The National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD) surveys indicate that a significant majority of young people report having a supportive adult in their lives at different stages of their journey – 93% at age 17, 90% at age 19, 77% at age 21. While these numbers are encouraging, they don't tell the whole story. Having a supportive adult isn't the same as sustaining a meaningful relationship with one. The data tell us little about who these supportive adults are, whether they are engaged in transition planning, or whether they will remain a consistent source of support as young people navigate adulthood.

Relational permanency offers a way to bridge this gap by fostering enduring relationships that provide youth with a sense of belonging, acceptance, and security. But achieving relational permanency requires more than connecting young people with caring adults, it requires rethinking how child welfare systems define partnership.

Too often, adults make decisions about permanency without first asking young people what it means to them. This disconnect is reflected more broadly in how child welfare systems support youth transitioning to adulthood. It remains unclear whether independent living programs achieve meaningful long-term outcomes, in part because child welfare systems are not required to collect comprehensive data throughout the transition process. As a result, agencies often have limited information about which supports are most effective. When young people also lose access to Extended Foster Care (EFC) and Chafee program as they age out of eligibility, they face an even greater risk of housing instability, economic hardship, and social isolation.

In the absence of comprehensive outcomes data, young people with lived experience represent an essential source of evidence about what works in practice. If lasting relationships are the goal, then young people can't simply be recipients of services—they must help shape the systems designed to support them. Co-design offers a practical way to do so by enabling child welfare agencies to ground decisions in lived experience, creating more responsive policies, programs, and permanency efforts.

Co-Design: From Participation to Partnership

In Follow the Love: Permanent Connection Scaffolding, Dr. Wynter and I describe co-design as a way of bringing foster youth and child welfare professionals together as equal partners. Rather than seeking youth feedback after decisions have already been made, co-design engages young people from the outset as collaborators in shaping programs, policies, and practice.

The International Association for Public Participation's Spectrum of Public Participation offers a useful way to understand this progression. Youth engagement can range from informing and consulting to involving, collaborating, and ultimately empowering young people. While organizations may begin by consulting or involving youth, authentic co-design is an intentional process of building youth-adult partnerships that progressively share decision-making authority, with collaboration and empowerment representing its strongest expressions.

This progression asks organizations to shift their role from making decisions for young people to creating the conditions for young people to help make those decisions themselves. In doing so, agencies recognize lived experience as a form of expertise that can strengthen policies, programs, and permanency efforts.

Co-Design in Practice

Across the United States, agencies are beginning to demonstrate what co-design can look like in practice. The examples below illustrate how agencies are engaging youth at different points along the co-design continuum. Although these efforts vary in scope and structure, together they illustrate how youth can move from providing feedback to becoming partners in child welfare decision-making.

Together, these examples reflect a broader shift in child welfare from viewing young people as recipients of services to recognizing them as partners in designing the policies and programs that affect their lives. Co-design doesn't transfer all decision-making authority to youth overnight, instead, it intentionally creates opportunities for youth and adults to share responsibility, build trust, and shape systems together.

Table 1 offers practical guidance for organizations looking to strengthen co-design in relational permanency programming. Organized around the four stages of co-design: consult, involve, collaborate, and empower, it includes planning and evaluation questions that practitioners can revisit as their partnerships with youth evolve.

Table 1 A Compass for Co-Design

Looking Ahead

Advancing relational permanency requires a commitment to partnering with young people as experts in their own lives. Co-design offers a practical pathway for creating meaningful opportunities for youth to shape the programs, policies, and relationships that affect them. By embracing shared decision-making, child welfare systems can build stronger youth-adult partnerships and more responsive supports. As the field continues to advance relational permanency, the path forward lies in recognizing lived experience as a form of expertise embedded into everyday practice. Doing so is not simply about increasing youth participation, it is about transforming how child welfare systems partner with young people.

Sources

California Department of Health Care Services. (n.d.). Support for peer partner programs in California. https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/cdss-programs/peer-partners

Children’s Bureau. (2012, June). John H. Chafee foster care program for successful transition to adulthood. U.S. Administration for Children and Families. https://acf.gov/cb/grant-funding/john-h-chafee-foster-care-independence-program

Florida Department of Children and Families. (n.d.). Statewide youth advisory board. https://myflfamilies.com/statewide-youth-advisory-board

Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. (n.d.). FY27 TLS statewide youth advisory board. https://il.amplifund.com/Public/Opportunities/Details/6aeab2cf-857a-428c-883b-a5907ecf7f85

International Association for Public Participation. (2018). IAP2 spectrum of public participation. https://iap2.org.au/resources/spectrum/

Maryland Department of Human Services. (n.d.). State youth advisory board. https://mylife.benefits.maryland.gov/state-youth-advisory-board/

National Youth in Transition Database. (2025). Data and statistics: NYTD. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. https://acf.gov/cb/data-research/data-and-statistics-nytd

New York State Office of Children and Family Services. (n.d.). Youth and young adult services. https://ocfs.ny.gov/programs/youth/ya-services/

Sunlight Foundation. (n.d.). Guide to co-design. https://communities.sunlightfoundation.com/action/codesign/

The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2021, May). Extended foster care explained. https://www.aecf.org/blog/extended-foster-care-explained

Wynter, E., Kashyap, M., & Elmore, G. (2023). Follow the love: Permanent connections scaffolding. Next Page Publishing Inc.

Washington, DC Council. (2025). Support, Opportunity, Unity, Legal Relationships (SOUL) amendment act of 2025. https://www.billtrack50.com/billdetail/1907697