This story was originally published by The Imprint, a national nonprofit news outlet covering child welfare and youth justice. Sign up for The Imprint’s free newsletters here.
As of this summer, Minnesota’s family courts must review more timely and detailed plans for all foster youth as they approach age 18, making sure they’ve had the chance to weigh in and address a judge about any concerns.
The new law that took effect in July aims to ensure that local child welfare agencies provide young people aging out of government care with information about their options for secure housing and financial stability. The plans must show that the teenager was involved in case planning and offered extended foster care, which provides additional services through age 21.
Prior to this change, caseworkers were required to help foster youth 14 and older outline their post-foster care plans. Judges had oversight of this process at annual hearings, but there was no requirement in Minnesota for a court check-in during their final days in government custody.
Now, county child welfare agencies must file a detailed report with the court in the 90 days before a foster youth’s 18th birthday to ensure the young person has had time to consider extended foster care.
“It makes it more clear what the agency needs to tell a child and when the agency needs to tell a child this information, and, hopefully, then gives the child an opportunity to raise any issues, or fears or concerns they have about the transition,” said Natalie Netzel, a professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law. The reviews, she added, can work as “a protection that the conversation is actually going to happen and that it’s going to happen in detail, and that there will be a written record of it happening.”
In an email, a spokesperson for the Minnesota Department of Children, Youth and Families said the department proposed the legislation to make certain that the courts are “aware of the youth’s eligibility and agency decisions.”
Although Minnesota’s child welfare system is run by counties and tribes, it is overseen by the state, which has informed local governments, the courts and the Minnesota Association of County Social Service Administrators of the new requirements, and is providing technical assistance and resources.
In September 2023, there were 542 foster youth 18 and older in Minnesota’s foster care system — roughly 9% of the total. That same year, 352 17-year-olds approached adulthood, federal data shows.
The stakes are high for young people leaving the child welfare system, and they are more likely to end up homeless, unemployed and incarcerated than their peers in families. A recent report by the nonprofit Foster Advocates also cited increased frequency of mental illness and high school dropout rates among Minnesota’s former foster youth.
The report also described Minnesota’s racial disparity rate in foster care as one of the highest in the country. Native American children are 16 times more likely than their white peers to be placed in foster care, the report said, while biracial children are 8 times as likely and Black children twice as likely to enter foster care.
By age 24, Minnesota youth who had aged out of foster care reported earning an average of $575 a month. In contrast, young people in the general population earned a monthly $1,535 nationally, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
“Once they turn 18, they move out of their foster home,” said Karina Hunt of Connections to Independence, a nonprofit supporting foster youth between 14 and 24. “They’re out of their school environment, they’re potentially living on their own, and a lot of them don’t have permanent adults in their life.”
Hunt praised the new law and its accountability, but pointed to some shortcomings for youth whose lives are controlled by family courts.
Although she supports greater accountability for child welfare agencies tasked with preparing foster youth for independence, she said the court hearings 90 days before a youth’s 18th birthday may be too little, too late.
She also acknowledged the complexity and individual nature of foster youths’ relationships to the courts that manage their lives. Whether a foster youth has a good relationship with their lawyer or judge may shape whether they feel comfortable bringing grievances to a court setting, she said.
“I hope that young people feel empowered to actually take advantage of that if they need to,” Hunt said.
Since 2008, the federal Fostering Connections to Increase Adoptions Act has required local courts to oversee transition plans for foster youth as they reach adulthood, to avoid these outcomes.
“The new Minnesota law is an enhancement of this requirement,” said Jenny Pokempner, senior policy director for the national Youth Law Center, and an expert on extended foster care access.
The Minnesota law makes clear that if extended foster care is not a young person’s choice, there has to be another plan in place and youth must be informed that they can change their mind and enter extended foster care anytime before they turn 21.
But there are strings attached. Extended care is voluntary, but to qualify for financial support and other services, federal law requires that foster youth be in school, employed for at least 80 hours a month, or unable to do either because of a medical condition.
The federal rules act as a floor for the requirements that states can impose — not a ceiling, Pokempner said.
Some states have loosened the requirements for eligibility and use local funds to supplement money from the federal government. In Washington, for example, last year the state enacted a law that made enrollment at age 18 easier and ensures that all foster youth receive financial help regardless of whether they meet work and study requirements.
Pokempner described it as ideal when states expand eligibility beyond the federal requirements.
Much of the planning for post-independence secure housing and steady income takes place with social workers, attorneys and caregivers outside of court.
“But the court review is a critical forum and opportunity for accountability,” Pokempner said in an email. “If the case planning team is facing challenges in achieving the goals of the transition plan — or if the young person feels their concerns are not being addressed — the court is an important place to resolve these issues and develop and order responsive actions.”
