California is grappling with a pressing issue: how to effectively support young adults as they age out of foster care programs. Recognizing the significant hurdles these individuals face, particularly in a state with soaring living costs, California lawmakers are considering vital reforms to the state’s independent living programs. These potential changes aim to extend crucial services and resources to former foster youth, helping them navigate the challenging transition to independence.
Currently, Independent Living Programs (ILPs) in California, funded by federal initiatives dating back to 1985 and refined in 1999 with the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program, are available to young people aged 16 to 20. These programs are designed to equip foster youth with essential skills for self-sufficiency, offering support that varies across counties. For instance, Los Angeles County directs funds towards transitional housing and paid internships, while Butte County operates a thrift store providing necessities. Other counties offer online workshops focusing on financial literacy and resume building.
Illustration depicting the transition challenges for youth aging out of foster care programs in California, emphasizing the urgent need for expanded support and independent living services.
However, recent data underscores a significant gap between the services provided and the actual needs of young people transitioning out of foster care. A survey conducted by Children Now revealed that a staggering one-third of foster youth reported needing more secure housing and more effective, timely support from ILPs. This stark reality highlights the urgent need to bolster these programs. The report emphasizes that housing instability and homelessness among former foster youth lead to further trauma, hinder their well-being, and impede their successful transition into adulthood.
Assembly Bill 369 (AB 369) is a proposed legislative solution currently under consideration. This bill seeks to extend the age eligibility for ILP services up to 23 years old. If passed, this would bring California in line with numerous other states that have already recognized the necessity of extending support beyond age 21. Extending eligibility to age 23 would provide thousands of young adults exiting foster care with an additional two years of critical assistance as they strive to establish independent lives in one of the most expensive states in the nation.
Beyond age expansion, AB 369 also aims to standardize and enhance the quality of ILPs statewide. The bill mandates the creation of a state plan to ensure consistent, effective services across all counties, tailoring programs to better meet the diverse needs of youth aging out of foster care. Another key provision in AB 369, authored by Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, addresses financial barriers. It amends state law to ensure that young people who have responsibly saved $10,000 or more are not disqualified from accessing essential ILP services.
Susanna Kniffen, Senior Managing Director at Children Now, stresses the critical timing of this legislation. She points out that foster youth currently face a “steep cliff” at age 21, losing access to virtually all support systems just as they are entering adulthood. Kniffen emphasizes that the needs of these young adults do not simply vanish at 21, making extended support crucial for their successful transition.
AB 369 has garnered broad support from child advocacy organizations including Children Now, the Alliance for Children’s Rights, and the California Coalition for Youth, as well as county agencies like Los Angeles and Santa Clara counties. Notably, the bill has encountered no opposition to date, signaling a widespread recognition of the urgent need for these reforms.
Jazzmin Marquez, a former foster youth who now manages San Diego County’s ILP with YMCA Youth & Family Services, offers a firsthand perspective on the importance of extended support. Aging out of foster care at 18, Marquez relied heavily on her ILP caseworker for support when she lacked other stable relationships. Despite working and attending community college, she faced housing insecurity and limited guidance. Marquez eventually achieved stable housing and a bachelor’s degree, but believes extended ILP support would have significantly eased her journey. She emphasizes that having a caseworker for an additional two to three years would have been invaluable in navigating complex adult systems and situations.
ILPs operate through caseworkers, often from child welfare agencies or contracted nonprofits. Their role differs from that of county social workers. While social workers manage larger caseloads and ensure regular check-ins, ILP caseworkers focus specifically on coordinating comprehensive support services for transition-age youth as they approach independence.
“Foster youth face a pretty steep cliff at age 21 where they lose pretty much everything — all their supports and services and help. But their needs don’t just stop there.”
— Susanna Kniffen
Federal funding through the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program provides California with approximately $16 million annually, which is combined with state funds to create localized ILP plans. A Children Now report from March highlights the significant variation in service delivery across counties. Some counties allocate up to 30% of ILP funds to housing, while others prioritize workshops, classes, or case management, or a combination of these approaches. Research indicates that participation in ILPs is linked to higher educational attainment and reduced risk of homelessness, underscoring the positive impact of these programs.
Advocates argue that updating ILPs, including extending the age of eligibility, is essential. Originally designed to prepare teens for aging out at 18, ILPs now need to adapt to the reality of extended foster care to 21 in California. Extending ILP services to age 23 would align with the federal Family First Prevention Services Act of 2018, which made federal funding available for ILP services up to age 23, and which approximately 30 other states have already adopted.
Previous attempts to extend the age limit in California have been vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom due to cost concerns. However, AB 369 offers a different approach by allowing counties to opt into extending services to 23, rather than mandating it statewide. This nuanced approach may be more palatable given the state’s current fiscal constraints. While AB 369 itself does not have a large price tag, proponents argue that investing in extended ILP services could yield long-term cost savings by preventing homelessness, hospitalization, and other emergency situations among former foster youth.
“Having this person for another two to three years would have greatly assisted with my ability to navigate complex adult systems and situations.”
— Jazzmin Marquez
AB 369 is part of a broader effort in California to address the growing issue of homelessness among former foster youth, exacerbated by the state’s high housing costs. Recent state budget initiatives have increased housing support for foster youth, and other legislative proposals aim to further extend foster care benefits. California has also taken steps to extend safety net services, such as financial aid for college, to former foster youth beyond age 25 and transitional housing until age 25 for those with probation or foster care histories.
Marquez, now working within the system, emphasizes the need to modernize social work practices to better serve today’s foster youth, acknowledging that their needs may differ from previous generations. She points out that young adults at 23 may be more ready to engage with services and address past traumas than at younger ages. However, even at older ages, achieving economic stability and educational success remains incredibly challenging without a strong support network, something many former foster youth lack. Extending the reach of independent living programs in California is a crucial step toward providing this essential support and ensuring a more successful transition to adulthood for these vulnerable young people.
