The United Nations Human Rights Council: Issues for Congress

Luisa Blanchfield
Specialist in International Relations

On March 15, 2006, the U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution replacing the Commission on Human Rights with a new Human Rights Council (the Council). The U.N. Secretariat and some governments, including the United States, viewed the establishment of the Council as a key component of comprehensive U.N. reform. The Council was designed to be an improvement over the Commission, which was widely criticized for the composition of its membership when perceived human rights abusers were elected as members. The General Assembly resolution creating the Council, among other things, increased the number of meetings per year and introduced a “universal periodic review” process to assess each member state’s fulfillment of its human rights obligations.

One hundred seventy countries voted in favor of the resolution to create the Council. The United States, under the George W. Bush Administration, was one of four countries to vote against the resolution. The Administration maintained that the Council structure was no better than the Commission and that it lacked mechanisms for maintaining credible membership. During the Council’s first two years, the Bush Administration expressed concern with the Council’s focus on Israel and lack of attention to other human rights situations. In April 2008, it announced that the United States would withhold a portion of its contributions to the 2008 U.N. regular budget equivalent to the U.S. share of the Human Rights Council budget. In June 2008, it further stated that the United States would engage with the Council “only in matters of deep national interest.”

In March 2009, the Barack Obama Administration announced that it would run for a seat on the Council. The United States was elected as a Council member by the U.N. General Assembly on May 12, 2009, and its term began on June 19, 2009. The Administration stated that it furthers the United States’ interest “if we are part of the conversation and present at the Council’s proceedings.” At the same time, however, it called the Council’s trajectory “disturbing,” particularly its “repeated and unbalanced” criticisms of Israel. On November 5, 2010, the United States underwent the Council’s universal periodic review process for the first time.

Since its establishment, the Council has held 18 regular sessions and 18 special sessions. The regular sessions addressed a combination of specific human rights abuses and procedural and structural issues. Six of the 18 special sessions addressed the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian territories and in Lebanon. Other special sessions focused on the human rights situations in Burma (Myanmar), Cote d’Ivoire, Darfur, Haiti, Libya, Sri Lanka, and Syria. The Council held a five-year review of its work in March 2011. Some participants, including the United States, felt the review did not sufficiently address the Council’s weaknesses, particularly its focus on Israel and lack of mechanisms for ensuring credible membership.

Congress maintains an ongoing interest in the credibility and effectiveness of the Council in the context of both human rights and broader U.N. reform. In the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Division H, the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2009, of P.L. 111-8), for example, it prohibited U.S. contributions to support the Council unless (1) the Secretary of State certified to Congress that funding the Council is “in the national interest of the United States” or (2) the United States was a member of the Council. Because the Council is funded through assessed contributions to the U.N. regular budget, withholding funds in this manner would likely be a symbolic policy action because such contributions finance the entire U.N. regular budget and not specific parts of it. More recently, in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2010 (Division F, the Department of State Foreign Operations, and Relations Appropriations Act, 2010, of P.L. 111-117), Congress required that the Secretary of State report to Congress on resolutions adopted by the Council.


Date of Report: December 19, 2011
Number of Pages: 29
Order Number: RL33608
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Missing Adults: Background, Federal Programs, and Issues for Congress

Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara
Specialist in Social Policy

Adults may go missing due to choice, an abduction, foul play, a mental or physical disability, or a natural catastrophe, among other reasons. Although no accurate estimates exist of the number of missing adults, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported that as of January 1, 2011, nearly 50,000 missing adult cases were pending in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) system, a federal computerized index with data on crimes and locator files for missing and unidentified persons. Certain adults are particularly vulnerable to missing episodes; for example, those with dementia are at risk for wandering. Adults who engage in high-risk behaviors, including involvement in gang activity, may also be more prone to going missing.

Unlike children, adults have the legal right to go missing under most circumstances. As a result, families of missing adults may receive limited assistance from state and local law enforcement entities in recovering their loved ones. The federal government has not been involved in assisting law enforcement entities with missing adult cases in the same way it has with missing children cases. Further, cases of missing children and young adults under the age of 21 must be reported to the NCIC, while reporting missing adults to the database is voluntary. In recent years, however, the federal government has increasingly played a role in (1) preventing certain types of missing adult incidents; (2) working to recover adults who go missing, including those who are deceased and for whom only remains can be found; and (3) supporting databases, including NCIC, that maintain records of missing adults and unidentified remains.

Recognizing the needs of a growing aging population, Congress authorized funding for the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert program under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322). The program has awarded funds to the Alzheimer’s Association, a nonprofit organization that provides research on Alzheimer’s disease, since FY1996 to protect and locate missing individuals with dementia through a patient identification program, as well as outreach and education efforts. In 2000, Congress passed Kristen’s Act (P.L. 106-468) to permit the Department of Justice (DOJ) to make grants to establish a national clearinghouse for missing adults and provide technical assistance to law enforcement agencies in locating these individuals. From FY2002 through FY2006, DOJ made grants for these purposes.

In addition, the federal DNA Initiative has also supported efforts to recover missing persons and identify unidentified human remains by funding DNA analysis and providing related assistance. In addition to the NCIC, federal support is provided to the National DNA Index System (NDIS), which stores criminal information as well as individuals believed to be missing, their relatives, and unidentified human remains; and the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs), which includes databases for missing adults and unidentified remains. Records are submitted to most of the databases by authorized law enforcement agencies, state missing persons clearinghouses, medical examiners and coroners, or DNA laboratories. Nearly all of the databases can be accessed only by authorized law enforcement and other personnel; however, records in NamUs can also be reviewed by the public.

Policymakers and other stakeholders have increasingly focused on the coordination of the federal databases on missing persons, as well as the role of the federal government in providing assistance to states and localities to develop alert systems and technology to locate missing adults. Many states have developed alert systems to recover vulnerable adults who have gone missing. For further information about these systems, see CRS Report R40552, Alert Systems for Missing Adults in Eleven States: Background and Issues for Congress.


Date of Report: October 25, 2011
Number of Pages: 23
Order Number: RL34616
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Congressional Primer on Major Disasters and Emergencies

Francis X. McCarthy
Analyst in Emergency Management Policy

Jared T. Brown
Analyst in Emergency Management and Homeland Security Policy

The principles of disaster management assume a leadership role by the local and state governments with the federal government providing coordinated supplemental resources and assistance. A declaration of a major disaster or emergency must, in almost all cases, be requested by the governor, who at that point has declared that the situation is beyond the capacity of the state to respond. The governor also determines which parts of the state they will request assistance for and suggests the types of assistance programs that may be needed. The President considers the governor’s request, in consultation with officials of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and makes the initial decisions on the areas to be included as well as the programs that are implemented. The immediate response to a disaster is guided by the National Response Framework (NRF), which details roles and responsibilities at various levels of government, along with cooperation from the private and non-profit sectors, for differing incidents and support functions.

The majority of federal aid is made available from FEMA under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, P.L. 93-288. In addition to that assistance, other disaster aid is made available through programs of the Small Business Administration (which provides disaster loans to both businesses and homeowners), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) within the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (in the form of Community Development Block Grant funds being made available for unmet disaster needs).

While the disaster response and recovery process is fundamentally a relationship between the federal government and the requesting state government, there are roles for congressional offices to play in providing information to the federal/state response and recovery teams in their respective states and districts. Congressional offices also serve as a valuable source of accurate and timely information to their constituents.


Date of Report: August 31, 2011
Number of Pages: 13
Order Number: R41981
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Youth Transitioning from Foster Care: Issues for Congress

Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara
Specialist in Social Policy

Recent research has demonstrated that compared to their peers, current and former foster youth are more likely to experience negative outcomes in adulthood. This research, along with the efforts of policymakers and child welfare advocates, has brought greater attention to the challenges facing youth transitioning from foster care. In response, Congress has sought to improve existing services and provide additional supports for this population. The 110th Congress passed, and President George W. Bush enacted, the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-351), which is arguably one of the most significant laws passed in the past two decades that expands services and supports for older youth in care. This report presents issues around implementation of P.L. 110-351. It also describes other issues affecting older youth as they transition from foster care into adulthood.

As enacted, P.L. 110-351 extends eligibility, beginning in FY2011, for federal foster care assistance to youth who remain in care after age 18 (at state option until 19, 20, or 21). P.L. 110- 351 additionally authorizes this assistance on behalf of older youth eligible for federal foster care if they reside in an independent living setting (as well as foster family homes or other eligible settings). The law requires the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to define independent living settings in regulation. One possible challenge in implementing the law is that even with assistance from the federal government, states (and tribes, pursuant to P.L. 110-351) may be hesitant to extend care to older youth because of the cost. Child welfare agencies may also face difficulties in retaining youth in care, even if remaining in care would be beneficial. For those states that choose to extend care, they will also need to determine how the courts will oversee cases involving these older youth, and how to facilitate emancipated youth returning to foster care between ages 18 and 21.

P.L. 110-351 also expands the purposes of the Chafee Foster Care Independence Program (CFCIP). The CFCIP was established in 1999 (P.L. 106-169) to provide supports and services to current and former foster youth who are likely to be emancipated from care. Changes made by P.L. 110-351 explicitly permit states to provide CFCIP services to youth who leave care at age 16 or older through kinship guardianship or adoption. Funding for the CFCIP was not increased, and whether states will expand their independent living programs to include this population remains to be seen. In addition, the law requires child welfare agencies to assist youth who are leaving foster care in developing a transition plan so that they have specific options on housing, employment, education, and mentoring.

In July 2010, HHS issued program instructions that provide guidance to states on the implementation of P.L. 110-351. Despite the passage of P.L. 110-351 and issuance of accompanying guidance, policymakers and advocates remain concerned that older foster youth and those who have aged out will continue to experience challenges during the transition to adulthood. Emancipated youth face particular obstacles in fostering permanent connections with caring adults, securing health insurance and housing, and staying connected to work and school. Little is known about youth as they transition from foster care, although a new national database will likely provide some insight into their outcomes across a number of areas, such as education, employment, and contact with social service and criminal justice systems.

For background information about older foster youth and the current federal policies and programs for this population, see CRS Report RL34499, Youth Transitioning from Foster Care: Background and Federal Programs, by Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara.


Date of Report: August 22, 2011
Number of Pages: 41
Order Number: R40218
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Youth Transitioning from Foster Care: Background and Federal Programs

Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara
Specialist in Social Policy

While most young people have access to emotional and financial support systems throughout their early adult years, older youth in foster care and those who are emancipated from care often face obstacles to developing independent living skills and building supports that ease the transition to adulthood. Older foster youth who return to their parents or guardians may continue to experience poor family dynamics or a lack of emotional and financial supports, and studies have shown that recently emancipated foster youth fare poorly relative to their counterparts in the general population on several outcome measures.

Recognizing the difficulties faced by older youth in care and youth emancipating from foster care, Congress created a new Independent Living initiative (P.L. 99-272) in 1986 to assist certain older foster youth as they enter adulthood. The legislation authorized mandatory funding to states under a new Section 477 of the Social Security Act. In 1999, P.L. 106-169 rewrote Section 477 to create the John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Program (CFCIP) and doubled the total annual funds available to states from $70 million to $140 million. The law also expanded the population of youth eligible to receive independent living services—with no lower age limit—and gave states greater flexibility in designing independent living programs. Independent living services can refer to assistance in obtaining a high school diploma and training in daily living skills, among other services.

The CFCIP has been amended three times. In 2002, the Promoting Safe and Stable Amendments of 2001 (P.L. 107-133) authorized discretionary funding for states to provide education and training vouchers (ETV) to youth who age out of foster care and youth adopted from care at age 16 or older. For FY2010, Congress appropriated $45.4 million to the ETV program. The CFCIP was amended again in 2008 by the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-351). The act expanded eligibility for the program by adding as an additional program purpose that youth who are in foster care on their 16th birthday but who subsequently leave care for adoption or kinship guardianship are eligible for CFCIP service. The law also extended the ETV program to youth who leave care at age 16 or older for kinship guardianship; made tribal entities eligible to apply directly for CFCIP and ETV funds directly from the federal government; and authorized additional supports and services outside of the CFCIP to older youth in care, including providing states the option, beginning in FY2011, to extend Title IV-E foster care to youth ages 18 to 21. In 2010, the program was amended for a third time by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148, PPACA), which requires states to educate youth aging out about the importance of a health care power of attorney.

Along with the CFCIP, federal child welfare law and other federal programs are intended to help older foster youth and recent alumni make the transition to adulthood. The Title IV-E foster care program has protections in place to ensure that older youth in care have a written case plan that addresses the programs and services that will assist in this transition. Further the law that established the CFCIP created a new optional Medicaid eligibility pathway for “independent foster care adolescents;” this pathway is often called the “Chafee option.” Beginning in 2014, eligible young people who emancipate from foster care will be covered under a mandatory Medicaid pathway until age 26, as required under PPACA. Federal law also authorizes funding for states to provide other types of assistance. Further, the Higher Education Act authorizes services specifically for youth in foster care or recently emancipated youth, including education and housing services.


Date of Report: August 1, 2011
Number of Pages: 58
Order Number: RL34499
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.