Bill Overview
Title: Fostering Postsecondary Success for Foster and Homeless Youth Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes a program through which the Department of Education (ED) must annually recognize institutions of higher education (IHEs) that offer outstanding services and programs to foster care and homeless youth. Further, ED must establish a Center for Fostering Postsecondary Success for Foster and Homeless Youth to assist IHEs with creating and maintaining their programs for these youth.
Sponsors: Sen. Stabenow, Debbie [D-MI]
Target Audience
Population: Foster care and homeless youth
Estimated Size: 4200000
- The bill is specifically targeted at supporting foster care and homeless youth by recognizing and helping create postsecondary education programs that address their needs.
- Globally, there are significant numbers of young people in foster care or who experience homelessness that may benefit from enhanced access to education and support services.
- The UNESCO reports that over 63 million children are considered to be in need of care, which would include those impacted by foster and homeless situations, although not all are at the postsecondary stage.
Reasoning
- The policy is aimed at improving access to postsecondary education for foster and homeless youth by providing recognition and support to institutions offering specialized programs.
- Given the target population and budget constraints, the policy is likely to have a higher impact on those directly participating in these newly recognized programs or initiatives rather than the entire population of foster and homeless youth.
- Not all foster and homeless youth will enter postsecondary education immediately, so the long-term impact might not be immediate but rather develop over time as awareness of and participation in these programs increase.
- It's important to understand the diverse experiences of foster and homeless youths, as not all will benefit equally due to variations in personal and educational circumstances.
- Considering the large population of youths experiencing homelessness and foster care, the impact might be small initially but could scale as more institutions participate and the programs expand.
Simulated Interviews
College Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy sounds promising as it recognizes and supports colleges that help people like me.
- I'm hopeful it can make college life less stressful by providing the services and resources we often lack.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Unemployed (Chicago, IL)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish this was available when I first started thinking about going to college.
- If it helps others in my situation get more support, that's great. It seems I missed the timing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
IT Support Specialist (New York, NY)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad to see support for youth who really need it.
- While I've moved past college, these kinds of programs would have made my college days easier.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
High School Student (Houston, TX)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems like it could guide my transition to college life.
- Knowing there will be dedicated support at the schools is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retail Worker (Portland, OR)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It seems like a good initiative but doesn't directly apply to me anymore.
- I hope it can reach more kids who were in my situation and help them complete their education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Part-time Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Keeping college going while worrying about where to sleep isn't easy.
- If the policy can help with stable housing options through college, I'm all for it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Waitress (Seattle, WA)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've been thinking about going back to school, so this could be helpful.
- Programs like this might make it more feasible for people like me to return to education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Freelancer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- College wasn't my path, but I support anything that helps foster kids succeed.
- These programs could have made trade school experiences better by providing additional resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Graduate Student (Denver, CO)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Encouraging more programs for foster and homeless youth is definitely needed.
- I'm already on my path, but this could help my younger sister currently in foster care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Warehouse Assistant (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This would be more helpful to my sibling than it is to me now.
- Hopefully, it will enable young people with fewer resources to achieve what they want in education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)
Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $48000000, High: $68000000)
Year 10: $70000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $80000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $180000000, High: $220000000)
Key Considerations
- Approximately 4.2 million youth experiencing homelessness each year overlap with foster care issues, underscoring the scale of potential impact.
- The educational support provided can meaningfully improve future labor force participation and reduce dependency on government programs for this demographic.
- Recognizing institutions may drive more effective implementation of specialized programs in higher education settings.
- These increased efforts can potentially catalyze broader national education improvements for disadvantaged youth.