interviews conducted with 141
youth. The authors found only three fifths of emancipated youth were employed 12-18
months after leaving care. Youth that were employed typically had lower incomes than
the average adult working full-time at minimum wage. In addition, Courtney et al. (2001)
found youth had difficulty accessing and maintaining medical care and housing. For male
foster youth, there was a higher risk of criminal involvement. Likewise, Courtney and
Heuring (2005b) review of the current literature they discussed similar findings regarding
foster youth’s challenges surrounding educational attainment, employment, permanent
and stable housing, mental health and finances. Even more recently, Mares (2010)
discussed that youth faced challenges concerning mental health, substance abuse,
acquiring health insurance, finding decent employment, and attaining stable or permanent
housing. It is significant that other researchers explore life situations of youth to see if
similar findings are discussed.
McMillen and Tucker (1999) reviewed data and records of 252 young adults
leaving foster care to evaluate the life situation that these young adults were in. The
dependent variable for the young adults exit status was measured by reviewing case
records of youth who had been emancipated from care. The variables were measured
using by analyzing case records of youth. The results indicated that 38% of youth were
employed when “aging out”, 29.4% had never had a job before discharge, 33.4% of youth
had graduated from high school, and only 17% of minority males graduated from high
school or received their GED. This demonstrates very poor outcomes for emancipating
19
foster youth in this study. Given these outcomes, it is evident that these foster youth will
face immense challenges in transitioning to young adulthood. The authors concluded that
similar to other studies a large percentage (45%) of young adults left foster care without
completing their high school education or obtaining employment. Further research needs
to examine the impacts of failing to obtain high school diploma or full time employment
on emancipating foster youth.
Recent research by Courtney and Dworsky (2006) focused on the outcomes of
young adults as they left foster care. A longitudinal study was conducted in which 603
youth were interviewed at three different time periods. The purpose of this study was to
characterize the overall welfare of adult former foster youth. Courtney and Dworsky
found young adults in the study who remained in the child welfare system had better
outcomes than those youth who left care by force or choice. For example, young adults
still in foster care were 50% more likely to be employed and in school than those who
emancipated (Courtney & Dworsky). Likewise, the authors found that youth who
remained in care on average received more services than young adults who left care.
Results also demonstrated that 37.1% of young adults did not earn a high school diploma
or GED. With the results from this study one could conclude that remaining in care
longer was correlated to more successful outcomes, while exiting care earlier was
correlated to more unsuccessful outcomes for youth. More programs, like ILP should be
implemented so that youth can receive services longer despite remaining in or exiting
care.
20
Courtney et al. (2006) findings confirmed conclusions made by McMillen and
Tucker (1999) that only about a third of the ILP youth graduated from high school or
received a GED and several youth mentioned suffering from one or more economic
hardships (McMillen & Tucker, 1999). It was concluded by McMillen and Tucker (1999)
that emancipating foster youth are facing additional challenges and struggles when
compared to their non-emancipating peer group. As briefly mentioned by the authors of
this study, these youth have strengths as well. Therefore, it is essential to consider, in
future studies factors that contribute to increased resiliency in youth.
Resiliency Factors
Resiliency in foster youth was studied by Daining and DePanfilis (2007). The
goal of the study was to note personal and interpersonal contributors to resiliency in
youth leaving foster care. The dependent variable, resiliency was measured by a
resilience composite score. This score was compiled by combining scores from:
educational participation, employment history, early parenthood, criminal activity,
homelessness and drug use. Findings demonstrated that males had lower resilient scores
than females in the sample (N=100). Likewise, the age of a youth when exiting foster
care was also correlated with resilient score (p= .007). For instance, being older when
exiting out of home care is correlated with being more resilient. In addition, young adults
who had more supportive relationships demonstrated a higher resilient score. Daining and
DePanfilis (2007) concluded that females who exited care at an older age were more
resilient than those females who exited care at a younger age. This demonstrates that age
21
when exiting care and supportive relationships can both serve as factors that make youth
more resilient.
Scannapieco, Connell-Carrick and Painter (2007) were also interested in what
factors contributed to foster youth successfully emancipating. Scannapieco et al. (2007)
conducted a study to find out from young adults and their close relationships challenges
they had during emancipation. Additionally, the authors inquired about what services
youth desired to allow for more successful transitions into adulthood. Challenges were
measured in the adolescents by forming focus groups in which qualitative data was
gathered through group interviewing. Results from this research project indicated three
major themes that led to successful outcomes in youth. The themes were; a need for
youth centered practice; further collaboration and improved communication; and to be
attentive to the unmet needs and permanent connections of youth. This demonstrated that
it was necessary for numerous youth to have additional opportunities to expand personal
skills and that a strong relationship was vital to have developed before aging out.
Benson et al. (2004) indicated that several factors contributed to a successful
transition into adulthood. Two dimensions discussed that foster youth often lack are life
skills and healthy family and social relationships. Life skills according to Benson et al.
(2004) include, decision making and emotional self-regulation. Interpersonal skills are
also discussed as vital life skills. Supportive relationships are described as involvement,
interaction and attachment with others. Supportive relationships are essential because
they provide networks of connections and intimacy to others. Often foster youth lack life
skills and supportive relationships (Biehal & Wade, 1996) making it more difficult to
22
acquire stable housing. Similar to the findings of Benson (2004), Masten and Garmezy
(1985) and Werner (1992) supported the idea that foster youth who have stable and
nurturing relationships with adults are more resilient than those who do not. Having a
supportive adult serves as a protective factor for foster youth (Masten & Garmezy, 1985).
More than 20 years later, Osgood, Foster and Courtney (2010) also reported that the
support by family and friends was a widespread protective factor for youth in transition.
Studies on Independent Living Programs
Likewise, preparation for independent living can serve as a protective factor for
emancipating foster youth. Preparation for independent living can serve as a protective
factor by creating a knowledge base to life as an independent adult. Every county
throughout the state of California has an ILP that provides various services to foster
youth. Programs vary depending on how each county decides to allocate funds. In
Sacramento County, there are four ILP social workers who attempt to assist youth ages
16-21 who are making their way to independence (Sacramento County Department of
Health and Human Services, n.d.). Referrals can be made by; social workers, probation
officers, school district foster youth services social workers and county ILP coordinators.
Financial assistance provided to foster youth Sacramento County is in the following
areas; college, employment, rental assistance and scholarships (Sacramento County
Department of Health and Human Services, n.d.). The amount of funding for such areas
varies by county and availability. Sacramento County also offers; classes, workshops,
services and activities for youth. This provides personal development, skill development,
resource development, education development, career development and network
23
development for emancipating age youth. Other counties serve youth of different age
groups and allocate funding slightly different depending on the needs of the population
and the resources available.
Scannapieco, Shagrin, and Scannapieco (1995) describe independent living
programs as a set of services that prepare youth 16-21 years old to successfully enter the
independent adult world. This is accomplished by providing various services to
emancipating youth. The services are meant to assist with a smoother transition for young
adults. In addition, the social workers who manage ILP cases tend to have smaller
caseloads. This allows these social workers to spend more one on one time with foster
youth. By spending more time with youth, ILP workers provide more social support to
youth. ILPs do not only offer individual services, but they also offer group and family
services. Together the social worker and the youth should develop an independent-living
plan for foster youth (Scannpieco, et al., 1995). The intention of an independent living
plan is to provide a realistic guideline for youth to follow. The expectation is that this
would create more successful outcomes.
After describing the purpose and intentions of ILPs, Scannpieco and colleagues
(1995) explored the efficiency rates of independent living programs. The researchers
compared 44 foster youth who participated in the ILP to 46 foster youth who did not
participate. This was done by a case record analysis of the two separate groups. It was
found that ILP youth graduate from high school 50% (n=22) and had a history of
employment 100% (n=44) compared to non ILP youth of which 13% (n=6) graduated
from high school and 71.7% (n=36) had a history of employment (Scannpieco, et al.
24
1995). These results demonstrate significant differences in education and employment
between the subgroups. Therefore, Scannpieco et al. found that ILPs led to more
successful outcomes for foster youth in areas of education and employment.
Comparable to Scannpieco et al. (1995), more recently Lemon, Hines, and
Merdinger (2004) compared the education and employment experiences of 81 youth who
were involved in ILPs to 113 youth not enrolled. Data was collected through selfadministered survey and the data was analyzed using bivariate statistical tests to describe
statistical significances between two groups. Their results indicated that 53.1% of ILP
group participants found that learning about college was vital in deciding whether to
attend college compared to 38.9% of non-ILP group participants. When comparing foster
youth who participated in an ILP 17.5% felt prepared for independent living, yet 32.1%
of non-ILP youth felt prepared for independent living. This result signifies the lack of
knowledge non-ILP have about independent living. Non-ILP youth may underestimate
the tribulations youth face when entering young adulthood independently. Similar results
were found when looking at employment available to youth exiting care; 58.4% of foster
youth in ILPs had jobs upon exiting care, yet 73.8% of non-ILP youth had jobs when
exiting care. These findings suggest that participation in an ILP does not guarantee
greater outcomes than youth that are not active in an ILP. The inadequate outcomes of
youth who participated in ILPs demonstrated in this study imply that future research
should explore why ILPs are not successful. Likewise, future research could investigate
what potential programs could employ to create programs that are more useful to youth
participants, in terms of creating more positive outcomes.
25
Kroner and Mares (2009) explored the correlation between participating in an ILP
and positive outcomes. Kroner and Mares (2009) studied 455 youth who were
participants of the Lighthouse Independent Living Program (ILP). The authors describe
the benefits of Lighthouse ILP; as close to a bus route, apartments that are affordable
after exiting the program, in familiar areas, close to school/work, and close to supportive
adults. The goal of this study was to measure the outcomes of the 455 youth who had
received services from the Lighthouse ILP through a six year time frame. The first
measure that was used to analyze the client’s characteristics at intake was the Global
Assessment of Functioning. Individual risk factors were assessed by subgroups such as,
mental health and substance abuse risk factors. The services youth received were
measured by a service use checklist, which case managers were responsible for when
youth exited the program.
Outcomes were measured into three categories when youth exited the program,
high school/GED completion, employed/completed vocational training and whether
youth lived on their own. In regards to length of enrollment of youth in the Lighthouse
ILP, 28% stayed from one to two months, 22% stayed less than three months, 48% stayed
anywhere from three to twelve months and less than 5% stayed longer than two years
(Kroner & Mares, 2009). This degree of variation in length of stay may have impacted
results on the correlation between participation in ILP and positive outcomes because the
varying time frames of involvement in program may impact the success of the programs
services. Additionally, the average score on the Global Assessment of Functioning was a
total of 61 indicating that most youth experienced some difficulty in communication,
26
employment and education. Youth involved in the ILP received an average of 6.8
services (Kroner & Mares, 2009). Most significantly, results revealed 60% of youth had
their high school diploma/GED, 31% were employed/completed vocational school
training and 33% were living on their own or with friends when exiting the program.
Additionally, 54-55% with one or two risk factors had housing and employment when
exiting the program compared to 31-35% of youth who had no risk factors. This is an
interesting finding because risk factors typically lead to less positive outcomes. Yet,
youth with one or two risk factors had on average better outcomes than youth with four or
five risk factors, which is atypical.
Unfortunately, authors’ results demonstrated that even the group with one or two
risk factors had negative outcomes. For example, roughly one-fourth of the group did not
have their high school diploma/GED and almost half of the group did not have a job or
secure housing at the time of exiting the programs. As mentioned previously the array of
periods of stay could have significantly influenced results. It would have been beneficial
if the researchers had compared outcomes of by analyzing subgroups categorized by
length of stay. In doing this, researchers would be able to more ac curately determine
what length of stay has the greatest impact on youth. The results of this study suggest the
need for effective and time efficient independent living programs for emancipating foster
youth. Time efficient programs would provide services to youth at a younger age so that
youth are prepared at the time of emancipation. Despite the Lighthouse ILP’s efforts,
many emancipating foster youth lack permanent housing. When the authors compared
their findings to other research it was found that the conclusions added to the data in how
27
risk factors impact youth’s outcomes. Other studies explored additional impacts of ILPs
on foster youth.
Georgiades (2005) completed a study that evaluated Independent Living
Programs (ILP) for foster youth with a focus on the emotional well-being, mental health,
social competence and connection to the community among other aspects. Specifically,
the study compared the outcomes of youth who completed independent living programs
to those who did not participate. Georgiades measured variables by using the Daniel
Memorial Independent Living Assessment (DMILA). Results indicated that there were
not great differences between these groups of youth in terms of ability to make
friendships (81% of Non-Independent Living Programs and 90% in Independent Living
Programs). Yet, there was a statistical significance in abilty to receive help when needed
(42% of Non-Independent Living Programs and 70% in Independent Living Programs).
The authors concluded that participation in Independent Living Programs does not
guarantee more social support. Georgiades suggests that future studies could explore
what programs provide social support to youth “aging out” of foster care and the impacts
of these programs on youth. Perhaps former foster youth would be more prone to thrive
by participating in independent living services, especially housing options if programs
also pair youth with an adult mentor. It is important for foster youth to have permanent
and stable relationships it is equally important for foster youth to have permanent and
stable housing.
28
Housing Programs
There are various studies that demonstrate the need for permanent and stable
housing for emancipating foster youth (Choca, Minoff, Angene, Byrnes, Kenneally,
Norris, Pearn, & Rivers, 2004; Georgiades, 2005; & Kroner & Mares, 2008). Ferguson
and Xie (2008) cited the Institute of the Study of Homelessness and Poverty (2004)
stating that areas such as Los Angeles have roughly 10,000 homeless youth. In addition
Cauce, et al. (2000) reported that homeless youth also have a higher prevalence of
depression, low self-efficacy, self-mutilation, abuse and neglect and substance abuse. Not
only are there often higher rates of self-mutilation in homeless youth, 35% of the
homeless youth in Los Angeles had attempted suicide (Cauce, et al. 2000). Noting such
outcomes for homeless youth the following sections will discuss current housing
programs for foster youth and what are areas of programs and services are deficient.
Transitional Housing Programs
Transitional Housing Programs in California are known as Transitional Housing
Placement Plus (THP-Plus) program (Brown & Wilderson, 2010). The services of this
program are offered to foster youth ages 18-24 (California Department of Social Services
(CDSS), 2007) and they must be attempting to meeting county approved goals (CDSS).
Not only are there requirements to get into the program, but youth can only be involved
in the program for twenty four months (CDSS). These programs like independent living
programs were created as a response to the John Chafee Foster Care Independence
Program or the Runaway Homeless Youth Act (Brown & Wilderson) and the goal was to
help youth obtain a healthy life style (CDSS). The housing that youth can live in consists
29
of: apartment complexes, condos, college campus dorm rooms, single family housing,
and with host families (CDSS). Other temporary forms of housing are not adequate such
as the THP-Plus program (Brown & Wilderson, 2010).
As described by Brown and Wilderson (2010), THP-Plus programs usually provide,
subsidized housing and training in various areas including employment and life skills. In
addition, these programs should focus on education and health of foster youth. These
areas can be worked out in detail by setting goals in the youth’s Transitional Independent
Living Plan which should be agreed upon by youth and their case workers (CDSS).
Counties have the option to participate in these supervised programs. In these programs,
youth have the option to live with others or alone if they are approved (CDSS).
Housing Collaborations and Approaches
It has been noted by Choca, et al. (2004) that the funding from child welfare
resources is not sufficient to cover the housing for emancipating youth, especially with
the rising rates of unaffordable housing. Choca and colleagues explored collaborative
housing alternatives in the Bay Area, Los Angeles and Sacramento.
Choca, et al. (2004) start their discussion with the Bay Area, made up of ten
Counties. However, for the purposes of their article Choca and colleagues only reviewed
San Francisco and Alameda Counties. The Foster Youth Alliance (FYA) and Forging the
Links are programs that serve Alameda County’s roughly 500 youth that emancipate out
of care annually. When FYA completed a study they found that 60% of emancipated
foster youth were homeless by the six month of exiting foster care. The FYA and the
Casey Family Programs paired up with several agencies to better serve mancipating
30
foster youth in the county. Specifically, the First Place Fund for Youth attempts to assist
youth through a master-leasing program in acquiring housing (Choca, et al., 2004).
According to Choca, et al. the program Forging the Links of Alameda County has
proposed to create housing for approximately 340 youth. Although, this number is
significant it fails to provide housing for over 100 emancipating youth. This is a
noteworthy number of youth that emancipate without a secure form of housing.
San Francisco County has a slightly smaller number of youth who emancipate out
of a care each year, more than 200. In 2001 Housing for Emancipated Youth (HEY) was
started by the United Way to collaborate in serving emancipating foster youth by working
with public and nonprofit agencies who serve foster youth throughout San Francisco
County. However, Choca, et al. did not discuss the number of emancipating youth that
access this program and the housing provided.
Los Angeles County has 1,200 youth who age out of care yearly, which is more
than the amount from both Alameda and San Francisco Counties combined. With such a
substantial number of youth leaving care the Emancipation Services Division was created
by the Department of Children and Family Services (Choca et al., 2004). The goal of this
division was to make resources more available to emancipating foster youth. In addition,
this provided more housing resources for youth, including 152 beds more beds in an
already existing transitional housing program. Likewise Choca, et al.(2004), discuss LA
County’s efforts to increase housing and subsidies for housing to emancipating youth.
The most significant county to this research project in which Choca, et al. (2004)
discussed was Sacramento County due to the similar sample size location to the current
31
study. The Sacramento Emancipation Collaboration was formed in 1999 by private and
public agencies to work with emancipating foster youth (Choca, et al., 2004). The
Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency as discussed by Choca aimed to supply
approximately 200 housing vouchers to emancipating foster youth. Additionally, Adolfo
Housing provides housing for emancipating foster youth. Annually, housing programs
mentioned provide 200 housing vouchers, three different housing developments that can
house up to 32 youth and supported housing for 25 youth with mental disabilities (Choca,
et al., 2004).
All counties are attempting to provide housing to emancipating foster youth,
however many of the programs are not sufficient and lack the support of an adult mentor.
Similar to the lack of housing programs available to emancipating foster youth, there is
also a lack of information on what keeps youth engaged and interested in seeking services
(Ferguson & Xie, 2008). Perhaps having a supportive adult to assist foster youth in
making the transition into adulthood will keep youth engaged in services.
Mentorship and Interpersonal Relationships
Often, a question that is asked is if mentoring programs truly help youth? Mech,
Pyrde and Rycraft (1995) discussed the significance of foster youth having an adult
supporter in their life. The researchers defined a mentor as someone who helps to direct
youth in positive a direction in terms of decision making. Therefore a mentor to a foster
youth would assist in making decisions regarding housing, employment and other
independent living concerns. Mech, Pryde and Rycraft (1995) also discussed mentors as
people who assist their mentees in developing by providing a trusting relationship and
32
acting as a role model. A mentor can assist foster youth in developing in several areas
such as; life skills development, communication skills development, and development of
overall human capital. Without a positive mentor-mentee relationship a mentor would
provide no assistance to foster youth. Freedmen (1993) described the mentor-mentee
relationship formula as having; a pair of two unrelated individuals, the mentor is
significantly older than the mentee and having a relationship that encourages personal
growth in the mentee. In addition, Freedmen’s belief was mentors would be nurturing to
their mentees. Therefore, a mentor can have significant positive impacts on foster youth
by providing support and enhancing development. Yet, in order for this to take place their
must be a mentor-mentee bond in intact.
With this, Mech, Pryde and Rycraft (1995) conducted a study to evaluate
mentorships within the child welfare system. Data was collected from 29 mentor
programs throughout 15 states. Interviews were conducted with administrators, program
coordinators, and support staff, and subgroups of mentors and mentees. To successfully
evaluate mentorship services in child welfare the researches came up with questions such
as, what are the types of program models that are most used when working with foster
youth and regarding the background of the mentor and mentee? Information was
collected through interviews and five models were noted, 1) Transitional Life-Skills
Mentors, 2) Cultural Empowerment Mentors, 3) Corporate/Business Mentors, 4) Mentors
for Young Parents and 5) Mentor Homes. Researchers found that participants are often
recruited by word of mouth and mentors typically devote 10 hours a month of work with
their mentee. The researchers concluded mentors can impact foster youth. The
33
researchers also concluded that mentoring displays the child welfare systems efforts to
connect emancipating youth to the adult community. It was suggested that mentor
programs within the child welfare system should be improved with a focus on more
effective recruitment, training and support for the mentors and mentees. Future research
explored the impacts of interpersonal relationships on life situations of foster youth when
exiting care.
Biehal and Wade (1996) studied the outcomes of foster youth leaving foster care
for four years, specifically looking at intrapersonal connections of foster youth. The
researcher’s goal was to assess the life situations of foster youth as they exit foster care in
relation to support youth received. The study design conducted by Biehal and Wade
consisted of two phases. The first phase had a sample size of 183 participants who
completed a survey. The second phase consisted semi structured interviews with 74
participants. The researchers found that youth in the study were forced into independence
at a much younger age and frequency than those youth who were not involved in foster
care. Biehal and Wade concluded that less than 1/3 of youth had supportive relationships
with one of their parents when emancipating from care. In addition the researchers
concluded that those foster youth without the support of their family were more
dependent on services. Researchers also concluded that these foster youth who lacked
support from their families needed informal sources of support. Without support and
connection to others youth can experience feelings of exclusion from their community.
Other studies have explored the impact of mentoring programs on youth’s emotions and
feelings regarding quality of life.
34
Osterling and Hines (2006) conducted a two year study to evaluate a mentoring program
for older foster youth. The researchers used both quantitative and qualitative measures to
collect their data. The quantitative methods in the first year resulted with nine surveys
were completed and in the second year 43 surveys were completed. The qualitative
methods in the first year four youth participated a focus group interviews and in year two,
three youth participated in the focus group interviews. The quantitative data was analyzed
using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software. The qualitative data was
analyzed using content analysis by comparing the means. The quantitative measure was a
self-administered questionnaire with a 40.6% response rate. The qualitative measures
were interviews in year one and focus groups in year two.
Results were discussed from both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative
results indicated that when youth needed to borrow money that 70.6% could borrow
money from a family member and that 86.3% of youth could ask someone for assistance
in times of need. Qualitative results indicated that youth found their relationship with
their advocate to be helpful specifically the supportive and nurturing relationship that was
maintained. Likewise, qualitative results indicated that youth felt their quality of life had
improved since they had been paired up with an advocate through this program. Youth
found specifically that their emotional regulation and ability to discuss their emotions had
improved and better prepared them for independent living. The researchers concluded,
advocates provided more concrete independent living skills, advocates assisted youth
with their ability to convey their emotions, and if there is a connection between a youth
and their mentor that this supportive relationship can serve as a protective factor against
35
negative outcomes for emancipating foster youth. Yet, other researchers explored the
literature inquiring whether various researchers found similar results.
Rhodes (2008) conducted a meta-analysis to explore overall results of mentormentee relationships. The author reviewed four previous meta-analyses, all of which had
drastically different results and conclusions. Rhodes (2008) speculated that the difference
came from how other authors interpreted evidence. The author continued by discussing
that numerous preceding researchers had confounds when it came to discussing the “ideal
vs. the real.” Meaning, that it was ideal that youth who were paired up with a supportive
adult would have positive results, yet the reality was that often mentors did not have a
significant impact on emancipating foster youth. Rhodes concluded that despite the
multitude of research on mentoring programs for youth, they have generally been found
to neither benefit nor disadvantage youth involved in mentoring programs. Rather, as
evident by Rhodes’ findings it is significant that future research explores which youth
will most greatly be impacted by mentoring programs and which program characteristics
yield the greatest outcomes. Other researchers also explored previous literature to
inquiring whether there were any themes among research findings.
Spencer et al. (2010) reviewed previous literature to draw conclusions upon
mentoring for youth “aging out” of foster care. The researchers examined several areas
surrounding foster youth and mentoring. The first topic of interest is mentoring foster
care youth. In this section the authors discuss the variety of mentoring programs, yet
there is a lack of empirical evidence on the overall success and impacts of mentorship on
foster youth.
36
Spencer et al. (2010) continued by discussing current research on the
effectiveness of youth mentoring programs. In this part of the literature review the
authors explored effectiveness of mentoring programs overall due to the lack of research
on mentoring with foster youth specifically. Spencer et al. (2010) cited DuBois,
Holloway, Valentine and Cooper (2010) when they stated that roughly fifty percent of the
time mentor-mentee relationships only produce mediocre positive impacts on mentees.
Yet, during this discussion, Spencer et al. (2010) noted that research has begun to
concentrate on discovering those factors that make mentoring more effective in meeting
the original intentions. Areas that were explored and found to increase positive impacts of
mentoring relationships as cited by Spencer et al. (2010) were surrounding duration,
consistency and emotional connection.
Regrettably, there are also potential pitfalls for mentoring programs as discussed
by Spencer et al. (2010) that were brought to the researcher’s attention. For example, it
was discussed by Spencer et al. (2010) that many mentoring programs had insufficient
support that would allow for maintaining mentor-mentee relationships. However, Spencer
and colleagues suggested that mentorship programs, if implemented effectively, can
assist with meeting some of the needs of youth transitioning out of the child welfare
system leading to a productive, healthy, and successful life. The authors provided
additional suggestions that if mentorship was not conducted properly it could lead to
more detrimental impacts on the youth. For example, a failed mentorship can lead to
disappointment for the youth due to another attachment ending abruptly. The lack of
conclusive findings in regards to mentorship programs suggests that mentorships need to
37
be further investigated in terms of what makes one mentorship program more successful
than another. Other authors have found that supportive adults are vital to making the
transition in adulthood (Mares, 2010).
Needs Assessment
Mares (2010) conducted a study to evaluate the needs of emancipating foster
youth. Specifically, Mares explored the independent living services needs of youth by
looking over previously recorded data, focus groups with former foster youth and surveys
taken by service providers. The purpose of this study was to become aware of the
independent living service needs of emancipating foster youth. The sample size consisted
of 108 emancipated foster youth. The data was collected by analyzing tracking data of
these youth. In addition focus groups were created for 86 youth. This data was analyzed
using content analysis to compare themes. Results from the focus groups with former
foster youth indicated that youth preferred family members, teachers or other supportive
adult community members to assist them in developing life skills when compared to a
classroom/lecture setting. Results from this study also indicated that 53% of youth did not
feel prepared for emancipation. Focus group results also indicated that foster homes and
other supportive adults were seen as more helpful in preparing for emancipation than case
carrying workers and independent living grants and classes. Supportive adults were
something foster youth from this research project viewed as helpful in developing
independent living skills and continuous support. A concept expressed by many foster
youth was the preference of life skills being taught by their foster parents rather than in a
class room setting and this included more training within their environments.
38
However, a result that was unexpected by Mares (2010) was the lack of concern
for housing voiced by foster youth. It was expected foster youth would discuss the lack of
transitional housing, but this was not mentioned. Yet, researchers found foster youth
typically were uninformed of the services available to them. Mares speculates the reason
for this lack of concern voiced by the foster youth may be because the foster youth in this
sample may not correctly represent those emancipating foster youth who struggle with
acquiring housing or those who are homeless. It will just be a blind spot for foster youth
as their housing needs have always been taken care of for them until the point of
emancipation. Mares concluded that there is a need for supportive adults in emancipating
foster youths teen and young adulthood years. The need for this is not unlike any person
who makes a major life transition; foster youth need a supportive adult to assist them
through this challenging time.
Goals of Present Study
The majority of research focusing on the needs of foster youth addresses the need
for a supportive person in the youth’s life or the need for stable housing upon “aging out”
of the child welfare system (Choca, et al., 2004; Georgidaes, 2005; Kroner & Mares,
2008; Mares, 2010, Mech et al., 1995; & Rhodes, 2008; Scannapieco et al., 1995; &
Spencer et al. 2010). Yet, for both mentoring and housing programs it has not been
identified what it is that makes either program successful for foster youth. It appears that
methods are hit or miss with emancipating foster youth. This study examines the need for
services of transitioning foster youth, in Northern California. Researchers generally agree
that all three aspects are important yet (Benson et al., 2004; Courntey & Dworsky, 2006;
39
Daining & DePanfilis, 2007; & Mares, 2010); this study focuses on a need for services
that identify what youth feel is significant to their success and what services youth and
adult supporters find significant to youth’s success.
In the current study, the needs of foster youth are measured by conducting an
interview that assesses both the needs of foster youth as viewed by youth members and
the needs as viewed by adult supporters and staff members. The researcher’s goal was to
determine what transitional services youth members, adult supporters and CYC staff
viewed as inadequate.
The present study was designed to investigate the following research question:
What is the need for more transitional services for foster youth? The researcher expects to
find that it is vital that foster youth’s opinions are heard when determining what services
are lacking and how services could be more beneficial to emancipating foster youth.
40
Chapter 3
METHOD
Purpose
The present study focused on what services are essential to youth transitioning out
of foster care and how these services can be implemented. In this study, it was important
to conduct a needs assessment to analyze the breadth of services foster youth have
received versus the services foster youth have not received but needed. The goal was to
demonstrate what services are lacking. It was also significant to explore what makes the
available services successful. The conclusions from data analysis will indicate the
services that are preferred and the services that have the bountiful impact on
emancipating foster youth’s housing, employment, educational and criminal outcomes.
The use of these findings can assist in preventing provision of inadequate services for
young adults who turn eighteen and are forced to live on their own with little preparation.
Design
The research design of this study is a descriptive using qualitative method. This
research study intended to conduct a needs assessment of housing and mentorship
programs available to emancipating foster youth. This study examined and evaluated the
needs of foster youth emancipating out of the child welfare system. This was
accomplished by gathering opinions on the availability, desire and impact of services in
the following areas: youth support, life skills, independent living programs, other
services, and hardships of emancipating foster youth.
41
Procedures
The youth members and adult supporters involved in California Youth
Connection’s Northern and Bay Area/Central Valley Regions were recruited through email or face-to-face meeting at CYC events and asked to participate voluntarily in a
confidential phone or face-to-face interview. Those asked to participate in an interview
were sent a recruitment script and a letter of consent via e-mail.
The researcher asked the subjects to participate in an interview on the topic of
their experience with services offered to youth during and after youth emancipate from
foster care. Those individuals who expressed interest in participating in this study set up a
time to conduct a brief interview with the interviewer using the telephone.
The interviews were confidential and took about 1 hour. The Letter of Consent
provided information on how participants could access the researcher following the
study. It included the purpose of the study and how to access a summary of the results
once the study was completed.
Materials
Informed consent was obtained from subjects by asking the participants to read and
then sign a consent form before the telephone or face to face interview. The consent form
was mailed or e-mailed to the participant and then back to the researcher prior to the
interview. The researcher responded to questions raised by the subjects. This was done at
a CYC facility. See Appendix A. In addition a recruitment script was sent via e-mail. See
Appendix A for the letter of consent and Appendix B for the recruitment script.
There were two sets of questions used during the interviews. The first set of
42
questions was demographic questions that included: age, education level, G.P.A.,
ethnicity, gender, marital status, employment status and CYC affiliation. (See Appendix
C). Interview questions were spilt into the following sections: youth support, life skills,
independent living programs, other services and hardships of emancipating foster youth
(See Appendix D). These questions asked for the participant’s opinions on the services
and programs that are available to foster youth and former foster youth.
Participants
The participants of this study were recruited from California Youth Connection
(CYC). CYC is an organization in which former foster youth and supportive adults
advocate for polices and legislation that impact foster youth. The 15 participants of this
study consisted of: 12 CYC youth members (former foster youth), one staff personnel
(for example outreach coordinators) and two adult supporters (adults who assist CYC
members in developing skills to lead and run their own chapter meetings and events).
Minors were excluded from this study. Only former foster youth (CYC members) ages
18-24 were allowed to participate in this study. The inclusion criteria of participants were
that participants were over the age of 18, did not possess any mental health concerns that
would inhibit their interview capabilities and if participants were former foster youth they
must no longer be dependents of the court.
Youth Members, Adult Supporters, and Staff Personnel were referred by the
Outreach Coordinators. Additionally, all current foster youth involved in this
organization were excluded from the study because of their minor status. Participants
were recruited with the help of the Outreach Coordinators of the Northern Region and
43
Bay Area/Central Valley Region of CYC. This was done by contacting the Outreach
Coordinators and discussing this project. Participants (CYC members 18-24, Adult
Supporters and Staff) were e-mailed by the Outreach Coordinators through their
community e-mail. To avoid conflict of interest no financial benefits were provided for
participating in the research. No incentives were offered to the participants. The
researcher had no prior personal or professional relationships with any research subjects.
Analysis
The interview data was analyzed by reviewing narratives to determine emergent
themes among respondents. The demographic variables were analyzed by comparing
means, median and modes and also by using frequency tables. For the short answer
questions a thematic analysis was conducted.
Human Subjects Protection
After an extensive review process on November 17, 2011 the application for the
protection of human subjects was approved by the Social Work Division committee for
the Protection of Human Subjects. This process included several drafts submitted to the
researcher’s thesis advisor for review and feedback. Once the application was approved
and signed by the researcher’s advisor the application was then submitted to the
Division’s committee for the protection of human subjects. Once reviewed by the
committee the application was approved with conditions.
This application ensures participants are protected in the following ways. First,
privacy was protected by ensuring that the interviewee’s responses were kept confidential
and coded (given alternate identifiers). Any data put on the computer was coded to insure
44
participants remain unidentifiable. The only two people who had access to this data were
the researcher and her advisor. All data was destroyed after the research project was
accepted by the Office of Graduate Studies. Additionally, the researcher informed the
participants that there was no penalty for withdrawing from the study or opting out of
participation in the study at any time. Therefore, participants understood they could stop
participation at any time during the interview. It is possible that some participants
experienced mild discomfort when discussing their experience with emancipation.
However, questions were designed to not cause significant (if any) emotional stress to the
participants. Subjects were also informed of the nature of the survey when they were
asked to participate; therefore, those individuals who had significant concerns about this
topic were able to elect not to participate. For those who did participate they were able to
refuse to answer any question. Participants were free to withdraw at any time without
penalty. The data was be kept in a locked file cabinet at the researcher’s home and will be
destroyed once the project is accepted by the Office of Graduate Studies.
45
Chapter 4
RESULTS
Introduction
The goal of this study was to investigate the following research question: What is
the need for transitional services for foster youth? The participants were asked a series of
33 questions (See Appendix D) regarding their personal and/or professional experience
with services for youth transitioning out of foster care. The interviewees utilized their
knowledge and understanding of their personal experiences, together with their
experiences with other foster youth, and finally their knowledge of the emancipation
process through professional and training experience.
Emergent Themes
Four primary themes emerged from the interviews regarding needs of youth
during the emancipation process: 1) the significance of having a mentor or supportive
figure in youths’ lives; 2) the significance of having resources that are available and
accessible to youth; 3); the significance of having stable housing; and 4) the significance
of knowing how to budget and manage finances.
This chapter will present demographic information about the study participants.
Next, the responses to several of the interview questions will be described in detail. Each
of the four primary themes will be discussed, including example quotes from the
interviews illustrating the themes. This chapter will also include a section on additional
findings that emerged through the interview process. Finally, life skills development
findings will be discussed.
46
Participants Demographics
Telephone interviews were conducted with 15 people who were involved in
California Youth Connection (CYC) in various counties in Northern California, 4 from
Yolo County (27%), 3 from Santa Clara County (20%), 2 from Contra Costa County
(13%), 2 from Alameda County (13%), 2 from Napa/Sonoma Counties (13%), 1 from
San Francisco County (7%), and 1 from Sacramento County (7%) (Table 1).
Table 1
County of Residence
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Yolo
4
27%
Santa Clara
3
20%
Contra Costa
2
13%
Napa/Sonoma
2
13%
Alameda
2
13%
San Francisco
1
7%
Sacramento
1
7%
Total
15
100%
Of the 15 participants, 12 (80%) were CYC Youth Members, 2 (13%) were CYC
Adult Supporters and 1 (7%) was a CYC Staff Member (Table 2).
47
Table 2
CYC Involvement
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
CYC Youth Member
12
80%
CYC Adult Supporter
2
13%
CYC Staff
1
7%
Total
15
100%
Additionally, 10 (67%) of the participants were female and five (33%) of the
participants were male (Table 3).
Table 3
Gender
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Female
10
67%
Male
5
33%
Total
15
100%
Nine of the participants (60%) were African American, 3 (20%) were Latino, 2
(13%) were White/Caucasian and 1 (7%) was considered other (Table 4).
48
Table 4
Ethnicity
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
African American
9
60%
Latino
3
20%
White/Caucasian
2
13%
Other
1
7%
Total
15
100%
The average age of the participants was 23, with the median age being 21 and the
bi-modes age was 21 and 22. Of the former foster youth participants interviewed, one of
the participant’s (8%) education level was G.E.D./High School Diploma, 11 participants’
(84%) education level was some college / vocational training, and one (8%) participant’s
education level was a Bachelor’s Degree (Table 5).
Table 5
Education Level of Former Foster Youth
Variable
Frequency (Out of 13)
Percentage
Some
11
84%
1
8%
Bachelor’s Degree
1
8%
Total
13
100%
College/Vocational
Training
G.E.D/High School
Diploma
49
Of the former foster youth participants pursuing a Bachelor’s Degree, 6 (46%)
were pursuing a degree in Psychology, 2 (15%) were pursuing a degree in Business, 2
(15%) were pursuing a degree in Art/Art History, 1 (8%) was pursuing a degree in
Communications, one (8%) in Computer / Information Sciences, and one (8%) was
pursuing another degree (Table 6).
Table 6
Major of Former Foster Youth
Variable
Frequency (Out of 13)
Percentage
Psychology
6
46%
Business
2
15%
Art/Art History
2
15%
Communication
1
8%
Computer/Information
1
8%
Other
1
8%
Total
13
100%
Sciences
The average GPA of former foster youth participants was 2.95. Of the former
foster youth interviewed 92% (12 youth members), were single and 8% (one youth
member) was married (Table 7).
Table 7
Marital Status of Former Foster Youth
Variable
Frequency (Out of 13)
Percentage
Single
12
92%
Married
1
8%
Total
13
100%
50
Additionally, 84% (11 former foster youth participants) were employed and 16%
(two participants) were unemployed at the time of their interview (Table 8).
Table 8
Employment of Former Foster Youth
Variable
Frequency (Out of 13)
Percentage
Currently Employed
11
84%
Currently Unemployed
2
16%
Total
13
100%
In relation to former foster youth participants experience with County funded and
staffed programs, 77% (10 youth members) had participated in an Independent Living
Skills Program and 38% (five youth members) had participated in a Transitional Housing
Placement Program. Additionally, 23% (three youth members) had not participated in
Independent Living Skills Programs and 62% (eight youth members) had not participated
in a Transitional Housing Placement Program (Tables 9 and 10).
Table 9
Participation in ILP of Former Foster Youth
Variable
Frequency (Out of 13)
Percentage
Yes
10
77%
No
3
23%
Total
13
100%
51
Table 10
Participation in THP Program of Former Foster Youth
Variable
Frequency (Out of 13)
Percentage
Yes
5
38%
No
8
62%
Total
13
100%
Mentors and Supportive Figures
Six (40%) participants believed that lack of a mentor or a support system was one
of the greatest struggles for youth emancipating out of care. When asked to describe this
struggle participants explained this as not knowing what your support system was after
emancipation. When asked to describe two services that would be most beneficial to
emancipating foster youth 20% of participants responded by discussing support from a
mentor or another role model figure, a person that youth can go to get assistance with
finding resources and guidance.
When asked what mentor programs are lacking, 33% of participants stated
programs were lacking training on how to effectively mentor transitioning youth. When
participants were asked what they think biological family members could do differently
to be more helpful to foster youth in the emancipation process, 67% of participants stated
family members could be more positive, understanding and supportive along with
attempting to make stronger connections. Similar responses were given for questions
pertaining to the foster parents and the social workers.
When asked to explain what is most beneficial to foster youth in mentor
programs, all participants stated mentors were beneficial. Participants listed several areas
52
in which mentor programs are beneficial. Forty seven percent of participants indicated
that support was why mentor programs are beneficial. Thirteen percent of participants
stated mentors programs were beneficial specifically because of higher education
support. Participants also described other reasons why mentor programs were beneficial,
27% percent of participants said connection, 13% of participants said a sense of
belonging, 13% of participants said a role model, and 27% of participants said advice.
Additionally, 40% of participants stated that it is vital that youth have contact with a
supportive adult at least one time each week, yet 60% of participants stated youth should
have contact with their mentor as often as possible and as needed by the youth .
To further illustrate the participants’ discussion of the significance of having a
mentor or supportive figure in their lives, participants explained what they thought was
most beneficial to foster youth in mentor programs by responding,
The most beneficial thing is having some form of guidance and talking with
someone informally and to get advice especially on relationships, be it friendships
or romantic relationships because I feel like a lot of foster youth lack the ability to
discern what a healthy relationship is and what that should look like and healthy
communication style…
Another participant responded,
I would say just again support because the majority of foster youth I have met and
I have heard that they don’t have genuine support from somebody. And as a
human we need that support to feel valuable to feel really to believe and know
53
that our life is valuable and that we have a purpose in this world. Support, not
always agree with us but to give us advice and guidance when it we need it.
Resources
When asked to discuss two services that participants thought would be most
beneficial to emancipating foster youth, 40% responded that more access and connection
to resources would be beneficial. When participants were asked how helpful
mentors/community members were to foster youth during the emancipation process 73%
of participants responded very helpful because they felt they were able to assist youth
with getting connected to resources. Along these lines 33% percent of participants felt
that foster parents and 13% of participants felt that social workers would be more
beneficial to foster youth if they assisted with providing resources to youth. Although
participants discussed this is something that some social workers do, many participants
discussed that this is not something that all social workers have done. One participant
discussed how some social workers are only concerned with making sure the necessary
paperwork is completed. Twenty percent of participants described that it would be
beneficial if foster parents took the time to get to know the child and 26% of participants
stated it would be beneficial if foster parents did not treat foster youth the same as all
other foster children. Additionally, 33% of participants stated that how helpful a social
worker is depends on the social worker. Some participants (40%) even stated that social
workers are not helpful during the emancipation process in any way.
54
To further illustrate participant’s discussion of the significance of having
resources that were available and accessible to youth, a series of statements participants
made are provided below. One participant stated,
Finding alternative sources for funding and living, wages and pursuing different
scholarships and fellowships in order to do those kind of not conventional jobs
just to get by in those two years transitioning into adulthood would really be
beneficial.
In this example, the youth explained the significance of having resources available in
multiple areas. Specifically this participant discussed the importance of resources when
acquiring assistance with pursuing higher education or employment.
Another participant responded,
…It can be difficult to find information yourself especially on the internet because
there is so much junk and it is hard to really narrow things down. Programs that
are based on providing information or a center for information and center to
connect with other foster youth because likely foster youth are comfortable with
other foster youth.
This participant discussed the significance of having access to resources and discussed
that resources are difficult to gain access to.
When another participant was asked how helpful they thought social workers
were to foster youth during the emancipation process she replied, “My Social Worker
was really helpful… She provided me resources when she knew I was going to attend
college.” Many participants’ responses indicated that having a supportive adult in a
55
youth’s life is helpful. Yet, the degree in which a social worker, foster parent, or
biological family member provides support depends on the situation and the relationship
between this person and the youth.
Housing
Thirteen (87%) participants believed that housing was one of the greatest
struggles for youth emancipating out of care today. Of the participants who indicated that
housing was one of the greatest struggles for youth emancipating out of care, 70%
explained that inadequate housing was a problem foster youth over 60% percent of the
time. The remaining 30% of the participants felt this happened to foster youth more than
statistics have demonstrated. When asked to describe how this struggle looks participants
described this struggle as not having a place to live or not knowing where you will be the
next day. Additionally, when participants were asked what services their county could
supply that would more effectively prepare foster youth for independent living 13% of
participants responded by discussing housing programs. Similar to this, when asked to
describe two services that would be beneficial to emancipating foster youth 27% of
participants responded by discussing housing and transitional housing programs.
To further illustrate participants’ concerns with housing for emancipating youth
examples of statements participants made are provided below. When asked to describe
what the greatest struggle looks like that emancipating foster youth face, a participant
responded,
…not knowing where you are going to lay your head is the greatest stressor. It’s
like, there is nothing worse than not knowing if you are going to be warm tonight
56
or if you’re gonna sleep in a laundry mat or on a mattress or on a couch or if
you’re gonna have to ask for a blanket. It is really defeating and extremely hard
on your mental capacity just to be involved in the day and your life.
Likewise, a participant a answered question about the greatest struggle of emancipating
foster youth stating, “It’s finding permanent housing. There are a lot of foster youth who
are homeless. Housing impacts many other aspects of a youth’s life, for example going to
school, job interviews, and lack of transportation.”
Budgeting and Managing Finances
Sixty percent of participants agreed that it is important that foster youth be
educated on how to budget and manage finances before exiting care. Likewise, 27% of
participants agreed that one of the most beneficial aspects of Independent Living
Programs was the assistance with finances through education and concrete financial
support in the form of gifts and cash aid.
To further illustrate participants concern with financial literacy for emancipating
youth examples of statements participants made are provided below. One participant
explained that,
…One of the biggest things for me is how much credit plays a role in the society
and having established credit. People are often deterred away from getting credit
cards and establishing credit and the truth is you need some type of credit in order
to do anything in this life really. I mean in order to get an apartment you have to
have established credit unless you have a parent to co-sign and most foster youth
obviously, don’t have that opportunity. Some employers even look at your credit
57
score. I just think credit is very important and a lot of foster youth are not
prepared for that reality.
Another participant discussed,
…as far as financial skills, learning how to budget beforehand. That is a lot of
problem about why youth, like don’t succeed where they are. I know a lot of
youth and I have friends now who are homeless now because they don’t know
how to manage their money. Money management …
Additional Findings
Unmet Expectations
There were several additional findings made, each will be discussed briefly. The
first additional finding made was that many staff members provided inadequate services
and failed to meet the youths’ expectations. This was seen throughout various questions
and responses of participants. Overall, it was observed that participants felt that social
workers lacked empathy for foster youth and treated foster youth as just another case.
Thirty three percent of participants stated that social workers need to be more present;
40% of participants stated social workers need to check in with youth more than just to
get paper work completed and for case management. Four (27%) participants felt that
social workers should take more time to understand what was going on within a youth’s
life and develop a connection. In addition, it was explained by 20% of the participants
that staff members presenting in independent living programs need to be better trained in
general.
58
Services to Empower and Hold Youth Accountable
A second finding noticeable from the participant’s responses was the importance
of having services in place that empower and hold youth accountable and responsible.
Thirty three percent (33%) of participants felt that programs that empower youth provide
the most assistance during emancipation. One participant described that programs based
on youth empowerment would better prepare foster youth for independent living.
Another, participants discussed that if programs do not focus more attention on youth
empowerment they may be further enabling youth and creating dependency rather than
independence. Additionally, 13% of participants felt that independent living programs
were lacking the ability to hold youth accountable for their actions.
The third unexpected finding was that the youth explained that it was important
for foster youth to develop positive self-esteem and a sense of belonging. Forty percent of
participants described that the greatest struggle for foster youth emancipating out of care
was having feelings of self-doubt and being alone. When asked to describe what this
struggle looks like 40% of participants described this as feelings surrounding self-doubt
and isolation. In addition, 20% of participants stated that it was important to feel a sense
of belonging to a community. Twenty percent of participants discussed that it is
significant for foster youth to know who they are related to, so they may feel a sense of
belonging.
The final theme was the importance of communication for all levels. Forty
percent of participants discussed the significance of developing professional social skills.
This included the ability to build relationships with others and set boundaries. In addition
59
this includes the ability to communicate professionally as voiced by 33% of participants.
This was described by one participant as,
Professionalism. It is a light switch that you can turn on. They flip the switch to
be the person that is getting things done. Learn professionalism light switch so
yeah I am in this environment so I can adapt. And I am in this environment so I
don’t have to worry about adapting I am not trying to sell anything; I am not
trying to not be myself. There is sometimes where they need to be more
professional.
Life Skills Findings
The development of life skills in emancipating foster youth was demonstrated
through several scaling questions. These results demonstrated participants opinion’s that
many emancipating foster youth have poor independent living and life skills.
Money
Forty seven percent of participants felt foster youth had poor shopping, budgeting
and money management skills. Thirteen percent of participants felt foster youth had very
poor shopping, budgeting and money management skills. Twenty seven percent of
participants felt foster youth had average money management skills. Finally, thirteen
percent of foster youth felt foster youth had good money management skills (Table 11).
60
Table 11
Shopping, Budgeting & Money Management Skills
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Very Poor
2
13%
Poor
7
47%
Average
4
27%
Good
2
13%
Excellent
0
0
Total
15
100%
Self-Care
Forty percent of participants felt emancipating foster youth had average basic
self-care skills yet, 33% of participants felt emancipating foster youth had poor basic selfcare skills (Table 12).
Table 12
Basic Self-Care Skills
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Very Poor
0
0
Poor
5
33%
Average
6
40%
Good
4
27%
Excellent
0
0
Total
15
100%
61
Social Skills
Forty percent of participants felt emancipating foster youth had average social
skills yet, 33% of participants felt emancipating foster youth had poor social skills (Table
13).
Table 13
Social Skills
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Very Poor
1
7%
Poor
5
33%
Average
6
40%
Good
1
7%
Excellent
2
13%
Total
15
100%
Cooking and Cleaning Skills
Forty percent of participants felt foster youth had poor cooking, and cleaning
skills (Table 14).
Table 14
Cooking and Cleaning Skills
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Very Poor
0
0
Poor
6
40%
Average
8
53%
Good
1
7%
Excellent
0
0
Total
15
100%
62
Time Management Skills
Forty of participants felt emancipating foster youth had poor time management
skills yet, 53% of participants felt emancipating foster youth had average time
management skills (Table 15).
Table 15
Time Management Skills
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Very Poor
2
13%
Poor
6
40%
Average
5
33%
Good
2
13%
Excellent
0
0
Total
0
100%
Job Skills
Sixty percent of participants felt foster youth had poor job skills (Table 16).
Table 16
Job Skills
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Very Poor
0
0
Poor
9
60%
Average
4
27%
Good
2
13%
Excellent
0
0
Total
15
100%
63
Interpersonal Skills
Fifty three percent of participants felt emancipating foster youth had average
interpersonal relationship skills yet, 33% of participants felt emancipating foster youth
had poor or very poor interpersonal relationship skills (Table 15).
Table 17
Interpersonal Relationships Skills
Variable
Frequency (Out of 15)
Percentage
Very Poor
2
13%
Poor
3
20%
Average
8
53%
Good
2
13%
Excellent
0
0
Total
15
100%
Through the participants responses to the scaling questions on the development of
emancipating foster youths’ life skills it is evident that in many skills foster youth may be
lacking. There were several skill sets reported where 40% or more of participants felt
emancipating foster youth had below average skills. Sixty percent of participants felt
foster youth had below average shopping, budgeting and money management skills.
Forty percent of participants felt foster youth had below average cooking and cleaning
skills. Fifty three percent of participants felt foster youth had below average time
management skills. Finally, sixty percent of participants felt foster youth had below
average job development skills.
64
Summary
In this chapter, the data from the study was analyzed and discussed. Results
indicated it is important to; have a mentor or supportive figure in a youth’s life; have
resources that are available and accessible to youth; have stable housing; and know how
to budget and manage finances. Results pertaining to life skills development of
emancipating foster youth indicated that at least half of the participants felt that foster
youth had below average shopping, budgeting and money management skills, time
management skills, and job skills. Chapter 5 is a discussion of the conclusions and
recommendations. The limitations of this study and the implications for social work
practice and policy are also discussed.
65
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION
Introduction
This chapter will discuss the most significant findings of this research study. The
four primary themes that emerged during the interviews will be discussed as they relate to
each other, and to services for emancipating foster youth. The chapter will discuss
recommendations for future studies and policies, limitations of the study, and outline the
implications of the study for social work practice.
Conclusions
The researcher found that the participants in this study were knowledgeable about
the needs of foster youth. This study asked the research question: What is the need for
transitional services for foster youth, specifically concerning housing and mentoring
services? The answer to the question put simply is, there is a great need for transitional
services for emancipating foster youth specifically concerning mentoring, resource
accessibility, housing, and budgeting. As the study participants elaborated on each of the
interview questions these themes emerged along with the development of additional
findings.
Mentoring
The first theme that emerged was the need for mentoring. Lacking a support
system was seen as one of the greatest struggles of foster youth emancipating out of care.
Participants stated that supportive figures or mentors can provide, a personal connection,
a sense of belonging, a role model, permanency, advice, and finally support in multiple
66
arenas. These findings are similar to the majority of research studies that suggests there is
a need for a supportive person in a youth’s life (Mares, 2010, Mech et al., 1995; &
Rhodes, 2008; & Spencer et al. 2010).
This theme was discussed in various questions throughout the interview process.
Mentoring was described as beneficial because mentors can provide support with
attaining higher education, advice, a permanent relationship, a sense of belonging to a
community and a role model for emancipating foster youth. These results are consistent
with what Mech, Pryde and Rycraft (1995) discussed. Mech, Pryde and Rycraft (1995)
discussed that mentors are people who assist their mentees in developing by providing
relationships and acting as role models.
Through the explanation by participants of how mentors can be beneficial to
youth, it evident that mentors would serve to enhance protective factors for foster youth
emancipating out of care. This finding is consistent with Masten and Gramezy’s (1985)
finding that supportive adults serve as protective factors for foster youth. It is also
consistent with Osgood, Foster and Courtney (2010) research, as they reported that the
support offered foster youth a widespread protective factor for youth in transition.
Similar to, Mech, Pryde and Rycraft’s (1995) research that suggested mentor
programs within the child welfare system should be improved with a focus on more
effective recruitment, training and support for the mentors and mentees, participants of
this study made similar statements. For example, when asked what services a county
could supply to more effectively prepare youth for independent living a participant stated,
mentors need to be trained and educated in several areas. In addition, participants stated
67
that mentor programs are lacking training on how to be a mentor due to the lack of
funding as a result of budget cuts.
As indicated by the participants from this research project it is crucial that foster
youth have frequent contact with a supportive adult. Participants discussed the
importance of youth being able to contact a mentor figure as needed through their life
experiences. The conclusion that frequent contact is necessary to ensure that youth’s
needs are being met and for a healthy relationship to be maintained is consistent with
conclusions made by Spencer et al. (2010). Spencer et al. (2010) found that duration,
consistency and emotional connection are significant to building mentor-mentee
relationships. Other themes found are also consistent with previous research.
Access to Resources
The second theme, the need for more access to resources emerged. Several
participants felt that foster parents and social workers would be more helpful if they
could assist in providing better access to resources. Likewise, providing access to
resources was one of the areas in which participants found mentors helpful. Participants
did not find current services inadequate, but rather what was inadequate was the number
of services and the accessibility and knowledge of services that were developed. These
findings demonstrate the significance of biological family members, foster parents, and
social workers in assisting with providing access to resources when possible.
Despite the fact that referrals are made by social workers, 77% of youth
participants had access to independent living skills programs and only 38% of youth
participants had access to transitional housing placement programs (THP). Both of these
68
programs are significant resources to foster youth transitioning from care and should be
provided to more youth in the future. ILPs provide classes, workshops, activities and
services to youth that would be useful during the transition into independent living.
Independent living programs (ILP) were created to decrease the negative impacts of
foster youth being forced to live on their own (California Department of Social Services,
2007). Yet, as this research project concludes this is not the case for emancipating foster
youth. In addition, access to such resources would assist with the development of life
skills for foster youth. Access to THP-Plus programs would decrease negative housing
outcomes for foster youth negative housing and housing challenges are themes
throughout this research project.
Housing
The third theme, the significance of stable housing, emerged as one of the greatest
struggles of youth emancipating out of care. Eighty five percent of participants felt that
this was the greatest struggle for emancipating foster youth. Participants discussed how
the lack of stable housing impacts all other arenas of a youth’s life and leads to various
negative consequences. Participants discussed how without stable housing it is difficult to
acquire a job, enroll in school, and attend appointments due to not knowing where you
will be sleeping that night or next day. These findings confirmed that there continues to
be a need for stable and permanent housing as other researchers have found (Choca, et
al., 2004; Georgidaes, 2005; Kroner & Mares, 2008; & Scannapieco et al.,1995).
Foster youth should not emancipate out of care without stable and permanent
housing. However, this continues to be a problem. When asked how often this struggle
69
occurs participants indicated that this happens most of the time. These findings are
parallel to the findings of previous research. For example, Heuring’s (2005b) review of
the literature discussed foster youth’s challenges surrounding maintaining permanent and
stable housing. Mares (2010) discussed that youth faced challenges concerning attaining
stable or permanent housing.
Additionally participants discussed that the lack of stable housing can negatively
impact other aspects of their lives. Participants discussed the difficulty in maintaining a
job and concentrating on normal day to day activities when they are unsure where they
will be sleeping that night. Encountering such circumstances may lead to higher levels of
depression, low self-efficacy, and increased levels of self-mutilation as Cauce et al (2000)
discussed. It is significant that efforts continue to be made to reduce the rates of
homelessness in emancipating foster youth by making permanent and stable housing
more readily available to youth exiting care.
Budgeting
The fourth theme, the significance of budgeting and managing finances, was an
unexpected finding. However, this theme closely relates to housing. If one does not have
financial literacy it may become difficult to maintain steady housing, especially on a
small budget. Participants’ responses demonstrate that over half of emancipating foster
youth have developed below average shopping, budgeting, and money management skills
upon exiting care.
This finding answered the initial research question by demonstrating that more
services need to be created within ILPs to promote skills in budgeting and managing
70
finances. It is significant that ILPs attempt to more realistically prepare youth about what
it means to be responsible for all financial decisions in the future and the consequences of
ineffectively managing a budget. If foster youth continue to enter independent living
without grasping the ability to effectively manage their money they will continue to
struggle with negative outcomes as demonstrated in previous research. Courtney et al.
(2001) found that youth had difficulty accessing and maintaining medical care and
housing. Mares (2010) discussed that youth faced challenges concerning mental health,
substance abuse, acquiring health insurance, finding decent employment, and attaining
stable or permanent housing.
It is not reasonable as discussed by McMillen and Tucker (1999) that
emancipating foster youth are facing more challenges and struggles when compared to
their non-emancipating peer group. It is evident through the four most significant themes
that foster youth need more support guidance and preparation for independent living that
includes housing and money management.
Services to Empower and Hold Youth Accountable
An additional finding that confirms the researcher’s hypothesis was the
participants desire to have services in place that empower youth and hold them
accountable and responsible. This confirms the researchers’ hypothesis that it is vital that
foster youth’s opinions be heard when determining what services are lacking and what
services would be more beneficial to emancipating foster youth.
71
Unmet Expectations
It was found that social workers and ILPs are not meeting foster youth’s
expectations. Social workers continue to treat foster youth as another youth on their case
load. Participants discussed the need for social workers to check-in to demonstrate they
are concerned, rather than to get their paperwork completed. Participants stated that ILP
presenters need to be better trained and more aware of their personal biases that may
impact their levels of empathy. The participants believe that it is important for social
workers and ILP presenters to be aware of the population they are serving and how
important it is demonstrate that they truly care because foster youth, like any other youth
have feelings and deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Finally, participants discussed the significance of developing a sense of
belonging, positive self-esteem, and communication skills. Participants discussed how the
lack of a support system can lead to feelings of self-doubt and separation from a
community. Participants described that this can impact youth outcomes. Communication
skills, specifically professional skills were seen as needing to be further developed by
foster youth prior to emancipating from care. The lack of communication skills were seen
in participant’s response to the life skills interview questions. Forty percent of
participants described emancipating youth’s social skills as being below average.
Recommendations
There are three areas where this study makes recommendations: future research,
Child Welfare services, and Child Welfare policies. The recommendations are presented
below.
72
Future Research
This study is a good starting point for anyone interested in doing further research
on the needs of emancipating foster youth. It would be interesting for future research to
explore the knowledge of resources that emancipating foster youth have. The research
could compile a list of resources in a specific community and provide surveys to foster
youth age 16-20 to inquire about which services foster youth are familiar with. This study
could expand by asking foster youth what are effective ways they may make these
resources accessible in the community. Results from such a study could assist in creating
a resource guide for foster youth and also providing the knowledge of where to display
the resource guide so that foster youth have access to identified services.
Other research could explore in more detail what types of housing programs
emancipating foster find most beneficial. This could explore and compare various types
of housing for non-minor dependent foster youth including, Transitional Housing
Programs, Certified Foster Family Agencies, Licensed Foster Families, relative of nonrelated extended family member, non-related legal guardian, group homes, and
Supervised Independent Living Placements (SILP). Results from such a study could be
used to effectively design housing services for youth.
It would also be interesting to create a similar study after AB 12 legislation has
been implemented to examine the degree to which the legislation has created positive
change for foster youth. This could explore the foster youth who were a part of the
extended foster care pilot when compared to those who did not choose to remain in care.
This could explore permanency in the areas of housing and support systems. Results of
73
this study could be used to create further policies in the future that address the gaps of
AB 12.
Child Welfare Services
Based on the findings of this study, the Child Welfare System needs to have more
services available to youth emancipating out of the foster care system. There is a need
for more services which link foster youth to a supportive adult figure at a younger age to
assist them in making the transition into independent living. Additionally, this adult
should be a more permanent figure who does not simply leave the youth’s life once they
have reached age 18 or when their allotted time frame has been exceeded.
Likewise, part of the Transitional Independent Living Case Plan should include
housing. This should involve educating foster youth on how to manage their finances so
that they are able to afford housing once they turn 18 and are helped minimally through
extended care. Additionally, foster youth should be prepared to afford housing once they
turn 20 or 21 and their financial assistance as a non-minor dependent has ceased.
Resource programs as well as more preparation for affording housing should be
put in place. Many of the participants interviewed for this study commented on resources
being in the community, but that they did not have access to them either because they
were unaware of the services, did not know how to apply for the services, or there was a
very limited supply of the services. Services need to be made available immediately and
they must be more comprehensive then they have been in the past to offer resources to
foster youth. By providing resources to foster youth while in care they may begin to learn
how to navigate through the resources available to them. This results in youth being
74
better able to seek and identify services that would be useful to them once they have
exited care and are living independently. The resource programs need to be designed to
meet the needs of the youth not just social workers and other advocates who seek the
services for youth. Allowing foster youth to gain the skills required to navigate through
and locate resources empowers them. Additionally, if this process is started while still in
care it leaves room for foster youth to learn from their mistakes while they still have
support from their Social Worker.
Finally, Child Welfare staff needs to treat foster youth as more than just another
child on their caseload. Participants in this study made it evident that foster youth are not
being treated like individuals. Social workers and ILP staff should check-in with youth to
make sure their needs are being met. In addition, the Department of Health and Humans
Services should more effectively train ILP presenters to be aware of their personal biases
that may impact their levels of empathy. Foster youth deserve to be treated with dignity
and respect as any other person would.
Child Welfare Policies
Although policies like AB 12 have passed and been implemented in the past,
outcomes of foster youth still remain negative. Policies need to continue to be created to
provide more opportunities for foster youth. Policies should reduce barriers for foster
youth so that they can successfully exit care and live successful lives thereafter.
Implications for Future Research
There are some limitations to this research project. The first limitation is the small
sample size. The reason for such a small sample size was due to challenges with
75
schooling, time management and accessing CYC youth members, CYC adult supporters,
and CYC staff. There were initially 23 participants who volunteered to participate in the
study however, only 15 completed the interviews. To eliminate a small sample in the
future, recruitment efforts should be set up to more effectively gain access to participants.
This could be accomplished by recruiting participants in person. For example, the initial
point of contact could be attending CYC chapter meetings first and then sending out a
reminder e-mail if necessary.
A second limitation was the time period during which data were collected. Since
data were collected in a short period of time it limited the number of participants that
were sought out to participate. If data collection occurred for a longer period of time the
researcher would have been able to attend more CYC chapter meetings throughout
Northern California to recruit more participants.
In addition, the participants were involved in CYC. CYC is an organization that
advocates for foster youth surrounding policies. Therefore, many of these participants
may have already recognized some of the flaws in the foster care system and were
already advocating for change in policies. To prevent this in the future a longer time
period could be allotted for collecting data, so that subjects outside of a specific agency
could be asked to participate.
Implications for Social Work Practice and Policy
Failure for foster youth to thrive after emancipation is a problem that most Child
Welfare social workers will come across in their career. They might work with
emancipating foster youth through personal experiences of their case load, by hearing
76
other social workers’ stories or in policy work. Failure for foster youth to be successful
after emancipation is a serious issue that it is often disregarded because social workers do
not have to check on their former clients once a case has been closed. Social workers
need to be educated and aware of what the issues are surrounding foster youth
emancipating in this state. Social workers need to continue to ask emancipated foster
youth about their experiences with emancipating and what would have been helpful in
order to emancipate successfully.
Social workers know that the outcomes of foster youth who emancipate out of
care are a problem. Yet, this problem will not decrease without the development of
comprehensive emancipation plans and support to foster youth. Recently, with the
passage of AB 12 youth can opt to stay in extended foster care until age 20 and
potentially 21 as a non-minor dependent. If youth choose to stay in care a Transitional
Independent Living Case Plan is developed collaboratively to work towards reaching the
youth’s goals for independent living, such as acquiring employment or housing. Until
such plans are implemented we will not be able to assess whether these plans are helpful
to youth. Yet, still similar plans need to be organized around youth who decide to leave
the support of the Child Welfare system. Such plans could assist youth by educating
youth on places they could turn when they need further assistance.
Social workers must also advocate for those youth on their caseload who are in
the process of emancipation. Social workers can be active in lobbying for more
legislation around providing support to foster youth starting at a younger age along with
more access to resources, including housing and mentorship programs. In addition,
77
social workers who recognize that a youth is lacking the sufficient development of a
particular life skill, can either assist the youth in enrolling in an independent living skills
program that can assist them, provide them with resources, or if time permits sit down
with youth to work on the development of a particular skill.
The researcher believes that without permanent and consistent support for our
foster youth the outcomes of emancipation will continue to be negative. The current AB
12 policy should be helpful in providing additional support to foster youth by extending
care but there remain gaps in services and support provided to foster youth. If the
policies do not continue to change to offer more support, then the programs will continue
to be ineffective. Awareness of this issue on the part of social workers may make a
difference to the foster youth that they serve. Social workers can begin fulfilling their
commitment to the children in the child welfare system by being responsive to needs of
foster youth and advocating for meeting the needs of foster youth emancipation.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to contribute to the understanding of the needs for
services for transitioning foster youth, in Northern California. The research found that
foster youth transitioning out of care do need greater access to permanent housing and
permanent supportive figures in their lives. The study also suggests that transitioning
foster youth need greater access to resources and the ability to develop more financial
literacy before exiting care. There is a need for additional research to explore knowledge
of resources that emancipating foster youth have and how they access these resources.
This could assist with linking foster youth with resources that are already in the
78
community. Further research should also consider exploring what types of housing
programs and mentoring programs emancipating foster youth find most beneficial.
Finally, it would also be interesting to create a similar study after AB12 legislation has
been implemented to see if the legislation has created positive change for foster youth.
79
APPENDIX A
Letter of Consent
My name is Nicole Stiving and I am a second year Masters of Social Work graduate
student at California State University, Sacramento. I am conducting a research project as
part of my MSW project, and this work is supervised by, Teiahsha Bankhead, Ph.D.,
Associate Professor of Social Work at California State University, Sacramento. I am
requesting your voluntary participation in a study about your ideas about the needs of
foster youth in California.
The study will investigate the needs of foster youth. You will be asked to participate in a
30 min to 1hr interview with several questions regarding your opinion on what services
are needed for foster youth “aging out” or emancipating out of foster care in terms of
housing and mentorship. You will have the option of participating in a phone interview or
a face-to-face interview.
Some of the questions in the interview may seem personal, but you do not have to answer
any question if you do not want to. You may withdraw from the study at any time without
penalty.
You may gain additional insight into factors affecting success of foster youth, or what
services are needed by participating in this study. The researcher anticipates the results of
the study will be beneficial for programs designed to assist foster youth “aging out” of
foster care.
You will be asked to answer various questions during the interview process. Your
responses to the interview questions will be kept confidential and stored securely. Only
the researcher and her advisor will know the codes assigned to a particular interviewee.
With your permission your interview will be recorded. These audiotapes will be
destroyed once the interviews are transcribed. Until that time, they will be stored in a
secure location in the researcher’s home. Only group results for the project will be
reported.
You will not receive any compensation for participating in this study. In the event of
increased emotional stress, contact one of the following for assistance 1-800-SUICIDE,
1-800-273-TALK, or (916) 368-3111.
If you have questions about this research you may contact the researcher at her e-mail
address nicole.stiving@gmail.com. If you have further questions you may contact the
research advisor, Dr. Teiahsha Bankhead at bankhead@csus.edu.
80
Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary. Your signature below indicates that
you have read this page and agree to participate in the research.
I agree to be audio-taped during the interview:
Yes______
No______
________________________________
Signature of Participant
____________________
Date
81
APPENDIX B
Recruitment Script
Hi, my name is Nicole Stiving and I am a second year Masters of Social Work
graduate student at California State University, Sacramento. I am requesting your
voluntary participation in a study about the needs of foster youth who are
emancipating out of foster care. I have attached a letter of consent for your viewing. It
briefly explains my research study. If you are interested please contact me by e-mail at
nicole.stiving@gmail.com to set up a confidential telephone or face-to-face interview
which will last roughly 30 minutes to 1hr. In addition, please contact me if you have any
questions. I look forward to your participation.
Thank you for your time,
Nicole Stiving
nicole.stiving@gmail.com
82
APPENDIX C
Demographic Questions
Needs Assessment for Foster Youth Transitioning Out of Foster Care
The present study’s participants will consist of CYC Members, CYC Adult
Supporters and CYC Staff and will focus on what services youth transitioning out of
foster care need and how these services can be implemented. The conclusions from data
collection should indicate desired services for emancipating foster youth and services that
have the greatest impact on emancipating foster youth. The use of such findings could
help to prevent problematic outcomes for young adults who turn eighteen and are forced
to live on their own with little preparation. (If you are an adult supporter or staff
member please skip questions: 2-4, 7, 8 & 10-14)
1. Age ______
2. GPA ______
3. Education Level (Check One):
Some High School ______
G.E.D. /High School Diploma ______
Some College or Vocational Training ______
Bachelors Degree ______
Masters Degree ______
Other______
4. Major (Check One) (If pursuing post-secondary education)
Business ______
Economics ______
Psychology ______
Political Science/Government ______
Nursing ______
Computer/Information Sciences
______
Biology/Biological Sciences ______
Criminal Justice ______
Education ______
Social Work ______
Language and Literature ______
Art/ Art History ______
Communication ______
Other ______
5. Ethnicity (Check One):
African American ______
Asian ______
Latin ______
Pacific Islander ______
White/Caucasian ______
Other______
83
6. Gender (Check one):
Male ______
Female ______
Transsexual/Transgender ______
Other ______
7. Marital Status (Check One):
Single ______
Married ______
Divorced _____
Other ______
8. Are you currently employed? (Check One)
Yes _____
No ______
9. Check one of the following that fits your current situation:
CYC Member ______
CYC Staff ______ (If checked skip the rest of demographic questions)
CYC Adult Supporter ______ (If checked skip the rest of the demographic questions)
Other ______
10. Did you participate in an Independent Living Program?
Yes ______
No ______
11. Did you participate in a Transitional Housing Placement Program?
Yes ______
No ______
12. For the majority of my childhood I lived with (check one):
Alone ______
Both Parents ______
Single Parent ______
Foster Parents ______
Parent and Step-Parent/Boyfriend/Girlfriend _______
Single Parent and a Another Family Member ______
Friend/Kin ______
13. For the majority of my adolescence I lived with (check one):
Alone ______
Both Parents ______
Single Parents ______
Foster Parents ______
Parent and Step-Parent/Boyfriend/Girlfriend ______
Single Parent and a Another Family Member ______
Friend/Kin ______
84
14. For the majority of my adulthood I lived with (check one):
Alone ______
Both Parents ______
Single Parents ______
Foster Parents ______
Parent and Step-Parent/Boyfriend/Girlfriend ______
Single Parent and a Another Family Member______
Friend/Kin ______
15. What county do you live in?
Sacramento ______
Yolo ______
El Dorado ______
Butte ______
Napa/Sonoma ______
Placer ______
San Francisco ______ Glenn ______
Mendocino ______
Shasta ______
Siskiyou ______
Tehama
______
Yuba-Sutter ______
Alameda _____
Contra Costa______
San Mateo _____
Other ______
85
APPENDIX D
Needs Assessment Interview Questions
Youth Support
1. Can you talk a briefly about your experience with mentor programs in the
Sacramento area?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
2. Can you explain what you think is most beneficial to foster youth in mentor
programs, if anything?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
3. Can you explain what you think these programs are lacking, if anything?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
4. How helpful do you think social workers are to foster youth during the
emancipation process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
5. What do you think a social worker could do to be more helpful to foster youth
during the emancipation process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
86
6. How helpful do you think foster parents are to youth during the emancipation
process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
7. What do you think foster parents could do differently to be more helpful to foster
youth in the emancipation process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
8. How helpful do you think biological family members are to foster youth during
the emancipation process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
9. What do you think biological family members could do differently to be more
helpful to foster youth in the emancipation process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
10. How helpful do you think mentors/community members are to foster youth during
the emancipation process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
11. What do you think mentors/community members could do differently to be more
helpful to foster youth in the emancipation process?
87
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
12. How important do you think is it for a foster youth to have an older adult in their
life to assist them with the emancipation process?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
13. How frequently should foster youth have contact with an older supportive adult?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
Life Skills
14. Describe your experience with life skills programs for emancipating foster youth?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
15. What are some core life skills that you think emancipating foster youth should
become aware of before exiting care?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
On scale of 1-5 please rate the following statements:
Rate the following statements on a scale of 1-5 according to your opinion of the abilities
of emancipating foster youth.
1 (Very Poor) 2 (Poor) 3 (Average) 4 (Good) 5 (Excellent)
16. Basic self-care skills
_____________________________________________________________________
______
88
17. Shopping, budgeting, and money management skills
_____________________________________________________________________
______
18. Social skills
_____________________________________________________________________
______
19. Cooking and cleaning skills
_____________________________________________________________________
______
20. Time management skills
_____________________________________________________________________
______
21. Job skills
_____________________________________________________________________
______
22. Ability to develop interpersonal relationships
_____________________________________________________________________
______
Independent Living Programs
23. Describe your experience with Independent Living Programs?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
24. What do you think foster youth find beneficial from these programs, if anything?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
25. What do you think these programs are lacking, if anything?
89
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
Other Services
26. What types of programs, groups, or organizations provide the most assistance to
foster youth during emancipation?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
27. Tell me about two services that you think would be most beneficial to
emancipating foster youth? Also why do believe these services would be
beneficial?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
28. What services do you think foster youth find the least beneficial? Why?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
29. What would you change about services currently in place to make them more
beneficial to emancipated foster youth?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
30. What services could your county supply that would more effectively prepare
foster care youth for independent living?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
90
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
Hardships of Emancipating Foster Youth
31. What do you believe to be the greatest struggle for foster youth emancipating out
of care today?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
32. Can you describe what this struggle looks like?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
33. How often do you think that it happens?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________
91
REFERENCES
AFCARS. (2010). The AFCARS Report.
Benson, P., L., Scales, P., C., Hawkins, D., Oesterle, S., & Hill K., G. (2004). Executive
Summary: Sucessful Youth Development (pp. 1-22): Search Institute & Soical
Development Research Group, University of Washington.
Biehal, N. W., J. (1996). Looking back, looking forward: Care leavers, families and
change.. Children and Youth Services Review, 18(4-5), 425-445. doi:
10.1016/0190-7409(96)00013-8.
Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary
Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28(5),759-775. doi: 0012-1649/92/.
Brown, S., & Wilderson, D. (2010). Homeless prevention for former foster youth:
Utilization of transitional housing programs. Children and Youth Services
Review 32, 1464-1472. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.07.002.
California Department of Social Services (n.d.). California Fostering Connections to
Success. FACT SHEET. Retrieved from
http://cpoc.org/php/AB12/AB12FactSheet.pdf.
California Department of Social Services: Independent Living Program Policy Unit
(n.d.). Transitional Housing Program-Plus (THP-Plus) for Emancipated Foster
Youth. Retrieved from
http://www.childsworld.ca.gov/res/pdf/THPPlusFactSheet.pdf.
92
California Department of Social Services: Independent Living Program Policy Unit
(n.d.).Transitional Housing Placement Program (THPP) for Current Foster Care
Youth. Retrieved from http://childsworld.ca.gov/res/pdf/THPPFactSheet.pdf
California Department of Social Services Independent Living Program Policy Unit
Transitional Housing Coordinator (2007). Transitional Housing Program for
Emancipated Foster/Probation (THP-Plus). Retrieved from
http://www.childsworld.ca.gov/res/pdf/THP PlusBrochure.pdf.
Cal. Stat. ch. 271. (2001-2002).
Cal. Stat. ch. 391. (2009-2010).
Cal. Stat. ch. 559. (2009-2010).
Cal. Stat. ch. 629. (2005-2006).
Cauce, A.M., Paradise, M., Ginzler, J. A., Embry, L., Morgan, C. J., Lohr, Y., &
Theofeils, J. (2000). The characteristics and mental health of homeless
adolescents: Age and gender differences. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral
Disorders, 8, 230-239.
Choca, M. J., Minoff, J., Angene, L., Byrnes, M., Kenneally, L., Norris, D., Rivers, M.
M. (2004). Can't Do It Alone: Housing Collaborations to Improve Foster Youth
Outcomes. Child Welfare, 83(5), 469-492. doi: 0009-4021/2004/050469-26.
County of Sacramento Dependency & Court Services Program Highlights (2012).
Extended foster care AB 12. Sacramento, CA: Saramento County Department of
Health and Human Services.
93
Courtney, M. E., Piliavin, I., Grogan-Kaylor, A., & Nesmith, A. (2001). Foster youth
transitions to adulthood: A longitudinal view of youth leaving care. Child
Welfare, 80, 685-717. doi: 0009-4021/2001/060685-33.
Courtney, M. E. (2005a).Youth aging out of foster care. MacArthur Foundation
Research Network on Transitions to Adulthood and Public Policy. 19. 1-2.
Courtney, M.E., & Heuring, D. H. (2005b). The transition to adulthood for youth "aging
out" of the foster care system. In D.W. Osgood, E.M. Foster, C. Flanagan, & G.R.
Ruth (Eds.), On your own without a net: The transition to adulthood for
vulnerable populations (pp.27-67). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Courtney, M. E., & Dworsky A. (2006). Early outcomes for young adults transitioning
from out-of-home care in the USA. Child and Family Social Work, 11, 209-219.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2206.2006.00433.x.
Daining, C., & DePanfilis, D. (2007). Resilience of youth in transition from out-of-home
care to adulthood. Children and Youth Services Review, 29, 1158-1178. doi:
10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.04.006.
DuBois, D. L., Holloway, B. E., Valentine, J. C., & Cooper H. (2002). Effectiveness of
mentoring programs for youth: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 30157-197. doi: 10.1023/a:1014628810714.
Ferguson, K. M., & Xie, B. (2008). Feasibility study of the social enterprise intervention
with homeless youth. Research on Social Work Practice, 18(1), 5-19. doi:
10.1177/1049731507303535.
94
Fernandes, A. L. (2006). Child Welfare: The Chafee foster care independence program
(CFCIP). Congressional Research Service, 1-6.
Fernandes, A. L. (2008). Youth transitioning out of foster care: Background, federal
programs, and issues for congress. Congressional Research Service, 1-82.
Franzblau, S. H. (1999). Attachment theory. Feminisim & Psychology, 9(1), 5-9. doi:
0959-3535(199902)91:5-9;007535.
Freedman, M. (1993). The Kindness of Strangers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jenson. M. J. & Fraser, M. W. (2011). Social Policy for Children and Families: A risk
and resilience perspective. California: SAGE Publications.
Georgiades, S. (2005). A multi-outcome evaluation of an independent living program.
Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 22, 417-439. doi: 10.1007/s10560
005-0020-y.
Kirk, R., & Day, A. (2011). Increasing college access for youth aging out of foster care:
Evaluation of a summer camp program for foster youth transitioning from high school to
college. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 1173-1180. doi:
10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.02.018.
Kroner, M. J., & Mares, A. S. (2009). Lighthouse independent living program:
Characteristics of youth served and their outcomes at discharge. Children and
Youth Services Review, 31(5), 563-571. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2008.10.011.
Lemon, K., Hines, M., Merdinger, J. (2005). From foster care to young adulthood: The
role of independent living programs in supporting successful transition. Child And
Youth Service Review, 27,251-270. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.09.005.
95
Maher, E. J., Jackson, L. J., Pecora, P. J., Schultz, D. J., Chandra, A., & Barnes-Proby, D.
S. (2009). Overcoming challenges to implementing and evaluating evidencebased interventions in child welfare: A matter of necessity. Children and Youth
Services Review, 31(5), 555-562. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2008.10.013.
Mares, A. (2010). An Assessment of Independent Living Needs Among Emancipating
Foster Youth. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 27(1), 79-96. doi:
10.1007/s10560-010-0191-z.
Masten, A.S. & Garmezy, N. (1985) Risk, vulnerability and protective factors
indevelopmental psychopathology. In: Advances in Child-Clinical Psychology
(eds B.B. Lahey & A.E. Kazdin), pp. 1–52. Plenum, New York.
McMillen, J. C., & Tucker, J. (1999). The Status of Older Adolescents at Exit from Out
of-Home Care. Child Welfare, 78(3), 339-360. doi: 0009-4021/99/030339-22.
Mech, E. V., Pryde, J. A., & Rycraft, J. R. (1995). Mentors for adolescents in foster care.
Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 12(4), 317-328. doi:
10.1007/bf01875982.
Mech, E. V. (1988). Editor. Independent-living services for at-risk adolescents. Child
Welfare League of America: Washington.
Needs Assessment. (2007). Dictionary.com. Retrieved from
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/needs+assessment.
Osgood, D. W., Foster, E. M., & Courtney, M. E. (2010). Vulnerable Populations and the
Transition to Adulthood. The Future of Children, 20(1), 209-229.
96
Osterling, K. L., & Hines, A. M. (2006). Mentoring adolescent foster youth: promoting
resilience during developmental transitions. Child & Family Social Work, 11(3),
242-253. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2206.2006.00427.x.
Parker, K (2012). Assembly Bill 12: The California Fostering Connections Success Act.
Sacramento, CA: Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services.
Rhodes, J. (2008). Improving Youth Mentoring Interventions Through Research-based
Practice. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(1), 35-42. doi:
10.1007/s10464-007-9153-9.
Rubin, R. & Babbie, E.R. (2010). Essential research methods for social work, 2nd Ed.
Belmont, CA: Brooks-Cole.
Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services (n.d.). Sacramento
County Independent Living Program. Sacramento, CA: Sacramento County
Department of Health and Human Services.
Scannapieco, M., Connell-Carrick, & Painter, K. (2007). In their own words: Challenges
facing youth aging out of foster care. Child Adolescence Social Work, 24, 423435. doi: 10.1007/s10560-007-0093-x.
Scannapieco, M., Schagrin, J, Scannapieco T. (1995). Independent living programs: Do
they make a difference? Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 12(5), 381
389. doi: 10.1007/bf01876737.
Spencer, R., Collins, M. E., Ward, R., & Smashnaya, S. (2010). Mentoring for young
people leaving foster care: Promise and potential pitfalls. National Association of
Social Workers, 55(3), 225-234. doi: 0037-8046/10.
97
Walsh, J. (2010). Theories for Direct Social Work Practice: A Social Work Perspective
on Clinical Theory and Practice. (2nd Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage
Learning.
Werner, E.E. (1992). The children of Kauai: resiliency and recovery in adolescence and
adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 13, 262–268. doi: 10.1016/1054
139X(92)90157-7.