Project Group Wiki Part 2: Identification Of A Policy As An

Projectgroup Wiki Part 2 Identification Of A Policyas An Astute So

Answer each question individually. Should be in APA format and include references and in text citations for each question.

Is the policy identified by your group dictated by local, state, or federal statute—or a combination thereof?

The policy addressing teenagers aging out of the foster care system is predominantly dictated by a combination of federal and state statutes. The primary federal law guiding this policy is the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008, which emphasizes transitional support and extended foster care services (U.S. Congress, 2008). This legislation establishes national standards for supporting foster youth, including provisions for extended foster care and educational assistance. Concurrently, individual states implement and adapt policies reflecting their specific legal frameworks, available resources, and administrative priorities. For instance, most states develop their own versions of transition planning laws and eligibility criteria aligned with federal mandates, thereby creating a hybrid legal environment that combines federal statutes with state legislation to address the unique needs of foster youth across jurisdictions (Courtney et al., 2011). This layered legislative approach ensures that foster care policies are both federally mandated and locally tailored, allowing states flexibility to address specific demographic and socioeconomic factors relevant to their populations.

What are the different aspects of the policy?

The policy encompasses several interconnected aspects aimed at improving long-term outcomes for foster youth aging out of the system. Key components include eligibility criteria, transition planning, provision of financial and educational support, health care access, and independent living skills development. Eligibility is generally defined by age, with federal guidelines supporting extended foster care services up to age 21 for eligible youths, provided they meet specific criteria such as participation in education, employment, or training programs (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2019). Transition planning is mandated to begin at least 90 days prior to the youth’s 18th birthday, ensuring personalized plans for housing, health insurance, education, employment, and life skills (Courtney et al., 2011). Financial aspects involve the extension of Title IV-E foster care funding until age 21 to support these initiatives, along with targeted vouchers like Education and Training Vouchers (ETV) that provide monetary assistance for post-secondary education (Torrico, 2010). Additionally, health care provisions, such as Medicaid coverage extensions, and independent living programs aiming to foster self-sufficiency, constitute critical elements of the policy framework.

How long has the current policy been in place?

The core aspects of the current policy, primarily stemming from the 2008 federal legislation, have been in place for over a decade. The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act was enacted in 2008, initiating significant reforms aimed at extending foster care and enhancing support mechanisms for older youth. Since then, multiple amendments and supplemental policies have been introduced to reinforce and expand these provisions. States began implementing these federal mandates shortly after enactment, with most establishing their own transition planning and support programs based on the legislation’s framework. Over time, legal and policy adaptations, including extensions of foster care services and modifications to eligibility requirements, have continued, reflecting evolving best practices and evidence-based strategies to improve outcomes for youth aging out of foster care (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2019). As of now, the policy remains active and responsive to ongoing research, needs assessments, and advocacy efforts, demonstrating its continued relevance and application.

Who supports and who opposes the policy?

The support for policies that assist youth aging out of foster care predominantly comes from social workers, child welfare organizations, advocacy groups, educators, and policymakers committed to promoting the well-being and independence of vulnerable youth. These stakeholders emphasize the importance of extended support, educational opportunities, and health care access to prevent negative outcomes such as homelessness, unemployment, and health disparities (Courtney et al., 2011). Conversely, opposition primarily stems from some state and federal budget constraints, political ideologies prioritizing fiscal austerity, and concerns about the sustainability and scope of extended support programs (Lee & Courtney, 2013). Critics argue that extended foster care might create dependency or strain public resources, calling for tighter eligibility and accountability measures. Nevertheless, extensive empirical evidence supports the long-term benefits of these policies, including improved educational attainment, employment rates, and health outcomes among former foster youths, which bolster backing from advocates and many policymakers (Courtney et al., 2011). The debate continues to center on balancing resource allocation, fiscal responsibility, and ensuring positive developmental trajectories for foster youth.

What changes/amendments have been made to the policy?

Since the enactment of the initial legislation in 2008, several amendments and policy adjustments have been made to strengthen and refine the framework supporting older foster youth. Notably, the extension of foster care and support services from age 18 to 21 has been a significant amendment, allowing youths to remain in foster placements and access benefits longer, which has shown to improve stability and outcomes (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2019). Furthermore, federal funding mechanisms, particularly Title IV-E, have been expanded and clarified to enhance resource allocation and eligibility criteria, facilitating state-level implementation (Torrico, 2010). States have also introduced changes to their transition planning requirements, emphasizing personalized, holistic approaches to preparing youth for independence. Additional amendments include increased focus on permanency planning, improvements in access to mental health services, and expansion of educational support mechanisms such as the ETV program (Courtney et al., 2011). Recent policy revisions also aim to address gaps identified through research and advocacy, promoting better coordination among child welfare, education, and health agencies, and ensuring that foster youths receive comprehensive, timely support tailored to their developmental needs.

References

• Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., & Middleman, R. (2011). Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Outcomes at age 24 and 26. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago.
• Lee, R., & Courtney, M. (2013). The future of foster youth policy: Extending support beyond age 18. Child & Family Social Work, 18(4), 372-381.
• National Foster Youth Institute. (2017). 51 Useful aging out of foster care statistics. Social Race Media.
• U.S. Congress. (2008). Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008. Public Law No: 110-351.
• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2019). The AFCARS Report: Preliminary FY 2019 Estimates as of July 2020. Administration for Children and Families.
• Torrico, R. (2010). Youth aging out of foster care: Supporting their transition into adulthood. National Association of Social Workers.
• Legal Center for Foster Care and Education. (2018). How child welfare agencies can use Title IV-E dollars to support school transportation. ABA Journal.
• National Association of Social Workers. (n.d.). Code of Ethics of the National Association of Social Workers.
• NFYIADMIN. (2017). 51 useful aging out of foster care statistics. National Foster Youth Institute.
• Editorial Team. (n.d.). Domestic adoptions rise slightly, despite overall decrease in adoption. Adoptive Families.