Search Type Title Author/Investigator Search Advanced Search

Table of Contents | Previous | Next

FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan

7. INCREASE SAFETY, PERMANENCY, AND WELL-BEING OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH

Approach for the Strategic Objective: Help children and youth while they are living with their own families, when appropriate. When necessary place children and youth in stable, family-like settings consistent with the needs of each child or youth. Support children and youth with developmental disabilities in individual and small group dwellings that will include them in community life.

7.1 CHILD WELFARE

Program Description, Context, Legislative Intent and Broad Program Goals

ACF funds a number of programs that focus on preventing maltreatment of children in troubled families, protecting children from abuse, and finding permanent placements for those who cannot safely return to their homes. Programs such as Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living provide stable environments for those children who cannot remain safely in their homes, assuring the child's safety and well-being while their parents attempt to resolve the problems that led to the out-of-home placement. When the family cannot be reunified, foster care provides a stable environment until the child can be placed permanently with an adoptive family. Adoption Assistance funds are available for a one-time payment for the costs of adopting a child as well as for monthly subsidies to adoptive families for care of the child.

The FY 2003 budget requests an increase in funds of $158.5 million for the Adoption Assistance program to support the adoption of eligible children with special needs. The amount requested, together with amounts requested for child welfare discretionary programs, will assist in achieving the performance goal of providing children with permanency and stability in their living situations and minimizing disruption to the continuity of family and other relationships through increasing the percentage of children who exit the foster care system and are adopted within two years of placement thereby making progress toward doubling the number of adoptions in the public foster care system.

The Adoption Incentives program was enacted into law by the bipartisan Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. The passage of this incentive program along with State, local and private initiatives focusing attention on the needs of children in foster care awaiting permanent adoptive families, are resulting in unprecedented increases in the number of children adopted from foster care.

The Adoption Opportunities program funds grants and contracts to public and private organizations to facilitate the elimination of barriers to adoption and to provide permanent, loving home environments for children who would benefit from adoption, particularly children with special needs. There are approximately 134,000 children in the public foster care system that cannot return safely to their own homes and parents. About 64,000 of these children are legally free and immediately available for adoption. Such children are typically school-aged, in sibling groups, have experienced neglect or abuse, or have a physical, mental, or emotional disability. While the children are of all ages and races, children of color and older children (over the age of 10) are over-represented. Demonstration grants are awarded through a competitive process to public and private non-profit agencies including State and local governments, universities and voluntary agencies.

The Child Welfare Services program funds grants to States and Indian Tribes to provide services to children and their families without regard to income. Family Preservation and Support Services, renamed Promoting Safe and Stable Families, focuses on strengthening families, preventing abuse, and protecting children. The FY 2003 request for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families program is an increase of $130 million over the FY 2002 enacted level. These grants help States and Tribes operate preventive family preservation services and community-based family support services for families at risk or in crisis, family reunification and adoption support services.

The Child Abuse and Neglect program assists States to meet their responsibilities for preventing and intervening in cases of child abuse and neglect. Discretionary funds generate knowledge and research, improve services, collect data, facilitate information dissemination and exchange, and support policy development and the education of professionals in the field. The FY 2003 request for Child Abuse Discretionary Activities is an increase of $201,000 over the FY 2002 appropriation. The additional funds in the FY 2003 request will be used to implement the fourth National Incidence Study on Child Abuse and Neglect. Funds from the Child Abuse Discretionary Activities program are used to conduct activities designed to assist and enhance national, State and community efforts to prevent, identify, and treat child abuse and neglect. The result of these funds will be to spur State and community level approaches to assist fathers to be more actively and productively involved in the lives of their children.

Mentoring children of prisoners, a newly-authorized Administration initiative, would provide $25 million for a discretionary program to provide competitive grants to State and local governments, Tribes and consortia and faith-based and community-based organizations. This new program will help children through the time parents are imprisoned, including efforts to keep children connected to a parent in prison, and increase the chances that the family can come together successfully when the parent is released. The arrest and incarceration of a parent often results in traumatic separations for children, followed frequently by erratic shifts from one caregiver to another. As a group, these children are less likely than their peers to succeed in school and more likely to succumb to substance abuse, gangs, early childbearing, and delinquency. Children of incarcerated mothers are particularly vulnerable, as these children typically come from households where the mother was the sole provider, making placement in foster care more likely when the mother is in prison.

The FY 2003 request of an additional $60 million for the Independent Living program will provide $5,000 vouchers for youth who "age out" of foster care for college tuition or vocational training. These vouchers would provide youth an additional resource to prepare for independent living, increasing the prospect that they will be able to secure work and become contributing members of society. ACF is placing increased emphasis on services for youth in foster care, particularly independent living services. Independent Living assists current or former foster care youths in the transition to independent living, education and employment assistance, training in daily living skills, and individual and group counseling. Nearly 16,000 young people leave foster care each year when they reach age 18 without an adoptive family or other guardian. Research indicates that these young people experience alarming rates of homelessness, early pregnancy, mental illness, unemployment and drug use in the first years after they leave the system. (This program should not be confused with the "Increase Independent Living" included in strategic goal 1 objective 2 in this annual performance plan; 1.2, focuses on achieving independence by helping developmentally disabled individuals rent or own their own homes in the mainstream community.)

The Congress established the Infant Adoption Awareness Program in FY 2001. This program's major role is to award grants to develop and implement programs to train staff of health centers to provide adoption information and referrals to pregnant women on an equal basis with all other courses of action included in non-directive counseling to pregnant women.

Other ACF programs that address child welfare are: the Abandoned Infants Assistance program, enforcement of the Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 and the Interethnic Adoption provisions of 1996, and State Child Welfare Reform Demonstrations (24 Demonstrations in 21 States and the District of Columbia, to date) to test innovative new ways to strengthen the child welfare system.

Program Activities, Strategies and Resources

ACF has undertaken a number of activities designed to improve overall performance in child welfare. Most significant is the publication in January 2000 of final regulations pertaining to aspects of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA), including regulations about foster care eligibility reviews and child and family services State plan reviews. Central and Regional Office staff have undertaken a major initiative to provide training and technical assistance to States regarding the regulatory requirements and improvement of their child welfare services systems.

As part of this training and technical assistance, ten Child Welfare Resource Center cooperative agreements focus on providing training and technical assistance to States and local agencies around issues pertaining to the implementation of ASFA. The Resource Centers focus on permanency planning, adoption, family-centered practice, youth development, legal issues, abandoned infants, organizational development, child maltreatment, community-based family resource services, and information technology.

On January 25, 2000, DHHS published a final rule in the Federal Register to establish new approaches to monitoring State child welfare programs. The rule focuses on results in the areas of safety, permanency and child and family well-being; strengthens the penalty and corrective action processes for the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA), as amended, regarding discrimination and adoptive and foster care placements; regulates provisions of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) of 1997, and the Federal foster care program; and updates the review process for the Federal foster care program. The new rule plays an important role in improving services to, and outcomes for, abused and neglected children, children in foster care, and children awaiting adoptive families. The focus on outcomes in the child and family service reviews builds on the outcome measures developed to meet the requirements of section 479a of title IV-E of the Social Security Act. It will promote increased safety for children who are maltreated; quicker movement to permanent homes and families for children in foster care; and enhanced well-being for families served by State agencies.

The rule addresses two monitoring activities: the Child and Family Services (CFS) review and the title IV-E eligibility review. The CFS review will address two areas: (1) outcomes for children and families in the areas of safety, permanency, and child and family well-being; and (2) systemic factors that directly impact the State's capacity to deliver services leading to improved outcomes. Each outcome is evaluated by using specific performance indicators as follows:

Safety Outcomes:

• Children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect.
• Children are safely maintained in their homes whenever possible and appropriate.

Permanency Outcomes:

• Children have permanency and stability in their living situations.
• The continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved for children.

Child and Family Well-Being Outcomes:

• Families have enhanced capacity to provide for their children's needs.
• Children receive appropriate services to meet their educational needs.
• Children receive adequate services to meet their physical and mental health needs.

The systemic factors being reviewed are related to the State's ability to deliver services leading to improved outcomes. The systemic factors include: 1) statewide information systems; 2) the case review system; 3) quality assurance system; 4) staff and provider training; 5) service array; 6) agency responsiveness to the community; and 7) foster and adoptive parent licensing, recruitment and retention.

The new CFS monitoring process is both a substantial improvement and a substantial challenge. While it is much more difficult to determine whether a child is safe than it is to determine, for example, that a date on a court order meets specified time frames, ACF believes the new monitoring process is better and more likely to yield findings that will help States improve those processes where needed. Seventeen States were reviewed in FY 2001. The remaining States will be reviewed by FY 2003.

In FY 2002-2003, ACF will continue to emphasize the improvement of data systems and data reporting in child welfare. ACF plans to increase the number of States with operational Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information Systems (SACWIS). ACF also plans to increase the number of States submitting penalty-free Adoption and Foster Care Reporting and Analysis System (AFCARS) data from 25 to 35 through the provision of technical assistance. In addition, a number of SACWIS and AFCARS reviews will be completed. Finally, activities are underway for developing performance and outcome measures for the Independent Living Program.

To achieve the results embodied in the performance measures, ACF requires qualified staff knowledgeable about the child protection and child welfare system in the States; data systems, computers, communications technology; statistical staff to monitor progress towards the goals; and ACF regional and central office staff experienced in working with States as partners. To meet the immediate need, ACF hired 22 new staff in FY 2001. Finally, ACF continues to work with the States to conduct various data verification, title IV-E, and child and family services reviews.

States continue to substantially exceed performance expectations in the Adoption Incentive Program. This program, authorized by ASFA, provides incentive funds for each adoption finalized in a fiscal year beyond the established baseline number of adoptions.

Finally, ACF is embarking on a set of activities that will make use of performance-based outcome measures. These include the incorporation of outcome measures into the CFS reviews to determine State compliance with statutory provisions; the publication of the second annual report on Child Welfare Outcomes for the States; and the use of AFCARS data in sampling for both the CFS reviews and the title IV-E reviews. ACF's achievements in its focus on outcomes in child welfare activities have been recognized through its selection as one of 15 finalists out of 3,000 applicants in Harvard University's Innovations in American Government competition.

Program Coordination, Partnerships and Cross-cutting Issues

Ultimately, decisions about placing children are made by judges in juvenile and family court systems throughout the nation. Improved judicial handling of child welfare cases will be essential to achieving permanency goals for children. Children in the child welfare system have many medical and mental health problems, while many of their parents are incapacitated by chronic substance abuse, mental health problems, homelessness, limited education, and other problems. The availability of services from other sectors to meet these needs is uneven. The expansion or contraction of services in various parts of the country will affect our performance. Major changes in assistance programs for low-income families as part of welfare reform will also have an unknown impact on the child welfare system over the next several years.

To ensure that activities are coordinated with Federal partners which provide many of these services, ACF works closely on achieving its goals with the Department of Justice, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program and other national agencies and organizations whose responsibilities overlap with child welfare services.

In developing and implementing the Family Preservation and Support Program (now reauthorized as the "Promoting Safe and Stable Families" program), and implementing ASFA, ACF conducted and continues to conduct a broad-based consultation process with a wide range of policy experts, advocates, foster and adoptive parents, and other interested individuals to ground its examination of strategies and issues in the daily experiences of participants in the child welfare system.

An example of the comprehensive approach ACF uses to obtain consultation in the child welfare area is the approach taken to develop performance outcome measures required by ASFA. In August 1998, ACF established a consultation group including representatives from State, Tribal, county, and municipal child welfare agencies; private non-profit child and family services agencies; State legislatures; Governors' offices; juvenile and family courts; local child advocacy organizations; and a national public employees' union. Also invited to serve as resources to the consultation group were representatives from several national organizations including the American Bar Association's Center on Children and the Law, the American Public Human Services Association, the Child Welfare League of America, the Children's Defense Fund, the National Association of Child Advocates, the National Center for Juvenile Justice, the National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, and the National Governors' Association.

Staff from ACF, the Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF), and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (OASPE) were also included in the consultation process. Department staff participating were those with expertise in child welfare services, outcome measurement for assessing system performance, national child welfare databases, and performance-based incentive systems.

As a result of this consultative process, the Department published a preliminary list of child welfare outcomes and measures in the Federal Register for public comment on February 2, 1999. Based on an analysis of the comments received, the Department made numerous changes to the preliminary list of outcomes and measures. On August 20, 1999, the Department published a final list of outcomes and measures in the Federal Register.

Program-wide Performance

ACF met the goals for four of the ten measures for which FY 2000 data are currently (December 2001) available. Over 58,000 (67 percent) children who exited the foster care through reunification did so within one year of placement (7.1c). The total number of adoptions continues to increase although at a more moderate rate. The total number of adoptions in FY 2000 was 50,000 which exceeds the target by 4,000 (7.1f). The median time to adoption also dropped to essentially meet the target of 39 months (7.1h). Although entered in the table as 40 months for FY 2000, the actual number was 39.68 months. Finally, the goal of 18 percent (8,200) for adoptions by relatives was met (7.1k). Two additional measures showed movement in the right direction. The adoption time difference between white and African-American children dropped from 19 months in FY 1999 to 14 months in FY 2000, only one month more than the target of 13 months (7.1i). In addition, the adoption time difference between white children and Hispanic children also dropped from 5 months to 4 months (7.1j).

Increasing the percentage of children who exit care through adoption within two years of placement (7.1d) showed some minimal movement in the right direction, from 19 percent to 20 percent (2,500). This measure continues to be affected by the adoption of children who have been in the system for a long time. However, as longer-term cases are cleared out of the system and as the required ASFA review for appropriateness of termination of parental rights are implemented, it is expected that the percentage of children who exit care through adoption within two years of placement will increase. Even with this expectation, we felt it necessary to reduce the FY 2002 goal from 28 percent to 25 percent to be more realistic.

Increase exits through guardianships (7.1e) is still plagued by weakness in the data. Guardianship, as a reason for discharge, has generally been under-reported and does not even exist as a discharge reason in some States. Therefore, the goals for this measure have been reduced for FY 2002 from 67 percent to 60 percent to be more realistic. However, we expect the reporting of guardianships to improve for a number of reasons. First, the use of guardianship as an exit strategy for relative foster care appears to be growing primarily for. children who may have been in a relative care placement for a long period of time and many States wish to track it. Second, AFCARS reviews have identified problems in the coding of guardianships in a limited number of States and those States have taken action to correct the problems. Third, the Data Profile component of the Statewide Assessment used in the Child and Family Services Reviews emphasizes discharge reasons. When a State identifies problems with the reporting of guardianships or other discharge reasons in their profile, they review their data and frequently re-submit it. Early indications are that this process has generated improved data for those States that underwent CFS reviews in FY 2001 and are in the process of undergoing CFS reviews in FY 2002. Finally, the ACF funded National Resource Center for Information Technology in Child Welfare is providing intensive technical assistance to States undergoing CFS reviews, particularly in relation to the Data Profile in the Statewide Assessment. We expect this technical assistance to result in an overall improvement in the reporting of discharge reasons.

Finally, because of the consistency in this measure over time, ACF believes that reducing the mean number of placement settings per episode to 2.0 is unrealistic (measure 7.1l). A new measure will be used in FY 2003 that is better able to capture the concern about child well-being while in foster care (measure 7.1m). The FY 2002 goal for that measure has been reduced from 74 percent to 60 percent to be more realistic given the historical data which we now have to use in setting the goal.

Measures Dropped in FY 2001

In 1997, Congress passed the Adoption and Safe Families Act (PL 105-89). Among other provisions designed to improve the child welfare system and protect children, it directs the Secretary of DHHS to consult with governors, State legislatures, and State and local public officials responsible for administering child welfare programs and develop a set of outcome measures for rating the performance of States in operating child protection and child welfare programs. (See Section on Program Coordination, Partnerships and Cross-cutting Issues for a detailed description of the process.) Based on this consultation, additional close examination of each of the measures for methodological and programmatic soundness, the need to use the same measures when operationalizing the same concept in each of the major activities related to performance outcomes (the annual report, child and family services reviews, and GPRA), we made a number of changes in measures for FY (CY) 2001 as discussed below.

• Replaced measures 7.1b with 7.1a -- Methodologically, by using the six month time period all the data will come from one NCANDS report period resulting in usable data being available from more States. In addition, data will be available in a timelier manner. Programmatically, research has shown that most recurrences of substantiated maltreatment occur within six months following the first substantiated report of maltreatment. Finally, this measure will now be consistent in the three major activities using performance outcomes.
• Dropped measure 7.1h -- This measure is being dropped because another measure, measure 7.1d operationalizes the same concept, speeding up adoptions, and is used in the other two major performance outcome activities.
• Dropped measures 7.1i and 7.1j -- These measures are not programmatically sound because they can be used to justify policies that are inconsistent with the best interests of minority children and in conflict with a statutory requirement. The differences in median length of stay between white and minority children can be accounted for, in part, by the more extensive use of relative care for minority children in foster care which is directly related to the number of assisted guardianships by relatives and adoptions by relatives. Because children in relative care tend to have longer lengths of stay than children in non-relative care, failure to show improvement in these measures could result in advocating the placement of minority children in non-relative care. This would not be in the best interests of children and is inconsistent with the statutory requirement (section 471(a)(19) of title IV-E of the Social Security Act) for relative preference in foster care placement and adoption.
• Added measure 7.1k -- This measure was developed to asses the outcome of adoptions by relatives to be less affected by major changes in policy and practice by a few large states. An analysis of the change between FY 1998 and FY 1999 in this measure showed that 28 States either increased their proportion of adoptions by relatives or their number of adoptions by relatives. We are setting a goal of 20 states in FY 2003, because of the four-year lag time between what we currently know and FY 2003. We expect that during this period many relative foster care placements will become adoptions and may make the overall potential for relative adoptions decline slightly
• Replaced measure 7.1l with 7.1m -- Methodologically, using a mean to measure stability in foster care placement settings decreases the ability to detect change because the denominator is so large, above 800,000. The new measure should be more sensitive to change and is also the measure used in the other two performance outcome activities.

Data Issues

Both AFCARS and the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) conduct extensive edit checks for internal reliability. For AFCARS, if a State's data fail certain edit checks, the State incurs a financial penalty. An additional 700-edit checks are conducted to improve data quality. All edit check programs are shared with the States. Compliance reviews for AFCARS are currently being piloted and State SACWIS systems are undergoing reviews to determine the status of their operation. As these reporting systems improve, the operationalization of various outcomes has become more refined. Furthermore, as the number of jurisdictions (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) reporting has increased from 32 in FY1995 to 49 in FY 2000 for foster care and from 29 in FY 1995 to 52 in FY 1999 for adoption, the values of the measures change and they more accurately reflect the total population. Because of this improvement in reporting, no data prior to FY 1998 (CY 1998 for measures 7.1.a-b) are being included in examining trends.

To speed improvement in these data, the agency has awarded funds to develop and implement the National Resource Center for Information Technology in Child Welfare. This Resource Center provides technical assistance to States to improve reporting to AFCARS and NCANDS, improve statewide information systems, and better utilize their data. These activities should result in further improvements in the data over the next few years.

Being able to report data in a timely manner is critical in guiding program improvement to achieve outcomes. The following summarizes why AFCARS foster care data are not available until eight months after the September 30 point-in-time date. AFCARS foster care data for September 30 of any year, under regulation, are reported by the States to ACF electronically by November 14. The data are processed, assessed for errors and compliance with regulatory standards and the results are transmitted back to the States. In order to avoid a financial penalty, States have until March 31 to re-submit their data. The resubmitted data are then processed and the data are made available to the statistical analysts in May. The analysts review the data to determine which States' data are useable in this plan.

The AFCARS adoption data take a longer time to become available because States can submit data on any finalized adoption at anytime without incurring a financial penalty. Frequently, adoption data are not entered into State information systems for some time after the adoption because the entry does not occur until the final paperwork is received from the court. For example, over 3,800 adoptions finalized in FY 1999 were not reported until the first reporting period in FY 2000, or by May 15, 2000. Because of the requirement of the Adoption Incentive Program that only adoptions reported by the first reporting period in the following fiscal year can be counted for incentive awards, almost all adoptions are now reported within that timeframe, though there are still a small number which are reported in subsequent reporting periods. After data are received (in this case by May 15 of the following year), they still must be downloaded, converted to analytical files and cleaned before they can be included in the plan.

The NCANDS data take even longer to become available. First, NCANDS is a voluntary system, and, therefore, States do not incur penalties for not reporting or reporting data late. More important for this discussion, however, is that reporting only occurs once per year which delays the calculation of recurrence. For example for a 12-month recurrence rate, for FY 2000 a first report could occur as late as December 31, 2000. To count as a recurrence, a second report can be received as late as December 2001. The NCANDS data are then complied by the States, Transmitted to the contractor, converted to analytical files, de-duplicated and cleaned before they are available to include in the plan. By changing the measure to recurrence within six months, the timeline is shortened by one year because the first occurrence can occur during the first six months of the year and the second occurrence only has to occur during the second six months of the year of interest. This makes the data available in early fall of the subsequent year.

Performance Measures for FY 2003 and Final Measures for FY 2002

In collaboration with States, Tribes, advocacy groups, foundations and others, ACF has developed new program monitoring procedures that focus on the quality of child welfare services and the outcomes for children and families. These reviews will be implemented through Federal/State partnerships. Following these reviews, States will receive immediate feedback on the extent to which their programs are achieving the stated goals.

PROGRAM GOAL - SAFETY: Children are protected from abuse and neglect in their homes. The risk of harm to children will be minimized.

7.1b.	FY 2002: Decrease the percentage of children with substantiated reports of maltreatment who have a repeat substantiated report of maltreatment within 6 months from 8% in CY 1998 to 7% in CY 2002.
	FY 2003: Decrease the percentage of children with substantiated reports of maltreatment who have a repeat substantiated report of maltreatment within 6 months from 8% in CY 1998 to 7% in CY 2003.
	Data Source: National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS)

PROGRAM GOAL - PERMANENCY: Provide children foster care permanency and stability in their living situations.

 

These performance indicators (measures 7.1b-d and 7.1m) are reflective of a series of efforts to focus on outcomes in child welfare. They are being used in two places where they are having substantial impact on State practice. First they are being used in the Annual Child Welfare Outcomes report. This report required under section 479b of title IV-E of the Social Security Act contains data for each State on a variety of outcome measures. In addition, these measures are being used in the Child and Family Services Reviews and failure to meet the standards associated with them can result in a State's being found not to be in substantial conformity with the State plan requirements in title IV-B and IV-E of the Social Security Act. The National Resource Centers funded by the Children's Bureau are offering technical assistance to States to help them improve the services they deliver to children and their families and to meet the State plan requirements.

This measure is being used in the Annual Child Welfare Outcomes report and technical assistance being provided in association with the Child and Family Services Reviews is focusing on all aspects of permanency, including guardianship. (See previous discussion under Program Activities, Strategies and Resources for more detail.) Note: Targets for both FY 2002 and 2003 are increases over actual FY 1999 performance. This measure continues to be affected by weaknesses in the data: guardianship, as a reason for discharge, has generally been under-reported and does not even exist as a discharge reason in some States.

7.1f.	FY 2002: Make progress towards increasing the number of adoptions of children in the public foster care system between FY 1998 and FY 2002 by increasing adoptions from 36,000 in FY 1998 to 56,000.
	FY 2003: Increase the number of adoptions to 58,500.
	Data Source: Baselines from the Adoption Incentive Program and the Adoption 2002 Initiative for FY 1997 and AFCARS for all subsequent years.

The implementation of the termination of parental rights provision of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) is expected to increase the total number of adoptions of children from the foster care system. In addition, the statute created the Adoption Incentive Program that provides incentive funds to States that increase the number of finalized adoptions over the State's baseline. The National Resource Centers and Federal staff are providing technical assistance to States to help them implement both of these activities.

New - Developmental

7.1g.	Twenty states will either increase the number of adoptions by relatives or the proportion of the adoptions by relatives over those in FY 2002.
	Data Source: AFCARS.

Adoption by relatives is seen as a positive permanency outcome for children who cannot live with their parents. A previous measure of relative adoption was very sensitive to policy and practice changes in a few large States. This measure will more accurately measure the national trend in relative adoption.

PROGRAM GOAL - FAMILY AND CHILD WELL-BEING: Minimize the disruption to the continuity of family and other relationships.

7.1m.	FY 2002: For those children who have been in care less than 12 months, increase the percentage who had no more than two placement settings to 60%.
	FY 2003: For those children who have been in care less than 12 months, increase the percentage who had not more than two placement settings to 62%.
Data Source: AFCARS

 

PROGRAM GOAL - PREPARE FOSTER CARE YOUTH FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING: (a) enhance the education, employment and other skills of foster care youth to avoid dependency; and (b) expand opportunities for youth to achieve self-sufficiency while under the auspices of the public child welfare agency.

In FY 2000, Congress passed legislation authorizing a substantial increase in funds for independent living services for foster care youth under title IV-E of the Social Security Act. These services prepare them for independent living by enhancing their education, employment and other skills to avoid dependency; and by expanding opportunities for youth to live independently while under the auspices of the public child welfare agency. This legislation requires developing and implementing outcome measures and a data collection system for this program.

In FY 2001-2002, ACF will develop and implement the methodology to determine the baselines for the number of foster care youth receiving independent living services and/or living independently under the auspices of the public child welfare agency and develop preferred outcome measures for independent living programs. The baseline will be established for FY 2003 and the first target will be set for FY 2004.

7.2 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (EDUCATION)

The DD education goal is: "Increase the number of students with developmental disabilities who reach their educational goals." This goal includes the following outcomes: "Students with developmental disabilities have educational experiences based on their individual needs and goals and have access to an array of educational opportunities in their neighborhood schools. Parents know their rights regarding their children's education. Educators are prepared to educate all students and public policy supports appropriate education."

(See information under 1.2 Developmental Disabilities - General for description of partnerships, data issues, strategies and resources.)

Program-wide Performance

Performance for the measure "the number of students with developmental disabilities served in more integrated /inclusive educational settings" (measure 7.2a) has experienced significant increases and decreases in years prior to FY 1999. These fluctuations have been caused by the use of varying methodology from State to State and from year to year as States gained experience in making projections and collecting performance data. For that reason, FY 1999 has been selected for the baseline year. In FY 2000, Protection and Advocacy (P&A) systems in all 56 States and Territories reported results (defined as 50 or more students) for a total of 10,054 students with developmental disabilities served in more integrated/inclusive educational settings as a result of P&A system intervention. This performance is consistent with FY 1999 results and exceeded the FY 2000 target by 1,254 students. P&A interventions included counseling parents on advocating for their children, negotiating better placements, counseling school systems on the rights of students with disabilities, administrative remedies, and, in extreme cases, litigation.

Performance Measures for FY 2003 and Final Measures for FY 2002

Performance for this measure is affected by a number of factors including the impact of the economy on the cost of providing educational services to people with disabilities, the impact of social attitudes regarding the desirability and potential for people with developmental disabilities to learn in the least restrictive environment, and funding priorities in individual States.

The above issues combined with data collection and interpretation difficulties continue to create instability in the data. ACF is providing technical assistance to State programs to improve data stability and programmatic outcomes. The fiscal year targets for this performance measure are provided by State P&As in January of that fiscal year.

PROGRAM GOAL: Increase the number of students with developmental disabilities who reach their educational goals.

Objective: Increase the number of students with disabilities who are served in more integrated/inclusive educational settings.

7.2a.	FY 2002: Increase to 11,500 the number of students with developmental disabilities who are served in more integrated/inclusive educational settings as a result of DD program intervention.
	FY 2003: Increase to 11,600 the number of students with developmental disabilities who are served in more integrated/inclusive educational settings as a result of DD program intervention.
Data Source: P&A annual Program Performance Report (PPR)

 

Because the perceived cost of providing an education in less restrictive environments is high, we have limited ability to accurately project performance. Our efforts are focused on achieving gradual improvement for this measure.

To accomplish this goal, the States work with three different program delivery approaches. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities (SCDD) works to create systems change within the education systems, including demonstration of more desirable models. Educational and research efforts contribute to improving public and professional opinion on education for persons with developmental disabilities involving both the State Council and the Centers on Disabilities/University Affiliated Programs (UAPs). Protection and Advocacy Programs have worked to ensure that the rights of students with developmental disabilities to a free and appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment are protected.

7.3 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES (HEALTH)

The DD health care goal is: "Improve the health of people with developmental disabilities and increase their access to the full range of needed health care services." This goal includes the following outcomes: "Individuals with developmental disabilities and their families have access to the health care information they need to make choices. Health care for people with developmental disabilities is available, affordable, accessible, and equitable. Health care personnel are appropriately qualified to meet the health care needs of people with developmental disabilities."

(See information under 1.2 Developmental Disabilities - General for description of partnerships, data issues, strategies and resources.)

Program-wide Performance

There have been concerns with fluctuations in the data prior to FY 1998 for Performance Measure 7.3a due to varying methodology used by UCDs. Some of these fluctuations occurred as UCDs gained experience in making projections and collecting performance data. For that reason, FY 1998 has been selected as the baseline year. Performance for this measure is affected by a number of factors including the impact of the economy on the cost of providing health care generally, and especially to people with disabilities; the impact of social attitudes regarding the desirability and potential for people with developmental disabilities to benefit from full access to health care and the attitudes of health care providers toward this special needs population.

The above issues combined with difficulties in data collection and interpretation have created instability in the performance data. ACF's technical assistance to University programs has helped to improve data stability and programmatic outcomes.In FY 1999, UCDs reported 4,100 health care providers trained to meet the needs of people with developmental disabilities, In FY 2000, UCDs reported 4,032 health care providers trained to meet the needs of people with developmental disabilities a decrease of 68 trained. This slight decrease may be due to increased costs facing UCDs.

Performance Measures for FY 2003 and Final Measures for FY 2002

Performance for this measure in FY 2002 is projected to increase from the actual level in FY 2000, but decrease from the target of 5,000 set for FY 2001. This decrease is based on the flat funding for core support of UCDs making it difficult to attract additional trainees. The lower targets for FY 2002 and FY 2003 are based on actual performance in FY 2000.

PROGRAM GOAL: Improve the health of people with developmental disabilities and increase their access to the full range of needed health care services.

Objective: Increase the number of health care providers trained to meet the health needs of people with developmental disabilities.

This measure focuses on the access to proper health care for persons with developmental disabilities. Because so few health care professionals are aware of the special health care needs of persons with developmental disabilities, there is a significant need for training. Actual performance remains unstable, largely due to changes in allocation of training resources, but we believe there is potential for gradual improvement.

Three programs in the States combine to provide a comprehensive approach to accomplishing this target. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities (SCDD) works to create systems change within the health care systems, including demonstration of more desirable models. Education and research efforts strive to improve public and professional opinion on health care, involving both the State Council and the Centers on Disabilities/University Affiliated Programs. The University Centers on Disabilities are the main providers of training to health care professionals. Protection and Advocacy Programs have worked to ensure that the rights of patients with developmental disabilities are protected.

7.4 YOUTH PROGRAMS

Program Description, Context, Legislative Intent and Broad Program Goals

Legislative Intent and Broad Program Goals: The Runaway and Homeless Youth (RHY) Program began in 1974 in response to concern about increasing numbers of runaway youth exposed to exploitation and the dangers of street life. It has subsequently been expanded to assist homeless youth both on a short-term basis and in making the transition to independent living. Fundamental to ACF's approach to youth programs is the concept of positive youth development, which values the contributions young people can make, their strengths and abilities. This approach maintains that youth nurtured by caring adults, given opportunities to become involved in work or education that builds their skills, supported and protected during challenging times, and actively engaged in service to the community can become valuable contributors to the quality of community life.

The RHY Program, reauthorized under the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act of 1999, funds approximately 640 grants for three community-based service programs to help runaway and homeless youth: the Basic Center Program (BCP), the Transitional Living Program for Homeless Youth (TLP), and the Street Outreach Program (SOP - also known as Sexual Abuse Prevention Grants). The Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB) administers the RHY programs.

In FY 2003, ACF is requesting $10 million to fund approximately 80 new Maternity Group Home applicants. These funds will provide young pregnant and parenting women with access to community-based maternity group homes through the use of targeted grants to local communities or faith-based organizations. Grantees will be providing a range of coordinated services such as childcare, education, job training, counseling and advice on parenting and life skills to young mothers. Funding for these maternity group homes will provide pregnant and parenting homeless youth access to transitional living opportunities, an alternative to the environments of violence and despair which many young pregnant mothers face and secure brighter futures for their children.

The FY 2002 appropriation for RHY programs is $88.1 million dollars. Under the statute, at least 90 percent of that amount must be spent on service grants. The balance supports a national hot line for runaways, an information clearinghouse, demonstration projects, data collection, on site program monitoring, and other support functions.

• BCP supports local youth shelters that provide emergency shelter, food, clothing, counseling, crisis intervention, and other services for runaway and homeless youth. The shelters try to help reunite youth with their families whenever appropriate and in the best interest of the youth, or arrange for alternative, appropriate and stable living situations.
• TLP was developed in response to the longer-term needs of older homeless youth (ages 16 to 21). The TLP helps such youth develop skills and resources to promote independence and prevent future dependency on social services. Housing and a range of services are provided for up to 18 months for youth unable to return to their homes.
• SOP awards additional resources to organizations serving runaway, homeless, and street youth so they may provide street-based outreach and education to support these young people and prevent their sexual abuse and exploitation.

Program Context:

The size and composition of the young homeless population varies with the economy, local and national demographics, community viability, school quality, family dynamics, and other factors. Many youth served in the RHY programs seek assistance because of problems with parental substance abuse, emotional, sexual and/or physical abuse and neglect, or other adolescent/parental relationship issues. Others are caught up in the turmoil of adolescence and need support in coping with the stresses in their lives. These factors complicate service delivery, aftercare follow-up, and achievement of desirable outcomes.

Estimates of the number of runaway and homeless youth in the U.S. vary, ranging from 500,000 to 1.5 million. The Research Triangle Institute projected that 2.8 million youth living in households in the United States reported a runaway experience during the prior year (1995). The RHY programs are able to shelter and provide face-to-face services to approximately 55,000 to 75,000 youth annually (as counted by formal enrollments in the Runaway and Homeless Youth Management Information System).

The three year RHY grants (See "Program-wide Performance" for typical amounts) generally provide only a small portion of the resources needed by grantee organizations, who blend or braid support from numerous public and private funding sources, including other federal programs. Many RHY grantees conduct fundraising among private individual, philanthropic and corporate supporters in the local community. Because these sources have their own rules and reporting requirements, this creates an administrative challenge for smaller agencies whose principal mission is service delivery. In particular, smaller RHY agencies may experience extensive professional staff turnover, have limited resources and rely primarily on volunteers.

Program Activities, Strategies and Resources:

Positive Youth Development: While all too many young people are in high-risk situations such as homelessness, there is plenty of good news about America's youth. In recent years, overall trends in crime, risky behavior, drug use, and teen pregnancy have been significantly downward and trends in academic performance, volunteerism, employment, and healthy relationships with parents have been upward. (See "A Profile of America's Youth" at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb/youthinfo/profile.htm.) These positive changes took place during strong economic growth and in a relatively smaller, post-baby-boom population of young people but will be difficult to sustain if the economic downturn continues straining resources, services and opportunities.

Over the past several years, FYSB has sponsored efforts to broaden and re-focus the agency's mission upon "positive youth development." This approach encourages communities to provide the settings and services needed for young persons' healthy growth and development. In many cases, problem behaviors are prevented where healthy alternatives and settings are available. The following "life and character components" are essential in the development of youth working toward a successful and productive adulthood:

• Safe and stable living situations, with access to necessities such as health promotion and treatment;
• A sense of usefulness, industry and competence, of being able to contribute and do something well;
• A sense of connectedness and belonging, of being part of a community and having relationships with caring adults; and
• A sense of power, of having control over one's fate and future.

These components are integrated into the structure of this performance plan (see "Summary Table").

If these factors are addressed at the same time as basic needs--such as safety, security, good nutrition and access to health care and other essential services--are fulfilled, young people can engage constructively in their communities and society. A brochure produced by FYSB and its partners, "Toward a Blueprint for Youth: Making Positive Youth Development a National Priority," defines positive youth development, addresses key elements, provides examples from Federal programs, and calls for a concerted effort by public and private agencies, communities, and individuals. (The brochure may be found at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/fysb/youthinfo/blueprint.htm.) For additional information, refer to the section "Program Coordination, Partnerships and Cross-Cutting Issues".

Program Support: The total amount of funding for FY 2001 was $84.1 million. In addition to administering (with regional office involvement) approximately $75.7 million in FY 2001 for the nationwide network of RHY grantees, soliciting and evaluating applications for funding and making awards accordingly, FYSB used another $8.4 million in FY 2001 to provide program support. The legislative formula mandates at least 90 percent of the appropriation for direct services.

FYSB's partners in the regional offices monitor RHY services to improve overall program quality and ensure the attainment of measurable results. This monitoring includes on-site visits by regional office staff (supported by trained peer reviewers) to each grantee every three years. Technical assistance and training to help improve the quality of services by grantees are provided through a network of ten organizations, one in each region operating under cooperative agreements. All grantees have access to their services.

FYSB funds the National Runaway Switchboard, a twenty-four hour, seven-day hotline staffed by trained multi-lingual counselors, who listen to and counsel youth in crisis situations and connect them with appropriate services (http://www.nrscrisisline.org/). The National Clearinghouse on Families and Youth (http://www.ncfy.com) provides extensive information and analytical resources to FYSB and the field, publishes newsletters and other documents, exhibits at conferences, and responds to inquiries. Information dissemination also takes place through websites maintained by FYSB, NCFY, the Switchboard, and the technical assistance providers.

During FY 2001, FYSB has continued to refine and install a more streamlined and relevant data collection system (with a new user interface). The RHY Management Information System is for use by all RHY grantees. Regional staff, NCFY experts, and representatives of the runaway and homeless youth service field worked on the RHYMIS with FYSB and its information technology contractor. Grantees have welcomed the simplified instrument (as well as a reduction of the reporting schedule from quarterly to semi-annually) enthusiastically. These changes will produce better data both for GPRA and for FYSB's Report to Congress, and provide information for grantees' use in their own jurisdictions. (More information under data issues, below.)

Program Coordination, Partnerships and Cross-cutting Issues:

In the first quarter of FY 2001, FYSB and a wide range of youth-serving partners within and beyond the Federal government published the statement of principles: "Towards a Blueprint for Youth: Making Positive Youth Development a National Priority." Following publication, the Federal partners (including the Departments of Labor, Justice, Education, Agriculture, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and other DHHS agencies) continued discussions on how to advance the initiative, such as exploring ways to improve interagency coordination on program announcements, technical assistance, and research related to positive youth development.

Since September 1998, with financial participation by the ACF Children's Bureau, FYSB has funded State Youth Development Collaboration Projects to support innovative youth development strategies and capacity building at the State level. The five-year grants enable the States to develop new, or strengthen existing, youth development infrastructures, partnerships and policies. These efforts focus on all youth, including those at-risk, such as runaway and homeless youth, those leaving the foster care system, abused and neglected children, and others served by the child welfare and juvenile justice systems.

FYSB and the ACF Children's Bureau are entering the seventh year of a collaborative partnership to promote the youth development philosophy and approach in services to foster care and homeless youth, with particular reference to expanded funding under the Chaffee Independent Living Program (ILP). FYSB's TLP grantees have valuable experience in helping disadvantaged older youth transition to a healthy and productive adulthood; thus, FYSB is helping CB's ILP connect with these community resources.

FYSB works with agencies across DHHS and other public, private, and non-profit entities to encourage use of the youth development framework in providing effective services to young people through the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Working Group and groups directed at the problem of homelessness, adolescent health, HIV prevention among street youth, and others.

Program-wide Performance

In FY 2001, through an extensive, competitive application review process. FYSB funded 369 Basic Center Programs (BCP), 112 Transitional Living Programs (TLP), 142 Street Outreach Programs (SOP), and 13 State Youth Development Collaboration Grants. Over 400 nonprofit organizations or public agencies operate the community-based programs. The average annual grant for these programs is $117,000 for BCPs, $195,000 for TLPs and $100,000 for SOPs.

During FY 2001, 55,000 to 75,000 runaway or homeless youths were reported "admitted to services" as counted by formal enrollments in the Runaway and Homeless Youth Management Information System. New data from improved collection methods, expected in FY 2002, may indicate a much high number served by the RHY system. These services included food, shelter, clothing, transportation, counseling and life skills training, recreation, substance abuse prevention, education, and health care. While these interventions may be brief or temporary, they usually have intrinsic, and sometimes lasting, value for the youth.

The performance data reported here reflects an ongoing, continuous improvement process both in terms of program activity and data collection. Although some of the targets for previous years were not met, the new data system will enable FYSB to more accurately report on its performance and to become more effective in its goal-setting. More accurate and complete data will be available beginning in FY 2002.

Performance data details for certain measures

7.4a:

Safe and appropriate settings after exiting FY 2000	Safe and appropriate settings after exiting FY 1999	Safe and appropriate settings after exiting FY 1998	Safe and appropriate settings after exiting FY 1997	Safe and appropriate settings after exiting FY 1996
Pos Outcomes: 32,174 Responses: 38,591 83%	Pos Outcomes: 30,258 Responses: 35,276 86%	Pos Outcomes: 52,100 Responses: 64,633 81%	Pos Outcomes: 59,686 Responses: 73,225 82%	Data not available (collected through Pre-GPRA predecessor system with criteria not consistent with current collection)

 

Methodology: From the RHYMIS Youth Profile (composite for both BC and TLP), all youth with "positive" youth outcomes for "Living Situation at Exit" divided by the total number of youth served. "Positive outcomes" would be all outcomes except: on the run, on the street, in squat, correctional institute, other temporary shelter, other, do not know.

7.4e: (Deleted in FY 2002)

Youth receive peer counseling services FY 2000	Youth receive peer counseling services FY 1999	Youth receive peer counseling services FY 1998	Youth receive peer counseling services FY 1997	Youth receive peer counseling services FY 1996
Total Peer: 4,207 Responses: 52,508 8%	Total Peer: 3,573 Responses: 29,620 12%	Total Peer: 6,701 Responses: 55,410 12%	Total Peer: 6,753 Responses: 55,382 12%	Data not available (collected through Pre-GPRA predecessor system with criteria not consistent with current collection)

 

Methodology: From the RHYMIS Youth Profile (composite for both BC and TLP), the number of youth receiving "peer counseling" divided by the total number of youth served.

7.4i: (Deleted in FY 2001)

Community Networking FY 2000	Community Networking FY 1999	Community Networking FY 1998	Community Networking FY 1997	Community Networking FY 1996
Using area services: 208 # of grantees reporting: 383 54%	Using area services: 152 # of grantees reporting: 296 51%	Using area services: 229 # of grantees reporting: 290 79%	Using area services: 232 # of grantees reporting: 300 77%	Data not available (collected through Pre-GPRA predecessor system with criteria not consistent with current collection)

 

Methodology: From the RHYMIS Agency Program Profile (composite for both BC and TLP), the number of grantees using any (at least one) of the "area services" (outreach, promotional instructional material, language assistance services, respite care, community/educational events, training/consultation or other) divided by the total number of grantees reporting in that period. (In this denominator, do not include the total number of grantees that were funded, only the total reporting.)

The following chart includes many youth with multiple issues and service experiences. Issues and services have been combined into similar categories and grouped in a horizontal "problem....solution" format for illustrative purposes only. The continuation of an "issue" row into a "services" row does not imply that a discrete group of youth with a given issue receive only that service or that the corresponding service directly on the right is always the treatment of choice. Obviously, some correspondences are multiple. However, it is useful to observe generic correspondences, e.g., between the number of housing issues identified and the provision of alternative housing solutions.

Issues Reported by Runaway and Homeless Youth During FY 00 *	# of Youth	RHY Services Provided to Runaway and Homeless Youth During FY 00 *	# of Youth
Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse	3,211	Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention	21,025
Housing Issues	3,965	Alternative Housing	6,389
Emotional Abuse Household Dynamics Neglect Physical Abuse/Assault Psychological Issues Sexual Abuse/Assault	3,413 13,225 2,380 3,064 11,093 1,157	Counseling/Therapy Support Groups Basic Support Services	71,411 3,276 56,404
Youth Having Trouble Getting Services **	1,258	Area Services Phone services	5,998 22,967
Socialization Issues	4,890	Life Skills Training	84,136
Unemployment	2,151	Employment	2,728
Involvement with Justice System	3,610	Legal Services	2,354
Health Issues	1,672	Health Care Recreational Activities	13,132 25,598
School/Education Issues	7,973	Youth Education	12,589
Unknown	2,232
Total	65,294	Total	328,007

* A more detailed breakdown within these categories is available.
** i.e., trouble getting non RHY services, such as permanent housing or foster care

The following chart illustrates changes in living situation resulting from community- based RHY program operations. The upper half of the charts represents generally positive outcomes and the lower half generally negative. Note that most youth return to the homes of parents, guardians or relatives. See also measure 7.4a. (This chart's format is only illustrative and is not meant to imply that an individual youth in the "entrance" column exited into the (identical) situation in the same row.)

Living Situation at Entrance	# of Youth	Living Situation at Exit	# of Youth
Basic Center	68	Basic Center (including elsewhere in US)	49
Drug Treatment Center	75	Drug Treatment Center	141
Educational Institute	17	Educational Institute	40
Foster Home	2,117	Foster Home	2,492
Friend's Home	2,477	Friend's Home	1,200
Group Home	956	Group Home	1,352
Independent Living Program	52	Independent Living Program	169
Job Corps	65	Job Corps	63
Living Independently	202	Living Independently	287
Mental Hospital	279	Mental Hospital	382
Military	8	Military	9
Other Adult's Home	410	Other Adult's Home	303
Other Institution	61	Other Institution	144
Parent/Guardian's Home	26,206	Parent/Guardian's Home	22,313
Other Parent's Home	391	Other Parent's Home	418
Relative's Home	2,607	Relative's Home	2,032
Residential Treatment	282	Residential Treatment	509
Transitional Living Program	74	Transitional Living Program	271
Entry subtotal	36,347	Total "safe and appropriate" exit situations (83%)	32,174
Correctional Institute	841	Correctional Institute*	713
Homeless Family Center	130	Homeless Family Center	113
In squat (e.g., an abandoned building)	61	In squat (e.g., an abandoned building)	54
On the Run	1,110	On the Run	1,824
On the Street	472	On the Street	638
Other Temporary Shelter	690	Other Temporary Shelter	1,081
Unknown situation before entry	6,571	Do Not Know (youth may not have disclosed, etc.)	1,659
Entry subtotal	9,875	Total not clearly "safe and appropriate" situations	6,082
Other	312	Other	335
blank cell	blank cell	Total valid exit situations (null values removed **)	38,591
blank cell	blank cell	Null values **	9,244
Total entrances	46,534	Total, including null values	47,835

 

* Placement in a correctional institute may be unavoidable depending on the legal situation. Youth's previous status in the justice system may force this outcome.
** Null values are essentially meaningless records, i.e., "information not provided." Microsoft Access generated null values for this element in FY 99 and 00 whenever a youth profile entry was saved before being completely filled in. However, the software did not force entry or remind the user of the missing information. Some exit records were thus not updated before transmission to the national database. The new RHYMIS-LITE forces complete data entry and, while it allows for saving and exiting before an entry task is completed, will remind the user at a later time that specific files need to be completed. It will also require more specific information for the "Do Not Know" exit situation.

Data Issues

Data Verification and Validation: Data sources for RHY GPRA measures previously were limited to RHYMIS. For FY 2002 and FY 2003, data from the National Runaway Switchboard (NRS) are being pilot-tested. The NRS data are gleaned from records of calls in which it is possible and appropriate for NRS staff to gather information beyond the basic facts needed to help the caller. Although the data are not a statistical sample of all calls received during the year, they represent a substantial percentage of youth crisis calls logged and provide a reasonably reliable indication of the situations of many young callers.

A significantly streamlined version of RHYMIS (dubbed "RHYMIS-LITE") was distributed to grantees in spring 2001. An extensive training program was implemented during the second half of FY 2001. An upgrade distributed in midsummer 2001 included new standard reports and file transfer features for national reporting at the end of the fiscal year. Improvements suggested via user feedback are being assessed. Eventually, a web-enabled RHYMIS-LITE will bring the entire RHY network, FYSB, and regional offices into a secure extranet.

RHYMIS-LITE, a Windows application with a browser-like interface, has built-in validation, verification and quality assurance routines to help grantees produce high quality data. The RHYMIS Technical Support team interacts with those agencies submitting problematic transfers or failing to report and works to determine the underlying source of difficulty. Grantees are then able to address input problems and re-submit data before the reporting period ends. The RHYMIS technical support team performs a proactive role in familiarizing grantees with the new software and encouraging its use.

FYSB's efforts with grantees to improve reporting software, procedures, and compliance will substantially shrink incomplete record-keeping (see following section). The simpler software, interactive help features, and fewer questions overall will reduce workload pressure on staff, facilitate meeting the deadlines, and reduce resistance to information collection.

Compliance and completeness of reporting: Improvements in the RHYMIS software are expected to increase grantee compliance with data submission requirements. The RHYMIS national data submission rate has continued to improve over the past years. This trend is expected to continue as grantees become increasingly aware of the new ease in reporting and the many ways they can use the RHYMIS data to improve their reporting and evaluation processes. FYSB has also engaged in energetic messaging and advocacy among grantees and their allies about the importance of data in telling the RHY story to policymakers and legislators through GPRA and the Report to Congress. Under RHYMIS-LITE, grantees will need less time for reporting and can spend more time helping youth. FYSB's expectation that the reliability of national data should improve considerably, has been borne out by the response rate in the second half of FY 2001 for reporting via the new system -- greater than 99 percent! (see table). (The increase in FY 2000 compliance reflects FYSB's messaging about the importance of reporting and appreciation among grantees as they anticipated the improved instrument.

Recent Levels of RHYMIS Reporting Compliance
blank cell	FY 97	FY 98	FY 99	FY 00	FY 01
% of grantees who submitted in all four quarters (for second reporting period in FY 2001).	39%	35%	45%	59%	99+% 620/623

 

Important statement about RHY data prior to FY 2002: FY 2001 data consist of a very uneven mixture of data reported via the old system for the first half of the year with RHYMIS-LITE data reported from April onward after OMB approved the information collection. During the remainder of FY 2001, grantees received, installed, trained, and operated the new software. As noted, the second reporting period, which ended on September 30, 2001, had a dramatically higher level of compliance. Until RHYMIS-LITE is fully implemented in FY 2002, conclusions from national RHYMIS data submitted to date, including performance results, trends, and baselines included in this plan, should be disregarded. In its biannual FY 2000-2001 report to Congress, mandated by the 1999 Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (as reauthorized), FYSB will not report any RHYMIS or partial RHYMIS-LITE data. There is a high risk that such data, with their many flaws, could be disseminated without the caveats of this statement. Because of the potential policy and research harm, no RHYMIS-LITE data will be reported to Congress under the RHYA or under GPRA until a complete year of FY 2002 data are validated. The report to Congress will provide information about the improvements in the system and in grantee reporting.

Summary Table

Performance Measures	Targets	Actual Performance	Reference (page # in printed document)
YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME I: Runaway and homeless youth find safety, shelter and services that support their well-being and development into adults.Life and Character component: Safe and stable living situations, with access to necessities blank cell Life and Character component: Safe and stable living situations, with access to necessities
PROGRAM GOAL I: Provide appropriate shelter, counseling and other support services to youth and their families in high-risk situations.
Note: Actual FY 99 performance levels for 7.4a and 7.4b are unchanged, but recalculations and re-comparisons based on new information or a revised measurement approach in FY 00 are displayed and explained at the asterisks.
7.4a.1. (FY 2002) Establish at X% the proportion of youth living in safe and appropriate settings after exiting ACF-funded services. (Revised baseline, using data from the new instrument, will be established in FY 2002.)	FY 01: 96% FY 00: 95% FY 99: 95%	FY 01: Transitional year*** FY 00: 83%* FY 99: 86%** FY 98: 81% FY 97: 82%	Px 161
7.4a.2. (FY 2003) Increase to X+y% the proportion of youth living in safe and appropriate settings after exiting ACF-funded services. (Revised baseline, using data from the new instrument, will be established in FY 2002) Developmental.	FY 03: TBD FY 02: TBD	FY 03: FY 02: revised baseline *FY 00: 64% of RHY youth exited the program into the homes of parents, guardians or relatives (24763/38591).	blank cell
* 32174/38591. "Null values" are excluded from both numerator and denominator for all four years, including the percent returning to homes of parents, guardians or relatives. See narrative under "Program-wide Performance" for discussion of the null value issue and solution. ** In FY 99, before the null value software issue was uncovered, removal of null values from numerator and denominator would yield 83 percent for this measure as recalculated. In FY 97 and 98, different software was used which did not generate null value readings. *** In its biannual FY 2000-2001 report to Congress, mandated by the 1999 Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (as reauthorized), FYSB will not report any FY 2000/2001 RHYMIS or partial FY 2001 RHYMIS-LITE data. There is a high risk that such data, with their many flaws, could be disseminated without the caveats that apply. Because of the potential policy and research harm, no RHYMIS-LITE data will be reported to Congress under the RHYA or under GPRA until a complete year of FY 2002 data are validated, as is further explained in "Important statement about RHY data prior to FY 2002" above.
7.4b. Increase the proportion of runaway and homeless youth who are able to rely upon safer and more appropriate means of survival while on the street, (based on information from reports by youth calling National Runaway Switchboard for help).	FY 02: Dropped FY 01: New - Developmental	FY 01:*** Transitional Year FY 00: 58% * FY 99: 65% *FY 00: 6877/11163	blank cell
YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME II: Youth have relationships with and increasing trust for caring, capable adults. blank cell Life and Character component: A sense of connectedness and belonging, of being part of a community and having relationships with caring adults
PROGRAM GOAL II: Prevent or mitigate severe youth crises by maintaining the credibility of RHY services among youth, increasing the level of trust which youth feel for service providers, and by publicizing opportunities to receive help (such as from the National Runaway Switchboard or local youth agencies) before situations deteriorate and/or the youth leaves home. (This program goal statement is revised for FY 2002 by combining two similar program goals. Measures 7.4c and 7.4d are "pre-intervention" in nature but related to successful outreach activities.)
7.4c. Increase the proportion of youth that contact the National Runaway Switchboard (NRS), for counseling and referral to safe shelter or other services, earlier rather than later in their runaway episode (up to the first week). (Developmental; FY 1999 is tentative baseline; FY 2002 and 2003 targets will be developed during FY 2002.).	FY 03: TBD FY 02: TBD FY 01: NA	FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 66% FY 00: 65%* FY 99: 63% *FY 00: 5383/8275	Px 161
7.4d. Increase the proportion of youth who call the National Runaway Switchboard when they are contemplating running away but before they do so. (Developmental; FY 1999 is tentative baseline; FY 2002 and 2003 targets will be developed during FY 2002.)	FY 03: TBD FY 02: TBD FY 01: NA	FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 11% FY 00: 9% * FY 99: 9% *FY 00: 1243/13700	Px 162
YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME III: Youth are empowered to develop into independent, contributing members of society. blank cell Life and Character components: A sense of usefulness, industry and competence, of being able to contribute and do something well; A sense of connectedness and belonging, of being part of a community and having relationships with caring adults; and A sense of power, of having control over one's fate and future.
PROGRAM GOAL III.A: Increase the involvement of youth as peers in service delivery and program development.
7.4e. Establish and maintain the proportion of BCP and TLP youth receiving peer counseling through program services. (revised target. FY 97 baseline was 12%)	FY 02: Dropped FY 01: 15%*** FY 00: 15%	FY 01: Transitional Year*** FY 00: 8%* FY 99: 12% FY 98: 12% FY 97: 12% *FY 00: 4207/52508
7.4f. Establish and maintain at X (or increase to X+y, if X appears unusually low) the number of BC and TLP youth engaged in activities that help others or the community through community service and service learning. (Replacement Developmental; FY 02 is baseline)	FY 03: TBD FY 02: TBD FY 01: NA***	FY 03: FY 02: baseline FY 01: NA***	Px 162
PROGRAM GOAL III.B: Strengthen youth in reaching their full potential socially and economically by providing opportunities that move them toward self-sufficiency.
7.4g. Increase the number of youth in the transitional living programs who successfully complete the program. (revised Developmental; FY 02 is baseline)	FY 03: TBD FY 02: TBD	FY 03: FY 02: baseline	Px 163
PROGRAM GOAL III.C: Build partnerships across governments, with communities, and with youth to help youth develop as individuals and as citizens.
7.4h. Maintain with 13 States and youth services grantees in those States a collaboration that supports a youth development approach to services for young people, including substance abuse and teen pregnancy prevention activities and add additional States as resources becomes available.	FY 03: 13 FY 02: 13 FY 01: 13 FY 00: 9 FY 99: 5	FY 03: FY 02: FY 01: 13 FY 00: 13 FY 99: 9	Px 163
7.4i. Increase (revised FY 97 baseline equals 77%) the proportion of ACF-supported youth programs that are using community networking and outreach activities to strengthen services.	FY 01: Dropped FY 00: 75% FY 99: 75%	FY 00: 54%* FY 99: 51%* FY 00: 208/383
YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME IV: Youth achieve good mental and physical health and a greater sense of optimism, empowerment and possibility. blank cell Life and Character components: Safe and stable living situations, including access to health promotion and treatment; A sense of power, of having control over one's fate and future (Health and security outcome measures will be developed from new data expected for FY 02)
Total Funding (dollars in millions) See detailed Budget Linkage Table in Appendix 8 for items included in funding totals.		FY 03: $113.1 FY 02: $103.1 FY 01: $ 84.1 FY 00: $ 79.2 FY 99: $ 76.5	Bx: budget just. section Px: page # performance plan

 

Revised FY 2002 Performance Measures

Measure 7.4b has been dropped from the revised FY 2002 plan. Given the need to manage the number of indicators, the fact that this measure covers only a subset of youth in crisis. and due to the "not-under-agency-control" factor because such youth have not yet come under the protection of NRS and RHY services, this measure has been deleted. Performance measures 7.4a has been revised and 7.4f has been replaced. Measure 7.4e has been dropped since peer counseling is based on case-by-case decisions regarding the suitability to individual youth and not appropriate for use as a national performance measure.

Performance Measures for FY 2003 and Final Measures for FY 2002 including outcomes, goals, targets and rationale

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME 1: Runaway and homeless youth find safety, shelter and services that support their well-being and development into adults.

PROGRAM GOAL I: Provide appropriate shelter, counseling and other support services to youth and their families in high-risk situations.

Developmental:

7.4a.	FY 2002: Establish at X% the proportion of youth living in safe and appropriate settings after exiting ACF-funded services. (FY 97 baseline equals 82%; FY 02 is new baseline)
	FY 2003: Increase to X+y% the proportion of youth living in safe and appropriate settings after exiting ACF-funded services. (FY 02 is baseline)
	Data Source: RHYMIS-LITE

 

Rationale: "Safe and appropriate living situation at exit" excludes all "negative" discharge outcomes such as: on the run, on the street, in squat, correctional institute or detention center, other temporary shelter, other, or do not know. Some exit situations may not be classifiable as either appropriate or inappropriate. Youth served in RHY programs should be placed in appropriate living situations at the end of their RHY stay. Follow-up services and referrals by the community-based grantee, where feasible, are an important part of this commitment. Basic centers are required to follow up on youth returning to their families after a runaway episode to make sure they arrived safely. However, achievement in this measurement area is impacted by resistance and distrust of society or adult authority on the part of the youth.

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME II: Youth have relationships with and increasing trust for caring, capable adults.

PROGRAM GOAL II.A: Prevent or mitigate severe youth crises by maintaining the credibility of RHY services among youth, increasing the level of trust which youth feel for service providers, and by publicizing opportunities to receive help (such as from the National Runaway Switchboard or local youth agencies) before situations deteriorate and/or the youth leaves home (revised goal statement).

Developmental:

7.4c.	FY 2002: Increase the proportion of youth who contact the National Runaway Switchboard (for counseling and referral to safe shelter or other services) earlier rather than later in their runaway episode (up to the first week (proposed FY 99 baseline)
	FY 2003: Increase the proportion of youth who contact the National Runaway Switchboard (for counseling and referral to safe shelter or other services) earlier rather than later in their runaway episode (up to the first week) (developmental: proposed FY 99 baseline)
	Data Source: National Runaway Switchboard (NRS)

 

Rationale: This developmental measure for FY 2002, though "pre-intervention" and largely beyond the control of FYSB and its partners, will indicate the reputation and credibility of the National Switchboard and the success of its outreach and information dissemination efforts in informing youth and increasing their trust and confidence in adults working for the Switchboard and at youth shelters.

Developmental:

7.4d.	FY 2002: Increase the proportion of youth who call the National Runaway Switchboard when they are contemplating running away (but before they do so). (FY 99 is tentative baseline)
	FY 2003: Increase to the proportion of youth who call the National Runaway Switchboard when they are contemplating running away (but before they do so). (Developmental; FY 99 is tentative baseline)
	Data Source: National Runaway Switchboard

 

Rationale: This developmental measure for FY 2002, also pre-intervention in nature, will suggest the reputation and credibility of the National Switchboard and the effectiveness of its outreach and information dissemination efforts.

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME III: Youth are empowered to develop into independent, contributing members of society.

PROGRAM GOAL III.A. Increase the involvement of youth as peers in service delivery and program development

Developmental:

7.4f.	FY 2002: Establish at X the number of BC and TLP youth engaged in activities that help others or the community through community service and service learning. (Replacement; FY 02 is baseline)
	FY 2003: Maintain at X (or increase to X+y, if X appears unusually low) the number of BC and TLP youth engaged in activities that help others or the community through community service and service learning. (Developmental, FY 02 is baseline)
	Data Source: RHYMIS-LITE

 

NOTE: Replaces "Increase the number of youth serving on RHY grantee organization boards and participating in program and activity design, in the following categories: (1) volunteer youth (from the community); and (2) TLP youth." This language was dropped because the data would be expensive to collect and definitions would likely not be uniform across organizations.

Rationale: This developmental measure for FY 2002 will indicate the commitment of RHY grantees and their affiliates to building authentic youth participation, volunteerism, and involvement in responsible roles that benefit the community, also known as "service learning." Unless baseline data appear to be unusually low, this measure is a maintenance, not an increase target, since service learning may not be appropriate or possible in all cases.

PROGRAM GOAL III.B. Strengthen youth in reaching their full potential socially and economically by providing opportunities that move them toward self-sufficiency.

Developmental:

7.4g.	FY 2002: Establish the number of youth in the transitional living programs who successfully complete the program. (Revised; FY 02 is baseline)
	FY 2003: Increase by X% the number of youth in the transitional living programs who successfully complete the program. (FY 02 is baseline)
	Data Source: RHYMIS-LITE

 

Rationale: Developmental measure 7.4g indicates the success of the TLP grantees in fulfilling their primary mission and are similarly justified. "Successful completion" does not strictly depend on lasting a full eighteen months but will be defined by status at exit, program completion and other elements in the TLP section of RHYMIS-LITE. The revision allows for establishing a baseline data before "increase" targets are set.

PROGRAM GOAL III.C: Build partnerships across governments, with communities, and with youth to help youth develop as individuals and as citizens.

7.4h.	FY 2002: Maintain with 13 States and youth services grantees in those States a collaboration that supports a youth development approach to services for young people, including substance abuse and teen pregnancy prevention activities.
	FY 2003: Maintain with 13 States and youth services grantees in those States a collaboration that supports a youth development approach to services for young people, including substance abuse and teen pregnancy prevention activities. (Depending on budget appropriations, the number of States may be expanded and the program revised based upon evaluations of the first wave.)
	Date Source: FYSB administrative records

 

Rationale: In numerous "new Federalism" programs, such as TANF and WIA, States carry an increasing burden of responsibility and authority. The FYSB demonstration grants enable participating States to address youth issues and integration of youth services with other programs on a state-wide basis, bring them into contact with the community-level RHY network, and further the promotion of positive youth development approaches. FYSB requires periodic reporting from these States, a final evaluation, and attendance at national meetings in Washington. The objectives of each grant were proposed by the States and awards were made and overseen by FYSB to encourage innovation. FYSB recently established contractual consulting services to help achieve high quality results and useful evaluations from these projects.

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME IV: Youth achieve good mental and physical health and a greater sense of optimism, empowerment and possibility. (Explore indicators and targets to measure mental, physical, and dental health services and outcomes in the TLP. Physical, mental, and dental health outcome data elements for TLP are incorporated in RHYMIS-LITE. First full year of collection is FY 2002.

 

Table of Contents | Previous | Next