Order Code RL34483
Runaway and Homeless Youth: Reauthorization
Legislation and Issues in the 110th Congress
Updated September 3, 2008
Adrienne L. Fernandes
Analyst in Social Policy
Domestic Social Policy Division

---

Runaway and Homeless Youth: Reauthorization
Legislation and Issues in the 110th Congress
Summary
The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (RHYA) was signed into law in 1974
as Title III of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (P.L. 93-415) and
was last reauthorized in 2003 (P.L. 108-96) for FY2004 through FY2008. RHYA
authorizes funding for programs to support runaway and homeless youth, as well as
related training, research, and other activities. These programs and activities are
administered by the Family and Youth Services Bureau (FYSB) in the Department
of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Administration for Children and Families.
Two bills to reauthorize RHYA are under consideration in the House and
Senate. On March 4, 2008, Representative John Yarmuth introduced the
Reconnecting Homeless Youth Act of 2008 (H.R. 5524). On June 9, 2008, the
House passed the bill under suspension of the rules. On May 6, 2008, Senator Patrick
Leahy introduced the Runaway and Homeless Youth Protection Act (S. 2982), and
on May 22, 2008, the Senate Judiciary Committee favorably reported the bill. S.
2982 was incorporated into the Advancing America’s Priorities Act (S. 3297), an
omnibus bill introduced on July 22, 2008. A motion for the Senate to consider S.
3297 was withdrawn on July 27, 2008, and no further action has been taken.
This report discusses the two reauthorization bills and includes a table with a
side-by-side comparison of their provisions, along with current law and regulation.
The bills share the common goals of broadening services for and awareness of
runaway and homeless youth and expanding congressional oversight of the programs
and activities established by RHYA. The means for meeting these goals include
amending provisions related to program funding, requirements, accountability, and
outreach. For example, the legislation would amend the Runaway and Homeless
Youth Act to increase authorization of appropriations over current levels for the three
programs that provide direct services to youth: the Basic Center Program (BCP),
Transitional Living Program (TLP), and Street Outreach Program (SOP). The bills
would also permit youth to remain in BCP and TLP shelters for a longer period and
enable the HHS Secretary to reallot any unused BCP funds from one state to other
states. Other major proposed changes would require HHS to regularly submit a report
to Congress that describes the incidence and prevalence of runaway and homeless
youth. Although the areas addressed by the three bills are similar, notable differences
include the definition of “homeless youth” for purposes of the BCP, as well as
funding levels for certain activities under RHYA.
Several issues regarding runaway and homeless youth have become prominent.
One issue, reflected in the pending legislation, is the amount of funding allocated to
grantees under the three direct-service programs. Grantees have raised the concern
that, although Congress has periodically increased funding authorization for RHYA,
funding for individual grantees has remained relatively stable. A second issue is the
lack of outcome data for youth once they leave RHYA-funded facilities. Other issues
include changing personnel needs within grantee organizations and concerns that
runaway and homeless youth face particular challenges as they transition to
adulthood. This report will be updated as significant legislative activity occurs.

---

Contents
Overview of Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Length of Stay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Definition of “Homeless Youth” and “Runaway Youth” . . . . . . . . . . . 4
TLP Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Priority Applicants for the SOP and Research Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Performance Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Grant Review Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Prevalence and Incidence Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Youth Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Evaluation of TLP Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Revisions to PART Outcome Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Changing Personnel Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Runaway and Homeless Youth as “Disconnected Youth” . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
List of Tables
Table A-1: Comparison of Current Law (and Regulations, if Applicable)
with H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

---

Runaway and Homeless Youth:
Reauthorization Legislation and Issues
in the 110th Congress
The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (RHYA) was signed into law in 1974
as Title III of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (P.L. 93-415) and
was last reauthorized in 2003 (P.L. 108-96) for FY2004 through FY2008. The act
authorizes funding for grant programs that provide direct services to youth — the
Basic Center Program (BCP), Transitional Living Program (TLP), and Street
Outreach Program (SOP) — and related training, research, and other activities.1
These programs and activities are administered by the Family and Youth Services
Bureau in the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Administration for
Children and Families. The Basic Center Program provides temporary shelter,
counseling, and after care services to runaway and homeless youth under age 18 and
their families, while the Transitional Living Program is targeted to older youth ages
16 to 21. Youth who use the TLP receive longer-term housing with supportive
services. The Street Outreach Program provides education, treatment, counseling,
and referrals for runaway, homeless, and street youth who have been subjected to or
are at risk of being subjected to sexual abuse and exploitation.
Two bills to reauthorize RHYA are under consideration in the House and
Senate.2 On March 4, 2008, Representative John Yarmuth introduced the
Reconnecting Homeless Youth Act of 2008 (H.R. 5524). On June 9, 2008, the
House passed the bill under suspension of the rules. The version of the bill that was
passed contains most of the same provisions as the original version. On May 6, 2008,
Senator Patrick Leahy introduced the Runaway and Homeless Youth Protection Act
(S. 2982), and on May 22, 2008, the Senate Judiciary Committee favorably reported
1 For detailed program information, see CRS Report RL33785, Runaway and Homeless
Youth: Demographics, Programs, and Emerging Issues, by Adrienne L. Fernandes.
2 The 110th Congress has conducted three hearings concerning RHYA reauthorization: (1)
U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Education and Labor. Subcommittee on Healthy
Families and Communities. Runaway, Homeless, and Missing Children: Perspectives on
Helping the Nation’s Vulnerable Youth. Hearings. 110th Congress, 1st session, July 24, 2007.
Transcript available at [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_
house_hearings&docid=f:36729.pdf]. (2) U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Ways and
Means. Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support. Disconnected and
Disadvantaged Youth. Hearings. 110th Congress, 1st session, June 19, 2007. Written
testimony available at [http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.asp?formmode=detail&
hearing=569]. (3) U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Living on the Street:
Finding Solutions to Protect Runaway and Homeless Youth. 110th Congress, 2nd session,
April 29, 2008. Written testimony available at [http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?
id=3312].

---

CRS-2
S. 2982 to the full Senate.3 The reported version includes an amendment to substitute
the original bill with new language, most of which is derived from that original bill.
S. 2982 was incorporated into the Advancing America’s Priorities Act (S. 3297), an
omnibus bill that was introduced on July 22, 2008. A motion for the Senate to
consider S. 3297 was withdrawn on July 27, 2008, and no further action has been
taken.
This report first provides an overview of pending RHYA reauthorization
provisions, followed by a discussion of related issues. Table A-1 at the end of the
report provides a side-by-side comparison of H.R. 5524 and S. 2982, along with
current law and regulation.
Overview of Provisions
H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 share the common goals of broadening services for and
awareness of runaway and homeless youth and expanding congressional oversight
of the programs established by RHYA. The means for meeting the two primary goals
include amending provisions related to program funding, requirements,
accountability, and outreach. The bills include several of the same provisions;
however, substantive differences include:
! Funding. H.R. 5524 would authorize funding for a new homeless
youth awareness campaign at $3 million for each of FY2009 through
FY2013, while S. 2982 would authorize $3 million for FY2009 and
such sums as may be necessary for each of FY2010 through
FY2013. The bills also differ on the authorized annual minimum
levels of BCP funding available for states and territories.
! Requirements. H.R. 5524 would allow youth to remain in a
program funded under the Basic Center Program and Transitional
Living Program longer than is provided under current regulation, if
permitted under state or local law. S. 2982 would extend the stay for
youth in shelters funded under both programs, regardless of
exceptions provided under state or local law.
! Accountability. H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 would direct HHS to
routinely conduct, directly or indirectly, an incidence and prevalence
study of runaway and homeless youth ages 13 to 26, as well as the
characteristics of a representative sample of these youth. The
provisions concerning the study are nearly identical in the bills;
however, H.R. 5524 requires HHS to consult with the U.S.
Interagency Council on Homelessness on the study.
3 A third bill, the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act Reauthorization of 2008 was
introduced on August 3, 2007, by Representative Raul Grijalva as Title II, Subtitle A of A
Place to Call Home Act (H.R. 3409), an omnibus youth policy and child welfare bill.
However, the bill has not been voted on by the House Education and Labor Committee or
the full House.

---

CRS-3
! Outreach. The two bills would require HHS to conduct a national
homeless youth awareness campaign. S. 2982 proposes slightly
different purposes of the campaign and uses of funds for the
campaign, compared to H.R. 5524.
Below is a discussion of the bills’ similarities and differences, as well as
background on current law and practice. The areas described are the primary
provisions in the respective bills and do not encompass all aspects of the legislation.
Funding
P.L. 108-96 authorizes funding for all parts4 of the Runaway and Homeless
Youth Act, except the Street Outreach Program, at $105 million for FY2004 and such
sums as may be necessary for FY2005 through FY2008. The Street Outreach
Program is authorized to receive such sums as may be necessary for FY2004 through
FY2008. The reauthorization bills seek to increase authorization of appropriations
for FY2009 to $150 million and such sums as may be necessary for FY2010 through
FY2013 for all parts of the act (except the Street Outreach Program, the national
homeless youth awareness campaign, and the prevalence study). The bills would
authorize $30 million for the SOP for FY2009 and such sums as may be necessary
for FY2010 through FY2013.
Further, the two bills would authorize up to $3 million for the national homeless
youth campaign for each of FY2009 through FY2013, while S. 2982 would authorize
$3 million for FY2009 and such sums as may be necessary for the other years. Both
bills would authorize such sums as may be necessary for the periodic estimate
assessment.5
H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 would also amend the funding structure for the Basic
Center Program. Funding for the Basic Center Program and related training and other
activities is allocated among states and territories. Under current law, states and
territories may receive a minimum annual allotment of $100,000 and $45,000,
respectively, in BCP funds. Funding allocated for states in excess of $100,000 is
determined by each state’s relative share of the population under age 18. H.R. 5524
would increase the annual minimum funding available for states to $150,000, while
S. 2982 would increase the state minimum to $200,000. Both bills seek to increase
the annual minimum funding for territories to $70,000.
H.R. 5524 would also provide that funding for each state in FY2009 and
FY2010 is to be no less than the amount allotted to that state for FY2008 (the bill is
4 Currently, Part A pertains to the BCP; Part B pertains to the TLP; Part C pertains to the
National Communication System; Part D pertains to coordinating, training, research, and
other activities; Part E pertains to the SOP; and Part F pertains to general provisions, such
as assistance to potential grantees, lease of surplus federal facilities, reports, records,
definitions, and authorization of appropriations, among other provisions.
5 Unlike H.R. 5524, S. 2982 would include a conforming amendment to exclude the periodic
estimate assessment (as proposed as Sec. 345 under Part D) from receiving funding that is
allocated to activities under Part C or Part D.

---

CRS-4
silent on a minimum for territories in those years). S. 2982 does not propose this
change. Further, in contrast to current law, the proposed bills would enable the HHS
Secretary to reallot any funds from one state to another that are not obligated before
the end of a fiscal year. The two bills do not propose changes to the funding structure
for the Transitional Living Program and Street Outreach Program. Funds for these
programs are allocated competitively by HHS to community-based organizations.
Requirements
Length of Stay. The reauthorization bills propose to change program
requirements related to the length of time that youth are eligible to stay in Basic
Center Program and Transitional Living Program facilities; the authorized use of
funds for the TLP; and the applicants that are prioritized under the Street Outreach
Program.
Current regulation specifies that youth may remain at a BCP shelter for up to 15
days. H.R. 5524 would permit youth to stay at a shelter for up to 21 days if the
project is located in a state or locality with an applicable law or regulation that
permits a length of stay longer than 15 days. S. 2982 would provide that youth may
be sheltered for up to 21 days at a BCP shelter, however, the bill does not specify that
the project must be located in a state or locality that allows for this longer stay.
Current law specifies that shelter at the TLP may be provided for up to 540 days
(18 months), and youth under 18 may remain in the program an additional 180 days
(six months) or until the youth turns 18, whichever comes first. H.R. 5524 would add
that a youth may remain in the program for a continuous period of 635 days
(approximately 21 months) if permitted under state or local law or regulation. S.
2982 would amend the language under current law to allow youth to remain in the
program continuously for up to 635 days, and permit a youth under age 18 to remain
in the program until their 18th birthday or 180 days after the 635-day period,
whichever comes first.
Definition of “Homeless Youth” and “Runaway Youth”. Under current
law, “homeless youth” for purposes of the BCP is defined as youth more than 18
years old for whom it is not possible to live in a safe environment with a relative and
for whom no other safe alternative living arrangement exists. H.R. 5524 would
amend the first clause to define “homeless youth” as youth less than 18 years old or
an older maximum age if the BCP center is located in a state or locality with a law
or regulation that permits a higher age. S. 2982 does not propose to change this
definition.
Further, under current law, “homeless youth” is defined for the TLP as an
individual ages 16 to 21 for whom it is not possible to live in a safe environment with
a relative and for whom no other safe alternative living arrangement exists. H.R.
5524 proposes to change the first clause of the definition to include an individual
between the ages of 16 and 22 or an age exceeding 22 years old upon exiting the TLP
project (as permitted under proposed Sec. 322(a)) so long as the participant enters the
TLP project prior to reaching age 22. S. 2982 would also change the first clause by
defining “homeless youth” as an individual between the ages of 16 and 22 and
specifying that nothing in the clause is to prevent a participant who enters a TLP

---

CRS-5
project prior to reaching age 22 from being eligible for a continuous 635-day stay, as
proposed under S. 2982.
Finally, under current regulation, a “runaway youth” is defined as a person under
age 18 who absents himself or herself from home or place of legal residence without
the permission of his or her family. S. 2982 would insert similar language into law
to include youth who leave home or their place of residence without the permission
of his or her parent or legal guardian. H.R. 5524 does not propose to change this
definition.
TLP Plan. To currently qualify for funding under the TLP, applicants must
submit a plan to the HHS Secretary specifying that they will provide, directly or
indirectly, shelter and services, among other types of assistance. H.R. 5524 and S.
2982 would amend the law to require that applicants provide, directly or by contract,
shelter and to provide, directly or indirectly, services and other assistance.
Priority Applicants for the SOP and Research Projects. Currently, the
law requires that in selecting applicants to receive SOP grants, HHS is to prioritize
non-profit private agencies with experience in providing services to runaway and
homeless youth, including youth living on the street. The bills would require that
HHS also give priority to public agencies.
H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 would also make changes to the priority areas for
awarding grants for research, evaluation, demonstration, and service projects.
Currently, the Secretary is to give special consideration to proposed projects relating
to these projects in nine priority areas that are specified in the law. For example, one
of the priority areas concerns special needs of programs that place runaway and
homeless youth in host family sites. H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 would amend the law to
state that the Secretary is to give priority to the priority areas. The bills would also
modify the language about two of these priority areas, including to expand the
description of the area concerning education-related projects for runaway and
homeless youth, and add as a priority area programs that assist youth in obtaining and
maintaining safe and stable housing. Another related change involves giving priority
consideration to certain applicants. Under current law, the Secretary is to give priority
consideration to applicants with experience working with runaway and homeless
youth. The bills would add that the Secretary is to ensure selected applicants
represent diverse geographic regions of the U.S. and carry out projects that serve
diverse youth.
Accountability
Provisions that seek to improve accountability of the Runaway and Homeless
Youth Act are found throughout the reauthorization bills.
Performance Standards. RHYA and accompanying regulations do not
explicitly set forth performance standards for the grantees. However, grantees are
collectively expected to meet certain performance measures established by the Office

---

CRS-6
of Management and Budget’s Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) process.6
The performance measures are as follows:
! achieve the proportion of youth served in the TLP entering safe and
appropriate settings directly after exiting care at 85% by FY2008 and
maintain this level through FY2010 (long-term outcome measure);
! increase funding efficiency by increasing the percent of youth who
complete the TLP by graduating or who leave ahead of schedule on
the basis of opportunity (long-term efficiency measure);
! increase the percentage of TLP youth participants who are engaged
in community service and service learning activities while in the
program (outcome measure); and
! increase by 2% annually, beginning in FY2008, the proportion of
youth who are prevented from running away through BCP in-home
or off-site services as a percentage of all youth receiving such
services, including those youth who must be fully admitted to the
shelter despite such preventative efforts (outcome measure).
Data for these outcome measures are collected from each grantee through the
NEO-RHYMIS (National Extranet Optimized Runaway and Homeless Youth
Management Information System) reporting system, which includes a range of data
elements on the characteristics and short-term outcomes of youth receiving services
through the BCP, TLP, and SOP.7 Further, during the grant application process,
described below, applicants must discuss the results or benefits expected from their
programs. For example, applicants are advised to identify quantitative outcomes for
their proposed projects that will fulfill the program purpose and scope of services as
described in RHYA and the grant announcement.
The proposed bills would amend RHYA to require that within one year after
enactment, the HHS Secretary is to issue rules that specify performance standards for
public and non-profit entities that receive BCP, TLP, and SOP grants. They would
also require the Secretary to provide an opportunity for public comment before final
rules for the performance standards are issued. In addition to these provisions, the
bills would direct the Secretary to integrate the performance standards into the
grantmaking, monitoring, and evaluations processes for the BCP, TLP, and SOP.
Grant Review Process. Applicants for BCP, TLP, and SOP funding are
currently evaluated and rated by an independent review panel made up of non-federal
reviewers who are experts in the field of runaway and homeless youth issues.8 The
6 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Detailed Assessment on the Runaway and
Homeless Youth Assessment, 2003 and U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Detailed
Assessment on the Runaway and Homeless Youth Assessment, 2007, available at
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/summary/10001064.2006.html]. (Hereafter
PART 2003 or PART 2007.)
7 For additional information about NEO-RHYMIS, see [https://extranet.acf.hhs.gov/rhymis/
custom_reports.html].
8 For additional information about the grant review process, see archived grant funding
(continued...)

---

CRS-7
review panel uses evaluation criteria to assign a score up to 100 for each applicant
and to identify the application’s strengths and weaknesses. The criteria are
established in regulation9 and described in greater detail in the grant announcements.
As set forth in the grant announcements, these criteria include (1) approach
(i.e., the extent to which the application identifies the services that will be provided,
required by and consistent with RHYA and FYSB program requirements, among
other requirements); (2) organizational profiles (i.e., the extent to which the
application demonstrates the organizational capacity necessary to oversee federal
grants through an explanation of the organization’s fiscal controls and governance
structure, among other requirements); (3) results or benefits expected (i.e., the extent
to which the applicant identifies quantitative outcomes for the proposed project that
will fulfill the program purpose and scope of services as described in RHYA and the
grant announcement, among other requirements); (4) objectives and need for
assistance (i.e., the extent to which the applicant describes clear and appropriate
program objectives that will fulfill the program purpose, and the extent to which the
applicant describes a clear need for the proposed project through a discussion of the
conditions of youth and families in the area to be served, among other requirements);
(5) staff and position data (i.e., the extent to which the applicant includes an
organizational chart that demonstrates the relationship between all positions
(including consultants, sub-grants and/or contractors) to be funded through the grant,
among other requirements); and (6) budget and budget justification (i.e., the extent
to which a detailed line-item budget for the federal and non-federal share of project
costs is included in the application and demonstrates how cost estimates were
derived).
As further described in the grant announcements, the review panel’s assigned
scores assist the FYSB Associate Commissioner and program staff in considering
applications. Applications are generally ranked in order of the average scores
assigned by reviewers; however, the scores, in combination with other factors,
determine whether an application is funded. These factors include, but are not
limited to, comments of reviewers and government officials, HHS staff evaluation
and input, geographic distribution, previous program performance of applicants,
compliance with grant terms under previous HHS grants, audit reports, investigative
reports, and an applicant’s progress in resolving any final audit disallowance on
previous FYSB or other federal agency grants. According to HHS, RHYA grants are
highly competitive, and as a result, these various factors may prohibit well-qualified
applicants from receiving funding.10 Further, in some years, applicants with scores
in the 90s have not been awarded grants because such a large number of applicants
receive scores of 100 or close to 100.
8 (...continued)
announcements for the program, [http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_archive.html].
9 45 C.F.R. 1351.81.
10 Based on correspondence with the Department of Health and Human Services on
September 21, 2007.

---

CRS-8
HHS does not have an appeals process for unsuccessful applicants; however, in
accordance with HHS’s Awarding Agency Grants Administration Manual
(AAGAM), unsuccessful applicants are notified by letter that they were not awarded
funding, with a full explanation of the reasons the application was not funded.11 The
letter contains a compilation of review comments outlining the strengths and
weaknesses of their application as identified by the panel of non-federal reviewers.
Compilations are also available for successful applications; however, they are only
sent at the request of these applicants. Scores are not automatically sent to any
applicants but are available upon request.
H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 would direct the Government Accountability Office to
examine the process by which organizations apply for BCP, TLP, and SOP grants
under RHYA. Specifically, GAO is to make findings and recommendations relating
to (1) the Secretary’s written responses to and other communications with
unsuccessful applicants to determine if the information in the response is conveyed
clearly; (2) the content of the grant applications and other associated documents to
determine if these materials are presented in a way that gives an applicant a clear
understanding of the information that is to be provided and the terminology used in
the materials; (c) the peer review process (if any) for the grants; (d) the typical
timeframe for responding to applicants and the efforts made by HHS staff to
communicate about delayed funding decisions; and (e) the plans for implementation
of RHYA-authorized technical assistance and training programs, and the effect of
such programs on the application process for the grantees.12
Prevalence and Incidence Studies. The precise number of homeless and
runaway youth is unknown due to their residential mobility and other factors, and
RHYA is silent on whether HHS or any other entity is to approximate this number.
These youth often eschew the shelter system for locations or areas that are not easily
accessible to shelter workers and others who count the homeless and runaways.13
Determining the number of homeless and runaway youth is further complicated by
the lack of a standardized methodology for counting the population and inconsistent
definitions of what it means to be homeless or a runaway.14 In response to a 2002
congressional request through the appropriations process,15 HHS submitted a report
to Congress in 2003 that discusses a plan for developing estimates of the incidences
11 Ibid, February 26, 2008.
12 For information about recent changes to the training and technical assistance programs,
see CRS Report RL33785, Runaway and Homeless Youth: Demographics and Programs,
by Adrienne L. Fernandes.
13 Christopher L. Ringwalt et al., “The Prevalence of Homelessness Among Adolescents in
the United States,” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 88, no. 9 (September 1998), p.
1325.
14 Ibid.
15 The Senate Appropriations Committee made this request in S.Rept. 107-84 to accompany
the Senate version of the Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations Bill for 2002 (S. 1536).
Companion legislation (H.R. 3061) was signed into law as P.L. 107-116. The report,
Incidence and Preavlence of Runaway and Homeless Youth, is available at
[http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/fys/design_opt/reports/incidence/incidence.pdf].

---

CRS-9
of runaway, throwaway, homeless, and street experiences among youth, as well as a
plan for regularly monitoring incidence trends.16
The reauthorization bills seek to determine the number of youth who have run
away or are homeless by requiring HHS to estimate, at five year intervals —
beginning within two years of the enactment of the bills — the incidence and
prevalence of the runaway and homeless youth population ages 13 to 26. The bills
would also require HHS to assess the characteristics of these youth. HHS would be
required to conduct a survey of and direct interviews with a representative sample of
homeless youth ages 13 to 26 to determine past and current socioeconomic
characteristics, barriers to obtaining housing and other services, and other
information the Secretary determines useful, in consultation with states and other
entities concerned with youth homelessness. The bills are silent regarding how the
studies are to be conducted, except to say that the Secretary should make the estimate
based on the best quantitative and qualitative social science research methods
available. Further, if the Secretary enters into an agreement with a non-federal entity
to carry out the assessment, the entity is to be a non-governmental organization or
individual determined by the Secretary to have expertise in this type of research.
Outreach
RHYA lacks specific provisions about methods for heightening public
awareness about runaway and homeless youth. According to HHS, the agency funds
outreach efforts to the public in three ways.17 First, a portion of BCP and TLP funds
are allocated for a national communications system to help homeless and runaway
youth (or youth who are contemplating running away) through counseling, referrals,
and providing a means for communicating with their families. With this funding, the
National Runaway Switchboard, a non-profit organization, has administered a crisis
hotline for youth and their families since FY1974. It has also provided outreach and
educational materials on resources to assist runaway and homeless youth.18 Second,
the National Clearinghouse on Youth and Families, an FYSB-funded resource center,
produces publications for the general public about the Runaway and Homeless Youth
Program. Finally, according to HHS, RHYA grantees conduct local advocacy and
outreach efforts, and public service announcements to attract youth eligible for
services. As described in grant announcements for the BCP, TLP, and SOP, grant
applicants are evaluated, in part, on the basis of their efforts to establish outreach
efforts to youth, including minority sub-groups of youth, where applicable.
16 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Evaluation, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for
Children and Families, Incidence and Prevalence of Homeless and Runaway Youth, May
9, 2003; available at [http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/fys/design_opt/reports/
incidence/incidence.pdf].
17 Based on correspondence with the Department of Health and Human Services on March
20, 2008.
18 Educational and promotional materials are available on the National Runaway
Switchboard’s website, [http://www.1800runaway.org/default.html].

---

CRS-10
The reauthorization legislation seeks to more formally increase awareness
among the general public of the issues facing runaway and homeless youth. The bills
specify that the HHS is to conduct a national homeless youth awareness campaign,
either directly or by contract, and limits how funds for the campaign may be used.
(The bills differ slightly in specifying how funds may be used.) H.R. 5524 and S.
2982 would direct the Secretary to conduct audits and reviews of the costs of the
campaign, pursuant to the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949
(41 U.S.C. 254d) and to determine if the costs are allowable under this law. The bills
would further require the HHS Secretary to test and evaluate the effectiveness of the
campaign, and to report to Congress a summary of the campaign that describes its
activities. The bills vary in the level of funding that would be authorized for the
campaign: H.R. 5524 proposes $3 million each year for FY2009 through FY2013,
and S. 2982 proposes $3 million for FY2009 and such sums as may be necessary for
the other four years.
Issues
Funding
While funding has increased overall for the Runaway and Homeless Youth
Program, from $103.0 million in FY2001 to $113.3 million in FY2008, individual
grantees have reported not receiving additional funds over this period. The
Government Accountability Office described in its report on disconnected youth that
funding has remained stagnant for federal youth programs, including those funded
by the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act. The report states: “While overall
Transitional Living Program funding increased in FY2002 to support a greater
number of programs, the amount available to individual local programs — capped
at $200,000 — has not changed since 1992. One [runaway and homeless] program
director explained that considering increases in the cost of operation, this amount
funds only part of one staff rather than three as in previous years.”19 At the April 29,
2008, hearing conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee on runaway and
homeless youth issues, providers and advocates voiced this same concern. A
provider in Vermont explained that his RHYA-funded programs have been
level-funded since 1994, while costs have risen significantly.20
An analysis of per grantee award amounts from FY2004 through FY2007
indicates that BCP and TLP funding has remained stable or has declined slightly.21
19 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Disconnected Youth: Federal Action Could
Address Some of the Challenges Faced by Local Programs That Reconnect Youth to
Education and Employment, GAO-08-313, February 2008, p. 29.
20 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Living on the Street: Finding
Solutions to Protect Runaway and Homeless Youth. 110th Congress, 2nd session, April 29,
2008. Written testimony is available at [http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=3312].
21 Based on a Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of appropriation information
and the reported number of grantees, as provided in the U.S. Department of Health and
(continued...)

---

CRS-11
For example, $44.4 million in BCP funds was awarded to 345 grantees for FY2004,
resulting in an average grant of $128,734. For FY2007, approximately $43.3 million
was awarded to 336 grantees, with an average grant amount of about $128,821.
Average TLP award amounts declined over the period from FY2004 through
FY2007. For FY2004, 194 grantees shared $36,744,000 in TLP funds, resulting in
an average grant of $189,402. The average grant award decreased to $181,558 for
FY2007, when 190 grantees shared $34,496,000 in TLP funds.
Youth Outcomes
Little is known about the outcomes of youth after they exit programs for
runaway and homeless youth. Local grantee organizations have limited information
about youth after they leave care, and research on whether youth experience
homelessness as adults is dated. Some grantees may decide to follow up with youth
who received services, but HHS does not require short-term longitudinal data
collection. HHS’s 2007 report to Congress, Promising Strategies to End Youth
Homelessness, states that longer-term studies of runaway and homeless youth are
challenging because of the youth’s transient nature.22 Further, knowledge about
effective strategies for serving these youth is limited23 and few, if any, studies appear
to have been conducted to determine the costs and benefits of these interventions.
Studies of intervention programs have not been based on rigorous design, primarily
due to ethical concerns in assigning homeless youth (or youth at risk of becoming
homeless) to a control group. According to the Promising Strategies report, creating
studies that compare groups of homeless youth is complicated by the diversity in the
population and the tendency for these youth to experience episodic periods of
homelessness. (Conducting such an evaluation may also be financially prohibitive.)
Evaluation of TLP Sites. In response to the need for longer-term evaluations,
HHS approved a sub-contract to Abt Associates in August 2007 to conduct an
evaluation of the Transitional Living Program at select grantee sites.24 The study
seeks to describe the outcomes of youth who participate in the program and to isolate
and describe factors that may have contributed to their successes or challenges,
including service delivery approaches, personal characteristics, and local
21 (...continued)
Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Justification of Estimates for
Appropriations Committees, FY2006 through FY2009.
22 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Promising Strategies to End Youth
Homelessness, Report to Congress, 2007. Available at [http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/
fysb/content/docs/reporttocongress_youthhomelessness.pdf]. This report was required
under P.L. 108-96. See 42 U.S.C. 5701.
23 Interventions can include case management, working with the youth’s family, and social
skills training, among other areas. For a review of research on intervention and prevention
of homeless and runaway situations, see Paul A. Toro, Amy Dworsky, and Patrick J. Fowler,
Homeless Youth in the United States: Recent Research Findings and Intervention
Approaches, 2007 National Symposium on Homelesness Research, March 2007. Available
at [http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/homelessness/symposium07/toro/index.htm].
24 Based on correspondence with the Department Health and Human Services on March 28,
2008.

---

CRS-12
circumstances. The Family and Youth Services Bureau and Abt researchers have
conducted three site visits to TLP grantees (in Dallas, Texas; Portland, Oregon; and
Wichita, Kansas) and a series of consultations with HHS and outside experts to
inform the design of the study.
FYSB has not yet selected the TLP survey sites; however, the sites will likely
have extensive experience working with runaway and homeless youth and have
continuous TLP funding for at least three years after the survey commences. These
sites will work to ensure that after receiving training, staff will be sufficiently capable
of administering the survey instruments. The sites will also need to be large enough
to capture an adequate sample size.
Youth participants will complete surveys at entry and while receiving services
through a survey administered by their TLP programs. They will also complete
surveys after leaving the program for up to one year. Youth will self-report the data
to a website six months and twelve months after exiting. Evaluators will compare the
individual outcomes of each youth to his or her benchmark data. The youth surveys
are pending executive branch review, and FYSB expects to begin collecting the data
in late calendar year 2008. Data collection will be completed after the final group of
youth are out of the program for at least one year. FYSB anticipates making
preliminary information available before the last surveys are completed. Further,
FYSB expects to maintain the self-reporting website indefinitely as a means of
tracking TLP graduates after the formal study is complete.
HHS plans to issue a proposed information collection request for public
comment about the evaluation in the Federal Register by fall of 2008.25
Revisions to PART Outcome Measures. In response to an assessment by
the PART, HHS has also revised its four annual PART performance measures,
described above, for the program to better capture youth outcomes.
Changing Personnel Needs
A review of testimony from the 2003 reauthorization of the Runaway and
Homeless Youth Act before the House Education and Labor Committee indicated
that the witnesses were generally satisfied with the services of the program and the
mission of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act.26 Witnesses said that the program
had also been successful in serving youth of different racial and ethnic backgrounds.
However, witnesses raised concerns about the changing personnel needs within
grantee organizations. They indicated that grantees needed financial support to
attract and retain professional staff who are bilingual. They reported that bilingual
staff who helped youth and their families obtain needed services through the program
were often hired away to positions in schools and social service agencies that pay
higher salaries.
25 Ibid, June 5, 2008.
26 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Education and the Workforce. Subcommittee on
Select Education. Missing, Exploited, and Runaway Youth; Strengthening the System.
Hearings. 108th Congress, 1st Session, April 29, 2003. Washington: GPO, 2003.

---

CRS-13
During CRS site visits conducted at grantee organizations in the Washington,
D.C. metropolitan area in November 2006, grantees said that staff are needed for a
large number of less common languages in addition to the more ubiquitous Spanish.
For example, a growing number of Pakistani youth are using services provided by
Northern Virginia’s only Runaway and Homeless Youth Program grantee. Although
many of these youth are fluent in English, their parents and extended families rely
primarily on Urdu and other languages to communicate.
Runaway and Homeless Youth as “Disconnected Youth”
The concept of “disconnected youth” has recently gained currency among
federal policymakers and youth advocates who have raised concerns about the
negative outcomes these individuals face in adulthood. On June 19, 2007, the House
Ways and Means Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support held a
hearing on disconnected and disadvantaged youth, with a focus on runaway youth.27
Witnesses described that “disconnected youth” refer to those youth who have weak
social networks of family, friends, and communities that provide assistance such as
employment connections, health insurance coverage, housing, tuition and other
financial assistance, and emotional support. They also discussed measurable
characteristics to indicate that vulnerable youth groups are disconnected, such as the
lack of high school or college attendance coupled with not having a job over a
specific period of time (e.g., one year).28
Some runaway and homeless youth are vulnerable to becoming disconnected
because of separation from their families, absence from school, and non-participation
in the economy.29 Family conflict — rooted in abuse and neglect, school problems,
and drug and alcohol abuse — can compel youth to leave home. Family
disconnectedness is also evident among many runaway and homeless youth involved
in the foster care system. These youth are brought to the attention of child welfare
services because of incidents of abuse and neglect. Further, youth “aging out” of the
foster care system experience homelessness at a greater rate than their counterparts
in the general population due, in part, to family disconnectedness. Some gay and
lesbian youth also experience family disassociation when they come out about their
sexuality.
Some runaway and homeless youth spend time out of school while they are
away from a permanent home. The FY2007 NEO-RHYMIS survey indicated that
about 20% of youth were not attending school regularly before entering the Basic
27 The written testimony from the hearing is available at [http://waysandmeans.house.gov/
hearings.asp?formmode=detail&hearing=569].
28 For additional information about disconnected and other vulnerable youth, see CRS
Report RL33975, Vulnerable Youth: Background and Policies, by Adrienne L. Fernandes.
29 Bob Reeg, “The Runaway and Homeless Youth Act and Disconnected Youth,” in Jodie
Levin-Epstein and Mark H. Greenburg, eds., Leave No Youth Behind: Opportunities for
Congress to Reach Disconnected Youth (July 2003), pp. 56-63.

---

CRS-14
Center Program.30 Of youth in the Transitional Living Program, 21% had dropped
out of school. Some homeless youth face barriers to attending school because of
transportation problems and the absence of parents and guardians who can provide
records and permission for youth to participate in school activities. Finally, some
runaway and homeless youth are removed from the formal economy and resort to
illegal activity, including stealing and selling drugs in exchange for cash. Other such
youth are too young to work legally or experience mental health and other challenges
that make working difficult.
30 These figures were derived from the report, “Grade Completed at Exit.” See
[https://extranet.acf.hhs.gov/rhymis/].

---

CRS-15
Appendix
Table A-1: Comparison of Current Law (and Regulations, if Applicable)
with H.R. 5524 and S. 2982
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
Sec. 1. Short Title
Runaway and Homeless Youth
Reconnecting Homeless Youth Act of
(Sec. 1)
Act.
2008.
Runaway and Homeless Youth
Protection Act.
Sec. 2. Findings
Finding About Positive
No provision.
Adds as a purpose that services for
(Sec. 2)
Youth Development
runaway and homeless youth should
Same as H.R. 5524.
be developed and provided using a
Would amend Sec. 302
positive youth development approach
(42 U.S.C. 5701)
that ensures a young person a sense of
(a) safety and structure; (b) belonging
and membership; (c) self-worth and
social contribution; (d) independence
and control over one’s life; and (e)
closeness in interpersonal
relationships.
Sec. 3. Grants for Centers and Services
Youth’s Length of Stay
No provision related to length
1351.1(a)
Safe and appropriate shelter not to
(Sec. 3)
of stay. However, the law
“Temporary shelter” under the Basic
exceed 15 days, or not to exceed 21
Safe and appropriate shelter
Would amend Sec. 311(a)
specifies that services provided
Center Program is defined as “the
days, if the center is “located in a state
not to exceed 21 days.
(42 U.S.C. 5711)
by BCP projects include “safe
provision of short term (maximum of
or locality with an applicable law or
and appropriate shelter.”
15 days) room and board and core
regulation that permits a length of stay
crisis intervention services, on a
in excess of 15 days in compliance
24-hour basis, by a runaway and
with licensure requirements for child
homeless youth project.”
and youth serving facilities.”

---

CRS-16
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
Grants for States and
An annual minimum of
To the extent that sufficient funds are
(Sec. 3)
Territories
$100,000 for each state and an
available, and subject to the provision
An annual minimum of
annual minimum of $45,000
about funding for FY2009 and
$200,000 for each state and an
Would amend Sec. 311(b)
for each territory.
FY2010, an annual minimum of
annual minimum of $70,000
of
$150,000 for each state and an annual
for each territory.
(42 U.S.C. 5711)
minimum of $70,000 for each
territory.
Minimum Funding for
No provision.
Funding for each state in FY2009 and
No provision.
FY2009 and FY2010
FY2010 is to be no less than the
amount allotted to that state for
Would amend Sec. 311(b)
FY2008.
(42 U.S.C. 5711)
Reallocation of Unused
No provision.
The Secretary shall reallot any funds
(Sec. 3)
Funds
from one state to other states that will
Same as H.R. 5524, with a few
not be obligated before the end of a
minor, non-substantive
Would amend Sec. 311(b)
fiscal year.
differences in the text.
(42 U.S.C. 5711)
Sec. 4. Basic Center Grant Program Eligibility
Adequate Emergency
No provision.
Projects must develop an adequate
(Sec. 3)
Preparedness and
emergency preparedness and
Same as H.R. 5524.
Management Plan
management plan.
Would amend Sec. 312(b)
(42 U.S.C. 5712(b))
Sec. 5. Transitional Living Grant Program Eligibility
Provision of Shelter,
To qualify for funding,
Applicants must specify in their plans
(Sec. 4)
Services, and Other
applicants must agree in their
that they will provide, directly or by
Same as H.R. 5524, with a few
Assistance
plan submitted to the Secretary
contract, shelter and to provide,
minor, non-substantive
that they will provide, directly
directly or indirectly, services related
differences in the text.
Would amend Sec. 322(a)
or indirectly, shelter and
to basic life skills and other services.
(42 U.S.C. 5714-2(a))
services related to basic life
skills and other services.

---

CRS-17
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
Youth’s Length of Stay in
Not to exceed a continuous
Adds that youth may remain in the
(Sec. 4)
Program
period of 540 days, except that
program for a continuous period of up
Not to exceed a continuous
youth under age 18 may remain
to 635 days if they are in a project
period of 635 days, except that
Would amend Sec. 322(a)
in the program until their 18th
“located in a state that has an
youth under age 18 may
(42 U.S.C. 5714-2(a))
birthday or the 180th day after
applicable state or local law or
remain in the program until
the end of the 540-day period,
regulation that permits a length of stay
their 18th birthday or the 180th
whichever comes first.
in excess of the 540-day period in
day after the end of the 635-
compliance with licensure
day period, whichever comes
requirements for child and youth
first.
serving facilities.”
Emergency Preparedness
No provision.
Transitional Living Program projects
(Sec. 4)
and Management Plan
must develop an adequate emergency
Same as H.R. 5524.
preparedness and management plan.
Would amend Sec. 322(a)
(42 U.S.C. 5714-2(a))
Sec. 6. Research, Evaluation, Demonstration, and Service Projects
Selection of Grantees
The Secretary is to give special
The Secretary is to give priority to
(Sec. 5)
consideration to proposed
projects focused on the nine priority
Same as H.R. 5524, with a few
Would amend Sec. 343(b)
projects relating to research,
areas in current law (with some
minor, non-substantive
(42 U.S.C. 5714-23)
evaluations, and
modifications to the descriptions of
differences in the text.
demonstrations in nine priority
the projects listed under paragraphs
areas, including (1) youth who
(8) and (9) in current law) as well an
repeatedly leave and remain
additional project under a new
away from their homes; (2)
paragraph (10): (8) increasing access
transportation related to
to quality health care (including
services provided under
behavioral health care) for youth; (9)
RHYA; (3) runaway and
increasing access to education for
homeless youth in rural areas;
runaway and homeless youth,
(4) programs that place
including access to educational and
runaway and homeless youth
workforce programs to achieve
with host families; (5) staff
outcomes such as decreasing high
training in sexual assault and
school dropout rates, increasing rates
victimization; (6) innovative
of attaining a secondary school
methods of developing
diploma or its recognized equivalent,

---

CRS-18
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
resources that enhance runaway
or increasing placement and retention
and homeless youth centers; (7)
in postsecondary education or
training for staff and youth
advanced workforce training
about the Human
programs; and (10) providing
Immunodeficiency Virus
programs, which shall include
(HIV); (8) increasing access to
innovative programs, that assist youth
health care (including mental
in obtaining and maintaining safe and
health care) for youth; and (9)
stable housing, and which may include
increasing access to education
programs with supportive services that
for runaway and homeless
continue after the youth complete the
youth.
remainder of the programs.
Priority Selection of
The Secretary is to give priority
Adds that the Secretary is to give
(Sec. 5)
Grantees
consideration to applicants with
priority consideration to applicants
Same as H.R. 5524, except that
experience working with
with experience working with
the applicants must have
Would amend Sec. 343(c)
runaway and homeless youth.
runaway and homeless youth and
experience working with
ensure that applicants selected
runaway and homeless youth
represent diverse geographic regions
in high-quality programs.
of the U.S. and carry out projects that
serve diverse youth.

---

CRS-19
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
Sec. 7. Estimate of Incidence and Prevalence of Youth Homelessness
Adds a new Section 345 under Part D (42 U.S.C. 5714-21-5714-24)
Periodic Estimate of
The Senate Appropriations
Not later than two years after this
(Sec. 6)
Incidence and Prevalence
Committee requested, through
provision becomes effective, and at
Same as H.R. 5524, except that
of Youth Homelessness
S.Rept. 107-84 (to accompany
subsequent five-year intervals, the
the Secretary is not directed to
S. 1536), that HHS submit a
Secretary, in coordination with the
consult with U.S. Interagency
Would add a new
report to Congress that
U.S. Interagency Council on
Council on Homelessness.
subsection Sec. 345(a)
discusses a plan for developing
Homelessness, shall prepare a written
Also, the text contains a few
estimates of the incidences of
report for the House Education and
minor, non-substantive
runaway, throwaway,
Labor Committee and Senate Judiciary
differences.
homeless, and street
Committee that contains an estimate,
experiences among youth, as
obtained using the best quantitative
well as a plan for regularly
and qualitative social science research
monitoring incidence trends.
methods available, of the incidence
This report was submitted in
and prevalence of runaway and
2003.
homeless youth ages 13 to 26, and
includes an assessment of the
characteristics of these youth.
Content of Incidence and
No provision.
Each assessment must contain the
(Sec. 6)
Prevalence Assessment
results of a survey of and direct
Same as H.R. 5524.
interviews with, a representative
Would add a new
sample of runaway and homeless
subsection Sec. 345(b)
youth ages 13 to 26 to determine past
and current (a) socioeconomic
characteristics; (b) barriers to
obtaining safe, quality, and affordable
housing; comprehensive and
affordable health insurance and health
services; and incomes, public benefits,
supportive services, and connections
to caring adults; and (c) other
information that the Secretary
determines may be useful, in
consultation with states, local units of

---

CRS-20
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
government, and national non-
governmental organizations concerned
with homelessness.
Implementation of
No provision.
If the Secretary enters into any
(Sec. 6)
Assessment
agreement with a non-federal entity to
Same as H.R. 5524.
carry out the assessment, such entity
Would add a new
shall be a non-governmental
subsection (Sec. 345(c))
organization, or an individual,
determined by the Secretary to have
appropriate expertise in quantitative
and qualitative social science research.
Sec. 8. Sexual Abuse Prevention Program (Note: also known as the Street Outreach Program)
Priorities in Selecting
In selecting applicants to
Same as current law, except that the
(Sec. 7)
Applicants
receive grants, the Secretary
Secretary shall also give priority to
Same as H.R. 5524.
shall give priority to non-profit
public agencies that have experience
Would amend Sec. 351(b)
private agencies that have
in providing services to runaway,
(42 U.S.C. 5714-41(b))
experience in providing
homeless, and street youth.
services to runaway, homeless,
and street youth.
Sec. 9. National Homeless Youth Awareness Campaign
Would redesignate current Part F as Part G and add a new Sec. 361 under new Part F
Purpose
No provision.
The Secretary shall, directly or
(Sec. 8)
through grants or contracts, conduct a
Same as H.R. 5524, except that
Would add a new
national homeless youth awareness
the first purpose does not
subsection 361(a)
campaign for the purposes of (a)
reference resources available
increasing awareness among
for runaway and homeless
individuals of all ages, socioeconomic
youth and the prevention tools
backgrounds, and geographic
that are available. Also, the
locations about the issues facing
text contains some non-
runaway and homeless youth, the
substantive differences.
resources available for these youth,
and the tools available for the

---

CRS-21
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
prevention of youth runaway and
homeless situations; and (b)
encouraging parents, guardians,
educators, health care professionals,
social service professionals, law
enforcement officials, and other
community members to assist youth in
averting or resolving runaway and
homeless situations.
Use of Funds
No provision.
Funds made available for the
(Sec. 8)
campaign may be used only for the
Same as H.R. 5524, except
Would add a new
following: (a) dissemination of
funds can also be used to
subsection 361(b)
educational information and materials
conduct outreach activities to
through various media, including
stakeholders and potential
television, radio, the Internet, and
stakeholders in the national
related technologies; (b) partnerships
awareness campaign. Also, in
with national and other organizations
contrast to H.R. 5524, S. 2982
concerned with homelessness; (c) in
specifies that funds may be
accordance with applicable laws and
used to evaluate the
regulations, development and
effectiveness of the activities
placement in media of public service
described under this
announcements that educate the public
subsection.
on the issues facing runaway and
homeless youth and the opportunities
adults have to assist these youth; and
(d) evaluation of the effectiveness of
the campaign.
Prohibitions on Use of
No provision.
Prohibits the use of funds for the
(Sec. 8)
Funds
national awareness campaign: (a) to
Same as H.R. 5524, except
supplant pro bono service time
(under (c) in the H.R. 5524
Would add a new
donated by national or local
column) that the bill specifies
subsection 361(c)
broadcasting networks, advertising
Section 213.3301 or 213.3302
agencies, or production companies for
of Title 5 of the Code of
the campaign, or other pro bono work
Federal Regulations (or any
for the campaign; (b) for partisan
corresponding similar

---

CRS-22
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
political purposes, or to express
regulation or ruling).
advocacy in support of or opposition
to any clearly identified candidate,
ballot initiative or regulatory proposal;
(c) to fund advertising that features
any elected official, person seeking
office, cabinet level official, or other
federal employee employed pursuant
to Section 213 of Section C of Title 5
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as
amended; (d) to fund advertising that
does not contain a primary message
intended to educate the public on the
issues facing runaway and homeless
youth (or youth considering running
away) or the opportunities for adults to
help such youth; and (e) to fund
advertising that solicits contributions
from both public and private sources
to support the national awareness
campaign.
Financial and Performance
No provision.
The Secretary is to conduct (a) audits
(Sec. 8)
Accountability
and reviews of costs of the national
Same as H.R. 5524
awareness campaign pursuant to
Would add a new
Section 304C of the Federal Property
subsection 361(d)
and Administrative Services Act of
1949 (41 U.S.C. 254d); and (b) an
audit to determine whether the costs of
the national awareness campaign are
allowable under Section 306 of that
act (41 U.S.C. 256).
Report to Congress
No provision relating to a
The Secretary is to include in the
(Sec. 8)
report on a national awareness
report to Congress (as currently
Same as H.R. 5524, except that
Would add a new Section
campaign. However, current
required under law) — a summary of
(under (a) in the H.R. 5524
361(e)
law (Sec. 382(a)) requires the
the national awareness campaign that
column) the report would

---

CRS-23
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
42 U.S.C. 5714-5701 et
Secretary to submit a report to
describes (a) the activities undertaken
describe the strategy of the
seq.)
Congress biennially on the
by the campaign; (b) steps to ensure
national awareness campaign
status, activities, and
that the campaign operates in an
and whether specific objectives
accomplishments of entities
effective and efficient manner
of the campaign were
that receive grants under
consistent with the overall strategy and
accomplished.
RHYA.
focus of the campaign; and (c) each
grant entered into with a corporation,
partnership, or individual working on
the campaign.
Sec. 10. Definitions
Definition of “Homeless
“Homeless youth” is defined as
Would amend the first clause of the
No provision.
Youth” (for the Basic
an individual who is not more
current definition to include an
Center Program only)
than 18 years old; for whom it
individual who is less than 18 years
is not possible to live in a safe
old, or an older maximum age if the
Would amend Sec. 387(3)
environment with a relative;
BCP center is located in a state or
(42 U.S.C. 5732a)
and who has no other safe
locality with a law or regulation that
alternative living arrangement.
permits a higher age in compliance
with licensure requirements for child
and youth serving facilities.
Definition of “Homeless
“Homeless youth” is defined as
Would amend the first clause of the
(Sec. 12)
Youth” (for the
an individual between the ages
current definition to include an
Would amend the first clause
Transitional Living
of 16 and 21; for whom it is not
individual between the ages of 16 and
of the current definition to
Program only)
possible to live in a safe
22 or an age exceeding 22 years old
include an individual between
environment with a relative;
upon exiting the TLP project (as
the ages of 16 and 22, and
Would amend Sec. 387(3)
and who has no other safe
permitted under Sec. 322(a)) so long
specify that nothing in this
(42 U.S.C. 5732a)
alternative living arrangement.
as the participant entered the TLP
clause is to prevent a
project prior to reaching age 22.
participant who enters a TLP
project prior to reaching age 22
from being eligible for the
635-day length of stay (as
proposed under Sec. 4 of the
bill).

---

CRS-24
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
Definition of “Runaway
“Runaway youth” is defined as a
No provision.
(Sec. 12)
Youth” (for the
person under age 18 who absents
Same as regulation, except that
Transitional Living
himself or herself from home or
the individual absents himself
Program only)
place of legal residence without the
or herself from home or place
permission of his or her family.
of legal residence without the
Would amend Sec. 387(3)
permission of a parent or legal
(42 U.S.C. 5732a)
guardian.
Sec. 11. Authorization of Appropriations
RHYA (other than Parts E
$105 million for FY2004 and
$150 million for FY2009 and “such
(Sec. 13)
and F, and Sec. 345)
“such sums as may be
sums as may be necessary” for each of
Same as H.R. 5524.
necessary” for FY2005 through
FY2010 through FY2013.
Would amend Sec. 388(a)
FY2008.
(42 U.S.C. 5751(a))
Part E (Street Outreach
“Such sums as may be
$30 million for FY2009 and “such
(Sec. 13)
Program)
necessary” for FY2004 through
sums as may be necessary” for each of
Same as H.R. 5524.
FY2008.
FY2010 through FY2013.
Would amend Section
388(a) (42 U.S.C. 5751(a))
Part F (National Homeless
No provision.
$3 million for each of FY2009
(Sec. 13)
Youth Awareness
through FY2013.
$3 million for FY2009 and
Campaign)
“such sums as may be
necessary” for FY2010
Would amend Sec. 388(a)
through FY2013.
(42 U.S.C. 5751(a))
Part C (National
In each fiscal year, after
No provision.
(Sec. 13)
Communications System)
reserving the amounts required
Conforming amendment to
and Part D (Coordinating,
for Parts A and B (BCP and
exclude Sec. 345 from
Training, Research, and
TLP, respectively), the
receiving funding that is
Other Activities)
Secretary shall use the
allocated for Part C or Part D.
remaining amount (if any) to
Would amend Sec. 388(a)
carry out Parts C and D.
(42 U.S.C. 5751 (a))

---

CRS-25
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
Sec. 345 (Periodic
No provision.
“Such sums as may be necessary” for
(Sec. 13)
Estimate Assessment)
each of FY2009 through FY2013.
Same as H.R. 5524, with minor
differences in the text.
Would amend Sec. 388(a)
(42 U.S.C. 5751(a))
Sec. 12. Performance Standards
Would add a new Sec. 390, per H.R. 5524, and a new Sec. 386A, per S. 2982, under resdesignated Part G
Establishment of
No provision.
Not later than one year after this
(Sec. 10)
Performance Standards
section becomes effective, the
Same as H.R. 5524, with a few
Secretary shall issue rules that specify
minor, non-substantive
Would add a new
performance standards for public and
differences in the text.
subsection 390(a) under
non-profit entities that receive BCP,
H.R. 5524 and a new
TLP, and SOP grants.
subsection 386A(a) under
S. 2982
Implementation of
No provision.
The Secretary shall integrate the
(Sec. 10)
Performance Standards
performance standards into the
Same as H.R. 5524,with a few
grantmaking, monitoring, and
minor, non-substantive
Would add a new
evaluations processes for the BCP,
differences in the text.
subsection 390(b) under
TLP, and SOP.
H.R. 5524 and a new
subsection 386A(c) under
S. 2982
Consultation
No provision.
In developing performance standards,
(Sec. 10)
the Secretary shall consult with
Same as H.R. 5524, with a few
Would add a new
representatives of public and nonprofit
minor, non-substantive
subsection 390(c) under
private entities that receive grants
differences in the text.
H.R. 5524 and a new
under RHYA, including statewide and
subsection 386A(b) under
regional nonprofit organizations
S. 2982
(including combinations of such
organizations), and national nonprofit
organizations concerned with youth
homelessness.

---

CRS-26
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
Public Comment
No provision.
Before issuing rules to establish
(Sec. 10)
performance standards, the Secretary
No provision.
Would add a new
is to provide an opportunity for public
subsection 390(d) under
comment concerning the standards and
H.R. 5524
maintain an official record of such
comment.
Sec. 12. GAO Study and Report
H.R. 5524 and S. 2982 do not specify the section of RHYA in which this language would be inserted
Study
No provision.
The Government Accountability
(Sec. 11)
Office (GAO) is to conduct a study,
Same as H.R. 5524.
and make findings and
recommendations, relating to the
process for awarding grants under
Parts A, B, and E of RHYA, including
(a) the Secretary’s written responses to
(and any other methods for
communicating with) applicants that
do not receive a grant under Part A, B,
or E, to determine if the information in
the response is conveyed clearly; (b)
the structure of the grant application
and associated documents (including
announcements that grants are
available under such parts), to
determine if these materials are
structured so that the applicant has a
clear understanding of what is
required in each provision to
successfully complete the application,
including a clear explanation of
terminology required to be used by the
applicant; (c) the peer review process
(if any) used to review the grants
(including the selection of peer

---

CRS-27
Bill Provisiona and
S. 2982 (as passed by the
Proposed Amendments
Current Regulation (where
H.R. 5524 (as passed by the House
Current Law
Senate Judiciary Committee
to RHYA (and U.S.
applicable)
June 9, 2008)
May 22, 2008)
Code)
reviewers) and the oversight of the
peer review process by HHS
employees, as well as to the extent to
which these employees make funding
determinations based on the comments
and scores of the peer reviewers; (d)
the typical timeframe and process used
by HHS employees, including
employee responsibilities, for
responding to applicants and the
efforts made by HHS staff to
communicate with applicants when
funding decisions are delayed or not
appropriated before the beginning of
the current fiscal year; and (e) the
plans for, and implementation of,
where applicable, RHYA-authorized
technical assistance and training
programs, and the effect of such
programs on the grant application
process.
Report
No provision.
GAO is to prepare and submit a report
(Sec. 11)
to Congress on its findings and
Same as H.R. 5524.
recommendations no later than a year
after the bill is enacted.
Source: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
Notes: S. 2982 includes a section on conforming amendments (Sec. 9). Sec. 9 of S. 2982 would amend Sec. 382(a) to reference Part F (national homeless youth awareness campaign).
Section 382(a) pertains to the biennial report to Congress on the status, activities, and accomplishments of entities that receive grants under Parts A, B, C, D, and E of RHYA. Further,
Sec. 9 of S. 2982 would also amend Sec. 386(a) to reference Part F. Sec. 386(a) pertains to evaluations of grantees that receive grants for three consecutive years under Parts A, B,
C, D, or E.
a. The section numbers refer to H.R. 5524

---