THE JOHN BURTON FOUNDATION

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2012

10:00 T O 11:30

Too Big to Ignore:Two Years Later

Will include cover of

new report

Webinar Technical Details

Call in phone number for live audio: (609) 318-0025; Access code: 696-673-107

To submit live questions, click on the “question and answer” arrow on your screen, type your question, and hit “send”.

Today’s Presenters

Amy Lemley, John Burton Foundation

Debbie Raucher, John Burton Foundation

Reed Connell, Alameda County Foster Youth Alliance

Heather Dearing, California Coalition for Youth

Shahera Hyatt, California Homeless Youth Project

Background

“Too Big to Ignore” outlined a statewide policy agenda

Collaboration between John Burton Foundation (JBF) and California Coalition for Youth (CCY)

Released November 2009

Can be downloaded at www.cahomelessyouth.org

The Report’s Three-Fold Purpose

To recommend 12 strategies to reduce youth

homelessness in California

To identify barriers

that have prevented

youth homelessness from

being addressed

To bring attention to

youth homelessnes

s in California

Purpose of Today’s Presentation

What has happened

since December

2009?

Has progress

been made?

What policies

have been changed?

Why or why not?

Summary of Progress

Notable progress: 7 out of 12 recommendations

No notable progress: 4 out of 12 recommendations

Condition worsened: 1 out of 12 recommendations

Recommendation #1:Building Funding Capacity

“Build the capacity for homeless youth providers to successfully apply for local,

state, and federal funding”

Rec. #1: Building Funding Capacity

2,500 hours of technical assistance provided through the Homeless Youth Capacity Building Project (HYCBP) to 193 youth-serving organizations

Indi

vidu

al C

onsu

ltatio

n

Group

Rou

ndta

ble

Regio

nal T

rain

ing

Web

Sem

inar

0

500

1000

1500

506

132

1182

681

T.A. Method

Hou

rs

Rec. #1: Building Funding Capacity

New public funding At least 7 organizations within HYCBP received large

public grants At least $7.3 million in total

New HUD rules: interim regulations for Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Program Provides definition of “homeless” Youth’s foster care history now considered risk factor

for homelessness Definition of “unstably housing” changed from “three

moves in 90 days” to “two moves in sixty days”

Recommendation #2:TAY & Permanent Funding

“Include the needs of homeless transition-age youth in the creation of a permanent funding source for housing development”

Rec. #2: TAY & Permanent Funding

JBF convened workgroup of homeless youth providers and nonprofit housing providers

Workgroup developed recommendations about how the needs of youth could be included in the agenda of the “Permanent Source Campaign”

Workgroup met with Housing California, the CA Department of Housing and Community Development, State Senate President pro-Tem Darrell Steinberg’s office and others

The level of awareness about the distinct housing needs of TAY was increased

Youth Recommendations Developed:

Rec. #2: TAY & Permanent Funding

JBF continues to support local and statewide efforts around permanent funding for affordable housing

Dissolution of Redevelopment agencies creates increased urgency

SB654 would help retain housing funds

Recommendation #3:Youth Homelessness Prevention

“Expand California’s investment and expertise in youth homelessness

prevention”

Rec. #3: Youth Homelessness Prevention

Senate Bill 123: California Runaway, Homeless and Exploited Youth Act (Liu) = halted Would have required the California Emergency Management

Agency (CalEMA) to develop a statewide plan to address youth homelessness

SB 123 passed out the Senate Human Services but was stalled in Senate Appropriations

CalEMA now proposed for elimination in 2012-13 Governor’s Budget

Back to the drawing board Senator Liu submitted request to CA Homeless Youth Project

to develop a preliminary state action plan for addressing youth homelessness – to be published spring 2012

Recommendation #4:Abused & Neglected Youth

“Better accommodate homeless youth whose circumstances meet the legal definition of abuse or neglect in the

foster care system”

Rec. #4: Abused & Neglected Youth

Homeless minors access Dreamcatcher Youth Shelter

Dreamcatcher screens for potential eligibility for foster care

Bay Area Legal Aid assists with making referral to Alameda County Social Services Agency for eligible minors

Project team evaluates process to ensure minors receive access to services from CWS if eligible

Innovative 2-year project: Alameda County AB 12 Homeless Youth Demonstration Project

Partners: Alameda County Foster Youth Alliance, Dreamcatcher Youth Shelter, Bay Area Legal Aid, Alameda County Social Services Agency, Alameda County Probation Department

Rec. #4: Abused & Neglected Youth

Presenting needs of 27 youth screened through the demonstration project:

20 youth had a diagnosed mental health disorder. 12 reported currently having health insurance (11 through

MediCal) 9 youth reported having been sexually exploited as a minor 8 youth asked to be tested for HIV 6 requested a doctor visit as soon as possible 6 reported currently using illicit drugs 2 needed immediate medical assistance 2  reported being a recent victim of violence 2 were pregnant 1 youth had a child but did not have custody

Rec. #4: Abused & Neglected Youth

Key Questions:

How many homeless minors were referred to Alameda County Department of Children & Family Services?

How many had cases opened?

What can we learn about why cases were opened and why they were not?

Rec. #4: Abused & Neglected Youth

Project will collect data and issue a summary report of findings to help other

counties achieve 2 goals:Reduce youth homelessness by improving the coordination

between homeless youth services and county CW agencies

Identify specific practice that can be utilized in counties across

California

Overall goals of the demonstration project:

Rec. #4: Abused & Neglected Youth

Youth-friendly foster care placement developed – The Supervised Independent Living Placement (SILP) Approved AB 12 placement for youth in extended foster care Allows youth to live in apartments, shared setting or student

housing while receiving their monthly federal foster care payment ($776)

Likely more appealing placement to homeless youth than traditional foster care placements

Special outreach to homeless youth Children’s Law Center and California Youth Connection

developed outreach plan to educate homeless youth and providers about extended foster care

Recommendation #5:SSI for Disabled Youth

“Increase access to SSI benefits for youth with disabilities”

Rec. #5: SSI for Disabled Youth

2008-2009 2010-20110.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

6.2%

10.5%

2008-2009 2010-201113.0%

13.5%

14.0%

14.5%

15.0%

15.5%

13.8%

15.3%

Percentage of Probation Youth Exiting with SSI in Place or Pending SSI

Application

Percentage of Foster Youth Exiting with SSI in Place or Pending SSI Application

Recommendation #6: Expand THP-Plus

“Expand California’s THP-Plus program to serve three out of five eligible homeless

former foster youth”

Rec. #6: Expand THP-Plus

THP-Plus budget reduced

Decrease in the number of former foster youth able to access safe, affordable housing and supportive services

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 -

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

650

1,568

2,314 2,245 2,209

Number of Youth Served by THP-Plus by Year

Rec. #6: Expand THP-Plus

Realignment of foster care and child welfare services

Shifts many functions from the state to the county level, motivated by the state budget deficit*

THP-Plus is now a county program – no longer funded by State General Fund

Counties can now determine whether the THP-Plus fund will remain with THP-Plus or be used for other child welfare activities

JBF is training THP-Plus providers on using data to advocate for THP-Plus to local decision-makers, including Board of Supervisors

*For more information on realignment, download JBF’s 1/25 webinar at http://www.cafosteringconnections.org/past.html

Recommendation #7:Extend Foster Care to 21

“Extend the upper age limit for foster care in California to age 21”

Rec. #7: Extend Foster Care to 21

Passage of extended foster care Assembly Bill 12 signed September 30, 2010 by Governor

Schwarzenegger AB 12 extended foster care in California:

to age 19 on January 1, 2012to age 20 on January 1, 2013to age 21 on January 1, 2014 contingent on legislative approval

Will prevent homelessness among thousands of youth in foster care

Most significant victory within the agenda developed by HYCBP

Recommendation #8: FUP Authorization

“Expand the federal Family Unification Program (FUP) authorization to better meet the needs of homeless transition-

aged foster youth”

Rec. #8: FUP Authorization

Growth in the number of FUP vouchers in California from 1992 to 2010:

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 -

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

272

6,937

Rec. #8: FUP Authorization

Knowledge of the Family Unification Program is building statewide

HYCBP webinar educating participants on how to apply for FUP was attended by 140 individuals

FUP has been a training topic at each of the transition-age youth conferences held by The California Wellness Foundation in 2009, 2010 and 2011

September 2011 HUD instructions clarify FUP tracking

Recommendation #9:Youth Shelter Regulations

“Develop alternate regulations for California’s Basic Center programs to ensure sustained Runaway and Homeless Youth Act funding”

Rec. #9: Youth Shelter Regulations

SB 119 (Lowenthal) – would require CDSS to create a new category of licensing for emergency youth shelters Received unanimous support, however, Cosponsors (JBF & CCY) were advised to work directly with

CDSS to explore alternatives to legislative mandate

Collaborative process to develop regulations CCY hosted meetings with CDSS, shelter operators and U.S.

HHS Representative Temporary solution anticipated to be developed within 9-12

months that will result in a more permanent licensing category

Recommendation #10:RHYA Appropriations

“Increase appropriations for the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act to $165 million annually and advocate for California to

receive funding in proportion to its population”

Rec. #10: RHYA Appropriations

Flat funding for Runaway & Homeless Youth Act, with a stated goal of $165 million

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

FY 2012

$114.0

$114.5

$115.0

$115.5

$116.0

$116.5

$114.7

$115.7$116.0

$115.0

RHYA Funding Levels

$ mil-lions

Recommendation #11:State Interagency Team

“Utilize the State Interagency Team for Children and Youth as the primary body

responsible for addressing youth homelessness at the state level”

Rec. #11: State Interagency Team

SIT Homeless Youth Workgroup The California Homeless Youth Project (HYP) met with

the SIT to request formation of a workgroup HYP to meet with the SIT again in late February

State Interagency Council on Homelessness Assembly Bill 1167 (Fong and Hill) calls for State

Interagency Council (but does not mention homeless youth as a distinct population requiring state attention)

Assemblymember Atkins convened the Select Committee on Homelessness

Recommendation #12: Research Agenda

“Pursue a research agenda on homeless youth”

Rec. #12: Research Agenda

California Homeless Youth Project Produces high-quality research on youth homelessness,

most recently: Programs Serving California's Homeless Youth: Results of

Point-in-Time Survey (January 2011) Struggling to Survive: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,

Transgender, and Queer/Questioning Youth on the Streets of California (March 2011)

Developing toolkit in collaboration with LAHSA for conducting Point-in-Time surveys of homeless youth (to be released spring 2012) This may improve the likelihood of a homeless youth count

for California and nationally – currently no well-substantiated calculations exist

Highlights

Implementation of extended

foster care (AB 12)

Increase in the number of FUP Vouchers in California

Increase in the proportion

of youth exiting foster care with SSI

in place

Efforts to implement alternative

regulations for California’s

Basic Center programs

Current Action Items

THP-Plus

• Advocate for Realignment legislation that protects children’s programming

• Educate BOS about effectiveness of THP-Plus

Youth Homelessness Prevention

• Advocate for AB 1167 • Stay tuned to Select Committee on

Homelessness to advocate for the inclusion of youth

Permanent Source • Advocate for passage of SB 654

Improving Child Welfare System’s Response to

Homeless Youth

• Contact JBF if your organization is interested in partnering in the Central Valley or Los Angeles

Download the Reports

“Too Big to Ignore” (2009)&

“Too Big to Ignore: Two Years Later” (2012)

can both be downloaded atwww.cahomelessyouth.org

Questions or Comments?

Enter your questions on your screen now by clicking the “question and answer” arrow, typing your question, and clicking “send”.

Or direct later questions or comments to:

Amy Lemleyamy@johnburtonfoundation.org

Debbie Raucherdebbie@johnburtonfoundation.org

Heather Dearingheather@calyouth.org

Reed Connellrconnell@fosteryouthalliance.org

Shahera Hyattshyatt@library.ca.gov