Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 13901396

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Children and Youth Services Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth

Discussion

Policy framework supporting youth aging-out of foster care through college:

Review and recommendations
Nathanael Okpych
School of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, 969 E. 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 2 January 2012
Received in revised form 19 February 2012
Accepted 19 February 2012
Available online 28 February 2012
Keywords:
Foster care
Youth aging-out of foster care
Foster care legislation
Postsecondary education
College persistence
Campus-based programs

a b s t r a c t
A college degree opens doors to higher paying and more stable employment. This holds particular importance for youth aging-out of foster care who must attain self-sufciency with little or no family support. However, these youth have lower rates of college entrance, persistence, and completion than same-aged peers.
Over the past 25 years, several major pieces of federal legislation have extended and increased support to
youth aging-out of care who are pursuing a postsecondary degree. Although these laws have been important
steps in the right direction, federal support ends too soon and variability in state policies and college-specic
services leave many youth with inadequate support. Policy reform can further render postsecondary completion a viable, realistic expectation. Three recommendations to improve current legislation include: extend the
Foster Care Independence Act (FCIA) funding to age 25, establish campus-based support programs funded
through FCIA, and adjust Educational Training Voucher disbursements to reect the changing cost of college.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Aging-out and college bound: the policy context

In the early 1980s, concern about the outcomes of youth who
aged out of the foster care system was mounting among researchers, child welfare advocates, and lawmakers. With foster care
services coming to an abrupt discontinuation at age 18 in most states,
many youth later resurfaced on welfare roles, inside the walls of the
criminal justice institutions, in mental health and drug rehabilitation
facilities, and in homeless shelters (Stone, 1987). Over the past
25 years several major pieces of federal legislation have appropriated
funding to promote successful transition to adulthood and selfsufciency among youth aging-out of foster care. In 1986 Congress
passed the Independent Living Initiative (Public Law 99-272). Later
amended in 1990 and 1993, the law allocated $70 million to states
to implement independent living programs to youth between 16
and 21 years of age. The Foster Care Independence Act of 1999 (FCIA)
(Public Law 106-272) replaced and expanded the Independent Living
Initiative by doubling federal funding to $140 million per year. FCIA
gives states the option of providing independent living services to
youth under the age of 16 and extending Medicaid eligibility to age
21. Two years later, the Education and Training Voucher (ETV) program was added to FCIA as part of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Amendments of 2001 (Public Law 107-133) and $60 million was
set aside to support postsecondary education and training. Eligible
youth can receive an ETV grant of up to $5000 per year until age 23.

E-mail address: nateockey@uchicago.edu.

0190-7409/$ see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.02.013

ETV funding can be applied to expenses related to postsecondary education, such as tuition, room and board, books, and transportation.
The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act
(Fostering Connections) (Public Law 110-351) was passed in 2008
and became fully effective on October 1, 2010. Fostering Connections
is a watershed law because it gives states the option to extend foster
care to age 19, 20 or 21 years of age. States that enact Fostering Connections legislation and receive federal approval are legally responsible for ensuring that the basic designated needs of youth who remain
in-care are met, and eligible services are reimbursed through Title IVE funding. Fostering Connections is more comprehensive and substantial in coverage than FCIA. For example, while FCIA gives states
the option to extend Medicaid beyond age 18 and the option to use
up to 30% of FCIA monies on housing assistance, Fostering Connections mandates that Medicaid is available and housing is provided
until youth leave care. Finally, the Higher Education Opportunity Act
(P.L. 110-315) in 2008 amended an earlier version of the law so
that children in foster care (including those who were in-care beyond
the age of 13) are eligible to participate in federal TRIO programs such
as Talent Search and Upward Bound and are permitted to le independent status on their Free Application for Federal Student Aid
(FAFSA). Postsecondary institutions are also required to engage in
staff development activities to recruit and serve former foster youth,
and cultivate an institutional climate supportive to these students
through special services and programming.
With the goal of promoting self-sufciency in adulthood, the parameters of FCIA and Fostering Connections strongly support educational attainment. For example, the central function of the ETV
program is to provide nancial support for youth who are pursuing

N. Okpych / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 13901396

1391

a college degree or vocational training beyond high school. Similarly,

a core eligibility requirement of Fostering Connections is that youth
are making progress toward pursuing a high school degree or certicate, are enrolled in postsecondary education or training, are
employed for at least 80 h per month, or are medically incapable of
any of these. While states may have latitude in determining the particular services that are delivered, the emphasis on promoting educational attainment is clear and consistent throughout.
The logic of supporting postsecondary education is based on
changing demands of the labor market and scores of reports that
link increased educational attainment with improved life outcomes.
Earning a college degree puts youth emancipating from foster care
in an improved position to attain economic self-sufciency. Over the
past few decades, the proportion and the real value wages of jobs requiring college-level education has grown compared to jobs that require a high school diploma or less (Handel, 2003; Lee & Mather,
2008; Powell & Snellman, 2004). Employment sectors that require
postsecondary education are projected to continue to grow into the
foreseeable future (Carnevale, Smith, & Strohl, 2010). Thus, postsecondary education and training have become increasingly important
for individuals entering the job market. In addition to meeting
changes in workforce demands, postsecondary education can open
doors to occupations that pay more and report lower rates of unemployment. The 2010 Education Pays report stated that the rate of unemployment for individuals with a bachelor's degree was 5.4%,
compared to 10.3% for individuals with a high school diploma and
14.9% for those who had not completed high school (U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 2011). In the same year, the mean annual income
for individuals with a bachelor's degree was $56,665, versus $30,627
for individuals with a high school degree and $20,241 for those who
did not graduate from high school (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011).
Despite the benets accompanying postsecondary education,
many of the 30,000 youth who age-out of foster care each year in
the U.S. (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Children's
Bureau, Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2011) do not see the
inside of a college classroom. Best available gures estimate that
one-quarter to one-third of youth leaving care enter college, but overall, less than one-tenth attain a degree (Barth, 1990; Courtney,
Dworsky, Lee, & Raap, 2010; Courtney et al., 2007; Emerson, 2006;
McMillen & Tucker, 1999; Mech & Fung, 1999; Pecora et al., 2003;
Reily, 2003; Wolanin, 2005). By comparison, data from the U.S. census 1 indicates that college attendance among persons aged 16 to 24
ranges from 60 to 70% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012) and approximately
33% of the U.S. population aged 2534 held a bachelor's degree or
higher in 2010 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011). Moreover, the small proportion of youth emancipating from care who do make it to college
are less likely to nish than their non-foster peers (Courtney et al.,
2010; Day, Dworsky, Fogarty, & Damashek, 2011; Dworsky &
Courtney, 2010a).

some children in-care experience has devastating effects on learning

(Cochrane & Szabo-Kubitz, 2009; Courtney, Piliavin, Gorgan-Kaylor,
& Nesmith, 2001; Courtney et al., 2005; Yu, Day, & Williams, 2002).
To redress educational deciencies, youth aging-out of foster care
are more frequently required to take remedial college courses that
do not count toward graduation (Dworsky & Courtney, 2010a).
While in college, many youth aging-out of care work to pay for
school and living expenses (Day et al., 2011; Merdinger et al., 2005;
Pike, Kuh, & Massa-McKinley, 2009). Among those who drop out of
college, the need to work and difculty paying for school are commonly reported reasons for leaving (Courtney et al., 2010; Dworsky
& Courtney, 2010a). Locating safe and affordable housing is a formidable challenge for some foster youth (Cochrane & Szabo-Kubitz,
2009; Dworsky & Courtney, 2010a) and is associated with a greater
likelihood of attrition (Salazar, 2011). Although some scholars have
acknowledged that sizable amounts of nancial support may be available to emancipating students (Casey Family Programs, 2006; Rios,
2008), these represent best-case scenarios in which youth are made
aware of funding opportunities, meet eligibility requirements, apply
before deadlines, and receive disbursements on time. Hurdles exist
that could stymie the receipt of nancial assistance. For example, in
one study of California foster youth applying for aid, Cochrane and
Szabo-Kubitz (2009) reported that 84% received Pell grants, 17% received a state Cal Grant, and only 9% received a federal ETV grant. In
total, less than 4% of former foster youth who completed a FAFSA received all three forms of aid (p. 2).
Mental health and behavioral difculties are more common
among youth aging-out of care than same-aged peers (Courtney et
al., 2010; McMillen & Tucker, 1999; Merdinger et al., 2005), and
many youth who have endured cumulative and complex trauma
struggle with attachment, regulation of emotions, and cognition and
attention (Unrau, Font, & Rawls, 2012). The increased stress of college
can trigger intense emotional reactions that youth may not have the
resources to cope with (Hines, Merdinger, & Wyatt, 2005; Wolanin,
2005). Exposure to maltreatment and relationship instability can
leave youth more emotionally guarded, and they may be reluctant
turn to others for help when difcult problems arise (Hernandez &
Naccarato, 2010; Kools, 1999; Samuels, 2008). Children and adolescents that have experienced multiple placement disruptions may
not have developed daily living skills such as managing nances,
resolving conict, and organizing responsibilities, which are commonly acquired through sustained relationships with caring adults
(Wolanin, 2005). Some young adults who left foster care have children of their own, and the need to care for children is a commonly
reported reason that is given for dropping out of college, particularly
among female students (Courtney et al., 2010; Dworsky & Courtney,
2010b).

2. Areas of risk among aging-out youth in college

Given the multiple, overlapping challenges that can hinder postsecondary completion, federal policy is integral in shaping the amount
and type of support that youth aging-out of foster care receive
while they are in college. FCIA (including the ETV program), Fostering
Connections, and provisions in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Opportunity Act are important steps in the right direction.
However, federal support ends too soon and variability in state policies and college-specic services leaves many youth with inadequate
support.

Researchers have identied potential factors that account for the

low entrance, persistence, and completion of college among youth
aging-out of care. Prior to college, foster care children are more likely
to be concentrated in low-performing schools and enter state care academically behind, are more likely to repeat a grade and miss school
because of suspension or expulsion, and are less likely to enroll in
college-preparatory classes while in high school (Courtney, Terao, &
Bost, 2004; McMillen, Auslander, Elze, White, & Thompson, 2003;
Merdinger, Hines, Lemon-Osterling, & Wyatt, 2005; Sheehy et al.,
2001; Smithgall, Gladden, Howard, George, & Courtney, 2004; Wolanin, 2005). The cumulative impact of multiple school transfers that
1
These gures were calculated by averaging the national annual college attendance
rate over the period when the previously cited studies took place (1990 to 2009).

3. Policy discussion: two areas of needed improvement

3.1. Variability in available support

Enrolling in college typically necessitates students to postpone or
limit employment. This is of great consequence and concern for
youth who lack family support and who are advancing toward denite self-sufciency on their 21st birthday. Pursuit of postsecondary

1392

N. Okpych / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 13901396

education is simultaneously a prudent investment in the future and a

time of increased vulnerability if sufcient, stable support is not provided to meet basic needs. Youth aging-out of foster care who delay
or curtail employment are particularly reliant on external forms of
subsistence as they work toward completing their postsecondary degree. However, the nancial and non-nancial support that is available varies widely based on the state in which they reside and the
postsecondary institution they attend. While all youth aging-out of
foster care can apply for federal support through income-based grants
and programs (e.g., Pell Grants and GEAR-UP) and student loans, as
well as national scholarships such as those offered through the
Casey Family Scholars Program, there are a number of other services
and supports that are contingent on location. First, states may or
may not elect to extend foster care to age 21. Second, although all
50 states receive funding through FCIA, there is a high degree of latitude regarding the type and amount of services each state chooses to
provide. Third, some states elect to offer their own provisions, such as
tuition waivers, scholarships, or grants that target or include youth
transitioning from foster care, while many other states do not
(Casey Family Programs, 2010; Dworsky & Prez, 2010; Eilertson,
2002; Spigel, 2004). Fourth, some college systems or individual institutions offer programs, scholarships, and grants specically for youth
who emancipated from care (Dworsky & Prez, 2010; Hernandez &
Naccarato, 2010; Unrau, 2011; Unrau et al., 2012). Fifth, there are
privately funded scholarships that have a state residency requirement, such as New Mexico's Albuquerque Community Foundation
Youth in Foster Care Scholarship Program (Albuquerque Community
Foundation, 2012).
Despite the great need for sufcient, stable support while attending college, the assistance and services available to youth aging-out of
care are contingent on where they happen to reside. For example, foster youth who age-out of care and pursue postsecondary education in
Michigan have access to a considerable network of support. In November 2011, the Young Adult Voluntary Foster Care Act (MCL
400.641-400.671) extended foster care to age 21 in Michigan. 2 States
that pass similar laws and that receive Title IV-E funding take on a
legal responsibility to ensure that the basic living needs of youth
who remain in care continue to be met. For example, Medicaid coverage is guaranteed, case management services remain available, a
court review of the youth's case takes place every six months, and
caseworkers or other staff are required to work with youth to begin
developing a detailed transition plan at least 90 days prior to their
discharge date. Given the high cost of housing, one of the greatest
areas of need for youth leaving care is nding a safe and affordable
place to live (Collins, 2004; Courtney & Dworsky, 2006; Jaklitsch,
2003). This basic need is met for youth who are able to remain in foster care so long as they reside in an approved setting (e.g., supervised
independent living arrangements, family foster care or kinship foster
care placements, licensed group homes, etc.). Early ndings suggest
that extending foster care to age 21 is an important factor in postsecondary engagement. In the Midwest study, the largest longitudinal
study that tracked individuals as they emancipated from care and
transitioned to adulthood, it was found that youth residing in a
state where foster care services were extended to age 21 were twice
as likely to complete at least one year of college than youth living in
states where foster care services ended at age 18 (Dworsky &
Courtney, 2010a,b).
In addition to the extension of foster care to age 21, youth agingout of care in Michigan are also eligible to receive the spectrum of independent living services offered through FCIA funding. Michigan
also administers the Tuition Incentive Program (TIP), a statewide tuition assistance program for low-income students attending one of
over 70 participating public and private institutions in the state

This law is currently awaiting federal approval for Title IV-E funding.

(Michigan Department of Human Services, 2012). Many youth who

are aging-out of foster care will meet the eligibility requirement of
having been enrolled in Medicaid for at least 24 months over a 36month period. For qualifying students who enter a two-year degree
institution, TIP covers mandatory fees and the average cost of indistrict community college tuition. For students who enter into a
four-year institution (or transfer to a four-year institution), they are
eligible to receive up to $2000 ($500 per semester) towards tuition.
Finally, there are several colleges and universities in Michigan that
provide campus support and scholarship programs to youth who
are emancipating from foster care. 3 For example, Western Michigan
State University offers the Foster Youth and Higher Education Initiative, a multi-component program that addresses seven developmental domains to support postsecondary persistence and completion
(Unrau, 2011; Unrau et al., 2012). When considering together the extension foster care, FCIA-funded services, statewide tuition assistance,
and the option of attending colleges that provide additional resources, youth living in Michigan have a range of available supports
as they initiate and pursue their college degree.
While Michigan is certainly not alone in taking progressive steps
to increase the feasibility of attaining postsecondary education, pursuing a college degree is a much steeper climb in states where there
is currently less extensive support. As of January 2012, only 11 states
were receiving Title IV-E funding for the extension of foster care beyond age 18 (Casey Family Programs, 2012). 4 In the absence of Title
IV-E monies, FCIA disbursements become a principal funding mechanism to support the transition to adulthood for emancipated youth.
However, scholars have recognized that the complex and sometimes
substantial needs of youth transitioning out of foster care and into
adult self-sufciency outweigh resources that are made available
through FCIA (Courtney, 2009; Courtney & Hughes-Heuring, 2005).
For example, only 30% of FCIA disbursements can be utilized for
room and board, which is not only insufcient to meet the high
costs of housing (Collins, 2004; Jaklitsch, 2003), but also detracts
from funding other services permitted under the law (Courtney,
2009). Furthermore, eligible youth do not always receive the various
independent living services and housing assistance designated under
the law, even though youth deem these services as potentially benecial (Courtney et al., 2007; John Burton Foundation, 2009).
Youth who age-out of care and attend college in states where support is not as extensive become increasingly responsible for sustaining their own basic livelihood while at the same time acclimating to
college and fullling academic responsibilities. Financial demands
may necessitate that they work to pay for unmet expenses, but
doing so could compromise their ability to remain enrolled and do
well in school (Courtney et al., 2010; Pike et al., 2009). For example,
Salazar (2011) reported that both the number of hours employed
and the perceived difculty of working during college predicted
aging-out youths' likelihood of dropping out of school. Underachievement has more than just scholastic implications for these youth. Two
important forms of nancial support that are typically available to
youth leaving care are Chafee ETV grants and need-based Pell Grants.
Both require that students make satisfactory academic progress to
sustain eligibility, which typically includes earning a minimum GPA
of 2.0 and maintaining at least part-time enrollment status. In the
20112012 school year, the combined maximum allotment of these
two grants is $10,550. However, a difcult semester or the need to
work increased hours could place students in danger of losing these
critical bricks in their economic foundation while they are in college.

3
The University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Aquinas College, Ferris State
University, and Western Michigan State University are examples.
4
While all 50 states participate in FCIA, as of January 2012 only 11 states have been
federally approved to draw on Title IV-E funding to extend foster care to age 21. Other
states, such as California, Michigan, and Massachusetts, have passed state legislation
and are awaiting federal approval.

N. Okpych / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 13901396

Whereas reliable, sufcient federal and state support could promote

college persistence and continued receipt of performance-based
funding, insufcient support could set in motion a process that
makes college persistence and academic achievement exceedingly
difcult.
3.2. Premature expiration of support
In addition to variations in government support that depend on
place of residency, nancial assistance and services expire before
aging-out youth are likely to have completed a college degree. Research indicates that among all students who enter four-year colleges,
only 57% have completed their degree six years later (National Center
for Education Statistics, 2010). Among students who are working toward a certicate or associate's degree at a two-year institution, only
37% have nished their program four years after starting (Knapp,
Kelly-Reid, & Ginder, 2010). Findings from the Midwest study suggest
that some aging-out youth may take longer than same-aged peers to
nish high school and initiate postsecondary education (Courtney et
al., 2010; Dworsky & Courtney, 2010a). However, even if youth leaving foster care enter college at age 19 or 20, principal forms of federal
funding, programs, and services cease on their 21st birthday. In most
states, turning 21 initiates a substantial drop-off of critical support,
such as housing assistance, Medicaid, case management, adult supervision and mentorship, and a host of independent living services.
Aged-out youth, who report higher rates of health and mental health
difculties, may be left uninsured if they are not able to secure coverage through college insurance or alternate means. Financially, youth
may have to work longer hours while remaining enrolled or may
leave school altogether to work full-time in order to pay for living expenses. In the Midwest study, approximately 45% of postsecondary
students who left college cited the need to work as a reason for discontinuing their education (Dworsky & Courtney, 2010a). While
$5000 in annual ETV funding remains available until the age of 23, eligibility for funding is contingent on making satisfactory academic
progress after the litany of supports have expired. Thus, for the
youth aging-out of care that make it to college, the stakes are high
and time is exceedingly limited. The window of federal support to
complete a postsecondary degree closes prematurely.
4. Three recommendations to improve current policy
Three policy recommendations are discussed to ensure that reasonable, adequate support is provided to all emancipating youth
pursing a college degree.
4.1. Extend FCIA funding to age 25
First, it is recommended that FCIA eligibility and provisions be extended to age 25 for all foster youth, including those pursuing a postsecondary education. Additionally, it is recommended that the
requirement that youth must apply for ETV funding by 21 years of
age be extended to age 23. The years between 18 and 25 are an integral time for youth to ready themselves for future self-sufciency
through education, training, and early workforce engagement. However, most youth are not prepared to be fully self-sufcient by their
early 20s. Many non-foster youth continue to receive nancial and
emotional support from their families well into their 20s as they prepare for economic independence (Fingerman, Miller, Birditt, & Zarit,
2009; Schoeni & Ross, 2005; Swartz, Kim, Uno, Mortimer, & O'Brien,
2011). Among aging-out foster youth pursuing a college education, nancial and non-nancial support through age 25 would provide students with a reasonable and more realistic time frame to complete
their degree. A report published by the National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES) in 2010 indicated that among rst-time college students, only 36.4% had completed their bachelor's degree in four years

1393

(Knapp et al., 2010, p.16). However, the completion rate jumped to

52.3% and 57.2% by years ve and six, respectively, and level off
after this point. If emancipated youth enter a four-year college at
age 19, FCIA support expires before they are likely to make it halfway
through college, and well before the time when college students generally complete their degree. As the NCES data suggest, years ve and
six appear to be instrumental in elevating baccalaureate completion
rates. If a similar trend holds for youth who are exiting foster care,
extending FCIA to age 25 would give a 19 year-old student who entered a bachelor's program approximately six years of continued support, and a 20-year old student about ve years. This time allotment is
consistent with the timeframe that it commonly takes to complete a
college degree.
Results from the Midwest study suggest that aging-out foster
youth are more likely to attend two-year versus four-year degree programs than non-foster peers (Courtney et al., 2010). With regard to
two-year college programs, the NCES study reported that only 18.9%
of students earned their degree two years after starting, but the completion rate nearly doubled after four years (37.3%) (Knapp et al.,
2010). One case where FCIA funding would support a student through
the completion of their postsecondary degree would occur if students
entered a two-year program around or before their 19th birthday,
and if they completed the degree in two years or less (before turning
21). However, longitudinal data from the Midwest study indicates
that both of these expectations not realistic for substantial portions
of youth aging-out of care. In the Midwest study, only 63% of youth
completed their high school degree or G.E.D. by age 19 (this rate increased to 77% by age 21), and only 33% of these 19 year-olds had
ever enrolled in postsecondary education (this rate jumped to 48%
by age 21) 5 (Courtney et al., 2005, 2007). With regard to postsecondary completion by age 21, only 1.9% had completed a two-year degree
and none had completed a four-year degree (Courtney et al., 2007).
Although initiating college by age 19 and completing a two-year program before turning 21 may be an ideal situation, these parameters
do not reect the time needed to complete postsecondary education,
both among youth leaving care and the general student body. FCIA
should see students through college, not just into college.
Extending FCIA funding to age 25 would provide youth with a
more normative and sufcient timeframe to complete their degree
without experiencing the drastic cessation of support and services
in the middle of their education. For example, 28% of youth who
aged-out of care had completed at least one year of college by age
21, but had not earned their degree (Courtney et al., 2007). Extending
FCIA services to age 25 would also provide youth aging-out of care
who take longer to earn their high school certicate or did not immediately begin postsecondary education with an opportunity to engage
with college or vocational training. Finally, extending the age of FCIA
eligibility may serve as a bridge for students attending two-year programs who aspire to earn a bachelor's degree to cross-over into fouryear colleges.
4.2. Establish campus-based support programs funded by FCIA
A second recommendation is that a national framework for
campus-based support programs be established through policy. In
this framework, campus-based programs would receive FCIA funding to deliver or coordinate essential services such as housing, nancial assistance, academic tutoring and guidance, childcare,
interpersonal and life skills training, linkage to mental health services, assistance with obtaining employment upon graduation, and

5
The rate of 48% was calculated using data from Table 18 (p. 27) and Table 22 (p. 29)
in Courtney et al. (2007). Out of a sample of 590 youth in the foster care group, 117
were currently enrolled and 169 had previously been enrolled in postsecondary
education.

1394

N. Okpych / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 13901396

other designated services. For youth engaged in postsecondary education, the manifold FCIA services would be structured around
the central goal of nishing college or vocational training. Structuring services in this manner would allow for greater specialization
and efciency in meeting this specic, organizing task. States
would have considerable exibility in determining the how services
were administered and delivered.
Over the past decade, several states have taken steps in building
partnerships among institutions of higher education, child welfare
department administrators, community agencies, and advocacy organizations so that comprehensive strategies can be developed to better
support aging-out foster youth in college (Bielat & Yarrish, 2009). In
addition, campus-based programs targeting the unique needs and circumstances of aging-out youth have accumulated by the dozen
(Casey Family Programs, 2010; Day et al., 2011; Dworsky & Prez,
2010; Hernandez & Naccarato, 2010; Unrau, 2011), but the large majority of the 4500 postsecondary institutions (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2010) likely do not offer programs with this specic focus. Although research evaluating the effect of campus-support
programs on aging-out foster youth is in its infancy, effectiveness of
multi-component academic retention programs with students in danger of college attrition have shown to promote retention (Dill, Gilbert,
Hill, Minchew, & Sempier, 2010/2011; Mann, Hunt, & Alford, 2003/
2004; Noble, Flynn, Lee, & Hilton, 20072008). Campus-based programs are promising because they are embedded in the place where
college-going youth spend considerable time, have access to specic
and thorough knowledge of the culture, logistics, and requirements
of the college, and employ staff with expert knowledge of needs specic to emancipating youth. A national framework would systematize
services to ensure that all aging-out youth attending college receive support promoting retention and graduation. Prior to developing generic models, extant campus-based programs would
need to be formalized and evaluated to determine which components are effective at retaining youth through graduation and promoting well-being. Once reliable data are available, evidencebased models can be developed, brought to scale, and adapted to
specic colleges.

4.3. Adjust ETV funding to reect the cost of college

Third, it is recommended that the ETV grant amount is adjusted to
keep pace with the changing cost of college tuition, fees, and room
and board. Since ETV was rst disbursed in 2003, the average cost
of tuition and room and board has steadily increased (National
Center for Education Statistics, 2011). As Table 1 displays, for fouryear public colleges, the $5000 voucher covered just over half of the
cost of tuition and room and board in the 20032004 academic
year, but it covers less than one-third in 20112012 (College Board,

Table 1
College expenses in 200304 and 201112.
Source: College Board (2011). Trends in college pricing 2011: Tuition and fee and room
and board charges overtime Unweighted.

Public four-year college

Private four-year college

Expense

200304

201112

Tuition and fees

Room and board
Total
(% covered by $5 k ETV)
Tuition and fees
Room and board
Total
(% covered by $5 k ETV)

$4431
$5520
$9951
(50.2%)
$16,293
$6297
$22,590
(22.1%)

$7692
$8240
$15,932
(31.4%)
$25,296
$9037
$34,334
(14.6%)

2011). 6 For four-year private colleges, the ETV disbursement covered

22% of the costs in 200203 and less than 15% in 201112.
Over this eight-year timeframe, the value of ETV funding in real
dollars has depreciated by nearly 20% for four-year public colleges
and 7% for four-year private colleges. With each year that the cost
of postsecondary education rises, the ETV disbursement becomes proportionately less effective at meeting nancial need. Rather than
remaining as a xed disbursement amount, it is recommended that
the ETV allocation be adjusted to reect changes in the annual costs
of college, similar to Pell Grants and other disbursements. This
would preserve the value of the ETV grant by ensuring that it reects
the real, current costs of college engagement.

5. Discussion
The intent of this discussion paper was to review federal policy
that supports transitioning foster youth who are pursuing postsecondary education. For most youth in their early 20s, family
resources continue to be instrumental in their transition to selfsufciency, especially during times of hardship (Fingerman et al.,
2009; Schoeni & Ross, 2005; Swartz et al., 2011). However, youth
emancipating from foster care may not have family they can turn
to for material assistance and emotional support to negotiate the
path to economic self-sufciency. The proposed recommendations
will undoubtedly require a substantial increase of public funding.
However, supporting a cohort that attains more education and is
better prepared for the current job market holds the prospect of fostering greater economic self-sufciency and less reliance on public
institutions (Packard, Delgado, Felmeth, & McCready, 2008). For example, drawing on data from the Midwest study, Peters, Dworsky,
Courtney, and Pollack (2009) estimated that the nancial benet
of extending foster care services until age 20 7 outweighed cost to
government by a ratio of about two to one. That is, the average
cost of providing foster care services to age 20 was estimated to be
approximately $38,000, while the increase in lifetime earnings
(due to projected increases in bachelor degree attainment) averaged across youth was estimated to be $72,000.
The question is not whether money is to be invested or not, but
rather if it is spent now or later, for promotion of wellbeing or recovery from mishap. If non-foster youth were faced with the predicament youth aging-out of care face at age 21 cessation of family
support and the expectation of self-sufciency it could be reasonably anticipated that a growing proportion would need to turn to government assistance or would delay or abandon pursuing a
postsecondary education. This is not because these youth are incapable of self-sufciency, but rather because the age at which it is
expected would be too early and important resources would be withdrawn prematurely. However, these are the circumstance youth
aging-out of foster care encounter. They are expected to achieve
more at an earlier age than their peers who have not undergone dislocations in place and family. Blome (1997) captures the scenario succinctly: It is a curious reality that society's most vulnerable youth,
those who have suffered abuse or neglect and have never known consistent, permanent, nurturing adult relationships, are asked to be selfsufcient at a time when other youth are still receiving parental support in college or are experimenting with their rst job from within
the safe connes of a family (p. 42). The efforts of youth emancipated
from foster care who are pursuing a college degree should be met

6
College Board data is similar to gures reported by the National Center for Education Statistics (2011). However, the former was used because the later only reported
up to the 200910 academic year.
7
This was based on the nding from the Midwest study that aging-out youth in Illinois, where foster care services are available to age 21, on average remain in care until
age 20.

N. Okpych / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 13901396

with adequate, reasonable time and resources to achieve a goal that is

benecial to all.
References
Albuquerque Community Foundation (2012). Youth in foster care scholarship
program. Retrieved from http://www.albuquerquefoundation.org/student_aid/
nd_the_scholarship_that_ts_your_needs/youth/
Barth, R. P. (1990). On their own: The experiences of youth after foster care. Child and
Adolescent Social Work, 7, 419440.
Bielat, K., & Yarrish, J. (2009). Building a campus support network for students emerging
from foster care. Retrieved from the Casey Family Programs website: http://www.
casey.org/Resources/Publications/pdf/BuildingCampusSupport.pdf
Blome, W. W. (1997). What happens to foster kids: Educational experiences of a random sample of foster care youth and a matched group of non-foster care youth.
Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 14, 4153.
Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., & Strohl, J. (2010). Help wanted: Projections of jobs and education requirements through 2018. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University, Center on Education and the Workforce.
Casey Family Programs (2006). It's my life: Financial aid: Postsecondary education and
training: A resource for child welfare professionals. Seattle, WA. Retrieved from
http://www.casey.org/resources/publications/ItsMyLife/Education.htm
Casey Family Programs (2010). Supporting success: Improving higher education outcomes for students from foster care (version 2.0). Retrieved from. http://www.
casey.org/Resources/Publications/SupportingSuccess.htm
Casey Family Programs (2012). States with approved IV-E plans to extend care beyond
18. Retrieved from. http://www.childwelfarepolicy.org/maps/single?id=210
Cochrane, D., & Szabo-Kubitz, L. (2009). Hopes and hurdles: California foster youth and
college nancial aid. Berkeley, CA: Institute for College Access and Success.
College Board (2011). Trends in college pricing 2011: Tuition and fee and room and board
charges over timeunweighted. Retrieved from http://trends.collegeboard.org/
college_pricing/report_ndings/indicator/Tuition_and_Fee_Room_and_Board_
Unweighted
Collins, M. E. (2004). Enhancing services to youths leaving foster care: Analysis of
recent legislation and its potential impact. Children and Youth Services Review, 26,
10511065.
Courtney, M. E. (2009). The difcult transition to adulthood for foster youth in the US:
Implications for the state as corporate parents. Social Policy Report, 23, 318.
Courtney, M. E., & Dworsky, A. (2006). Early outcomes for young adults transitioning
from out-of-home care in the U.S.A. Child and Family Social Work, 1, 209219.
Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., Cusick, G. R., Havlicek, J., Prez, A., & Keller, T. (2007).
Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Outcomes at age
21. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., Lee, J. S., & Raap, M. (2010). Midwest evaluation of the
adult functioning of former foster youth: Outcomes at age 23 & 24. Chicago, IL: Chapin
Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., Ruth, G., Keller, T., Havlicek, J., & Bost, N. (2005). Midwest
evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Outcomes at age 19. Chicago,
IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
Courtney, M. E., & Hughes-Heuring, D. (2005). The transition to adulthood for youth
aging out of the foster care system. In W. Osgood, C. Flanagan, E. M. Foster, &
G. Ruth (Eds.), On your own without a net: The transition to adulthood for vulnerable
populations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Courtney, M. E., Piliavin, I., Gorgan-Kaylor, A., & Nesmith, A. (2001). Foster youth transitions
to adulthood: A longitudinal view of youth leaving care. Child Welfare, 80, 685717.
Courtney, M. E., Terao, S., & Bost, N. (2004). Midwest evaluation of adult functioning of
former foster youth: Conditions of youth preparing to leave state care. Chicago, IL:
Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
Day, A., Dworsky, A., Fogarty, K., & Damashek, A. (2011). An examination of postsecondary retention and graduation among foster care youth enrolled in a fouryear university. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 22352341.
Dill, A. L., Gilbert, J. A., Hill, J. P., Minchew, S. S., & Sempier, T. A. (2010/2011). A successful retention program for suspended students. Journal of College Student Retention:
Research, Theory & Practice, 12, 277291.
Dworsky, A., & Courtney, M. E. (2010). The risk of teenage pregnancy among transitioning foster youth: Implications for extending state care beyond age 18. Children and
Youth Services Review, 32, 13511356.
Dworsky, A., & Courtney, M. E. (2010). Does extending foster care beyond age 18 promote
postsecondary educational attainment? Chapin Hall Issue Brief Retrieved from http://
www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/les/publications/Midwest_IB1_Educational_
Attainment.pdf
Dworsky, A., & Prez, A. (2010). Helping former foster youth graduate from college through
campus support programs. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 255263.
Eilertson, C. (2002). Independent living for foster youth. Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislatures.
Emerson, J. (2006). Strategies for working with college students from foster care.
E-source for College Transitions, 3, 34.
Fingerman, K., Miller, L., Birditt, K., & Zarit, S. (2009). Giving to the good and the needy:
Parental support of grown children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 12201233.
Handel, M. J. (2003). Skills mismatch in the labor market. Annual Review of Sociology,
29, 135165.
Hernandez, L., & Naccarato, T. (2010). Scholarships and supports available to foster
care alumni: A study of 12 programs across the US. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 758766.

1395

Hines, A. M., Merdinger, J., & Wyatt, P. (2005). Former foster youth attending college:
Resilience and the transition to young adulthood. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75, 381394.
Jaklitsch, B. (2003). The John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program: Aftercare services. Tulsa, OK: National Resource Center for Youth Services.
John Burton Foundation (2009). THP-Plus annual report: Providing affordable housing
and supportive services to youth formerly in the foster care and juvenile probation systems. San Francisco, CA: John Burton Foundation for Children Without Homes.
Knapp, L. G., Kelly-Reid, J. E., & Ginder, S. A. (2010). Enrollment in postsecondary institutions, fall 2008; graduation rates, 2002 & 2005 cohorts; and nancial statistics, scal year 2008: First look. Institute of Education Sciences, National
Center for Education Statistics Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/
2010152rev.pdf
Kools, S. (1999). Self-protection in adolescents in foster care. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 12, 139152.
Lee, M. A., & Mather, M. (2008). U.S. labor force trends. Population Bulletin, 63(2), 118.
Mann, J. R., Hunt, M. D., & Alford, J. G. (2003/2004). Monitored probation: A program
that works. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 5,
245254.
McMillen, J. C., Auslander, W., Elze, D., White, T., & Thompson, R. (2003). Educational
experiences and aspirations of older youth in foster care. Child Welfare, 82,
475495.
McMillen, J. C., & Tucker, J. (1999). The status of older adolescents at exit from out-ofhome care. Child Welfare, 78, 339360.
Mech, E. V., & Fung, C. C. M. (1999). Placement restrictiveness and educational achievement among emancipated foster youth. Social Work Practice, 9, 213228.
Merdinger, J. M., Hines, A. M., Lemon-Osterling, K., & Wyatt, P. (2005). Pathways to college for former foster youth: Understanding factors that contribute to educational
success. Child Welfare, 74, 867896.
Michigan Department of Human Services (2012). The tuition incentive program. Retrieved
from http://www.michigan.gov/dhs/0,4562,7-124-5452_7121-18162,00.html
National Center for Education Statistics (2010). Digest of education statistics: 2010:
Chapter 3: Postsecondary education.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/
programs/digest/d10/ch_3.asp
National Center for Education Statistics (2011). Fast facts: What are the trends in the cost of
college education? Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76
Noble, K., Flynn, N. T., Lee, J. D., & Hilton, D. (20072008). Predicting successful college
experiences: Evidence from a rst year retention program. Journal of College
Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 9, 3960.
Packard, T., Delgado, M., Felmeth, R., & McCready, K. (2008). A cost-benet analysis of
transitional services for emancipating foster youth. Children and Youth Services
Review, 30, 12671278.
Pecora, P., Williams, J., Kessler, R., Downs, A., O'Brien, K., Hirpi, E., et al. (2003). Assessing the effects of foster care: Early results from the Casey National Alumni Study.
Seattle, WA: Case Family Programs.
Peters, C. M., Dworsky, A., Courtney, M. E., & Pollack, H. (2009). The benets and costs of
extending foster care to age 21. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the
University of Chicago.
Pike, G., Kuh, G., & Massa-McKinley, R. (2009). First year students' employment, engagement, and academic achievement: Untangling the relationship between
work and grades. NASPA Journal, 45, 560582.
Powell, W. W., & Snellman, K. (2004). The knowledge economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 199220.
Reily, T. (2003). Transition from care: Status and outcomes of youth who age out of foster care. Child Welfare, 82, 727746.
Rios, S. J. (2008). From foster care to college: Young adults' perceptions of factors that
impacted their academic achievement. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
ProQuest ETD Collection for FIU (AAI3347043).
Salazar, A. M. (2011). Investigating the predictors of postsecondary education success
and post-college life circumstances of foster care alumni (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (3459806).
Samuels, G. M. (2008). A reason, a season, or a lifetime: Relational permanence among
young adults with foster care backgrounds. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for
Children at the University of Chicago.
Schoeni, R. F., & Ross, K. E. (2005). Material assistance from families during the transition to adulthood. In R. SetterstenJr., F. FurstenbergJr., & R. Rumbaut (Eds.), On the
frontier of adulthood: Theory, research, and public policy (pp. 396416). Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Sheehy, A., Oldham, E., Zanghi, M., Ansell, D., Correia, P., & Copeland, R. (2001).
Promising practices: Supporting the transition of youth served by the foster care
system. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Smithgall, C., Gladden, R. M., Howard, E., George, R., & Courtney, M. (2004). Educational
experiences of children in out-of-home care. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall for Children at
the University of Chicago.
Spigel, P. (2004). Support for foster children's post-secondary education. Hartford, CT:
State of Connecticut General Assembly Ofce of Legislative Reports.
Stone, H. (1987). Ready, set, go: An agency guide to independent living. Washington, DC:
Child Welfare League of America.
Swartz, T. T., Kim, M., Uno, M., Mortimer, J., & O'Brien, K. B. (2011). Safety nets and scaffolds: Parental support in the transition to adulthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 73, 414429.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2011). Education pays. Retrieved from http://www.bls.
gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm
U.S. Census Bureau (2011). Table 231: Educational attainment by selected characteristics: 2010. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/
12s0231.pdf

1396

N. Okpych / Children and Youth Services Review 34 (2012) 13901396

U.S. Census Bureau (2012). The 2012 statistical abstract: Higher education: Degrees. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0299.pdf.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children's Bureau, Child Welfare
Information Gateway (2011). Foster care statistics 2009. Retrieved from http://
www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/foster.cfm
Unrau, Y. A. (2011). From foster care to college: The Seita Scholars Program at Western
Michigan University. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 20, 1720.
Unrau, Y. A., Font, S. A., & Rawls, G. (2012). Readiness for college engagement among
students who have aged out of foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 34,
7683.

Wolanin, T. R. (2005). Higher education opportunities for foster youth: A primer for policymakers. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy Retrieved from
http://www.ihep.org/assets/les/publications/m-r/OpportunitiesFosterYouth.pdf
Yu, E., Day, P., & Williams, M. (2002). Improving educational outcomes for youth in care:
Symposium summary report. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.