“What’s New in Washington” McKinney-Vento Liaison Training Spokane, Vancouver, Tacoma March 14, 15, 16, 2012

Topics for today… Homeless data: This year and next Grants (funding, new applications, etc.) Monitoring and site visits Foster care summit 2011 OSPI “Awaiting Foster Care” memo Q and A

Homeless Data BIG kudos to districts! Most frequent challenges… – Many had not worked with CEDARS administrator in the past – Some districts had not collected homeless data in CEDARS prior to – Many districts had to complete a “non- standard” submission – Not submitting the information on time – OSPI help line was very busy

Data Challenges, cont. – Enrolled vs. “served” numbers (grant recipients) – New system = Tami can’t rescue you at the last minute! – Question: How were the fields pre-populated? – Multiple systems (i.e. Skyward) – Questions as to when the form was actually “submitted” (“Thank you for submitting”) – “But I don’t have any homeless kids…” – Districts not always reporting kids who qualify

What to expect this year… Continued/ongoing work on the CEDARS submission process Changes for – Available to districts in June 2012 – Some “fields” will change (TBA) Science assessment data Assessment data for all districts Changes in the 0-2 fields

Data Trends , , , , , , , ,049

Data Trends

Nighttime Residence

More to come… Webinar will be scheduled in late May re data collection. Data is posted on the OSPI website at

Monitoring and Site Visits CPR monitoring is conducted each year January – May. Three year rotation, plus districts of concern and “Big Four.” Compliance checklists for district and building. OSPI provided webinar. Recorded version is online. Site visits are less formal and focus on technical assistance.

Common Findings 12.1: District policy 12.5:Identification of homeless students and staff awareness/training 12.6:Equal access (enroll and participate fully) 12.7:Young children; and referrals for service 12.7b: Community collaboration

Grantee Oversight/Monitoring Grantees participated in a Grant Recipient workshop in August 2011 Specific procedures outlined for grantees (reporting requirements, monitoring, etc.) OSPI will be paying attention to issues such as district response to families, compliance, spending history, complaints, etc. New grant funding available Spring 2013 Revised application will be available Webinar will be scheduled to provide info.

Foster Care Summit Washington, D.C. (November 2011) Focus: Educational Outcomes for Kids in Foster care (HHS/USDE) Teams from each state: Education, Child Welfare and Courts Two days to learn/collaborate/plan Benefits? Outcomes

Outcomes/Goals Goal #1:Improve School Stability Improve records transfer Create geomap of licensed foster homes Increase transportation/remove barriers Goal #2: Improve well-being Improve youth voice/youth engagement Develop communication strategy (DSHS/Education/Courts) Commit to future collaboration

Follow up: “Awaiting” Foster Care Memo The term, “homeless children and youths” means individuals who lack a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence and includes-- children and youths who are (lengthy list of qualifiers) or are awaiting foster care placement;…

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. The term “awaiting” is not defined in federal law. Webster’s New College Dictionary: 1) To wait for. 2) To be in store for. 3) To lie in ambush for. To wait.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. Since the term “awaiting” is not defined in federal law, each state education agency is tasked with defining the term for its own operational purposes.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. What are other states doing? Delaware: Includes all kids* in foster care. California: No guidance at this time. Oregon: “If a Child Welfare judge has determined that a foster student must attend a particular school, then DHS-Child Welfare is responsible for providing that transportation.” (ORS )

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. Alaska: (paraphrased) 1) Emergency foster care homes or an emergency bed at Booth Home, Covenant House or Providence Crisis Recovery Center (CRC), 2) A child who is placed in a home where the provider received the emergency foster care reimbursement rate, 3) placed in a home where there has been less than 24 hours notice given to the provider, 4) placed in a home where the intent is for less than a ten day stay, 5) released from hospital with no identified placement.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. Washington: “…the period of time between the initial placement of the child into state care and the 30-day shelter care hearing.”

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. What is the 30-Day Shelter Care Hearing? At the 30 day hearing, the court reviews the status of the child and will either order the child to return home or to remain in placement. (This is the second hearing in the placement process.)

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. The law draws a distinction between children who are “in” foster care, and those who are “awaiting” foster care. Children and youth who are “in” care are not considered homeless according to McKinney-Vento. Children and youth who are “awaiting” foster care are homeless according to McKinney-Vento.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. Why the 30 Day Hearing? This is the point at which a decision is made about continued state custody vs. return home. (Fits “awaiting” vs. “in care.”) Provides protections for vulnerable children beyond the initial (72 hour) shelter care hearing.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. The OSPI “Awaiting Foster Care” memo (March 5, 2012) is not a change in existing law or guidance. Provides much needed clarity. Is the minimum threshold for compliance with McKinney-Vento. Districts may provide services to children/youth already “in” care at their discretion.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. On the continuum of state’s interpretations of the term “awaiting”, Washington is more conservative than some states, and more liberal than others.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. Considerations The 30 Day Shelter Care Hearing may not always occur within (exactly) 30 days. The district liaison will want to work closely with case workers. The district will follow McKinney-Vento as it would for any other homeless student.

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. Decisions regarding homeless transportation are made by the school district, according to McKinney-Vento. (Regardless of the reason for their homelessness.) Good collaboration with case managers will ease the way. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU’s)

“Awaiting Foster Care”, cont. Awaiting foster care memo may be revisited (if needed) to further clarify/assist school districts with the appropriate identification of students who qualify as homeless due to “awaiting foster care.”

Q and A Additional questions may be directed to: OSPI Homeless Education: Melinda Dyer at OSPI Homeless Education: Jess Lewis at Children’s Administration (Foster care) Juliette Knight at