.. ..

>> the meeting will come to order. robert frost once wrote home is the place when you have to go there, they have to take you in. unquote. unfortunately for far too many children in the foster care system that type of home is not available. today, the senate finance committee will hear testimony annal alternatives that can reduce the reliance ons foster care group homes. i have been pleased to work on this with ranking member wyden. i enjoy working with him on everything we work on. keep it up. this is a bipartisan hearing and i appreciate senator wyden's efforts and those of had staff to make it so. the basic premise of this hearing is simple. whenever possible children should grow up in a home with

their family. when problems arise, attempts should be made to keep the child safely at home. if they cannot be safely at home efforts should be placed to put them with relatives. children and youth should only be in group homes for short periods of time and only when efforts to place them in a safe family place has been isolated. too many youths spend years confined in foster care homes. the committee held a hearing in may to reduce the reliance of foster care group homes. we heard powerful testimony from the former foster youth about her negative experiences in a foster care group home. the committee also heard testimony about how expensive, inappropriate, and untimely it is to be in the homes for many children and youth. i believe we should do whatever we can to reduce reliance on

foster care group homes. there is a quote when we refuse to spend subdidized dollars for placement that we know result in negative outcomes for the children but the youth as well. no one would support allowing states to use federal taxpayer dollars for cigarettes for foster youth. continue to use taxpayer dollars to fund group homes is ultimately just as destructive. it is not sound public policy to work to reduce the group homes without addressing the need to work for support of family and youth at risk of entering a facility. the purpose for this hearing is to examine alternatives to group homes such as allowing states to use federal foster care founds for the purpose of providing services and interventions that

can allow children to stay safely at home. currently the federal governments demotes the highest portion of the funding to the least desirable outcome for v vulnerable outcome. removing them from home and placing them in a stranger's care or a group home. certain funds are kept from providing services that can help with harmful conditions in the family home. some states like utah, for example, believe they can reduce the need and if they use funds to provide front and back services for families. i drafted legislation that allowed 30 states to provide the upfront services. today we will hear from an official from my home state of utah and how this flexibility

has improved outcomes for children and families, reducing the reliance on foster care. i believe we should take from utah's homework initiative as a model for all states. when you ask a child who has been in foster care how we can best improve the system the answer is often you could have helped my mom so i didn't have to go into foster care in the first place. when a child can't remain at home, assisting the parents to maintain parental ship is until another alternative is a fit relative for a child. in the landmark legislation of fostering for success and increasing adoption act of 2008 congress allowed states to get reimbursement for kinship

placements. and states are now u lowed to get federal incentives for kinship placements. kinship placements should be a priority but challenges remain. we will hear about the barriers to kinship adjustment and make this more prevalent. there is going to be federal funds to be used for services to help families live together. i look forward to working with them and members of the community on legislation that would reduce the reliance ons foster care group homes and allow states to use federal foster care dollars for these prevention services. i hope to have a committee mark up of this legislation in the fall. this is part of the bipartisan process to improve outcomes for vulnerable children and families and i hope the members will listen carefully to it testimony and policy regulations presented

here today. let me turn to senator wyden for his opening remarks >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. in the beginning i want to take note of the fact you, mr. chairman, have spent decades keeping child welfare issues bipartisan here in the united states senate and i commend you for that, look forward to building on that partnership. i know the ship he or she carried the torch for many years. and i think once again the finance committee can work in the bipartisan area on the issue. this morning in america there is likely to be a single mom with two kids, multiple part-time jobs, and one really big worry. she works long hours to provide for her family but even then it is a struggle to pay the bills and keep food on the table. and because her work schedule

changes week-to-week she is forced to leave her children unattended at times. a neighbor might place a concern call to child protective services. once that happens, social workers have to chose between two not very good options. breaking up the family or doing nothing at all to help. and that has to change. whenever you ask anyone who has been through the child welfare system about what could help them the most the answer is often and i quote here helping my mom. helping my dad. helping my family. but that is just not in the cards when social workers have nothing to offer but foster care. today kids prendominantly wind p

in foster care because those people like the single mom are cut in circumstances that lead to neglect. most are not there because of physical or sexual abuse. maybe mom or dad needs help covering the bills for a month. substance abuse treatment. connections to child care. often times a youngster's aunt, uncle or grandparents could step up especially if they had a little bit of assistance. in my judgment, every single one of those avenues ought to be explored before breaking the family apart. it might save resources in the long run without compromising unsafety. back in the mid-1990's there was a big debate about what we are going to talk about this morning. a gentlemen by the name of newt gingrich said the answer here was to put the kids in

orphanages and i remember hearing that and remembered from great panthers day a lot of the seniors and the churches they went to had been talking about how a grandparent might be able to step in for a short period of time when their child, the parent, the second generation in affect, was having a little problem and they were out of work for a while and had a substance abuse problem. i learned then that older people, grandparents, aunts, uncles, were an enormous uncapped potential of kin that could make a big difference in terms of how we assisted the troubled youngster. i offered the kinship care act

that said immediate relatives; aunts, uncles, grandparents who met the necessary standards for caring for the child would have the first preference when it comes to caring a niece, nephew or grandchild. and it was the first federal law that had been enacted to promote kinship care. here we are in 2015, and i think we have an opportunity as chairman hatch suggested in going either further to help these youngsters thrive with kin. it begins with supporting families when they fall on hard times. there is proof waving states out of the old fashion federal system can produce results. my home state of oregon has a

program called differential response and it is about signaling that every child and every family may require a different type of support. the old two option system, basically saying it is either foster care or nothing, doesn't cut it. and what we are going to talk about is how oregon has taken a more taylilored approach. tomorrow i'm going to introduce legislation that builds on that first bill of the 1990 kinship care. it would be family stability and the kinship care act and the bill will make sure more states

can adopt a australian -- adopt a strategy like oregon's and aunts and uncles can step in easier other than the child having just two options. i will close by saying i want to make it clear that this is in no way a condemnation of foster care. the fact is we know kids for which foster care has been a lifesaver. kids are whom foster care was a safe place where they can grow up and thrive. what this is all about is creating as many good choices as we possibly can for youngsters to grow up in a safe, healthy environment and that means keeping the family's together. i will close by way of saying that i said at the outset to chairman hatch has put in

decades trying to steer this child welfare debate in a bipartisan way. i commend him for it and i want the chairman and our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to know i think we have an opportunity to rise to the occasion again and i look forward to working with the chairman and all of you on it. >> thank you, senator wyden. let me introduce the panel, sandra killett a patient advocate in new york city. she is a single mother who raised two sons who are 20 and 18 years of age. as we will hear, she experienced first-hand problems in our foster care system with her eldest son being removed from the son for one and a half years due to behavioral issues. she was able to be reunited with her son who is new pursuing a degree in architecture at the new york city college of technology. she is currently the direct of

the child welfare project. next we will hear from rosaline burton who is a former foster youth from california. she went through 23 different placements and numerous school changes during her 12 years in foster care. now at just 23 years old, ms. burton enjoys working as a mental health working at a residential facility for foster youth in san dieogo. she is attending community college where she will get her bachelor degree and work toward her masters. and donna butts who served as the execute director and now runs the program. she received her undergraduate

from mary hurst and later graduated from stanford university. she is a recipient of the jack and sea berry awards and has been recognized twice as one of the top 50 and most influential non-profit leader in the united states. and i will let senator wyden introduce the last guest. >> mr. nyby, i touched on your work in the response making sure there is not a one-size-fits-all approach for helping the youngsters and has been doing it for the past 13 years going from case working to supervisor and

now chuck nyby is introducing these programs. he is a graduate of eastern oregon university. mr. chairman, i will not filibuster here but we have three oregon connections on the panel. not only chuck, but ms. donna butts we just mentioned and i guess i am showing my age i remember jack and his good work and butts as roots in oregon and ms. rosaline burton is a tra transplant to oregon for the summer. so we run the table. thank you, mr. chairman. >> last but certainly not least we will hear from ann williamson. ms. williamson completed a

masters in social work from louisiana state university and has gone on to receive distingiushed awards from both schools. she served as president and ceo of the non-profit for louisiana and cabinet director for louisiana's social services. ms. williamson has helped the state of utah obtain a federal title 4-e waiver and the launching of a child welfare demonstration project that aims to reduce the use of foster care, child abuse and neglect, and the need for services and intervention. i welcome each member to the committee. i urge you to keep your remarks to the allotted five minutes if

we can. we will start with you ms. killett. >> thank you, chairman hatch, ranking member wyden, and members of the committee for the invitation to be here today. my name is sandra killett and i am a divorced single mother who raised two sons who are now 22 and 20 years of age. i reside in new york city and i am currently employed as the executive director of the child welfare organizing project. this is a self-help advocating organization of parents who have been affected by new york city's children services. today i am hear to share insights, gain from my own experience as a parent impacted by the child protective system, as well as the perspective from hundreds of parents whom i have worked with and other organizations including the new

york city coalition for child welfare finance reform, first parent national network and other parent organizations. some of these parents are here with me this morning. i will tell you that they did not have the luxury i had and that was to come here last night. but they got on a bus at 3:45 a.m. to be here at the time for this hearing. so i would like to say thank you to all of those parents who have taken the journey with me. i would like to say i am here on behalf of hundreds of parents across the jurisdiction pertaining to child protection and as we would like to see it be a child welfare system in true reality. i am a parent who has been affected by the child protective system again i say. it has forever changed my life as well as my son's lives. this is a system that you already heard in the opening that has really, for me,

destroyed a stable family, forever left our family traumatized from this experience. as a single mother, i relocated to new york city from atlanta, georgia with my two boys. they were young and we relocated to new york due to financial hardship. all of my family supports were in new york city. it was difficult for my two boys. they left their dad but their dad travelled back and forth to new york city from atlanta to be there them. my older son, which is the one whom generated the contact with new york city's childrens service name is trey he and found it the most difficult. it was a disruption in the family. i sought help and support for my family challenges. my son was attending family

counseling, and we were getting some supports that we needed. but i can tell you that the move to new york city and the separation from his father was difficult and it was challenging thereby generating some aggressive behaviors from my son in which i continuously sought help with. i began to ask every week about individual services for my son. i was told that those services were not available immediately and we were on a wait list. we stayed on the wait list and before we could get off the waitlist there was an outbust that occurred with my son. i will tell you the outburst had had me retreating to the bedroom

with my younger son in fear of what might happen. but it pursued and an alterication did occur. i did reach out to new york city children's services for assistance. i did not receive the assistance. instead i received an investigation into my household and that was very intrusive and i absolutely say an investigation because that is what it was. my family was asked questions i thought were not necessary. my son's were asked questions that were about how i parented th them, whether or not i disciplined them and how i disciplined them. i found this out later from my sons who they told me this. i was surprised they were not interested in what occurred or what i came into their office for. i know that time is moving forward for me. what i would like to do is highlight for you three recommendations on how to

improve services for families at-risk or already involved with the child welfare system. funding needs to be aligned to support prevention and early intervention services to strengthen families and keep them together. promoting a support of non-punitive approach with help families at-risk keep their children at home. partnering with parents to work and support other families before and during any involvement with the child protective system and courts can help families stay strong. most parents want to be good parents but may need help squ assistance along the way. i ask you help all children at-risk and build factors to

insure their children grow up in a healthy, safe and nurturing home. thank you for allowing me to share my experience and the voice of many parents whom have come in contact with the system and for whom i bring into this space with me on this very historic time. i think that unless you really know what it is like to be separated from your family, your children, and that bond forever broken between not only mother and child but between sibling, between extended family, having a grandparent not be able to see their grand child because they have not been cleared by a system. having an aunt not being able to stay overnight with a nephew.

not having input in the growth of your son or child is an enormous, traumatic experience for every family that has went through it. i will tell you although we have come through it and i believe that we are coming through it, there are good days, there are bad days, but i will tell you i still hear families today, every day based on the work i do in the organization that talk about the experience and the horrendous experience they have with a foster care system that doesn't understand who they are as a family, doesn't understand where they come from in a community, and does not understand the burden that is brought payupon them to do thin no other parent or household would have to do to reunify with their children. and having parental rights

terminated as a point as though it is water running from a faucet. that is how often that is happening where parents are loosing the rights to their children. so i implore you to really hear us, listen to us, and i say you have been listening, but i think there has to be an action. and the mindset of family's that might be in crisis should be seen differently. i know i have time remaining but i think i have done justice here and i thank you for inviting me and hearing me and i hope this testimony does something for us to have a child welfare system that will truly impact families and children, help them to be strong and safe and nurtured in

their own community. >> we will turn to you ms. burton. >> chairman hatch, ranking member wyden, and members of the committee on finance thank you for inviting me to talk about the issues that i know affect many young people in the foster care system. my name is rosaline burton a current intern at a foster club and a mental health working at a residential home. i spent most of my childhood in foster care and was in and out of foster care experiencing 12 years of care and more than 23 places. i aged out of care and i am still hoping to find my forever family. my most memorable placement was with my great aunt when who i lived a year and a half. i was three years old and my mother was pregnant with her eighth and final child. i was her fourth. my six siblings were removed

after my mother went away to receive treatment for addiction and my father was reported for neglect. my sistecys siblings and were t shelter and my sister and i were placed with a great aunt. giving with her gave me stability, love and normalcy that i never experienced again. we were all unified with our participants who relapsed. over the years, my siblings and i reentered care several times. at some point my siblings began to have different cases and social workers. we no longer went to the same court dates or the same plan. kinship care was never brought up again. i come from a big family, we are

part of a bigger extended family. while living with my great aunt i saw my siblings and parents closely and discovered their presence in our life. my close knit sibling group became strangers to each other. before entering care, we took care of each other. but once bonding became optional the history was obsolete. i often worried if a sibling passed i would have nothing to say because i didn't know them. my reentries into the foster care are proof they didn't know how to keep me safe and care for me and my siblings. entering foster care is a traumatic experience for everyone involved. my father felt invaded because he was raised in a family where what happens in the home stays

in the home. my mother felt revictimized haunted by or own foster care challen challenges. her struggle with abuse and lack of addiction and mental health care led to reentries. my mother struggled to get and stay clean, her battle with mental illness and her inability to support eight kids and dependence on an abusive man made it impossible to take care of her. my life was a cycle of neglect and instability. at 15 my mother's rights were lost. by the time she worked on a house and maintained sobriety the damage was done. i was no longer the kid that wanted to be home with mom and dad. i was suffering with depression and angry. counseling along with financial assistance played a huge role

successful unification. the therapy my mother received helped her identify childhood traumas that affected her parents and substance abuse. i imagined had my mother received preventive care from professionals who saw her as a victim and not a drug addict my siblings and may not have needed to spend so much time in foster care. support like counselling and financial assistance and supporting the same services after reunification. children and their parents need help understanding and processing the damage time away from each other has on relationships once unified. support for placements for children that need to be removed so they can stay connected to their families. i work at an amazing group home but i recognize as hard as they

try, group homes never can give youth the things a loving family can. not a graduation, definitely not a good birthday. group homes are temporarily. families should be forever. thank you. >> thank you. ms. butts. >> i am donna butts and i am from home of the national center on grand families. i am pleased toprovide testimony and applaud chairman hatch, ranking member wyden and committee member for the leadership on holding this hearing on preserving families and reducing the need for foster care. every child deserves to grow up safe, stable and loving home but for 7.8 fam children that headed by a uncle, aunt or family friend. the issues are complex but un united by the belief of the importance of family and believe children fair better when raised in a family not a system.

despite the challenges facing the grand families, children farewell in the care of relatives. they are more stability and likely to report feeling loved. federal law affirms and research confirms relatives should be the first choice. kinship families are divers divt the way they are tide is the way they common. children outside of the foster care system receive little to no services or benefits compared to children in the form of the system. all children and relative care should receive the support they need to thrive regardless of the circumstances that brought them to live with a caring relative. congress enacted several provisions to insure an increase relative placements and allow waivers allowing grand families to be supported.

we salute these and encourage strength in them. today i will focus on four areas that are more much detailed in my written statement. notice to relatives, licensing, prevention and trauma inform supports. first, notification. we recommend changes to help insure relatives receive notification with clear information and assistance so they can digest their options and make the best decision for children. recent law requires states to identify and notify relatives when a child is removed from the home. they are to be told their options under the law including any options that may be lost if they fail to respond to the notice. we hear caregivers know little about the requirement and for those who do many say it was presented in a confusing and even threatening way. second licensing. we direct congress to assess and make changes to the existing license standards using the new

model from the association of regulatory administration. until now there have been no national family licensing home standards so they vary from state to state and pose unnecessary barriers that result in appropriate relatives denied license causing the children to be placed in group settings or foster care. jj and his little brothers and sister went to live with their grandparents when their father's drinking was out of control. the family struggled to make the changes to their home so they could meet state requirement and be able to continue as a stable family. jj's grandparents had to file for bankruptcy because of the cost to make the home comply. it was filled with love but not enough bedrooms. we recommend ways to find

practices. for every child with a relative in foster care there are 23 outside of the system being closed by relative or family friend without a parent presence. these families save $4 billion each year and under current financing laws these families receive little or now preventive supporters to keep them together and out of foster care. fourth, trauma support. generations united recommends urging states to make sure kinship families have access to the same level of therapy. many grandparents report awards coming from living with the children but experience challenges and they can be daunting when caring for kids that experienced trauma. to many kinship families they are not offered support and left

to manage serious mental health needs on their on. flexible funding services are needed to fill the gaps for kinship families outside of the system. social services block grant and other services in supporting children in relative care must be recognized. poet maya an fugelu who was rai by her grandparents said people who know their grandparents have trees and roots and can't be mowed down. all of america's children deserve to stay with the roots of the family to grow strong, productive and contributing citizens. thank you for allowing me to offer testimony and i look forward to your questions. >> mr. nyby, i will turn to you. >> first of all express appreciation to chairman hatch,

ranking member, and the committee. i plan to talk about my experience of working the child welfare system 13 years, what i experienced and where we are at. when i started working for child welfare out of college i was absolutely not prepared for the challenges. when you listen to the testimony, part of what i found my job included, and not just learning rules and procedures, but how to overcome the perception of the system with the family and kids in the communities i worked with. and i had a variety of experience with the foster care systems. early in my career, it seemed like foster care was a solution for kids when they were not safe in their homes. what i observed was it felt like a consequence. i was really naive and thought when kids were experiencing abuse and neglect in their home they would want to leave and i thought they would not want to go back until things changed.

but what i found is that kids would run away from foster care and live on the streets, they would go back to homes where they came from, because they preferred that. it was a huge learning experience for me as a caseworker to understand the impact foster care had on kids even when experiencing abuse and neglect at home. i started to question the work i was doing. in 2007, oregon adopted a model of using foster care as a last resort. change in any system is show and i found it has been a process in oregon since that time and i have experienced this inside and outside of the child welfare system. that same year i became a supervisor and worked that for the next five and a half years. you work late hours, evenings, weekends, and as a supervisor i had to be available. one of my biggest challenge was

helping them make decisions for work i wasn't doing. i found fear was common in those decisions and fear that something bad would happen to a child, fear we would intervene when we didn't need to, fear of ending up on the front page of the paper. that fear is real. i supervised high profile cases and it was challenging in the field not to let 1-2 percent of had cases we see affect our work with the families. during my time as a supervisor i saw services coming into place. more upfront services were available, we were able to work with families and keeping kids safe at home but there were gaps and without filling those gaps the challenge remains for child welfare to work with families in a way that keeps kids safe at home if families are not getting the support they need.

in 2013, i took the operation and policy analyst job to help with the different responses. it is supported by legislative services we call strengthening and unifying families. i have felt more excited about the work i am doing than ever before. the practice model provides flexibility to help families in a way we never have. foster care is slowly becoming what it was intended to do which is a safety service used as a last resort. change takes time. i think we are making progress. but it is my opinion in order to continue that progress with child welfare reform changes need to be made in the way the child welfare systems are funded. they need flexibility just like families. oregon has a title 40 waiver for a number of years allowing the state to spend federal foster

care dollars more fluidly and we match and finance and expand service array and allowed oregon to increase services in communities and the array available for families. i understand it is set to expire in 2019 and i worry without that our ability to invest in the front end services will be reduced and funding child welfare through foster care placement doesn't support families in the way the system is trying to reform and change to. i want to close by saying that my journey as a caseworker and supervisor, i would not change. working at that level helps me understand the challenges family and children face that interact with the child welfare center, it trained me to find solutions, see possibilities and look at things differently. i understand working for child welfare will always be a challenging job and stigma involved in the system but it comes with great reward when we

can be successful. i want to thank everyone for the opportunity to speak here today. >> thank you very much. ms. williamson, we will finish with you. >> chairman hatch, ranking member wyden, and member of the finance committee. thank you for letting me appear before you recommending the utah family services. in utah, we value what is in the best interest of children, youth and their families but what is cost-effective. several facts about utah's child welfare model shows the strength of our approach. withing thf highest percentage of minors per capita, utah has one of the lowest entry rate into foster care. 3.1 child for every 1,000 and the national average is 6.1. the avrnl length of stay is 10.4 months and the national average

is 13.4 months. changes allowed utah to make an agreement and we were touted for success. we had family meetings, rigorous process reviews, established an independent office and a fatality review panel. in recent years, we identified the need to build equally affective in home support to safely keep children with their families reducing the need for foster care. regardless of how well a foster care system operates, the fact remains that children are best served in homes with familiefam familiar schools and community. the brace of one woman who aged out of foster care underscores the opportunity we have to do better. beth was removed from her mother care from the neglect that resulted from her mom's untreated mental illness. instead of remaining in her home

this parent was swept into a journey between multiply foster homes, the juvenile justice system, truancy, and homelessness. when asked why she continue to run away from foster care homes beth plainly said it was to get back to her mother. she expressed feeling out of control and without a voice. the positive influence of her final foster father and caseworker resulted in beth graduated from high school, getting a job with child welfare and now enrolled in law school. hers was a rare success story. her insights are profound and motivating to us today because we know we can do better. we can avoid this kind of human cost and as measured results of the current practice prove we are doing so. poet mayu described utah's

commitment to serve. do the best you can until you know better and when you know better do better. with research, social science discovery and evidence of trauma inform care utah believes we can better serve the needs of those in need of child welfare supporting safe care in their homes without separating them from their families is less traumatic and less costly. multiply generation approaches is more effective in breaking cycles of dependent on prolonged expensive government programs. the opportunity to apply for the 4-e waiver was ideal for utah. our program call homework was implemented in 2013 and being used across the state. we invest federal funds toward support with greater value. not only to keeping children safe with their family but to the taxpayers receiving greater

return on the dollar. for the average cost of serving one child in a foster care home for one year we can serve 11 families through homework. for the average cost of serving one child in a group setting for one year we can serve 34 families through homework. these are compelling proofs of the sound business of this practice while the humanitarian merit of investing to keep children safe with families make this approach essential. we worked with a family of jim who was on track to enter foster can failing in middle school and behavioral outburst at home. applying a model in his home offering peer parenting, additional family engaged and his school counselor and

behavioral therapist is helping him. this helps us assist multiply families for long-term behavioral change that reduces the risk of repeat maltreatment and ongoing involvement with government intervention. structured decision making, consistent assessment, and more staff time with families and community support. earlier results are positive. we respect the temporary nature of the waiver and the time limited opportunity we have to learn. utah is focused on shoring up what we have begun. therefore thank you, senator wyden, the family stability and kinship act proposed is an encouraging measure. the key proponents of the bill reinforce utah's experience. federal statute that folks on

early intervention and community ownership will strengthen the system. we seek to finance a system that strengthens family and is accountability for child safety, wellbeing and permancy. we look forward to helping for the greater public good. thank you. >> this has been a great panel here today. let me start with you, ms. burton, thank you for appearing today and for your compelling testimony here. you are remarkable young woman and i am impressed with what you have overcome. i am so sorry the foster care system failed you and your brothers and sisters. you were in the foster care system on and off for 12 years as i understand it. is that correct? >> i spent a total of 12 years.

>> my question is what are your suggestions for congressional action that can improve the foster care system? >> i think that a plan -- it should be required states are required to have a plan for the child right away. if they believe the situation can be mitigated to do that, provide the services before entering care if possible, as soon as possible when the child enters care so they can return home, in a short period of time. kids are spending too much time in limbo and then damage is created that affects the whole family so that when they do reunify it is not a successful unification. does that answer your question? >> that will be fine. ms. williamson, i want to thank you for appearing before the committee today and your testimony. i would like to take the

opportunity to acknowledge the work done by two members of your team brent flat and chris mills. >> absolutely. thank you >> my staff worked with them and you for many years and we are deeply indebted to each of you for your expertise and willingness to engage. i was pleased to be one of the authors of the legislation to allow up to 30 states to receive a child welfare waiver. as you testified, utah is one of the first states to apply for a child welfare waiver. as you know, all waivers expire in 2019. i believe we should build on what we learned through state innovation relative through the waivers for policies that could benefit all states. you tested that because utah is able to provide federal dollars for front end services.

would you elaborate on how utah is able to achieve such savings? >> it is my pleasure. indeed, what utah recognized is the expense that it was costing taxpayers of utah for poor outcome for youth, namely extended stays in the foster care and too often in the deepest end of the foster care with residential care. it only cost on average, $2,400 to keep a family together in the home. that much to serve a family, keep children safe and facilitate long-term change. whe whereas average cost of one child in care is $83,000. so the financial logic of focusing on early, in-home

intervention services has naturally allowed us to then have these dollars go further because we have reduced our reliance on long-term care. >> thank you. mr. nyby, i am going to thank you for appearing before the committee and for your thoughtful testimony as well. as i indicated in my opening statement i think strongly we should reduce the relines on foster care group homes and we must improve efforts to keep children safe at home and strengthen family-like placements for children and youth when a child cannot remain safely at home. oregon has the lowest rates of foster care children in group homes. can you share how oregon has reduced the reliance on foster care group homes? >> i think being from oregon one

of the strong commitments that oregon has made is to reduce foster care across the board. you know, not just group homes but across the board. and i know that, you know the way that we train our caseworkers and supervise them is to really use foster care as our last resort and give priority to relatives and senator wyden's comments about the priority of relatives is well engrained in our practice and relative placements are something we prioritize over foster care and group homes. those are viewed as last-resort options and not viewed as solutions for kids. >> senator wyden. >> thank you very much. ms. williamson, i don't want to make this a full bouquet tossing

but let me share thanks on the good work you are doing. that is astounding to get the rate of return you describe. and i want to be clear particularly with your words about the stability and kinship care acts and the whole point is to say the flexibility you are talking about is going to be permanent. that is the point of where we ought to go for the future so appreciate the good work you are doing. let me see here. mr. nyby, you have run the goblet in terms of services in the field. i am not sure we have given you a chance to say what services do you think are most important? that is what we are going to have to do. we will have to find our way given the fact resources are fight to say there are choices to be made and here are the show

stoppers. tell me what you think those services are. >> i think the services that would help our services that would prevent or avoid more intrusive intervention from child welfare and i don't have data to share but drug and alcohol, substance abuse is a really important service. a lot of families, the system is setup to up help them are complicated, and they need help understanding where to go for help and how to get there and how to navigate a court system, how to navigate a transportation system, services that assist with general challenges around poverty, housing and child care. in oregon, head of primary services we have through the strengthening act is naviga

navigatethat help the parents. we know that domestic violence is a challenge. advocating for women who are experiencing domestic violence. i think those are some that i can think of off hand. >> well you are doing a terrific job and i look forward to partnering with you in the days ahead. ms. butts, let me talk to you about kinship care. i look back at the debates in the 1990's and they thought kinship care would make a big difference and we were able to get the law passed giving families and seniors the first preference. that first kinship care law has far exceeded what people thought was possible and you gave some

numbers about the extraordinary role that kinship care plays. i guess the question is if you had to name one big step in the future on the kinship care side what would it be? i know at an earlier hearing we heard about an older parent, really a grand parent who wanted to take care of a child and they were told because even though they had a wonderfully, comfortable place to stay it didn't have the exact number of bedrooms so they completely disqualified.

i grew up in a family of six with three bedrooms. i shared a bedroom with my sister my entire life and to think that relatives can't figure out how to make do with a little bit less doesn't make sense. we need to take that into consideration. i think the bill that you will be introducing goes a long way

hoping to understand the grand parents need the supportive services to be successful and i think that's what you and many of us have advocated for. they have the navigator programs that have been proven to be successful. they need mental health services because the children that come into their care has been through different situations and needed that kind of support. it's understanding that just because they are family doesn't mean they need them on their own. we need to provide the services, so that is the next step. >> as we go forward to work on this in a bipartisan way the ideas that this panel have offered, these are not big and expensive kind of proposals that you're making. nobody is going to say this is going to break the bank.

thank you very much mr. chairman and ranking member and thank you senator for your efforts on kinship care. it's my pleasure to be cochairing the caucus with senator grassley and to work with everybody on the committee, and thank you to each of you for being here. i'm very appreciative. i've worked on these issues are longtime. in the 80s we offered a foster care reform that was dubbed the span of a bill and was put into law to move the system more quickly and i'm incredibly frustrated that we are talking about these issues because we have two sets of things. one is what happened and the

system failed you and i'm sorry that happened to you. the system just plain failed you and we have a situation people get caught up in the system and can't bring their children home or kids can't go home. and at the same token we have the other end of which is very serious abuse and neglect which is also caught up in both ends of these things. i am very concerned that one way or another, foster care should be temporary with people either back home or ideally never leaving the home but if they are in foster care or they move moved to a permanent family one way or the other instead of being caught in limbo like you were over and over again. thank you for your eloquence. mr. chairman, i do want to say as we listen to all of this and cost effectiveness and we know

these things don't cost a lot of dollars that we are about ready to go into a debate on the budget where there is a great willingness to add money to the department of defense. but we are not yet at a bipartisan agreement on how to defend our families. and the things that we can do that would make a tremendous difference. so i hope when we go into discussions about appropriations, we will remember what we have heard here. the senator and i are pleased to offer a project to address mental health and substance abuse in the community that will allow aid to states to dramatically increase what they do but it's eight states. it's not 50. and it wouldn't take a lot would take a lot to make it 50 states. i appreciate that we were able to move forward on a pilot. but my frustration is there are

things we should do and can do we just have to want to do it and i hope that you will help us be able to want to. i do have a question on - re: one piece of this i'm pleased with the senator to be co- sponsoring the bill on the foster care services and the whole question i've been working on therapeutic foster care and what can be done in that front if you might speak a little more of that and support the therapeutic foster care and family-based foster care services. >> senator stabenow, i can't say that i can speak directly to therapeutic foster care, but this is what i can speak to. but i can speak to is that if my

son received actually in how intensive therapy, which i guess you could call it therapeutic, he would not have went into foster care so that the intensive care key that would have been needed. so it's their cubic in foster homes he would say that foster homes need to be thoroughly trained about the youth or the young person they are going to be receiving in their household. so they need to know what has been going on with the youth and where this comes from. it is moving from a place moving them to another home is a dramatic impact. and it wouldn't have any other type of issues to know what's going on at home sometimes with the parent and sometimes not. but when they come into the system they developed these

behavioral issues, so i would have to go back and say - and i plead with you and go back and say this but for my household, that was a stable household. we were secured. the factors were in place. we knew, i knew what was necessary and needed for my family. we didn't get did get that and because we didn't get back, you and me and taxpayers paid an enormous amount of money to go through the criminal court system, the family court system and an attorney, an attorney for my office and remain in foster care and still end up not getting any of the services that we needed as a family and there's a situation in which the younger brother becomes withdrawn so i know you asked me about therapeutic in foster care that i can tell you that if the foster home does not get the

very things that i needed in my home, we will be looking at the same thing. so essentially across-the-board, families need what families need, and i can echo every thing needed for the families that i come in contact with and with the share with me about what they need. we work with parents, foster parents and youth and i will say to you the system isn't kind to anyone. >> i hope that we will have the political will to do the things that you are talking about because it's not rocket science being committed to do that. so thank you. >> i appreciate you holding this hearing with the senator. there is a lot of work for us to do. we have to find a way to reduce the use of the care settings and encourage the states to adopt best practices defined families

for the children. one of the things is to invest in prevention. what this means for us here in congress i believe is we need to look him preemptively at reducing the number of children in care and investing in families to prevent children from ending up in foster care to begin with in group settings as well. that's why i'm introducing a bill today the old kids matter act which will give states the ability to invest for families on the front end before the nation's children nations children and the foster care system and for the 400,000 children in and out of the nations foster care system we've built and accountability transparency measure. when the families are placed with their own family in the coming sweet look forward with the product to elevate the conversation of the nation's

most vulnerable children. the experience you and your siblings have with the education system as you are going through. >> i go into more detail about the siblings, i met a lot of them. about half of us graduated and the other half didn't. but one that graduated from ucla and is actually now the campaign campaign manager said he's doing really well for himself and - if you need anybody - >> i want a little clarity on that one. >> two of us are in college and education was hard for me. i experience experienced six

different elementary schools and five different high schools that i went back for a couple of times, said it was hard to stay focused and motivated. >> thank you. >> you mentioned at the end of your testimony the last couple of years in the new role you were able to discover flexibility that you haven't had in the past. i wonder if you can describe that in more detail it in more detail for the committee and to the extent that flexibility has resulted in the sort of prevention efforts with families we would like to hear about that, too mac. >> the flexibility comes from the differentiator he responded with a means for child welfare so when a child is reported to us, we don't treat them all the same way. so essentially, the more severe allegations of abuse and neglect are assessed in the more traditional manner and reports that involve less or more

moderate severity are assessed with the family and it's not done to them it is done with them and we try to partner with the family to drive the assessment jury of the other thing to the other thing that it brings in both scenarios we have the ability to provide services without opening the case, without getting involved in the family. so we caught early intervention. you know, the families still have to be reported to provide that. but with the the families hope healthy can connect them to the communities so they don't have to come back with child welfare. that's fairly new but essentially prior to that, the only way child welfare could offer services is by opening a formal case in the system. this allows us to provide the services and fill the gaps without having to do that. >> it sounds like it's that early intervention system had been in place you may not have

faced the kind of things you had to content with. >> i think that you are absolutely right. one of the things that's mentioned is the community-based resource service is really the way to go for families, so i should have been able to walk into any community-based program without having an investigation. >> thank you for the testimony and mr. chairman for your attention to this important issue. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to read or read as well my appreciation for the hearing into the work in this area over many years and for the chairman's work in particular his legislation of the family stability and kinship act, which focuses on prevention and getting a set of services to the

families long before or at least early in the process. i was struck for the first two witnesses both using the same word at some point in the testimony traumatized and traumatic for which i know for some people might seem self-evident in terms of how the issues are for families. they have the same kind of human gravity to them and severity. so we appreciate you bringing your own personal stories. it's not easy to talk about what you've been through. it's easy to talk about things when they are theoretical and policy oriented so we are gratefully willing to do that without having the personal testimony. i am not sure we can sit here

and understand unless we've gone through it ourselves. and i also want to say that you mentioned as one of the strategies you hope we would implore or part of the strategy on page six of the testimony in the headline early intervention services and focusing on meeting the immediate needs of the families and the idea of early intervention i think we saw in some way or another throughout the whole range of testimony all the way and we are grateful we spent a lot of time in this time focusing on national defense strategy to focus on a broad national defense strategy.

in the tax code that's part of the work this committee does, some of the effort is what is the best way to change or amend or approve the tax code so it will be a strategy to create jobs but we don't spend nearly enough time in the city is what are strategies that will work to make the life of a child better, what are the strategies that will work to sustain and support families? and i didn't get to the question because i know i'm just talking. but we do need a strategy for the kids and families. i guess one of the things, the last witnesses in terms of practitioners who are in along with others in the trenches kind of doing the policy work, and i know that each of you are to a certain extent but maybe my one question would be i guess for

oregon i'm forgetting my terminology, differential. and then homework is in oregon. tell us about what works in those and what does and what you would hope we would be right to veto their five and i know that we're limited on time. >> thank you very much. you heard a consistency i would highlight evidence-based assessment. there was a mention of evaluating risk. being very purposeful in the structure of family support that is directly tied to risk that was revealed. the other element i would have is very consistent between oregon and as mentioned has mentioned its family engagement, listening to the family. when families have a voice in the state children included when

children and families have a voice and a vested interest in their success and in the case plan that allows them to achieve that a sustained safety and permanency, we would realize the outcomes much more efficiently and effectively. >> i'm out of time but . i would echo what was said in the different parts. the only thing that i would add is that in order for to support and sustain families, you need a workforce that has the tools available to them to support families. to get it to work and to get a family to engage with the system to the system has to bring and offer something that is tangible and realistically going to help the family. and so in addition to the practice model and, you know, the support and the community because depending on what community you live on that has an impact on what is available to use it to fill the gaps in the communities to help

families. >> i will submit a question for the questions for the record for the other witnesses. >> senator. >> thank you mr. chairman for the great testimony this morning. this has been a fascinating hearing and i would think that senator for his longtime advocacy for kids specifically foster care and kids who are facing issues at home and i know this isn't an easy issue but one thing talking to all of you this therapeutic foster care for the kinship takes a lot of sense and there is an assumption that this is going to be a lot more expensive to have that kind of intensive care not just for foster parents as it was talked about also for kinship.

and we've got this extra panel that i want to get your input first i've been very fortunate to have had the congressional coalition. we have these issues and experiences in the foster care system and a lot of abuse in foster care and adoption but she's come out of out of it's just incredibly strong and resilient young woman and she has helped us to kind of think through the policy issues that we have a group back home that i assume a lot of states have which is a foster youth advisory board made up through the foster care system. i want to get your input on this, there was a sting operation back in 2013. the fbi did nationwide on child sex trafficking in issue i worked on a lot and we have the

caucus here. it's bipartisan. we've been doing work on this. but here's the amazing and sad statistic. 60% of the victims that were recovered nationwide from over 70 cities were from foster care or group homes. 60% of the kids. and you know, you think about that and does this go to what you're talking about? not just the fact that in this case she's been through the system and at the other end of it as the mom for the professionals here, is there something that we should be talking about in this regard coming in other words, in other words is it less likely that those kids will end up being victims of trafficking and vulnerable if they are not in the group homes, and maybe i ask you to start on this if if you could respond i know you have

thoughts on this earlier. >> when you have a child in the care there isn't someone looking for the sign. there is something that happens and we don't think about what's happening on the street. and we have a child that didn't have therapeutic services to learn why they are feeling the way they feel they just want to be loved and there are so many things we can talk in more depth about. >> what we say is a child can age out of the system they don't age of the families others somebody that stays with them and watches and knows what they are missing and that makes all the difference in the world. it's so easy for young people to get lost and be caught up in the

sex trafficking world. i used to run at the - work at the covenant house and you would see a kid being kicked out of their home and all they would have is a garbage bag and nobody cared where they were going. with a family they are much more likely to forgive. they are likely to take them back. they are more likely to let them sleep on the couch and they don't have any place to be. it's about family, finding the family, notifying them is critically important. >> thank you for that response. we talked earlier on the questioning about the legislation that we've introduced for the senator and myself and it's called the family-based foster care service act and one of the things we are trying to do is create a national standard for what is therapeutic foster care because our sense is that each state doesn't a little differently.

my question to you is how can the uniform definition of the services promote equality a quality of care and also more accountability in the training of staff in foster care parents, does that make sense, and since i'm getting near the end of my time, if you haven't heard me respond yet if you could get a response to that quickly but then also if you don't mind sending me a written response that would be helpful and look at the legislation i'm sure many of you have already added to us what you think of this idea coming up in the uniform definition. >> i don't have a uniform definition that i would say that i would like to follow up in the returned response because it is going to do a lot to give that information. >> that would be great. >> would you do the same. >> thank you mr. chairman and

members of the panel for your participation and certainly your rich testimony. it's good to know when you talk about the incredible assets in south carolina it's well-educated i think i heard. >> we will talk later on why you left that we will get to that later. >> i will tell you this is a moving topic and a hard topic to digest and confident. i know that we oftentimes look at the $9 million that's been through one program, but if we look at it only from the person of the finances we miss the point of the service which is trying to find a way to make sure that every american experience experiences the full potential and have an opportunity last year to visit one of the foster care homes in south carolina. i think it was the week of thanksgiving coming to a couple of publications and talking to the kids about the goals and

dreams and expectations. and one of the planes that you made that's an important point that seems to ring true consistently to get back home and it doesn't really appear or doesn't much matter that the home from our perspective on the outside looking in what they want is their mom very often, their data, also but always i hear the same conversation, no matter how difficult the situation is at their house, they still have this yearning for their family, their loved - bloodline. to express the difficulty and the road for the single parent into the challenges many of them have faced and i'm sure my mother would have wanted wanted to encourage me at many times when i was a difficult kid and my brother was the better of the two of us.

i was the rambunctious, challenging difficult kid growing up. that's what i've learned through talking to the kids is they are just brilliant. so much potential. and i believe i had an interim - i don't waste your brother is a campaign manager but i want to talk about the psychology at some point. i had an amazing intern just this summer who's gone through the foster care program and she is going to be a doctor one day but before she becomes a doctor she's going to china to teach english. and so, in all of her moves and changes, she's able to remain focused in a way that very few of us have been able to focus. in learning their stories has been an important part of the

questions. you can see in the tearing families apart it seems to be important in finding the path back it up to hear your comments on that. it. there's a program in greenville south carolina called serenity place that's doing remarkable things for the treatment of the 120 pregnant women and young mothers each year with 86% of the children still living.

it was directly linked to the childhood of being in foster care that she never dealt with without and no one provided the services that she needed to deal with peter and maybe she had to ask for them. i don't know what happened but i believe she had the services defined what are the triggers but then she could end up back there. so it was the staying clean. and i also, understanding her illness, so that then i didn't hold that against her, her addiction it could have been helpful so i think it's providing a cubic services for the whole family to understand the situation and support each other to keep strong ties. >> and to that, one of the questions that keeps ringing in my my ears is the system hinges

on the the caseworkers assessment and seems to be such a powerful part of the analysis. what can be done and should be done to make the caseworker better prepared to focus on family cohesion coming and when i think about the family cohesion and the point on the opportunity for the in-home intensive therapy i would love to hear your comments. it is on the key workers and what we might do to think about it from that actual level of the transaction and the caseworkers assessment being perhaps the most in four - most important

key. it's going to be figured out on the states and in the programs but i think that eliminating - illuminating what should be done would be helpful to all of us watching this and paying attention to the issue. for the representatives at the table for stakeholders and the success of the changed outcome. the efficacy of the family is involved and it's not such a point in time but i'm happy to say that they've taken a

national standard in the assessment and created a utah family child assessment that is an engagement tool throughout a lifetime of the case so that when a parent says i really could use the system and mental health i could use the system with the substance abuse disorder a substance abuse disorder that is consistently revisit it because perhaps the initial intervention is not successful but still they seek the changed result. >> my concern in asking the question about the caseworkers assessment and the tearing apart of the families is the ultimately. for the fear of the breakdown of the family - >> my time is actually up.

>> i want to thank each one of you as the witnesses here today you've been really good, each one of you. it's somewhat of a little important perspective to this end we are going to see what we can do to help here. so i just want to thank the witnesses for appearing today and i want to thank the senators that participated this has been a compelling discussion and i do appreciate everyone's participation. any questions for the records should be said that no later than tuesday august 18 and i hope that you will get your answers back as quickly as possible. i'm grateful to each one of you for taking time out of their schedules to be with us. we've had a variety of perspectives here today but all of you seem to agree that we can do a better job than we are

doing right now. and i would like to see that we do. god bless all of you. thank you for being here. with that we will recess until further notice. army general john campbell has been in charge of the mission in afghanistan since the combat operations ended in 2014. today he talked about the security situation at the brookings institution. this is one hour and 20 minutes.

thank you for coming out on this warm august day. i'm from the policy program in here with my colleagues on behalf of all including the vice president and the foreign policy we would like to welcome all of you but especially welcome back sherman and general campbell to talk about afghanistan. as you know, the united states remains in afghanistan with about 10,000 uniformed personnel as well as the very brave and dedicated civilians and this is an operation that is nearing roughly its 14th year although it has been renamed. it's an operation that is only 10% of the size that it had been to about 10,000 americans and 4,000 nato troops by way of a couple of points of background we will get to the general campbell but in this particular season i think that you are aware that afghans were doing

most of the fighting and if you want to quantify you are doing 90% and not just the numbers were the troops where they have 30,000 or so of the army and police and nato has 13 or 14,000 but in the casualties. this is the time of the american fatality in afghanistan this year is in the single digits, perhaps for. no one wants to knock on wood but it's in the american role of the world even though it is quite important. as you probably also aware of the are also aware the current plan for president obama is to reduce next spring and perhaps to move towards a very small embassy mission by the end of 2016 although some of the details remain subject for the reconsideration. we are going to proceed for about the next hour. we have until about four t-tango ten.

he's generous with his scheduling and we are lucky to have him in him and very grateful suite of 60 minutes of time. to quickly ask a couple of questions that we will go to all of you for some discussion. general john campbell is a 1971 graduate of west point, the congress from a military family - >> at its continued in subsequent generation as well he's now in his third tour in afghanistan and the first was the kernel. but also the kind of expertise at the senior officer level into the kind of perspective they have across all different levels of command. he was in the regional command east in 2010 and 2011 for the part of afghanistan as you know that suffers the greatest violence along with regional command south and was reminded he earlier.

but in that year and in that sector alone there's been a change again in the u.s. role in the country. he was also the deputy chief of staff in the u.s. army and had a number of other positions including serving in iraq. matt sherman has also been at this for a very long time and i missed the most durable and remarkably gifted and committed to work in the war. he spent a number of years in iraq and a number in afghanistan that was about five years ago and had been a forever war that he's kept at it. i would like to ask you all for joining me to welcome him to brookings. [applause]

thanks everybody for taking the time to be here and showing an interest in afghanistan. we are not in the headlines like we used to be so we would like to take some time to talk about afghanistan and how i see it, and i look forward to your questions. i thought about five to ten minutes of remarks and then lay out the dialogue. i see david back there in the back. there's a seat there is a seat for you right here all the way in the front. i would ask you a question. a long career on this issue and ben came over just a little bit to see us. this is the third tour in afghanistan going on a year )-right-paren. any time i've been there, the treaty forces continue to get better and better. they have challenges and issues they've identified in the past as we have worked on close air support and we work on intelligence and logistics and special operating forces. but again i see them continuing

to progress and be very resilient. mike talked about the mike talked about the number of casualties this year on and it has been a very tough fighting season for all of afghanistan both from a military site and also the number of civilian casualties has gone up as well and i attribute most of those in the 70 plus% i of it is that over 90% in the civilian casualties caused by the taliban and other insurgents out there and we can't forget that sacrifice. i have a very good opportunity to see the afghan security forces from all different levels the leaders from the circulation as they interacted with afghan soldiers in place but today i spent a lot of time working with the ministry and the minister of interior and the president and

the doctor and i'm very honored to have the opportunity and again i think they continue to progress and they have challenges this fighting season has been tough on the casualties out has been talked about but there's a lot of reasons for that and part of it is we don't have 80,000 plus coolish enforcers in the battlefield. they don't have the type of close air support that we've provided in the years past. pakistan has done well in the fighting fighting inside pakistan driving people into afghanistan. and again, they are figuring this out. we are at the core level and we stay involved in the special forces which is probably the best in the region and the afghan special forces. i look forward to taking your questions into talking about afghanistan. it is near and dear to me and has been for a long time. and again i would like to tell you about them as they go

through. i would like to ask about more specifics on the military dynamics and momentum, but before i do talking about this earlier and i would give you the chance to talk about how in your eyes why it is important, why afghanistan is support the db2 important and i know it is complex and sometimes seems in iraq were a note but i know you've thought a lot about it and i wonder if you could share some thoughts. >> i wear two hats. i have the u.s. forces afghanistan and nato and under the nato had a busy train advisory to the system to continue to kind of codify and solidify the gains we had in the last 14 years in the security forces from the u.s. side of the same thing the train can advise and assist. and the same reason we went to afghanistan in the first place in 2001 is to make sure that there will be safe havens the insurgents will plan to hit the homeland. i do feel we have done a great job in the conventional

perspective and the afghan security forces as well to make sure we haven't had another 9/11 and we have to continue to build the capacity in the region. they want to be a regional partner. they now have a president and a ce committed to the committee, committed to the afghan security forces. the president is president is the commander-in-chief and every single day is concerned about the welfare. he visits the training in the security quite well. so for me it really is about the last 14 years that they've made to ensure that we have a stable afghanistan for central asia in that area which i think really cuts down on the opportunities for insurgents to plan something for the homeland. i think anybody that's been to afghanistan understands that there are people out there that continue to want to change our way of life and to do that sometimes we have to play this away game and i think the last 14 years has prevented us from having another 9/11 and we are

very blessed to have great men and women that continue to every single day that their lives on the line. we have a sweet spot 13 to 14,000 with nato. we took the casualties and we only had one loss from the u.s. soldier who was a green on blue and we had one defense logistics agency killed and then the contractors working with our folks comes with it is since the first of january but that's not work every single day to mitigate and i'm privileged to lead the men and women to think about afghanistan and be part of something larger. >> for the long-standing leader of the taliban there appears to years ago or so in the taliban

ranks they will talk about that a little later but i wanted to ask about the military trends and dynamics how strong is the taliban right now and how is the fight going, how would you explain what's going on besides the point you've already made that this is a big transition but they are overwhelmingly doing it on their own besides that how else should we think about the trends and battlefield dynamics this year? >> i think again very tough fighting season. i would tell you that it started last year so it's been kind of a continuous fighting season. when we talk in terms of the fighting season it's until october but i think that we have seen from the very last number through the fall we had some political instability and the fighting continued and really afghan security forces started but we called the season on their own they didn't wait for the company in this year. they had a multi-core operation of the february and march timeframe where they took them in helmond.

they took about three or four weeks of planning and proper commanders together. we went back and took that with the senior afghan police and army and it was a very complex plan that they want to take in initiative to find first into the debate. they followed that up with another multi-cooperation. then we had about a month and a half where we had a little bit of a wall and that was caused by the insurgents in afghanistan going up to the north. we haven't seen this kind and not great levels but it just takes a few in the district center. you have the people that call out to the central government. we need some help and it causes them to start moving some of their people up to the north are probably the three large areas, so it's dressed the afghan security forces at the time they

were trying to focus on another area that i think over time in the leadership and having a corps commander we went without one for about two and a half month's so there was a little bit of a timeframe that they didn't have the right leadership they need it and once they moved the commander by the name of the major general who was in town in the south they moved to the north when north when he got an opportunity to be on the ground and i think he made a difference in the north. but again we have seen fighting over afghanistan. he talked about the south end of the east and we have seen that in the last 13 or 14 years but the difference has been in the north where they express the afghan security forces. but i seem to react to that and again when they do the crossword nation and have the police and army and intel they can't he beat and i tell the afghan forces that the taliban don't have a nice 35417.

it doesn't have the humvee. so it really gets down to the leadership and having the confidence to take it to the enemy. there is no way that the taliban even despite his tough fighting season at the casualties that they are taken that they can overthrow the afghan government that's not going to happen. they will continue to have a attacks throughout the country and do high profile taxes and they will continue to try to take a magnetic id and put it on a bus because again civilian casualties for every magnetic ied that goes off the forces stop and we don't hear about that but that's a good thing and the number of times the afghan security forces have stopped attacks on i. headquarters and other places throughout is quite remarkable but again what makes the news is that suicide attack

and again one or two people very low risk for the taliban to come into the city upwards of 5 billion people but i do think they continue to make progress and we will continue to work the systems and process to processes to build an afghan army and a police they can sustain. >> thank you very much for that. i'm trying to just complete the picture in my own mind and others as well about the overall state of security in the country today and it's like i know one of the things you've done is we've downsized and now you are commanding the resolute support you used to command their original system and one of the things you do is give greater responsibility for the analysis so we don't produce as many documents how we think the security picture books for our code congress or public and i think that makes it harder sometimes for people to get a

feel. my sense, and correct me if i'm wrong this at some of the big cities remain pretty good especially via the standards that we think of as a war time zone and the road in most areas the big circumference road round of the main agricultural zones is also as secure as it has ever been in the variable in the last six or eight years but i would like to hear you describe it. i could be wrong and i'm sure the audience cares about how you would explain the nuances, so it isn't a general picture - >> the areas for the enemy to attack the major convoys in the coalition that's not happening like it was just a year ago. but they are having the problems in these remote district centers that represent the government and of the atlantic over the district center, that shows the loss of confidence for the people that live in the district on the district center will

understand that they don't have the right to security. a year ago they took over the district center than it might be two, three, four, maybe a week or two before they have the capability to take that back. today what you see is as soon as they are taken over that for ten hours most of the time the security forces were taken. so they have the ability now and they have the capability to react much quicker, to move the forces all around the country to go back and take over the district centers. so i think it is a sign of progress has been moved forward. again, they have technology. they have the people, they have the training. i think the difference this fighting season is getting the leadership in place for holding those leaders accountable for the welfare of the soldiers and the police had been building the morale as they continue to take the offenses. they are very defensive in nature. eight d.% of them them on checkpoints in when you were on a checkpoint you are vulnerable

to the attacks and that is where they are taking their losses on these small checkpoints. the local police were designed to be the guardians of the village area selected by the authors of the village. they are supposed to guard the village dates employed in 5 kilometers, ten columbus outside of the village without reinforcing support them in him and therefore the intelligentsia be targeted to take over checkpoint and roll that up three, four, five people in the next one so they are learning as they go on the offense the duties planned operations into the number of casualties are much, much less because they've planned them out. and when they are maneuvering and they are not just sitting in the positions that they are not in target for the taliban. so, the president is working very hard for the senior leadership is working very hard. it's kind of been in the dna to work on the checkpoint so they are working on it very hard. i think that we will see continued progress in it for the rest of the season. >> to remind folks i think it is

estimated was estimated about 5,000 afghans gave their lives in defense of the nation and this year it's a little higher. but i know one of the other concerns is that a lot of people go awol and don't complete. before we move onto the next question for the future of the afghan security forces would you describe the current situation where they are losing people through a wall or a church in? >> we have a deep dive on it and we worked with the defense to focus on how we can help them and as we look they lose probably in the neighborhood of the 4,000 per month and a lot of that you would think is battlefield casualties and that is the biggest problem that is the case. absent without leave and it goes back down to the leadership and as we have done a deep dive and said why are they beating it's because you have young soldiers or police that have been

fighting for two or three years that haven't had a break. something we take for granted in all of the services back here in the noncommissioned officers and junior officers they don't have the same thing in afghanistan. they are growing but they are not there yet. when you are fighting at the time and needed to take a break and have no other way, you go back home and don't come back and that has been the biggest issue. we are working on leadership and ways to retain people. when they enlist in the afghan army and again this is an all volunteer force. but again this is an all volunteer force that you have somebody that lists for three years and they want what we've called reenlist and re- contracting. you take a young soldier that has been added for three years and doesn't want to reenlist for five years you may want to go another year or two years.

now by the way they have money for the bonuses so they start to apply the tools but they lost sight of it and that's going to grow and maintain. but but it goes down to the leadership in fighting the common things to take care of the soldiers and police and once they do that they will stay because they told me they don't need advisers to talk about the patriotism or the fighting. they've got that down pat. they need to write the leadership to show them what it looks like. some have said that the loss per casualties and and awol are unsustainable. they are higher than you would like. would you describe them as unsustainable is unsustainable or is that not the best?

spin any casualty is a shame if we have to take stock in that and we the end we can never forget of the sacrifice of the martyrs of the police and the army. we can't forget about the wounded warriors. we are starting to incorporate the wounded warrior programs like we have in the united states into the afghan army and hopefully in the police will be a good thing as we go forward. i think another thing again if they get the worthy attrition peace and they work hard on recruiting for w. because what they do now that they don't recruit during the fighting season and from april to october the don't worry about recruiting and the u.s. army we look at recruiting all year long so they try to have them do that. if they start to put those measures in place and i think once they do that, again and any of the lose, they lose by going awol and that isn't good but we did overcome this would overcome this based on retention. >> to the last question for you

when you look ahead at the next 18 months and we look at it as the united states we are hoping the congress will continue to be appropriated funds in the forces and economic development over many years in the future because they do not yet have a sustainable economic base to pay for the costs of their own. beyond that there is the military dimension and we are thinking about two different priorities. one is the counterterrorism needed to extend we want the ability to have american drones and intelligence in afghanistan or south asia to the longer-term future. the other is what why do they still need or might they need potentially beyond the timeframe that is projected. what will you be examining to evaluate the progress? talked about air power in other sessions and get that intelligence and another are a few things on your mind. could you give a couple

examples? 's connect many of the gaps and challenges that they have had we identified years ago into these are things that they've done for me and it's going to take a long time to build. it's a very tough thing. logistics just quadruples how complex and how hard it is, so logistics in the intelligence being able to take the different sources to figure out what that means that took many years to do so those areas will continue to work on those and we are putting the priority on the advisers. our advertisers today are the weapon systems. it's changed over the years. i have advisers.

they are programming and budgeting those kind of things that are experts in the transparency accountability and oversight and rule of law sustainability, strategic communication goes are areas we continue to work very hard and we have metrics and those that we measure every single week i get an update on the functions as we look at it and over time it will come to the point we are going to see that is the best we can do and i have six months left i need to reprioritize and move the advisers to something that will be important in the long run so i'm continually assessing the afghan security force for the police and army as we go forward. for the long haul the intelligence aviation takes a long time, two to three years for a pilot, two to three years to maintain. we started late on growing the air force, so we are going to be there for a while to continue to work hard on the air force and as we go we've built a lot of

the lack of a better term mechanics to work on the weapon systems into vehicles but what we didn't do well as we did and build up the middle management to take the time to build what i call the senior noncommissioned officers to keep them into it's going. so again i will assist those every week as we move forward and we make adjustments based on input i get from the afghans. ..