Stikkordarkiv: #CSFES

What is an exchange organization?

Once you have decided to go for the exchange student life, you need to decide if you should travel with an exchange organization. Some countries, like Japan, give you no choice. No exchange organization = no visa. I don’t know what guidelines most other countries have about this.

What is an exchange organization

Basically, an exchange organization is a travel agency. They organize your plane tickets, the place you stay and the activities you will participate in (i.e. school). The receiving exchange organization is supposed to function as a guardian. Ideally you will be placed in a safe area with a safe host family that, at least, pass the same requirements a foster home would. Schooling should be at an approved (by authorities) institution.

Types of exchange organizations?

There are three kinds of exchange organizations. Volunteer organizations like Rotary, AFS and YFU base their work on volunteers. Usually, there is a small regional office with permanent staff who earn average salaries.

Non-profit organizations can be a misleading term. Usually the term has to do with saving taxes. If the exchange organization has holding companies in links above it, you aren’t really looking at a non-profit organization but rather a company that utilizes what tax loop-holes there are. Exchange organizations like EF Education, Aspect Foundation, Explorius/Educatius/CETUSA, Forte International Exchange Association/Astar Education, and Heltberg International Education all have holding companies controlling them.

Some of the exchange organization have their own travel agencies and insurance agencies.  Erika Travel Insurance belongs to EF Education. Rejsespecialisten is a sister-company to My Education.

For-profit exchange organizations are open about being in the business of making money. I do not know if their representatives get paid more than the non-profit ones (price per student placed) do. In the US, for-profit firms fall into the F-1 student exchange programs category.

Communication between various parties

In a student exchange situation there are several parties involved. You have parents of the exchange student, the exchange student, exchange organization in the home country, main office in host-country, host-country local representative, host-country school, host-family.

When you sign a contract with your exchange organization at home, you usually authorize them to function as a go-between for you and the partner organization. Most contracts forbid contact between parents and partner organization. In addition, the exchange companies seldom want you to have contact with your child’s school. Nor do they encourage contact with the host-family.

Your child is supposed to communicate with their local representative who is then supposed to bring the matter up the chain until the information eventually reaches the parents. The host-family is supposed to use the same route. However, our experience has been that what the parents are told is not always what the partner organization was told by either student, school or host-parent. We encourage contact between parents and their child, parents and the host parents and in crisis between parents and the school. We also encourage you to keep all contacts documented (emails, sms, recordings of phone calls etc.). Just in case.

Home country exchange organization

Most exchange organizations use the following procedure:

  • After the potential exchange student fills out application 1, the exchange organization makes its choice. Rotary require better grades than the rest.
  • Organization, student and her/his family meet.
  • Application part 2 is filled in by parents and student and signed by them.
  • All necessary documentation is collected by the company and forwarded to their partner organization in the host country.
  • Have information meeting.
  • Be a point of contact between biological parents and partner.

The Partner organization in the host country is supposed to

  • Train leaders and representatives.
  • Match representative and exchange student.
  • Match exchange student and host family.
  • Make sure ALL necessary documentation regarding host-family, representative and school has been forwarded to the proper authorities.
  • Make travel arrangements to and from host country.
  • Some hold orientations camps.
  • Be responsible for all host-country trips.
  • «Be there» for the student 24/7.
  • Support school leadership.
  • Ensure the student is safe during emergencies.
  • Return students who break the laws of the host country.

2014: USA News

2014 Dec 17: Markus Kaarma Guilty Of Killing German Exchange Student In Montana

2014 Oct 13: Exchange student program sparks concerns at Grant High School (fear of Ebola)

2014 Oct 13: Chinese exchange student denied transportation to school by Huntington School District

2014 Oct 03: Russia suspends student exchange program with U.S.

2014 Aug 24: Exchange student from Ghana dies in California kayak accident

2014 Aug 11: Exchange student found after night in hills

2014 Aug 07: China exchange student drowns in pool of California host family

2014 Aug 06: Foreign exchange student host used spy camera on students, police say: Lloyd Lindquist, 78, arrested on video voyeurism, child porn charges

2014 Jun 30: West Rapids host families receive USD 300 per month per student from Educatius

2014 Jun 04: Police: Maryland teacher videotaped foreign exchange student as she showered

2014 Jun 03: Exchange student hit by pickup

2014 May 23: Bond set at $250,000 for Wayne Miller, president of Cathedral Bible College with Myrtle Beach campus

2014 May 08: Shot in Missoula: The Tragic Death of a German Exchange Student (offer gutt)

2014 May 07: Ex-pastor is charged with sexually assaulting church youth in Harrison

2014 May 06: Sentencing delayed for Merced man convicted in rape, sexual battery

2014 Apr 16: Hamilton County man charged with statutory rape of foreign exchange student (vertsfar / offer = jente)

2014 Feb 04: Missing Egyptian exchange student boarded bus to New York City  

2014 Jan 27: Former Mormon bishop indicted of luring teenage child for sex (kjente tilfeller ifjor og iår = gutter / områderep for Educatius)

2014 Jan 17: Man Arrested After Being Accused of Sexually Assaulting Exchange students (handlingene skjedde i 2012: jenter ofre)

2014 Jan 07: Man charged with pointing gun at foreign exchange student (vertsfar pekte på jente + annen ungdom)

2014 Jan 04: Teacher Arrested On Charges Of Sex With Student (offer – gutt – ikke utvekslingselev men utvekslingselev – gutt – har fått bo hos ham)

UK: Entry requirements

Hentet fra Study in Britain and Ireland’s sider.

Om dere reiser med et utvekslingsbyrå skal de sørge for at dere ordner dette på riktig måte. Det er derfor dere betaler dem. Alle utgifter til visa kommer i tillegg.

European Economic Area
If you are a national of a European Union country or are from Norway or Iceland you are free to enter the UK to study, live and work and you do not need a visa.  … Icelandic and Norwegian students have to pay full fees as international students, but do not need work visas and so can fund their course by working.

Non-visa Nationals:
Non-visa nationals are from countries that don’t require a visa to enter Britain, you can arrive with the necessary documentation and be issued the visa when you arrive. You need:

  • Proof that you have been accepted onto a full-time course at a UK school … (totaling 15 or more hours a week).
  • A letter from your new school or college, … on their official headed paper, to state that you have paid your deposit and/or your tuition fees.
  • Proof that you have the funds to pay for your study and living expenses … (travellers’ cheques, a bank draft drawn on a UK bank, letters or bank documents from sponsors, or a combination of all these things). You will have to show that you can support yourself financially without relying on the British welfare state or by working to fund your studies.

If you are staying for longer than six months, it is advisable to submit your documentation to the British Embassy/High Commission in your own country and get entry clearance (a visa) prior to arrival. Your status can still be challenged but you have the right to lodge an appeal and remain in Britain while your case is heard.»

Australia: Which English language tests are acceptable for my student visa application?

Approved tests are:

  • International English Language Testing System (IELTS)
  • Occupational English Test (OET)
  • Test of English as a Foreign Language internet-Based Test (TOEFL iBT)
  • Pearson Test of English (PTE) Academic
  • Cambridge English: Advanced (CAE) test (also known as Certificate in Advanced English).
Below are the test score equivalencies (the scores required will depend on the visa subclass you apply for and your assessment level):
English Language Tests for Student Visas
Test Test Score Band
IELTS 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0
TOEFL iBT 31 32 35 46 60 79 94 102 110 115 118
PTE Academic 29 30 36 42 50 58 65 73 79 83 86
Cambridge English: Advanced (CAE) 32 36 41 47 52 58 67 74 80 87 93
OET Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
TOEFL PBT 433 450 500 527 550 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

UK: Hvem klager man til?

united_kingdom_political_mapProblemer kan oppstå mens dere er i Storbrittania. Noen av dem lar seg greit løse mens andre blir svært utfordrende for dere.

Uansett satser vi først og fremst på at alle parter er løsningsorienterte. Utvekslingseleven begynner med å henvende seg til vertsfamilien og/eller den lokale representanten.

Men HOLD ALLTID FORELDRENE DERES INFORMERTE. Det er bare dere som kan gi dem din egen versjon. Sørg for å sende dem kopi av all dokumentasjon og forsøk i så stor grad som mulig å få alt skriftlig. Det er det utvekslingsbyråene gjør når de krever at dere skal skrive under på såkalte «Agreements» i løpet av utvekslingsåret. Husk at dere allerede har undertegnet avtale to ganger før avreise.

Dersom ikke den lokale representanten hører på dere klag høyere opp. Enten gjør dere det eller så gjør foreldrene deres det. Jeg forstår godt om dere ikke tør gå videre med saken før dere kommer hjem. Alt for mange elever har fortalt meg historiene sine til at jeg har noen illusjoner igjen når det gjelder denne bransjen.

Om dere venter med å gå videre med saken, ta for all del bilder av forholdene. Behold alle papirer. Ta opp samtaler. Før logg. Send kopier til foreldrene deres.

Når dere kommer tilbake til Norge må dere klage INNEN det har gått en måned. Sjekk kontrakten deres så ser dere at de fleste utvekslingsfirmaene har denne klausulen.


DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION har ansvaret for utvekslingselevene mens dere er i UK. Det er også dem man klager til både mens man er i UK og etter at man kommer tilbake til Norge. Ansvarlig person per 2014 Feb 18 er:

Mr. Nigel Fulton:

The Office of the Children’s Commissioner: / Tel: 020 7783 8330

Litt nærmere utvekslingshjemmet er det lokale Council og det lokale politiet. Listen over Civic Offices finnes på GOV.UK Jeg vet helt sikkert at de kommer og undersøker hjemmet dere bor i.


WELSH GOVERNMENT (Department for Education and Skills)

Minister for Education and Skills
Huw Lewis:

Children’s Commissioner for Wales: / Tel: 01792 765600


SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (Department for Education and Lifelong Learning)

Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning: Michael Russell MSP

Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People: / Tel: 0131 558 3733

Northern Ireland:

NORTHERN IRELAND’S GOVERMENT (Department of Education)

The Education Minister: John Dowd

Northern Ireland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People: / Tel: 028 9031 1616

Norwegian Embassy in the UK

  • E-mail:
  • Phone: +44 (0) 20 7591 5500 (Monday-Friday 10.00-11.00 – Wednesdays closed)

De har liste over det lokale konsulatet. Jeg anbefaler varmt at dere tar kontakt med dem mens dere er i UK. I USA er konsulatene stort sett behjelpelige om utvekslingseleven får store problemer.

In case of emergency in the UK, please phone:

Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) is dedicated to eradicating the sexual abuse of children. That means we are part of UK policing and very much about tracking and bringing offenders to account either directly or in partnership with local and international forces.)

 Child-Safe UK (child protection charity that aims to safeguard and prevent the abuse of children and young people away from home, particularly in the global youth travel sector)

Jeg forsøker å holde denne posten oppdatert.

USA: Hvem klager man til og hvordan klager man?

Jeg tenkte det kunne være greit å ha en mal på hvordan klagen man sender inn til ECA (klageinstansen for utvekslingselever) kan se ut. Den inkluderer emailadressene man skal benytte. CSFES hadde satt stor pris på om dere kunne sende en kopi til oss. Nederst står alle dere må sende kopi til pluss alle emailadressene dere trenger:

United States Department of State
Office of Private Sector Exchange Administration
Mr. Henry Scott, Director
Private Sector Programs Division
James Alexander, Branch Chief
Darra Klein, Branch Chief

Dear Sirs and Madams,

RE: Elevens navn, landskode (NO…), Utvekslingsorganisjonene

–  Sakens natur


U.S. Placement Agency: Navn på organisasjon
–  De ulike menneskene der har hatt med å gjøre oppover i hierarkiet

Sending Agency:  Navn på norsk organisasjon
–  De ulike representantene oppover i hierarkiet

Exchange student:

Host family: Navn, adresse, kontaktinformasjon

School: Navn (adresse og kontaktinformasjon)

1. Ankomstsdato
2. Når problemene startet
3. Når dere gjorde andre oppmerksomme på problemet.
4. Deres reaksjon
5. Hjemsendelsesdato (om aktuelt)

Description and comments
Her pleier jeg å si litt om når eleven kom USA og hvordan familieforholdet og relasjonen til lokalrepresentanten var. Etter det går jeg fram skritt for skritt og forklarer hvordan situasjonen utviklet seg og henviser til vedlegg.

Erfaringsmessig er det disse partene jeg skriver mest om:

  1. På førsteplass kommer soleklart vertshjemmet (elendig tilstand) og/eller vertsfamilien og/eller nabolag.
  2. Utvekslingsorganisasjonens ulike representanter er veldig forskjellige personligheter. Noen er rett og slett mobbere og manipulatører. Andre er dedikerte som få. Oftest vil de som sitter høyere opp i gradene bry seg lite om eleven og mest om rykte.
  3. Skolen er ikke det dere ble lovet. Norsk lov krever visse fag for at deler av lånet skal bli stipend.
  4. Fremmede. Da er det oftest snakk om kriminelle handlinger.

Lise Lottes råd nr 1. DOKUMENTER. FB meldinger, ikke-slettede SMS, screenshots, bilder osv. Jo mer dere kan legge ved klagen som underbygger det dere påstår, desto bedre er det.


Lise Lotte M. Almenningen
CSFES Norway

Encl: 5


Navn på mottakerorganisasjonen i USA

Navn på avsenderorganisasjonen i Norge

SIU (Senter for Internasjonalisering av Utdanning)





Om dere trenger hjelp til å skrive klagen (det er ikke alltid så lett å vite hva man skal ta med), har spørsmål eller bare trenger å snakke med en som har vært i en lignende situasjon er det bare å ta kontakt med meg på

Skrevet om 22 desember 2016

1998-1999: Holiday Snapshots…Protecting Young People on European Exchanges from Abuse: Rapporten som satte utvekslingsindustrien på dagsordenen



EXCHANGES FROM ABUSE (Research 1998 – 1999)


Chris Gould, Chairman

Child-Safe International Ltd

Avon and Somerset Constabulary,

PO Box 37, Valley Road, Portishead, BristolBS20 8QJ, United Kingdom

Tel: + 44 (0) 1275 816131  / Fax: + 44 (0) 1275 816655

email: website:


Legislative and regulatory concerns about the policing and control of child sex offenders, convicted or otherwise, has increased both nationally and internationally during the past three to five years.  High profile cases in both the United Kingdom and Belgium have focused attention on the best way of combating such offending.

In August 1996 the first “World Congress Against Commercial and Sexual Exploitation of Children” was organised in Stockholm.  Several countries subsequently introduced extra-territorial legislation to prosecute citizens who commit crime against children overseas (“sex tourism”) and an increasing interest has been shown in the sex offender “register” concept that was initiated in the USA.  Such a register was introduced in the UK under the Sex Offender Act in September 1997.  Concerns continue about how to prevent potential child sex offenders gaining employment to work with children.  Both the European Union and the Council of Europe have taken decisions with pan-European implications.

The British Government is currently looking at preventing unsuitable people working with children, under the auspices of an interdepartmental working group.  Legislation is expected to be introduced in the Spring of 2001 which will lead to the creation of a national Criminal Records Bureau, allowing criminal record checks and, in some cases, intelligence checks to be carried out by employers on such staff.  The Premier’s Department, NSW, Australia have been working on a similar piece of legislation earlier this year, entitled “Employment Screening Procedures for Child Protection”.

Following his innovative work with the “Holiday Snapshots…” research, Detective Superintendent Chris Gould has been collaborating with the interdepartmental working group on behalf of the Association of Chief Police Officers, to ensure that his findings are considered for any future legislation.



Just when it seemed that child abuse had infested all possible “child” areas of our society, and that nothing else could shock us or present itself as “new”… along came some extraordinary revelations by two experienced British police officers.

Following exposure that a Spanish boy had been placed within a host family in the policing area of the Avon and Somerset Constabulary, United Kingdom, the father of whom was a known paedophile, Chris Gould and Kaye Jones set about examining school exchanges and the cultural, educational and language commercial business within Europe. They wanted to see exactly who, and what, regulates this multi-billion dollar enterprise.

In April last year, the Home Office awarded a grant to both officers, with a remit to identify the range and extent of child abuse on international visits, focusing primarily upon the European Union.  Their research project “Holiday Snapshots…Protecting Young People on European Exchanges from Abuse” has already gained international recognition  –  even prior to publication.  By April 1999, the officers were receiving the Police Research Award for innovation from the Home Secretary Jack Straw MP.  By now, this pioneering child protection work of the Avon and Somerset Constabulary, had become known as “Child-safe” and this specialist area of investigation was referred to as

“Child-Safe Travel-Safe”.

For over a year the officers travelled extensively looking at the best practice child protection procedures across the world.  The results of their research focus on homestays by young people under the age of 18 and have now been consolidated.  The findings were then segmented into a series of practical information books targeted at the main groups involved in organising or using international homestays.  The seven books provide practical guidelines on how to set up and monitor child safety policies whilst also providing a solid background of case histories from around the world which illustrate the extent and seriousness of this problem.  This paper can only hope to give a brief overview of the issues, findings and recommendations.  Further details of the work can be found by accessing the “Child-Safe” website (, or by speaking with the authors.

Some things became clear almost immediately. No-one seemed to know the structure of the industry itself, such is its complexity and diversity.  The business is totally unregulated and few, if any, checks are being done in respect of host families, agents or organisations.  Crimes against children are happening and are either not being reported or the information is suppressed.

The research project was designed to capture anecdotal evidence from across Europe of cases where young people had experienced abuse in this way.  These examples were sought in order to establish the range of difficulties that young people were encountering, without speculating as to the scale of the problem unless records and interviews made it statistically possible.  This evidence would hopefully reinforce the need for legislation, regulation of controls to be put in place across the European Community.  At the very least it would foster debate as to the level of State intervention, raise awareness of the issues, improve self regulation and ultimately lead to enhanced safety and welfare conditions for young travellers.



The project has two primary objectives:

  • To identify a sample of cases involving child abuse to or by foreign visitors within the European Community, following placements into host families by school exchanges, twinning or other educational or cultural visits.
  • To determine how the research findings can be used to assist European Governments, relevant travel organisations or other businesses, language schools, educational authorities or twinning associations in preventing the placement of young people on European exchanges in a home where they are likely to be at risk from abuse.

The project also has three hidden objectives:

  • Publicity, to ensure that parents and organisations are made aware of the potential risks inherent with such travel
  • To work towards the creation of appropriate legislation or regulation within the UK or Europe
  • To publish informative travel books/booklets to targeted audiences offering the best practice and guidance alternatives

Methodology (in brief)


à         Press strategy…release of information re research and cases uncovered

à         Personal interviews with victims, parents, organisers, agents, schools,

host families

à         Focus days held with specialists both in the UK  and abroad

à         Telephone interviews with organisations, victims etc

à         Questionnaires sent to host families, organisations and students

(10,000 – UK only)

à         Telephone questionnaire with 54 police forces UK and Channel Islands

à         Extensive literature searches, including internet search and document analysis

à         Visits to USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, The Netherlands, Belgium,

Spain etc

Research findings

It has been established that this “industry” is extremely diverse and complex, and for some twenty, thirty or even forty years it has existed without any form of regulation.  The standards within the businesses vary dramatically from those which have set up their own professional standards body to those ”cowboys” who seasonally set themselves up to make a fast dollar.  This can mean, for instance, that children are being placed within homestays that have never been visited, let alone checked.  There are many instances where extra children have turned up on the coach and organisers have resorted to knocking on doors randomly in order to find last minute hosts, some have even flicked through telephone directories, ringing locals who may be able to assist and at the same time earn some extra cash.

Within the first three months some 550 cases of abuse had been discovered, ranging from neglect through to emotional, physical and sexual abuse.  This was enough to indicate to the authors that there is a problem and from that time their efforts were concentrated on looking for best practice and guidance from which recommendations for change could be made.  Whilst the research considers all types of travel that young people under 18 years venture upon; whether it be staying in youth hostels, hotels, igloos or under canvas: 95% of all abuse cases uncovered happened within a homestay environment.  The number of recorded cases uncovered during this research now exceeds 1,000.

For many child protection professionals, the cases discovered will not be shocking.  They will not be different in any way to those already experienced within their own professional capacities.  However, one big difference is that of those first 550 cases which were Europe wide with a handful from New Zealand, Australia, Canada and America; only three had ever reported to any law enforcement agency.

Victims give many reasons for not reporting, for example; not being able to speak the language; putting up with the situation because it is only short stay; lack of understanding in relation to culture, practices or procedures; not having a parent or guardian close by or contactable, nor any other adult with whom they feel comfortable to disclose.  In many cases, the use of a telephone to either ring home or contact an adult supervisor or guide is restricted or made difficult by homestay rules.  In some situations telephone calls are forbidden.  Young people travelling abroad or away from home are vulnerable, some more than others.

If a report is made to agents or organisers, the young person is generally removed from the host family, but that is the full extent of the action taken, leaving an offender or suspect free to host again.

Whilst the research focused on cultural, educational and language visits made by the under 18 year olds travelling abroad, there was little, if any, safety, welfare or pastoral guidance being given by any organisation.  Since this work started in the UK the officers have worked closely with the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE), who, following consultation with the authors, have now published “Guidance on Pupil Health and Safety on School Visits” which includes advice about International Visits.  The British Incoming Tour Operators Association (BITOA) have also consulted the authors and produced a “Homestay Committee Report” giving advice for homestays.  The British Council, ARELS and BASELT have published some of the earlier pieces of guidance issued during this research.

The complexity and diversity of this industry, coupled with apparent under-reporting of incidents of abuse to the authorities, has resulted in law enforcement agencies having little, if any, intelligence or information on this area of criminality.  Limited intelligence and involvement, that is: until now. Law enforcement includes not only the police, but Customs and Excise, Immigration, Europol, Interpol, National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) as well as prosecution lawyers.

Specific Cases

Cases range from children not being fed at all whilst on a visit, to those fed solely on such things as peanut butter or jam in order to save money.  Others have slept three to a bed, some sleeping under beds or in a cupboard under the stairs and others as young as seven or eight who have simply been left or abandoned and have quickly found themselves to be lost.

There have been cases where the host family circumstances have changed and visitors have been turned out of the home following domestic disputes or some who were not accepted into the home in the first instance.  Many children and young people have been victims of acquisitive crime with property or money being stolen.  Some have suffered verbal and racial abuse and we have heard many reports of young people who have been exposed to domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse by their hosts.

At the more sinister, thin of the wedge, there are known, or suspected, sex offenders or child abusers who have infiltrated the “industry” – either acting as hosts or attaining more prominent positions as language school teachers or even agents or organisers.  The researchers came across cases of known paedophiles who have been trafficking vulnerable young people from places like Albania into Europe.  At this time, it is difficult to determine the full extent of abuse or the level of such incursion.  Suffice to say, that what has been revealed is considered to be just the tip of the iceberg.

There are but a few known, reported cases that have subsequently been investigated and prosecuted.  In Perth, Western Australia, a 65 year old organiser was convicted less than two years ago of the sodomy, amongst other crimes, of a 14 year indigenous boy who was en route from the north to stay with a host family in the South West.  This man had been abusing vulnerable children on such cultural exchanges for many years.

In Minnesota, USA, A 17 year old French boy who stayed with a host family, was convicted of sexual assault of the 12 year old daughter of his hosts, following several days of molestation.

In Nottinghamshire, UK a host father was convicted of possession of pornographic videos following a disclosure by the young Spanish boy whom it is believed he was sexually attempting to groom.

Scale of the problem


The scale of this problem is unknown due to the inadequate records kept within Europe in respect of youth travel.  Essentially, there is no base line from which to begin calculations.  However, to give the issue some perspective, estimates from tourist records kept by the British Tourist Authority and the English Tourist Board, indicate that in 1998 some 4 million children under the age of 18 entered the UK. Of those, just over 1 million travelled on what are recorded as independent holidays or studies.

From a European search, the researchers estimate that in 1998 between 5 and 6 million children and young people travelled abroad on cultural, educational or language trips, the majority of which passed without incident.  Although impossible to say accurately, the officers’ professional view from the work conducted so far is that in total approximately 4-5% per annum are suffering some form of abuse.

There are some 60+ million school aged children in Europe, so the potential growth in this area of travel is huge.  Youth tourism already represents 20% of the world tourist market and this figure is growing.  In 1998, within the UK alone, student expenditure was in excess of £1 billion (including course fees, accommodation and travel).

To give a further example of the size and scale to this “industry”, the Federation of International Youth Travel Organisations (FIYTO) represent some 289 member organisations world-wide in 72 different countries.  Their turnover per annum is 6 billion US dollars, serving some 14 million young people travelling annually and selling over 6 million air and surface tickets.

Research Methodology


Within the United Kingdom the officers circulated

  • 5,280 host family questionnaires
  • 1,242 student questionnaires to international visitors within the UK
  • 574 questionnaires to school aged pupils (12-14 years)
  • 1,260 questionnaires to university students
  • 731 questionnaires to organisers

The return rate is at present in excess of 15%, however, responses continue to be received almost daily.

Following the implementation of a media strategy many individuals came forward and face to face interviews were conducted with victims, parents, organisers, agents, teachers and others.  An abundance of mail has been received from people with concerns together with supporters of this work and organisations looking to implement changes as well as many individuals who have suffered abuse whilst travelling in this way.

Experiments were conducted in various parts of the UK, and police checks were made on host families employed by certain organisations.  In one such experiment, 700 families were checked, 26 had serious convictions for offences such as supplying drugs, armed robbery, indecency offences, serious assaults and two known paedophiles were identified.

Numerous focus days have been held gathering experts together both in the UK and Spain.  Searches have been made, throughout Europe and beyond, including both literature trawls and the examination of travel statistics and existing legislation.  Meetings have taken place with Europeans from the travel industry, youth exchange, education, child protection charities, law enforcement and others both on a formal and informal basis.

Presentations have been made by the authors at both the House of Commons, UK, and the European Parliament in Brussels highlighting the concerns and problems within this area of youth and student travel. Ministers are now working towards airing these issues within the European Parliament Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs Committee.

Emerging facts from completed host family questionnaires


  • only 11.6% of host families were interviewed face to face
  • only 13% were obliged to supply references
  • around 10% were never visited by the agents or organisations nearly 10% of organisers making a home visit failed to check on students’ sleeping arrangements or facilities
  • over half were not asked to sign any form of contract
  • only 10.6% of host families received an unannounced visit
  • 61.5% work for language schools
  • only 25.5% of host families were asked if they would consent to a police check
  • only 10.9% were  required to look after students’ welfare
  • 25.2% of host families said that they had experienced “difficulties” when hosting
  • 21.2% of these said the organiser had been “unhelpful” or “very unhelpful” at these times
  • 93.9% of host families were given information about their student prior to their arrival
  • 65.6% were provided guidance and practical support from the organiser



Recommendations – the way forward


Earlier in this report the use of criminal records was alluded to.  The authors are clear, however, that at this time, this is not the answer.  A code of practice ensuring a minimum standard of operation must be implemented throughout this industry and criminal record checks may form part of this as an additional safeguard.

The following is a brief synopsis of the detail contained within the travel guide booklets which the authors have produced. The books themselves will contain suggested formats for written documentation, proformas of checklists, examples of forms and full explanations of the bullet points listed below.

  • Young people must be protected from harm and their general welfare promoted
  • Children have rights – this must be recognised and they must be treated with respect
  • Awareness of child protection issues should be raised throughout your organisation – consider addressing the following

– write a mission statement for your organisation

– ensure that you have a child protection policy

– identify a “Child Protection Officer”

  • Develop safety procedures which minimise the likelihood of children and young people being harmed and which enable organisers and others to respond effectively to accidents or suspected cases of abuse.
  • Empower children and young people and their parents

– give them information about the culture of the country in which they will stay

– tell them where they will be living

– give helpline numbers and emergency contact points

– give everyone involved in the trip an opportunity to feed back about their experiences

–  inform  parents of all arrangements and itineraries

  • Establish links with parents and other relevant organisations, both in this country and abroad
  • Create the right environment to ensure a safe and successful experience – the key points are

– Support

– Communication

– Information

– Preparation

  • Share information about any problems or concerns you may have about individuals or in general
  • with each other
  • between agencies

  • Develop good practice and
  • review and continue to progress and develop

  • hold regular seminars and invite people from all aspects of your  business

  • commercial groups who hold conferences should extend invitations to the voluntary sector and others who are involved in the same work

  • Make sure you have appropriate management practices in place

– raise your standards of child safety

– implement a preventative strategy– it is better to avoid problem than to risk

– safety of a young person

  • Ensure adequate pre-trip planning is conducted
  • consider making a risk assessment of the homestays into which young people will be placed
  • distribute bi-lingual help cards – in the visitor’s own language with the English equivalent

  • advise host families about possible requirements for insurance relating to both property and their vehicle

  • Implement proper training – host parents may be acting in loco parentis and they need to understand the implications of this, as well as your staff/employees
  • ensure a basic level of first aid

  • give adequate health and safety training

  • make sure they understand what to do if a child protection issue arises

  • record and evaluate incidents at homestays – and share the information with each

  • other and between agencies where appropriate

  • Leaders should be fully trained and aware of their responsibilities

  • Recruitment of host families – for instance, language schools in the UK can do the following
  • Contact Area Child Protection Committees to let them know you exist

  • Form a relationship with your Community Beat Officer

  • Subject access checks can currently be undertaken for a fee

  • An interdepartmental working group has been established to look at the following new pieces of legislation

  • Preventing unsuitable people working with children

  • Criminal Records Bureau

  • Check employee details against the DfEE List 99
  • Check employee details against the D H Consultancy Service
  • Define the role of a host family – all parties need to be aware of expectations
  • Address the suitability of current advertising for host families, photographs of children and some text phrases may be wholly inappropriate and attract the type of host
  • Screen Applicants
  • conduct interviews over the telephone and in person

  • make sure that every person who regularly stays within the household has been met

  • ask for a declaration to be signed by each member of the household stating there is no reason why that person should not have access to children and that they have no

  • criminal convictions

  • two people should conduct interviews wherever possible

  • check the identification of the household members – use the voters’ register

  • ask for references – and then follow them up

  • Check out accommodation
  • hosts should be made aware of the organisation’s terms and conditions

  • hosts should be aware of all relevant regulations, legislation and safety issues

  • an accommodation checklist should be completed

  • a host family application form and contract should be signed and dated

  • Remember
  • children and young people should always be listened to, given a sense of belonging and kept safe from harm

  • parents should be informed, supported and encouraged

  • staff volunteers who work with children and young people should be trained, supported and protected

European Conference, Bath 18-22 August 1999


Between 18 and 22 August 1999 invitations were extended to over 100 expert delegates from the 29 Council of Europe Countries.  These experts, from law enforcement, social services, health, youth travel, education and various children’s charities and non-governmental organisations, together with government and European Commission representatives, heard key note speeches and took part in inter-active workshop sessions. Delegates were given an opportunity to critique the work of the authors and present their personal and organisational perspectives in relation to the issues raised.

The conference concluded with each of the European experts endorsing and validating both the work and the research findings.  Undertakings were given that the Child-Safe Travel-Safe guidance would be promoted in each of the Council of Europe countries and lobbying of governments would continue.  Through this inaugural network, delegates committed themselves to continue to work in their respective countries, supporting each other to the goal of enhanced welfare, safety and pastoral care of children and young people engaged in international travel.



UK Launch – House of Commons, 11 October 1999


On 11 October 1999 the Child-Safe Travel-Safe booklets were launched at the House of Commons, London, by Home Office Minister Charles Clarke MP.  Other dignitaries present included Senator Landon Pearson, Advisor on Children’s rights, Canadian Senate; Diana Lamplugh, Suzy Lamplugh Trust; Gordon Blakely, British Council; together with representatives from the Department for Education and Employment, The Federation of International Youth Travel Organisations and children’s charities such as Childline and the NSPCC.



You would not send your child to a house at the end of your street if you knew nothing about the person living there.  Yet on the strength of a glossy brochure, the payment in some cases of vast sums of money, and an assumption that someone else has asked the right questions, we send our children thousands of miles across the world to stay with strangers.

The companies, organisations and individuals that abuse this blind trust cannot be allowed to continue to profit from it and we must all take responsibility for the care and safety of our young people.

UK: Exchange student to Isle of Thanet: Margate, Broadstairs, Ramsgate

Travelling to other countries as a foreign exchange student is a matter of trust. Both the student and the parents trust that the company they are travelling with want to provide the student with the best home possible and that the student will be sent to schools that uphold at least an average standard. One of the places I have discovered many students have been placed in difficult circumstances is on the Isle of Thanet.

Ideally, the foreign exchange companies should have up-to-date information about the places where they send our kids, but reality shows something else. So I decided I would check out the complaints I had received and see what the reality of the Isle of Thanet was. All I had to do was spend a little time on the net and information flowed my way.

The first thing I did was check Wikipedia: Ramsgate, Margate og Broadstairs are the three main towns on the Isle of Thanet. The whole area struggles with seasonal work, poor health and a recession. Out of 324 districts Thanet has been placed on number 295. The local authorities are concerned about the high unemployment numbers and have invested a lot of money in different projects – one of these being education.

A-Levels schools in South Thanet are:

Areas that ought to worry you:

I also discovered a lot of information that locals shared about where they recommended/did not recommend you live. Leo Mckinstry is one of these people.

In 2012 he wrote and article called «Margate one of the world’s top ten resorts? Trust me, it’s East Germany with  wind farms«. In it he talks about his family’s move to the area in 2006 and their views on the city. His claim is that out of the three towns Broadstairs is the favored one while Margate is the least recommended place to live.

Most deprived areas
Within Thanet, the most deprived wards include Cliftonville West and Margate

If you get sent to: West Margate Central, North Margate Central, North Cliftonville West, Central Cliftonville West or East Cliftonville West you are being sent to trouble spots. In these areas criminal activities happen out in the open.

Sadly, some of you or someone you know is going to get sent to just such an area. Their representative or home could be terrible. Of course, most of you will have a good time but for those of you who don’t please try to get help as soon as possible. In the UK you can contact Child-Safe. Part of their job is to take care of foreign exchange students.

Various articles:

2010: USA: Hostage in America

(by Ragni Trotta)

Last year, 17-year old Synne Fjellvoll from Norway was one of 28,142 foreign exchange students granted a J-1 VISA to study in the U.S. as a foreign exchange student in 2009. Synne and her parents researched various student exchange programs before settling on the Education Foundation for Foreign Study (EF), which spread glossy brochures around Norway’s many highs schools and held a local EF seminar in their hometown promoting their student exchange program under the slogan “Personal Service”, “Safety”, “Quality”. At a cost of US$6,000, plus an extra US$500 to ensure that she was sent to the “Southern States”, everything seemed set for the experience of a lifetime. Says Synne; “I was so excited to study abroad in the United States of America. It was a dream come true.”

Synne’s dream was soon to turn into a nightmare. Placed in the care of what appeared to be an all-American host family in Branchville, South Carolina, she soon started to have misgivings of the people assigned to care for her wellbeing. In Synne’s case, the failure to do background checks on the host family as well as the local EF representative, both of whom the sponsoring organization had been using for years, were the gravest of several violations of Federal Regulations perpetrated by EF. Background checks would immediately have thrown up several red flags, had they ever been undertaken, as Federal Regulations clearly state. A closer look by a private investigator and ex-FBI agent has showed that the local EF representative assigned to Synne as her 24-hour support person; Linda Davis (or Linda J. Teller), in fact had 10 liens & judgments and 3 criminal convictions against her, as well as a history of using numerous aliases.  Furthermore, 36 judgments and liens are registered against her host mother Gidget Vickers. 

Federal Regulations state that foreign exchange students must be placed within a “nurturing environment” in a “financially stable home”. However, with the host father unemployed for the first 6 months of her stay and the host mother holding down two jobs to support the family’s 5 children, Synne’s chores swiftly added up to include babysitting the two youngest kids every day after school from 3:00 – 6:00 pm and on weekends, mow the lawn, walk the dogs, do the dishes and even wash her host sister’s clothes on Sundays. Explains Synne; “I never felt like part of the family, I felt like a maid. It hurt me when my 16-year old host sister was allowed to hang out with her friends and go to the movies, while I had to stay home to babysit.”

Worse, the home was clearly uninhabitable by most health & hygiene standards. Several untrained dogs were urinating and defecating around the house, which also suffered mould problems. Explains the exchange student; “The stench was disgusting. Several holes in the roof and walls were scantily covered by cardboard and boards, and the window in my room was broken. It was freezing in my room when the frost came”.

Host families are also required to provide meals for the students. However, Synne was quickly also told that she had to buy her own food as well as any other items that she needed. She was not allowed to eat from the family fridge and had to pay for her own food when the family ordered Chinese takeout, which was frequent. Branchville is a town 1,083 people, with 54% white and 43 % African American inhabitants. She was told by her host mother that “black people were a bad influence and would get her involved in drugs.”

Under the constant threat of being sent home, Synne was frequently forced to sign EF “ Success Plan for Student Behaviour” and “Academic Agreements” admitting to her many failures, presented to her by her host mother and local EF representative Linda Davis. Grounded for weeks and isolated in a foreign country far away from home, her telephone was confiscated and her internet access taken away for weeks on end, making it impossible for her to contact her family. Says Synne; “I was threatened by the host mother all the time. I was frequently told “Synne, you are in big trouble” and “if you don’t pull it together we are going to have to send you home early. And you have yourself to blame. You did this to yourself.”

According to local sources, it is common knowledge that the Vickers family uses foreign exchange students extensively for babysitting purposes and complaints have been raised against the family by previous exchange students. In 2007, the same family stopped providing adequate food to a 17 year old German girl  (Sina Tuscheerer) who was an exchange student staying with them, forcing teachers at Branchville High School to purchase and place food for her in the school fridge. According to the teachers, the problem was reported to local area representative Linda Davis as well as EF in Boston several times, but no action was taken. Still, much to the astonishment of the teachers at Branchville High School, the Vickers family has continued to be on the receiving end of foreign exchange students, even hosting two students from Finland (Sointu Lampinen) and Sweden (Frida Edstrøm) at the same time.

Federal Regulations state that sponsoring organizations must provide a student card with a telephone number that affords immediate contact with both the program sponsor and the sponsor’s local representative. The regulations also state that local area representatives must check in with exchange students at least once a month. As early as in October 2009, Synne spent several days unsuccessfully trying to reach her local contact local EF representative Linda Davis on the telephone number written on her student card. Explained Synne; “I tried to call Davis several times. Nobody picked up the phone.” She then dialed the number to EF’s office in Boston and requested a change of family. The phone call was answered by Program Coordinator Claudia Jackson, who told her to call her local representative who according to Jackson was “always available”. Jackson stated that anyway, it was “too late to change family”. Synne’s student card failed to include a toll free phone number to the U.S. State Department, the supervisory body of student exchange programs, which according to Federal Regulations should have been printed on the card. Says Synne’s father Per Fjellvoll; “My daughter was held hostage in a house and with a family who did not want her there as anything other than a housekeeper and a babysitter.”

When Linda Davis finally contacted Synne in late December 2009, and the Norwegian exchange student again requested a change of family, the EF coordinator told her that she was; “always complaining and whining”. According to Davis, the Vicker’s were “a good family and you are the one making all this trouble for us. It is always the Norwegian exchange students that are hardest!” EF representatives also repeatedly turned their back on the 17-year old when she repeatedly turned to them for help via phone and email in January, February and March 2010. She was called a ‘liar”, a “troublemaker” and conveniently ignored. However, she complained one time too many and was “removed from the program” by EF in a whirlwind of accusations in March 2010, after what EF claimed were “a number of chances to improve her behavior”.

According to Toralf Slovik, EF’s Program Coordinator in Oslo, Norway, who contacted her natural parents, Synne was being sent home because she had been expelled by Branchville High School. Says her father; “I called the Principal of Synne’s High School and he told me that he knew nothing about my daughter being expelled.” The “expulsion” later turned out to be an erroneous translation of the word “detention”, but EF was adamant that she still had to be repatriated due to “bad behavior”, “bad grades” and too many “social activities”. Synne in fact had little time to commit to spare time activities due to daily babysitting responsibilities, house chores and two-three weekly Church visits. Says the exchange student; “My host mother told me that I had to take most responsibility since I was the oldest.”

The Principal and teachers at Branchville High School were deliberately kept at an arm’s length and forced to watch from afar, although several posed questions with Synne’s host mother’s demands for her to be enrolled in several too advanced and unnecessary classes, contrary to the curriculum that had been chosen for her in collaboration with her local high school and natural parents prior to her departure from Norway.  While EF maintains that Synne had problems at school, neither the Principal, the school counselors or any of her teachers were at any time made aware of this fact. This highlights the total disconnect between the sponsoring organizations and the U.S. high schools to which they send their participants and one is forced to ask what kind of organization puts an exchange student with a B+ average on “Academic Agreement” without informing the school or any of her teachers. Says Synne’s father Per; “We had just received an email from EF saying that everything was fine and she was doing well in school. Of course, the positive news was sent to us along with the news that Synne had been involved in a car accident. That was probably no coincidence.”

On several occasions, host mother Gidget Vickers acted so threatening and aggressively towards the exchange student that even her teachers became concerned. More than one teacher witnessed Synne’s traumatic last day at Branchville High School; “Gidget Vickers showed up at school, verbally attacked Synne in front of several teachers and students, snatched her handbag and forced her to leave without saying goodbye to her friends and teachers.” After confiscating her phone, Vickers took her home to pack and subsequently drove the 17-year old to Charleston Airport, where the Norwegian exchange student and her luggage were thrown out of the car curbside and left to fend for herself.

According to Synne’s father, her premature repatriation was based on minor episodes and lies by EF and her host family who was just looking for a reason to send her home. “The accusations made against my daughter were subsequently proven false by emails and communications with the Principal and teachers at Branchville High School. Clearly, any serious organization would have taken immediate steps to correct the situation and let her finish the 9 weeks that remained of her school year.”


On the morning of March 23, Synne was told by EF that she had to be on the plane back to Norway that evening or she would be deported. At the point of her repatriation, three local families were willing to host Synne for the remainder of the school year. Torolf Slovik from EF informed the family by email that she would be in the U.S. illegally if she stayed beyond that evening and that her VISA had been cancelled. However, her host-mother Vickers and local EF representative Davis made it abundantly clear around town that anyone who took her in would be charged with harboring an illegal alien. Says Synne; “They were determined to send me home.”

Says Fjellvoll; “EF has gained a reputation for taking swift action only when it comes to sending students home, as was the case with my daughter. The family contacted the U.S. Embassy in Oslo and the U.S. Department of State in Washington and asked them to intervene so that Synne could complete the 9 weeks that remained to her graduation. The Norwegian Embassy in the U.S. was also contacted. However, the family was told that it was a private issue between the student and EF and that they could not do anything.”

The scaremongering that EF spreads regarding the deportation of students is completely untrue and inaccurate. According to Stanley Colvin, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Department of State and supervisor of the J-VISA student exchange programs, foreign nationals that enter on a J-1 visa are “lawfully present” so long as they are in “valid program status”, meaning that they must be successfully pursuing the activities for which they entered the United States, under the sponsorship of a designated Exchange Visitor Program sponsor. If the sponsor withdraws their sponsorship, for cause, then the participant is no longer lawfully present and has thirty days to leave the country. Says Fjellvoll; “Having to leave in thirty days is vastly different to having to leave in a few hours. One month may have permitted us to seek other alternatives so that Synne could have completed her school year.”

When Synne’s case was brought to the attention of the U.S. State Department, they said they were willing to help her reissue her J-VISA provided EF reinstated Synne’s sponsorship. Alternatively, the State Department said they would accept the sponsorship of another exchange organization. Despite several requests both directly from the family as well as a U.S. lawfirm, EF refused to reinstate the sponsorship and finding another exchange organization 9 weeks prior to graduation proved an impossible task.


Under the current system, the student is completely powerless. EF will always side with their host family in any dispute, because any acknowledgement of mistakes on their part would make them liable to lawsuits. The student has absolutely no chance from the outset. The bias of local coordinators, who in many cases place young students with friends or relatives, is another issue some students have been faced with. Norwegian exchange student Synne Fjellvoll’s host mother was a friend of the local EF area representative and had a cell number to her that she refused to give the 17 year old exchange student. The local coordinator consistently ignored Synne’s requests for help.

According to Stanley Colvin, the U.S. Department of State cannot do anything to help once a student has been taken off a program. According to Colvin, sponsoring organizations can take student off a program for “cause”.

The question here become “what is cause” and more importantly, who determines what is “cause”? Under the current system, the sponsoring organization has the power to send a student home for anything it determines to be a “cause”, without any review of the situation or an interview with the student by an independent third party. What is even more disturbing is that when a student complains to the sponsor, the sponsoring organization is actually left to investigate itself.

Many young students are afraid to complain fearing retaliation and repatriation to their home country, because complaints are dealt with by the very organizations that they did their exchange with. Few students are savvy or confident enough after having been bullied around and lied to by their local coordinators to take their complaint to the next level, which is the U.S. Department of State which operates a toll free phone line for J-VISA holders. This toll free 800 number should according to Federal Regulations be printed on every exchange student’s student ID card, but was not included on Synne.

While some problems is to be expected among thousands of young foreigners from different cultures, a pattern of ignoring complaints, failing to find appropriate families and repatriating “problem students” early have become the distinguishing trademarks of EF’s operation. Strangely, few problems seem to be reported by the exchange organizations and the U.S. Department of State refers to approximately 200 investigated complaints per year, the Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students (CSFES) reports between 150 – 200 phone calls per week. A “thorn” in the side of the exchange companies and the only independent organization who speaks up on behalf of the students, Grijalva is tireless in her efforts to help protect the young casualties who have suffered at the hands of the exchange organizations and bring them to the attention of the proper authorities. On March 28, 2010, CSFES filed a complaint with U.S. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on behalf of Per Fjellvoll regarding EF Foundation’s failure to adhere to the Federal Regulations in the case of his daughter.

 The resounding agreement from the many students participating in EF’s exchange program is that EF was “not interested” in any problems they might have. Financially speaking, a student has no recourse to claim for “breach of contract” if it can be proven that the student failed to adhere to the program rules. Hence, the EF Foundation’s policy is for it’s employees and agents to thoroughly document every little trespass made by students so that a possible claim for reimbursement can be denied. EF’s legal policy is to make settlements with the worst cases of abuse to keep the limelight away from the real problem, which is the organizations continued violation of Federal Regulations and student’s civil rights.



Who actually has the power to investigate and rectify situations that bear further scrutiny?

While the U.S. Department of State actually had the power to investigate the student exchange companies, little seems to happen with the continued violations of several sponsoring organizations. In an interview with the Arkansas Democratic Gazette in December 2007, Stanley Colvin commented on complaints about EF Education and its Fayetteville coordinators, Gerald D. and Sherry A. Drummond. The U.S. State Department began an investigation after Arkansas State Senator Sue Madison, D-Fayetteville, received complaints from host families and foreign-exchange students about EF Foundation and the Drummonds. The students and their current host families in Northwest Arkansas told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette how foreign-exchange students lived in what they considered unclean, unsafe homes and how they felt disliked by Sherry Drummond when they stayed with her. They also complained that the Drummonds improperly served the dual role of host family and organization representative for several students, making it awkward for the students to voice their concerns. Rikke Stoyva, a Fayetteville High School student from Norway, didn’t care for emphasis on religion by her host family, John and Jill Foster. The family attended nondenominational church services three times a week in West Fork. Stoyva, who is Lutheran, lived with the Fosters for three months, then was moved to Camden, where she’s attending Camden Fairview High School.

“About 20 percent involve students brought to the United States by EF Foundation”, Colvin said. As part of its investigation in Arkansas, Colvin said the State Department could reprimand the company and require it to write a corrective-action plan to ensure it doesn’t violate federal regulations. A more severe penalty could involve shutting down the corporation or limiting how many students it can bring to the United States. Colvin sent a letter to the EF Foundation describing five media accounts and complaints last week regarding the organization. “This is not a pretty picture,” he concluded in the letter.

The U.S. Department of State does not divulge information about investigated complaints, and it is not clear what other reprimands EF got from the U.S. State Department following this investigation. Not long ago, Colvin shut the doors of a placement agency in South Carolina called United Students Association who had placed 4 foreign exchange students in homes of convicted felons. However, the many complaints received by CSFES on a daily basis regarding EF’s continued violations of Federal Regulations, suggest that too little is being done to monitor the sponsoring organizations.

While the US. Department of State is the supervising body of the student exchange programs, U.S. Congress is ultimately who issues the licenses to sponsoring organizations.


As case after case of mistreatment of exchange students continue to surface, a clear pattern of exploitation is being revealed. Says Danielle Grijalva, Director for the Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students (CSFES); “Because the current system gives the sponsoring organization the power to withdraw a student’s visa on a whim, students are put at the mercy of the sponsor and the host family from the day they arrive in the U.S. The constant threat of being sent home, grants the host family complete power over the exchange student. It also affords host families who wish to mistreat a student within the confines of their walls ample opportunity. Sadly, students are willing to do almost anything to avoid the shame and failure of being sent home.” Grijalva is contacted by hundreds of foreign exchange students who have been left stranded and desolate by their exchange companies on a monthly basis.

Sadly, countless stories like that of Synne are appearing across the world, bearing witness of EF’s violations. As a result of the fundamental flaws of the system as well as the lack of oversight, droves of young students continue to find themselves stranded and alone in the “land of opportunity”, living as hostage far away from home and with no one to turn to for help.

So much concern has been raised concerning the lack of protection of young, vulnerable exchange students, that Federal Regulations were put in place in 2006. However, the lack of oversight of the Exchange Programs, which is the responsibility of the U.S. Department of State, continues to display glaring holes. Far from protecting the most vulnerable, the current system actually works to the student’s detriment, by placing all the power in the hands of the sponsoring organization and the host families, putting the student in what can only be described as a hostage situation.

This serves to further emphasize the need to independent supervision of the foreign exchange students. Federal Regulations state that problems with students and change of host families must be reported to the U.S. Department of State. Although the number of complaints made to the U.S. Department of State is not available, it is reasonable to believe that the sponsoring organizations try their utmost to contain troubles.

Says Grijalva; “EF continued violations of Federal Regulations and well as student’s civil rights, need to be scrutinized by the U.S. State Department. We call upon the U.S. Congress, which is ultimately responsible for the failure of the program, to permanently suspend EF’s license.”

Grijalva has filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s Office and the U.S. Department of State regarding EF’s failure to adhere to the Federal Regulations which were written to protect foreign exchange students participating in their program. Says Grijalva; “These are not isolated incidences. EF continues to violate Federal Regulations and student’s civil rights.”


Incidents such as Synne’s these pose serious questions with what is marketed as an “educational” program. According to the Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3), EF’s tax-exempt status is based on the fact that EF is an “educational” organization, which is a contradiction in that EF claim it is not “their policy” to involve the school in matters of a student. Last year, the student exchange industry received US$34 millions in grants from the U.S. Government to promote ‘cultural exchange’, but what is meant to be a program to build ‘cultural’ bridges between young Americans and high school students from other countries is increasingly becoming an embarrassment to the U.S. as a growing number of foreign students are shipped back home early in disgrace and humiliation.

It is also a common misconception among Europeans that US “non-profit” organizations are philanthropic entities not focused on financial profit, a grossly misleading and incorrect fact that the EF Foundation uses to great advantage in the marketing of its services. In fact, the term ‘non-profit’ only means that earnings must be reinvested in the organization, which put the focus back where it really is: the money.


Education First Foundation for Foreign Study, founded in 1979, is the country’s largest foreign-exchange company. Approximately 35 U.S. organizations have been granted the very sought after licenses to sponsor J-VISA’s for foreign exchange student. However, the Federal Regulations and accompanying moral obligations which accompany the responsibility of holding such a license are being blatantly ignored by several of the sponsoring organizations. Among the repeat offenders in the abuse of its participants feature EF Foundation for Foreign Studies, a sponsoring organization with headquarters in Boston that has a strong representation of Swedes on their U.S. Board of Directors, including Chairperson Asa Fanelli, previous Chairman Goran Rannefors, President Dan Sodervall, Director Jennifer Baverstam and Director Jens Appelkvist. The EF umbrella includes several company names including; EF Institute for Cultural Exchange Ltd, EF Foundation for Foreign Study, EF Educational Tours, EF International Language Schools, EF Voyages Culturels, EF High School Year Abroad and Education First. Approximately 5,000 students were sponsored by the EF Foundation in 2008.

While the organization sponsors exchange students from across the world, EF’s main markets for the recruitment of exchange students are Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Germany.

It is curious, but not surprising, to note that the Norwegian arm of the company is registered as a limited company in the category of “tour operator”, featuring a local company name that translates to “EF Education The European Holiday School Ltd.” EF’s “summer language trips” abroad has been the target of media reports in Norway, due to the lack of oversight and the availability of alcohol to minors down to the ages of 12 years old.

Kirsti Kollenborg is listed as the Norwegian company’s CEO, while Toralf Slovik is the country Program Director and Heidi Bjoere Larsen the Marketing Manager.

6 U.S. student exchange companies have been approved by the Norwegian Government’s loan association (Statens Laanekasse) for the purposes of student grant and loans to study abroad. Aside from having to redo a lost year of studies, Norwegian exchange students who are sent home early without graduating, must fully repay all grants they received from Statens Laanekasse. Says Fjellvoll; “Synne’s student exchange and unnecessary repatriation has cost the family at least US$20,000.”


Even at the tender age of 17, Synne Fjellvoll says she became concerned with her host family’s seemingly poor finances. Despite strong denials that they received any payment from EF, she overheard her host parents talking about a “receiving a paycheck from EF.” But U.S. host families are to receive no compensation for hosting, which puts a question at EF’s reported expenses (990 form) that includes expenditures for so-called “Supervisory Fees”. Unfortunately, EF is able to hide their multi-million dollar activities behind their 5013C (not for profit) status of the Foundation.

Perks for host families of exchange students include free babysitting and housekeeping services, although foreign exchange students are only permitted to take sporadic jobs. When you call EF’s office in Boston and enquire about taking in a foreign exchange student, they will tell you that the issue of babysitting is “tricky” and that host families are not allowed to force exchange students to babysit. This was certainly not the case with Synne, whose far from sporadic babysitting job was performed under the threat of being sent home.

Explains Danielle Grijalva, Director for the Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students (CSFES); “ I have come to learn of family after family who can barely feed their own family, let alone an exchange student. However, the local area representative whispers in their ear that the exchange student’s parents are wealthy. Many families steal money from the students or “borrow” their ATM card, as in the case of Espen Hansen from Norway who was placed with a family in Minnesota by the EF Foundation. The students don’t speak up in fear of being sent home and it is not uncommon for families to rake in $800 – $1000 in rent from students living in their home, even if it is in shambles.” The EF Foundation coordinated his placement with a US sponsoring organization called CETUSA. CSFES’s efforts to assist the Hansen family, led to CETUSA filing a lawsuit against Grijalva for her efforts in assisting the young Norwegian exchange student.

According to CSFES, theft by host families is rampant. In 2008, a Nebraska woman called Fayette Klug was arrested for stealing $10,000-plus from two foreign exchange students living with her, one foreign exchange student from Norway and one from China. The two girls told law enforcement that Klug took cash from them, used their credit cards and locked them in the basement apartment area that they shared. Why Klug was even hosting foreign exchange students became a point of investigation because turned out to be a convicted felon. According to the Madison County Sheriff’s Office, the investigation into Klug is ongoing, as additional foreign exchange students may have been victimized by Klug.

Says Grijalva; “U.S. Senator of Pennsylvania Robert P. Casey, Jr., is to be commended for his efforts wasting no time investigating the treatment of exchange students placed in Scranton, PA. In May 2009, Senator Casey sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urging her to investigate the Department of State’s oversight of U.S. youth exchange programs following reports of abuse and mistreatment of nine foreign exchange students in Scranton, Pennsylvania, including Norwegian exchange student Anne Bardoz. “The situation these students found themselves in is simply unacceptable,” said Senator Casey, who has called on the U.S. State Department to swiftly review its oversight procedures.

Grijalva also hails the efforts of U.S. Senator Sue Madison from Arkansas, who has spearheaded a study of the health, safety and welfare of exchange students placed in Arkansas after receiving complaints that some foreign exchange students were being placed in homes with families ill-equipped to take care of them.” According to U.S. Senator Madison, The U.S. State Department, which currently has oversight authority, does not have adequate staff to oversee the foreign exchange program. Senator Madison is the champion of Senate Bill 411, called “The Arkansas Foreign Exchange Student Program Act” in the State of Arkansas, which seeks to further protect the welfare of foreign exchange students in her State.

Regulations prohibit sponsoring companies from bringing students to the U.S. without having first located a host family and Madison’s findings further under build the stories of several exchange students, who appear to have arrived in the US without families or have been subjected to “last minute changes” of families.

Said U.S. State Senator Sue Madison: “Some parents came to me about problems they’ve seen in Northwest Arkansas.” In Clarksville, Madison said, a student from Korea was placed with a family living in low-income housing. “The student would write home asking her parents for money to help feed her host family,” she said. “At that point, she asked to be moved to another family and representatives from the company set up a table outside a Wal-Mart to recruit her another family,” Madison said. “They found her another family and this time the male of the household was arrested on a drug charge.”

Madison said to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette that she was told by an EF Foundation employee that the Drummonds (local coordinators for the EF foundations) are paid $300 to $400 for each foreign exchange student placed in a family’s home, including their own. The Drummonds received $12 per student, per month, for verifying the students are doing well and helping with difficulties they encounter, Madison said.

According to Danielle Grijalva of CFSEF most foreign-exchange student companies pay $400 to $750 for each student who is placed in a home. Host families aren’t paid. The payment is a small portion of the $5, 000 for six months or $10,000 for a year that the students pay EF Foundation to come to the United States.

In the Scranton case, 69-year-old Edna Burgette, took students door-to-door in an effort to find host families. The local coordinator for the Aspect Foundation charged families US$400 to place malnourished students in northeastern Pennsylvania homes. Said Norwegian student Anne Bardoz to Aftenposten: “The floor was covered with dog feces, the air filled with tobacco smoke and the stench was unbearable.” Anne had to buy her own food and was not allowed to leave the house she was placed in. According to court documents, Burgette will plead guilty to ‘mail fraud” collecting money using fraudulent paperwork related to the placement of five exchange students including Bardoz. She faces up to 20 years in jail and a fine of US$250,000.

Edna Burgett ‘plead out’ to the charge of mail fraud because she knowingly accepted these students to supervise, all the while knowing she did not have a home for them. This was considered ‘mail fraud’ because her placement agency relied on the U.S. Postal Service to secure these placements.

Exchange students subjected to “last minute changes” of families, include Michaela Kaluza from Germany, who was all set to live with a host family in Colorado for a year and had brought appropriate winter clothing. Without explanation, she was told she had to go live with a host family in Maryland consisting of a 69 year old grandmother, her 81 year old husband and their young granddaughter. In a house splattered with dog urine and with no food, Michaela’s chores included frequent changes of the 81 year old man’s diapers.  After 2 weeks, Michaela complained to her school and her local EF representative. She was told by Elizabeth at the EF office in Boston that she was “struggling with American culture and just needed to deal with it.” Elizabeth proceeded to accuse Michaela of “lying and bad behavior” and told her that she had to “stay with her host family or go back to Germany.”

Says Pedro Acevedo from Caracas, Venezuela, who was an exchange student to Mississippi with EF in 2008: “From the very first day I arrived, I had problem after problem.” After sending Acevedo two fake placement letters identifying US host families, he was finally told that EF had found a temporary «arrival family» in Mississippi that would take him in until something permanent was found. After arriving in the U.S. 2 months after the school year had started, Acevedo slept on the living room sofa and had no privacy staying with the first of three host families. He was not allowed to hang up his clothes, did not get any food and was generally treated like and unwanted intruder by the host family, whose father was a Vietnam vet. Says Acevedo; “I was told I needed to start ‘acting like expected’ or I was going to be sent home. Emily Force, my International Exchange Coordinator, and local EF area representative, treated me like an animal. I was called names including ‘idiot’, ‘brat’, ‘stupid’ and ‘irresponsible spoiled child’. I was yelled like no one had ever done before, to the point that I had to clean her spit out of my face.”

After visiting her son at his second host family, Acevedo’s mother offered to pay his second host mother US$150 per month to ensure her son was fed. Recalls Acevedo; “My mom also went to Wal-Mart, and spent over US$250 in food and stuff for the house, all of this under the verbal agreement that I was not to have food issues while I was living there. After my mom left, the story changed. I was still being asked to pay for dinners, and even had to buy my own lunch, because sometimes there wouldn’t even be bread to make a simple sandwich.” Acevedo was finally was offered to stay with a third host family from another organization, who was hosting an exchange student he knew from school. Says Acevedo; “Our experience with EF was awful”.

Says Tone Sigurdsen from Norway; “Our experience with EF is terrible. Our daughter was in the US two years ago. She was placed with a family that could hardly be called a “host” family. The company had no control of the number of students or available places. Changing host family turned out to be a nightmare, and EF did absolutely nothing to help. If she hadn’t found another host family herself, she would have been sent home in the middle of the school year. There was no help or interest from EF in solving the problem.” Sigurdson was told that EF “did not have enough host families available”, because they had enrolled too many students that year. An in there lies yet another violation of Federal Regulations, which state that no student must be brought to the U.S. without the sponsor having found a host family.

Federal regulations prohibit employees or agents of a foreign exchange company from serving as both host family and area supervisor for a student. The U.S. State Department is currently investigating complaints involving the EF Foundation and its Fayetteville coordinators, alleging that exchange students stayed at the homes of the coordinators.

In September 2009, EF sent Marion Ridal from Finland to live with a family Alabama. Says her mother; “The people in the family were imbalanced and my daughter was very frightened during her stay there. Members of the family called her names and humiliated her in many ways. She was too afraid to even sleep at night. Fortunately she had the courage to ask if she could get in to another family.” The EF district supervisor took her to their home, and she started school.” After a week, the EF representatives from New York decided to send her to Missisippi to a new family. Says her mother; “They told her that it’s either Missisippi or being sent back home. She was picked up from school and didn’t have a chance to say goodbye to her new friends. Marion was really shocked and was crying hysterically when she called me.” A local family was willing to take her in so she wouldn’t have to move, but EF would hear nothing of it and her mother’s many phone calls and emails to EF went un-answered.

Once in Mississippi, Marion’s new host mother took her mobile phone away, yelled at her all the time and prohibited her from going out. “Marion didn’t have anyone to turn to because the local area supervisor in Mississippi was the host-mothers brother in law. They always blamed Marion and said that if she didn’t do as she was told, they would put her on a plane back to Finland.” Explains the mother; “We were told Marion would be in secure and caring surroundings in USA. EF has made Marion to look like some sort of troublemaker, even though she hasn’t done anything wrong.”

An Italian student placed in Ohio by the EF Foundation in 2007, bought gifts in excess of $3000 for the host family, paid numerous restaurant dinners, bought groceries and lent money to members of the host family which was never repaid. Although he was Catholic, he was required to attend church on a regular basis. His host family placed him in danger by having him attend a party with his host brother where a fight broke out and guns were fired.  The police were called to the party, and the exchange student told one of the police officers that such occurrences were routine for that area. The home environment was inappropriately controlling and his host mother would lecture him until late at night on many occasions regarding his friends. The host mother refused to take him to the doctor when he was ill with fever for a week, leaving him in his basement room without checking on him or offering him food, drink, or medication. His assigned co-ordinator from EF was a good friend of the host mother, so he could not confide in her. This young student suffered emotional abuse in this home and he would become anxious and stressed around his host mother.

Swedish Patrick Sundelin was yet another foreign exchange student travelling with EF, who was placed in an Alabama host family. The couple’s own child had been taken away by social services and two convicts rented rooms from the family. Patrick’s first trip in the US was to the local court house, because the host family boarders had to register with their local probation officer. He faced the anger of local EF representatives when he demanded to change family and refused to sign the “Behaviour Success” agreement he was presented with several times. Patrick filed a complaint with the Swedish National Board for Consumer Complaints and was awarded the meager sum of SEK 10,000 (US$1,000) in compensation.

This fundamentally flawed system has been able to continue because most parents are reluctant to start an expensive litigation in the U.S. against an organization that is willing to throw anything at a case to win it. Says Fjellvoll; “EF is digging in it’s heals due to the flood of ugly cases looming in the wings.” However, a growing number of natural parents in Norway who have had to save their money for years to send their child abroad, are now digging deep into their pockets to seek justice for their children for the way in which they were treated while on this ‘cultural exchange.’

Fjellvoll is spearheading a group of parents who aim to highlight the gravity and prevalence of what has so far been dismissed as “isolated incidents”. Says Fjellvoll; “EF’s policy is to accuse the student of wrong doing and send them home early in shame and defeat. An exchange organization that encourages this kind of mistreatment of young people, while they continue to ignore the many traumatized students they are responsible for, should not be licensed to operate in any country.” Fjellvoll is bringing his complaint to the attention of the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which he calls upon to take action on behalf of the many Norwegian students who have been subjected to abuse as EF exchange students. He also calls upon the U.S. Department of State to withdraw EF’s license to sponsor foreign exchange students. Concludes Fjellvoll; “The EF Foundation is a repeat offender with no concern for the children the send abroad. This organization should NOT be in a position to revoke a high school student’s J-VISA, at least not without an independent review by the U.S. Department of State or another independent third party. Despite their many violations of Federal Regulations, they are allowed to continue to abuse young exchange students far away from home in the worst of ways. One must ask oneself what kind of nation allows this kind of injustice to carry on.”

Swedish TV did an expose on exchange student Emma Dahlberg, a Swedish exchange student with EF was forced to go to church several times a week and worship snakes in Harlan, Kentucky for two months, before she was removed.


Senator Madison’s “The Arkansas Foreign Exchange Student Program Act” in the State of Arkansas, states that the student, the host family and the school shall be given telephone numbers and email addresses for the Department of State, The Council on Standards for International Educational Travel; and The Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students. Furthermore, the bill states that students have the right “to not be coerced to write letters or sign agreements that the student does not fully understand”, “to not be sent back to his or her home country before the completion of the exchange without a prior review process” and “to not be caused to fear being sent back to his or her home country for any communication” made to authorities.

Furthermore, the bill states that international student exchange visitor placement organization shall cooperate with state, school, and other public authorities and that alternate placement shall be readily available so that no student remains in a home if conditions appear to exist that endanger the student’s welfare. It also grants the Department of Human Services extensive rights in the monitoring of foreign exchange students, and expressly states that retaliation or the threat of retaliation by international student exchange organizations will lead to disqualification from placement of any foreign exchange student in Arkansas.

“Clearly, the above Bill needs to be adopted by every state in the U.S.”


In the landmark case of Beul v. Asse International Inc. placement agency, U.S. brought the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit of September 2000, the lead opinion of Circuit Judge Posner was that it is placement agency’s responsibility to step into the shoes of the natural parents. The negligence lawsuit was brought by foreign exchange student Kristin Beul under Wisconsin law against exchange company Asse International Inc.

For a fee of $2,000 it placed the 16-year-old German girl who wanted to spend a year in the United States, with the Bruce family of Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin. The family, which consisted of Richard Bruce, age 40, his wife, and their 13-year-old daughter, had been selected by Marianne Breber, Asse International’s Area Representative in the part of the state that includes Fort Atkinson. Kristin Beul arrived in Wisconsin from Germany on September 7, 1995, and was met at the airport by Richard Bruce and his daughter. Marianne Breber did not go to the airport to meet Kristin. In fact, apart from a brief orientation meeting at a shopping mall in September with Kristin and one other foreign exchange student, at which Breber gave Kristin her phone number, she didn’t meet with Kristin until January 21 of the following year. Breber called the Bruce home a few times during this period and spoke briefly with Kristin once or twice, but she made no effort to make sure that Kristin was alone when they spoke.

Kristin had led a sheltered life in Germany. She had had no sexual experiences at all and in fact

had had only two dates in her lifetime. On November 17, 1995, Richard Bruce, who weighed almost 300 pounds and who was alone at home at the time except for Kristin, came into the loft area in which she slept and raped her. This was the start of a protracted sexual relationship. In the months that followed, Bruce frequently would call the high school that Kristin was attending and report her ill. Then, with Mrs. Bruce off at work and the Bruce’s daughter at school, Bruce would have sex with Kristin. By February 22, Kristin had been absent 27 days from school. Bruce brandished a gun and told Kristin that he would kill himself if she told anyone what they were doing together.

In February Mrs. Bruce told Breber that she and her husband were getting divorced, and Breber found another host family to take in Kristin. Kristin didn’t want to leave the Bruce home, but on February 22 Breber arrived there with a sheriff’s deputy to remove Kristin. The deputy asked Kristin in the presence of Richard Bruce and his daughter whether there was any inappropriate sexual activity between Richard and Kristin, and Kristin answered «no.» Kristin lived with Breber for a few days between host families, but Breber didn’t use the occasion to inquire about any possible sexual relationship between Kristin and Bruce. Breber told the new host family that Kristin was not to contact Bruce for a month, but she did not tell Bruce not to have any contact with Kristin. They continued to correspond and talk on the phone. Kristin had decided that she was in love with Bruce and considered herself engaged to him.

In April, Mrs. Bruce discovered some of Kristin’s love letters and alerted the authorities. A sheriff’s deputy interviewed Bruce. The next day Bruce, who had committed a misdemeanor by having sex with a 16 year old, Wis. Stat. § 948.09, killed himself, leaving a note expressing fear of jail. It is undisputed that the events culminating in Bruce’s suicide inflicted serious psychological harm on Kristin; the jury’s assessment of her damages is not claimed to be excessive.

As the sponsor of a foreign exchange student, ASSE was subject to regulations of the United States Information Agency that require sponsors to train their agents, «monitor the progress and welfare of the exchange visit,» and require a «regular schedule of personal contact with the student and host family.»

It was the opinion of Circuit Judge Posner that; “ASSE was standing in the shoes of the parents of a young girl living in a stranger’s home far from her homeland and could reasonably be expected to exercise the kind of care that the parents themselves would exercise if they could to protect their 16-year-old daughter from the sexual pitfalls that lie about a girl of that age in those circumstances. ASSE assumed a primary role in the protection of the girl.»

 The jury returned a verdict finding that plaintiff Kristin Beul’s damages were $ 1,100,000.


According to Christopher Gould; CEO, Director and Founding Member of Child Safe, an international charity registered in the UK in 2004 Gould is a retired Detective Chief Superintendent with over 30 years service, who has been involved in the investigation of child abuse for over 15 years. In 1997, while managing the Child Protection Group in the Constabulary, Gould began an exte4nsive research project to examine the scale of abuse of children and young people involved in educational and language trips in the UK, Europe and beyond. The investigation was prompted upon his discover of a 12-year old Spanish exchange student who had been sexually abused by his host father while on a  4 week language trip in the US. The host father was a known and convicted sex offender who had been hosting foreign exchange students in the area for approximately three years.

Says Christopher Gould: “My interest in this matter is one of the police perspective.  I retired two years ago as a Detective Chief Superintendent in the UK after 30+ years service, much of which was devoted to child abuse investigation and homicides.  Following research I undertook for the Home Office and European Commission, I set up the Child-Safe international children’s charity  (whilst a serving officer).  The original research looked at the abuse suffered by children and young people on educational, cultural and language trips abroad. The findings were significant and took me around the globe, investigating and researching.  Since setting up the charity, the aim has been to advise and support commercial and voluntary organizations involved with such programmes (including schools) and help them to reduce the opportunities for abuse within their organisation/homestays etc.  Much of the support comes from experience, intelligence and information gathered from victims, survivors and offenders.”

In the first 12 months of his research, Gould uncovered 2,000 cases of abuse ranging from neglect to emotional abuse to both physical and sexual abuse.97% of the 2,000 cases were related to incidents which happened within host families. Says Gould; » Based on my personal experience and research, host families containing sex offenders and child abusers are being used in significant numbers by exchange agencies, generally without their knowledge, for exchange students. Furthermore, homes where a host parent or family member has a conviction for a serious crime are also being utilized by exchange agencies. In one study of 700 families Gould conducted in the UK, 26 families had household members with convictions for serious crimes or specific crimes against children.

Says Gould: “I also work internationally with many different law enforcement agencies and Governments.  The charity is now supported and endorsed by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), the Home Office, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF), the Centre for Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP), ECPAT, International, the United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) and others.”

Programmes are monitored and to a large extent controlled by rules imposed by the US State Department: “There is much concern at the moment around the growing number of cases where foreign exchange students are being treated inappropriately and in many instances unlawfully. Many breaches of Visa requirements are being identified by the US State Department by organizations responsible for bringing these young people into the country.  The growing concern surrounds the International standing of the USA once these complaints are made by returning students in their countries of origin.”

Extracts from article “Exchange group gets probe after teens complain

Arkansas Democrat Gazette from December 2007

Fayetteville High teachers and counselors said they’ve had frequent issues with the Drummonds and EF Foundation placements. They’ve complained to officials in the foundation’s headquarters (EF in Boston) about the Drummonds and believe the organization did nothing in response. “I only hear about the bad [situations ], and there are several each year that are miserable for the student, and the placement in the homes get changed and the students have to be moved,” said Anne Butt, the high school’s college adviser for nine years.

Lesli Zeagler, a Fayetteville High counselor, said there are few problems with the international students attending the school who are brought to the United States by Rotary International. Not true with EF Foundation, she said. “With EF, I’ve experienced students who are scared, who seem to be malnourished, and they seem to be isolated,” Zeagler said. “The problems go back years, but we’ve never had a group of students who have been so vocal about it.”

Around 30, 000 exchange students come to America annually, said Colvin of the State Department’s exchange coordination office, adding the State Department investigates about 200 complaints each year. About 20 percent involve students brought to the United States by EF Foundation, Colvin said. As part of its investigation in Arkansas, Colvin said the State Department could reprimand the company and require it to write a corrective-action plan to ensure it doesn’t violate federal regulations. A more severe penalty could involve shutting down the corporation or limiting how many students it can bring to the United States. Colvin sent a letter Thursday to the EF Foundation describing five media accounts and complaints last week regarding the organization. “This is not a pretty picture,” he concluded in the letter.

STATISTICS 2009/ 2010

  • 28,142 foreign exchange students came to the US, mainly from Europe.
  • Norway is 6th in country ranking by number of students sent to the US
  • The top ten countries sending foreign exchange students to the US last year are;
    • Germany 8,172 students (29%)
    • Brazil 1,889 students (7%)
    • China 1,661 students (6%)
    • South Korea 1,616 students (6%)
    • Thailand 1,210 students (4%)
    • Norway 925 students (3%)
    • Italy 892 students (3%)
    • Spain 866 students (3%)
    • Japan 791 students (3%)
    • Denmark 655 students (2%)
    • France 622
    • Sweden 601
    • Finland 345
    • Iceland 14
    • A total of 2,493 students, almost 9%, came from Scandinavia.
    • 7,881 students went to the Southern region of the US
    • 247 foreign exchange students went to South Carolina
    • 1,980 US exchange students went abroad, mainly to Europe
    • In the last 7 years, Norway has sent 5,016 FES to the US
    • In the last 7 years, Sweden has sent 3,812 FES to the US
    • In the last 7 years, Denmark has sent 3,958 FES to the US
    • In the last 7 years, Finland has sent 2,243 FES to the US

2013/2014: Utsatte områder/regioner i England

Most deprived in England
Animation for richest and poorest areas of England
Alistair Rae, 2011

Som dere ser av bildet fra animasjonen er det mulig å finne ut av hvor i England man bør takke nei til å reise som utvekslingselever. Chris Gould fra Child-Safe UK er ganske åpen om at det er en del familier i England som tar inn utvekslingselever på grunn av pengene. Det er ikke den kulturelle utvekslingen som er viktigst for dem men den økonomiske hjelpen i en vanskelig hverdag.

Noe som de fleste burde kjenne til er det at økonomi i et område henger sammen med kvaliteten på skolene, helsetilbudet og kriminalstatistikken. Områder med dårlig økonomi har naturlig nok et dårligere tilbud for ungdommen og en del mer voldskriminalitet enn velstående områder. De av dere som har blitt sendt til enkelte områder i Thanet i Kent i England har blitt kjent med dette fenomenet.

Ifølge Department for Communities and Local Government ligger områdene med de høyeste fattigdomstallene i:

  • Liverpool,
  • Middlesbrough,
  • Manchester,
  • Knowsley,
  • Hull,
  • Hackney og
  • Tower Hamlets

Kredittselskapet Experian har skapt et interaktivt kart basert på innsamlede data. I denne artikkelen forklarer de hvordan de har gått fram. Bildet under tar dere til den interaktive siden. Trykk inn stedet dere skal bli sendt til og se hvordan de ligger an på fattigdomsskalaen. En ting Experian har funnet er det at:

Der man er mest utsatte for fattigdom er: Middlesborough
Der det sannsynligvis bor flest fattige: Hull
Der man er mest utsatte for arbeidsløshet: Newham

Experian poverty maps of England
Experians interaktive fattigdomskart over England

Utvekslingselevers erfaringer

CSFES har en database som vi legger forholdene inn på og bruker dem som grunnlag for nedenstående eksempler:

  • Loftsrom uten varme og med knust vindu.
  • Ikke lov å tenne lys på rommet.
  • Lite eller ingen varme om vinteren.
  • Matrestriksjoner.
  • Eleven må handle mat til seg selv og familien.
  • Dårlig omsorg ved sykdom.
  • Arbeidsledighet.
  • Kriminalitet i den grad at det er umulig å gå ut om kvelden og jenter er redde for å bli voldtatte.
  • Eleven blir ranet.
  • Eleven blir slått ned.
  • Kjærester/barn/vertsforeldre som driver med dop og involverer eleven i salg.
  • Skittent hjem og psykisk ustabile vertsforeldre (henger kanskje sammen).
  • Skolen er en vits.


Burglary and violent crime by region: England and Wales
Data source: British Crime Survey (BCS)

Skjemaet over viser hvordan fordelingen er av innbrudd og voldskriminalitet.

Hvor kan du dra?

Hvordan finne ut om området man skal reise til:

La oss ta Thanet som eksempel. Det er en by med mange postkoder og derfor mange mulige tall. om man går inn på UK Crime Stats kan man søke på postkode/nabolag, politikontor/navn på politibetjent osv. Jeg skriver inn Thanet og en lang liste over mulige nabolag kommer opp. Man kan da se at f.eks. Eastcliff, Thanet er mer belastet enn Viking, Thanet. Går man inn på Middlehaven, Middlesbrough dukker de røde tallene opp. Ser dere på kartene, ser dere også nabolagsfordelingen.

De røde områdene må dere for all del ikke dra til, mens de blå tallene burde være ganske greie. Gule områder?? Vel det er jo grunn til å tenke seg om da.

Trotti, Ragna: Hostage in America (2009)

Used with permission from CSFES

Following the humiliating, early repatriation of 17-year-old exchange student Synne Marie Fjellvoll only 9 weeks prior to the completion of an international exchange program, Norwegian father Per Fjellvoll took matters into his own hands to ensure that his daughter was credited for her Sophomore year at a US High School. Fjellvoll is among a growing number of foreign parents distressed by the US State Department’s failure to supervise organizations sponsoring exchange students and enforce current regulations. Said Fjellvoll, “Students are put at the mercy of the sponsoring organization and the host family from the day they arrive in the U.S., in what can only be described as a hostage situation. Students and schools have no say in their own fates.”

By: Ragni Trotta

Says Synne; “I was so excited to study abroad in the United States of America. It was a dream come true.” Synne’s dream would soon to turn into a nightmare.

The granddaughter of two Norwegian school teachers, Synne’s high school exchange was made through the US with The Education Foundation for Foreign Study (EF), an exchange sponsor designated by the United States Department of State. Under the slogan “Personal Service”, “Safety”, “Quality”, EF charged the natural parents the equivalent of US$12,000 for Synne’s one year “cultural experience” in the U.S.

Placed with Tommy and Gidget Vickers in Branchville, South Carolina, a family made up of a mother, an out-of-work father, 4 children and 2 dogs, Synne’s chores swiftly added up to include daily babysitting for the family’s two youngest children from 3:00 – 6:00 pm, mowing the lawn, walking the dogs, doing the dishes and even washing her host sister’s clothes on Sundays. She was told she would be “on a plane home to Norway” if she refused to perform the many duties assigned to her. Explains Synne; “I never felt like part of the family, I felt like a maid.” Regulations stipulate that exchange students may only take on voluntary, sporadic jobs.

With two untrained dogs urinating and defecating around the mold-ridden Vicker’s home, the host family’s abode was clearly questionable by most health & hygiene standards. Says the exchange student; “The stench was disgusting. Several holes in the roof and walls were scantily covered by cardboard and boards and the window in my room was broken.”

Host families are required to provide meals for students. However, Synne was quickly told that she had to buy her own food. She was not allowed to eat from the family fridge and had to pay for her own meals when the family ordered Chinese takeout, which was frequent.

Grounded for weeks and isolated in a foreign country far away from home, her personal cell phone was confiscated and her internet access revoked by her host mother, making it impossible for her to contact her parents in Norway for help. Synne’s student card did not include the toll free help line of the US Department of State, as required by law.

According to Federal Regulations, foreign exchange students must be placed within a “nurturing environment” in a “financially stable” home and sponsoring organizations must ensure that the host family has adequate financial resources to undertake hosting obligations. EF’s gravest of several violations was the failure to do criminal background checks on the host family and the local EF representative.

36 judgments and liens registered against the Vickers would have thrown up several red flags, had they ever been carried out.

Numerous criminal convictions and judgments would also have turned up against her local EF representative Linda Davis (a.k.a. Linda J. Teller), who ensured a steady flow of exchange students to the Vickers despite repeated complaints from prior students. Local area representatives, who are paid US$ 400-700 to find homes, are required to check in with students at least once a month and must be contactable to the exchange student 24/7. But Davis ignored Synne’s repeated pleas for help for several months and told her to “stop whining” and that “Norwegian students are always the hardest.” Synne’s requests for a new family were also ignored by EF’s Head Office in Boston, MA, who had received reports from teachers at Branchville High School regarding the Vickers’ treatment of a German exchange student staying with them only two years earlier. At that time, teachers had to buy food for the student and place it in the fridge at school to feed her.

Following months of desperate pleas for help, Synne was “removed from the program” in a whirlwind of trumped-up accusations in March 2010. According to EF, she was being repatriated to Norway due to “bad behavior”, “bad grades” and too many “social activities”. While EF maintained that she had been “expelled” from school, a phone call to the Principal at Branchville High School revealed that this was a complete falsehood.

The Fjellvoll family were informed that EF had cancelled Synne’s VISA and that she had to be on a plane back to Norway that very night or she would be deported by US Authorities. In actual fact, foreign nationals who enter the US on a J-VISA have 30 days to leave the country following the cancellation of student sponsorships. Says Synne’s father; “We were shocked. We had just received an email from EF in February 2010 saying that everything was fine and Synne was “doing well in school”.

When the community got wind of Synne’s struggles with the Vickers, three local families volunteered to take her into their homes for the remaining 9 weeks of the school year. However, her host-mother and the local EF representative made it clear to would-be rescuers that anyone taking in the exchange student would be charged with harboring an illegal alien. After verbally attacking Synne at her high school, confiscating her phone and forcing her to leave without saying good-bye to her teachers or friends, Vickers dropped her curbside at the Charleston Airport to fend for herself. Synne’s  parents did not know the details of her ordeal or her whereabouts until she stepped off the plane in Oslo, Norway, where she fell into her father’s arms sobbing.

According to her father, Synne’s premature repatriation was based on minor episodes and lies by EF and her host family. Says her father; “Any accusations used by EF or the Vickers family to expedite the US deportation of Synne have subsequently been proven false by the Principal and teachers at Branchville High School.”  Fjellvoll tried every possible avenue to stop the unjust repatriation of his daughter only 9 weeks prior to the school year’s end. Says the father; “I was horrified to learn that sponsoring organizations have the power to simply withdraw a student’s sponsorship on a whim.” The Norwegian father expressed frustration at the U.S. State Department’s unwillingness to intervene with the EF Foundation on behalf of his daughter.

According to the US Department of State, a sponsor has the power to withdraw their sponsorship “for cause.” However “cause” is determined by the exchange organization itself, without any independent assessments. Said Fjellvoll, “Students are put at the mercy of sponsoring organizations and host families from the day they arrive in the U.S. in what can only be described as a hostage situation. The student is powerless.”

Unable to accept the injustice done to his daughter, Fjellvoll was able to arrange an agreement between Synne’s local high school in Kirkenes, Norway and her exchange school in Branchville, SC.:  Synne would complete her final exams in Norway before returning to the US to attend a 10th grade graduation ceremony at Branchville with her classmates.  There she was awarded a grade level completion certificate as well as two “Certificates of Excellence for Academic Achievement”, not to mention the chance to properly say good-bye to the friends she made during the academic year.

The graduation ceremony stands as a personal victory for the young Norwegian but also prevented a significant financial loss to her family.  The Norwegian State Educational Loan Fund sponsored the equivalent of US$6,000 to Synne for her acceptance into a program for students desiring to complete a study year abroad.  If for some reason the student does not complete their schooling the student is in ‘breach of contract’ and the grant becomes a loan.

Like many others, the Fjellvoll family found Danielle Grijalva, Director of The Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students (CSFES) online and contacted her for help regarding Synne’s unjustified repatriation. A “thorn” in the side of the exchange companies, Grijalva committee is the only independent organization which assists the droves of young students who continue to find themselves stranded and alone in the “land of opportunity”.

Many students participating in foreign exchange student programs have become victims of crimes including abuse and sexual exploitation during their stays in the United States. Grijalva of CSFES stated, «Student placement agencies not interested in the complete health, safety and welfare of its students should not be allowed to place exchange students.»

While the U.S. Department of State claims to investigate approximately 200 complaints per year, The Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students (CSFES) reports between 150 – 200 phone calls per week.  It is thought that only a small fraction of complaints come to the attention of US Authorities, because complaints are typically filed by exchange students upon return to their home countries.

On March 28, 2010, CSFES filed a complaint with U.S. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on behalf of Per Fjellvoll regarding EF Foundation’s failure to adhere to the Federal Regulations in the case of his daughter. Complaints have also been filed with Stanley Colvin; Deputy Secretary of US Department of State, Mark Sanford; Governor of South Carolina, and Lindsey Graham; US Senator South Carolina.

A pattern of ignoring complaints, failing to find appropriate families and repatriating “problem students” early have become the distinguishing trademarks of EF’s operation. Despite stringent admittance procedures to EF’s program in student’s home countries, an increasing amount of foreign exchange students continue to be shipped back to their home country in disgrace and humiliation, prior to the completion of their program. Problems continue because the exchange industry continues to cite these cases as an isolated incident. However, the many similar stories reported by exchange students indicate that problems are caused by a systemic failure.

Synne was one of 925 youngsters to arrive in the US from the Scandinavian country of 4.3 million last year for a high school year abroad. In the last 7 years, Norway has sent 5,016 foreign exchange students to the US.

Seksuelle overgrep 3: Hvor henvender man seg?

Det er gjerne to ting du kommer til å oppleve. For det første, blir du svekket/utslitt/nedkjørt av det du har opplevd. For det andre, er det meget mulig at du føler deg skyldig og skamfull. Disse følelsene er helt normale. Prøv å huske at det er den som sitter med makten i forholdet som har skylda. At det var deg det skjedde med var tilfeldig. At det er du som sliter i ettertid, det er noe som følger med overgrep.

Gjør så godt du kan for å få hjelp til å komme deg ut av situasjonen. Noen av ressursene dine er:

1. Foreldrene dine

Jeg tror de fleste foreldre gjerne vil vite om ungen deres har det fælt. Mange ganger holder det å si fra til dem og de sier fra videre. Foreldrene dine kan ringe utvekslingsorganisasjonen, politiet i det landet du er bosatt i og/eller frivillige organisasjoner.

2. Representanten fra utvekslingsorganisasjonen

Representanten din bør få beskjed. Organisasjonen skal umiddelbart fjerne deg fra den farlige situasjonen. Utvekslingsorganisasjonen plikter selv å følge landets lover og skal melde fra om overgrep / mishandling til autoritetene. I tillegg skal de ta vare på deg på best mulig måte. Hvorvidt det vil si å få deg hjem til foreldrene dine så raskt som mulig eller inn i en ny familie blir noe du, familien din og organisasjonen bestemmer sammen.

Om representanten din ikke tar deg på alvor (det skjer dessverre), vil det vanligvis finnes rådgivere eller helsepersonell på skolen som du kan henvende deg til.

3. Politiet

Som sagt, utvekslingsorganisasjonen plikter å melde fra om overgrepene. Foreldrene dine kan også ta kontakt med de lokale myndighetene. De viktigste er at du får en bedre hverdag borte fra overgriperen din.

4. Frivillige organisasjoner som er til for deg

2012 Nov 27: Behov for en uavhengig statlig norsk oversynsinstitusjon

Min mail til kunnskapsdepartementet sendt 27. november 2012:


  • Kunnskapsminister Kristin Halvorsen
  • Statssekretær Elisabeth Dale
  • Ekspedisjonssjef Johan Raum
  • Ekspedisjonssjef Eivind Helle

Barneombudet: Rådgiver Anders Prydz Cameron

Stortingets utdanningskomites medlemmer:

Leder Marianne Aasen, A: Line Engebretsen; A: Oda Amanda Malmin; A: Tor BremerA: Svein Gjelseth; FrP: Bente Thorsen; FrP: Mette Hanekamhaug; FrP: Tord Lien; H: Elisabeth Aspaker; H: Svein Harberg; H: Henning Warloe; SV: Heidi Sørensen; Sp: Vanja Stenslie Krakk; Sp: Anne Tingelstad Wøien; V: Trine Grande Skeie; KrF: Dagrun Eriksen


De siste fire dagene har jeg blitt kontaktet av tre familier som trenger hjelp i forbindelse med utvekslingseleven sin. De møter motstand fra norske byråer og får bare høre at de norske byråene ikke vet noe om det som skjer. Selv regler som samarbeidspartner i USA skal overholde blir ikke overholdt og bla. Morten Davidsen fra EF protesterer på at han vet noe om dem. Dette er regler som er lett tilgjengelig og som organisasjonene selv siterer når det passer dem.

Mobiler blir fratatt eleven. Det blir også laptop. Eleven blir nektet kontakt med familien sin og de må snike eller tigge seg til en samtale. Det er ikke tilrettelagt med skoler som tilfredsstiller studieforberedende fag VGS 2. Elevene blir beskyldt for å være bortskjemte og blir skjelt ut av representantene sine i USA. De blir ikke trodd på det de sier og de eneste eleven kan betro seg til er foreldrene. Dessverre når heller ikke foreldrene fram til byråene og da vender de seg til sånne som meg eller CSFES i USA.

Det vi trenger i Norge er:

  1. Uavhengig organisasjon med oppsynsansvar for utvekslingsbransjen.
  2. Utvekslingsbyråene må vise at de følger reglene fra departementet.
  3. Utvekslingsbyråene må sende inn liste med navn over utvekslingselever, hvor de skal.
  4. Om utvekslingselevene må hjem tidlig skal utvekslingsbyråene informere organisasjonen (pkt 1) om hvorfor slik at man kan undersøke saken.
  5. Legges inn på database.
  6. Det må kunne klages inn for forbrukerrådet/ombudet på lik linje med et hvert produkt man kjøper. Utvekslingsbyråer er IKKE reisebyråer. Dette er organisasjoner som skal sørge for at ungdommene våre sikres utdanning på relevante skoler i utlandet (selv om det stadig vekk ikke skjer), de skal sørge for at ungene plasseres i     trygge hjem som kan gi ungdommen den omsorgen en ungdom har krav på.

Med hilsen
Lise Lotte M Almenningen
CSFES volunteer – Norway


  • AUF-Arbeidernes Ungdomsfylking: Political adviser, Mats Kvaløy-Bjørbekk
  • FpU-Framskrittspartiets Ungdomsparti: Vice president, Sivert Bjørnstad
  • Kristelig Folkepartis Ungdomslag
  • Senterpartiet
  • Sosialistisk ungdom
  • Unge Høyres Landsforbund
  • Venstre

NOKUT – Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education

  • Deputy Director General – Department of Foreign Education, Stig Arne Skjerven
  • Senior Adviser, Mr. Rolf Lofstad
  • Higher Executive Officer, Marthe Haugerud Moe
  • Higher Executive Officer, Pia Hesby Andressen

ANSA – Association of Norwegian Students Abroad

Hanne Refsdal, Mari Berdal Djupvik

2009 jul 16: «Exchange students live American nightmare»

Drew Griffin and Kathleen Johnston | CNN | 16. juli 2009:
SCRANTON, Pennsylvania (CNN) — They came from around the world hoping to spend a high school year immersed in the culture and joys of America.

Exchange student Carlos Villareal of Colombia says he was underfed and kept in "an unsafe environment."
Exchange student Carlos Villareal of Colombia says he was underfed and kept in «an unsafe environment.» Source: CNN

Instead, five young foreign exchange students found themselves caught in a nightmare of neglect, malnourishment and abandonment by those supposed to protect them.

Now those five — natives of countries stretching from Norway to Tanzania to Colombia — are back home telling friends of a different America than they expected. And their brief visit reverberates in America as a United States senator demands accountability and reform, a Pennsylvania district attorney seeks criminal charges and the U.S. State Department concedes it failed to protect kids coming to America.

«We at the Department of State recognize [because we] are responsible for this program we have to make sure we are aggressively overseeing this program and make sure children are well-suited,» said State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley.

«This is a program that is very important to the Department of State,» Crowley said. «We are talking 15- to 18-year-old children. We are introducing them to the United States. We are trying to put our best foot forward. We recognize in this incident in Scranton and also elsewhere around the country we have failed to do so.»

What happened in Scranton, according to Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania, District Attorney Andrew Jarbola, is a crime. He has convened a grand jury to look into the families where some of the 12 students who came to Scranton were placed, as well as the company who placed them there and its officials.

«Well, in my opinion they were treated kind of crudely,» Jarbola said. «Not provided the proper food, hygiene and things of that nature. And the areas they were placed? I know one of the students was placed in a home with a convicted felon — convicted of drug trafficking or drug offenses — and that is very disturbing to me.»

Jarbola said some students were so malnourished that one was treated in a hospital for dehydration while another passed out during track at school.

«They weren’t provided with food,» Jarbola said. «In fact there is one incident with tape on food items in the refrigerator of the host family that says, ‘Do not touch. This is for the host family only.’ So basically they were neglected.»

The company that placed the students first denied any problems existed, then said it had corrected them and fired those responsible. The families who housed the students say the allegations are untrue. But the students themselves tell a different story.

‘It was nothing like I had envisioned’

The San Francisco-based Aspect Foundation sponsored all 12 of the Scranton students, some of whom were on State Department grants. On its Web site, the Aspect Foundation says it began in 1985 as «a small non-profit organization offering affordable study-abroad opportunities to students from around the world,» and now «students live with volunteer host families in more than 350 communities throughout the United States.»

In 2008, the State Department gave 17 placement groups $39.4 million in taxpayer funds to manage programs involving exchange students. Aspect received $1.08 million of those funds.

Carlos Villarreal’s family, however, paid their son’s way to America from Colombia, giving Aspect $13,000 for him to study here. Villarreal said he lived with a family that housed ex-convicts and that he had very little to eat. He said his mother’s repeated contacts with Aspect about his situation were ignored.

«I lost a lot of body weight, and [it was] an unsafe environment which I felt uncomfortable living in, and it was nothing like I had envisioned my experience in America,» he said.

The Rev. Elmer Smith told CNN he took in Villarreal as a favor to Aspect’s local coordinator, Edna Burgette, and denied he failed to feed him.

«The boy had no place to go, so I took him in and I fed him,» Smith said. «He had a television in his room, he had heat in his room, he had air-conditioning in his room.»

Another woman who hosted students said she was sitting on her porch when Burgette walked by and asked her if she would take in a child. Like Smith, the woman said that she was just trying to help a student whom she was told had nowhere else to go.

Jarbola said a girl from Norway, who asked to be identified only by her first name, Anne, tried to alert officials that she and some of the students were in dire straits.

Anne told CNN she had school officials send an e-mail to Aspect in October explaining how bad things were and including photographs of the inside of the home where she was placed. The home was later condemned by the city.

Anne’s high school principal took her in, but other students weren’t as lucky and spent nearly the entire school year in unsafe homes, until Children and Youth Services was tipped off about a month before school ended, Jarbola said.

Jarbola, who said Anne’s e-mail is now evidence in the criminal investigation, told CNN that when welfare officials interviewed the students, one was so hungry he wept when they gave him pizza during questioning. In all, five of the students were removed from homes where they’d been placed by Aspect.

Sponsoring agencies asked to police themselves

U.S. Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pennsylvania, said the situation sickened him.

«I’m the father of four daughters,» he said. «I would never want my daughter nor would any parent want their daughter or son exposed to these kinds of conditions anywhere, but especially when you’re in a foreign country. And in this case the United States was this foreign country.»

Aspect gave conflicting responses to CNN.

Vivian Fearen, its executive director, did not return calls seeking comment. Her Pennsylvania public relations firm issued a statement blaming the Scranton problem on Burgette, who was fired once the allegations surfaced in the Scranton media.

Burgette also did not respond to repeated attempts by CNN for comment.

Later, however, Aspect issued a statement through the public relations firm.

«Based on their own investigation and verification from county children and youth officials, Aspect Foundation was led to believe that none of their students in northeastern Pennsylvania was abused, malnourished or dehydrated,» said Karen Walsh, public affairs director for the Neiman Group.

But the statement also said Aspect «fully acknowledges that what happened in Scranton, Pennsylvania, was deplorable and in complete violation of their own strict standards and those of the Department of State’s Exchange Visitor Program.»

«Aspect Foundation has corrected the problems; terminated or accepted the resignations of those who were responsible for them; and established new policies and procedures to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again,» Walsh said.

Walsh said the Lackawanna County Children and Youth Services agency reported no Aspect students in Scranton required medical attention and only three were relocated. In addition to Burgette’s firing, Walsh said, two other supervisors resigned.

But the district attorney and other officials in Lackawanna County dispute Aspect’s contention. Jarbola said two received medical attention. All told, according to Jarbola, five were relocated, and those cases are being reviewed by the grand jury.

But Casey’s staff pointed out that Aspect employed Burgette for 10 years, making it difficult to portray her simply as a rogue employee.

Casey said Aspect knew in October the students were in trouble and chose to ignore it. But he saved most of his anger for the State Department, which allows groups like Aspect to police themselves.

«It’s about time that the State Department complete its investigation — even as the grand jury is working — complete the investigation, level tough sanctions and make improvements to this program in terms of oversight,» Casey said.

In its initial statement to CNN, the State Department said when it hears of allegations, «we immediately contact the sponsoring organization involved and ask them to investigate. We gather full information and act swiftly and appropriately.»

That’s the problem, argue critics, who say the department has had a hands-off policy for years when it comes to foreign exchange group sponsors. When complaints are made against the sponsor, they are asked to investigate themselves.

Arkansas legislator Sue Madison said she had a law passed in her state to protect students after it was discovered some of them were forced to do manual labor, live in unfit conditions and even forced to hand over their money to host families.

«You make a complaint to the State Department and you basically never hear from them again,» Madison said, explaining why she decided her state needed a law to do its own enforcement.

Watchdog groups struggle to get State Department’s attention

Danielle Grijalva, director of the Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students, said she once worked in the industry. The agencies, which she calls unregulated travel agents, can make millions of dollars enticing rich foreigners and lobbying for State Department grants to lure scholarship-eligible students here for a year of study.

Her group now monitors complaints. The situation in Scranton, she said, is not isolated — nor is the State Department’s initial response to the crisis. She fields calls from parents and students alike who complain they have nowhere else to turn.

«It’s self-regulated, unmonitored, under-reported,» Grijalva said. «Students being raped, placed in the homes of convicted felons, placed in the homes of registered sex offenders, come to the United States and lose 20, 30, 40 pounds.»

Grijalva shared e-mails with CNN which she said came from parents and students and host families — even correspondence with the State Department managers who oversee the program.

The State Department «will not accept as a complaint any matter that is not presented to us by an involved party to the exchange agency,» she was told in a 2006 e-mail by Stanley Colvin, a deputy assistant secretary for private-sector exchange.

Complaints forwarded by watchdog groups like hers, she said, are not considered by the State Department as worthy of investigation.

The State Department turned down CNN’s request to talk to Colvin or other managers directly involved in managing the exchange programs.

«When we bring this to the attention of the State Department, once again, it’s a business issue, they can’t get involved and they continue to look the other way,» Grijalva said.

Crowley said the department is not looking the other way now. He said the Scranton situation showed the department «tended to inspect by exception. Only when we were aware of dire circumstances did we send an investigator out.»

Crowley said the department asked the inspector general’s office to investigate Aspect but also plans to inspect its own management controls. He said that given the number of students, the department will still have to depend on sponsoring agencies to monitor the students they bring over. But he said the State Department can and will do more.

«We do recognize that the oversight of this program at the State Department was not strong enough, not aggressive enough,» Crowley said.

«We were not out there in the community looking hard at where our children were. We have already taken steps to put more eyes on these homes around the country so that in the future not only will we be putting the appropriate emphasis on the agents that are responsible first and foremost for oversight we’ll be looking over their shoulders as well.

«That did not happen certainly in the case of Scranton,» he said.

Crowley also released a June 12 report on Aspect written by Colvin. In it, Colvin said the department has warned the industry for the past three years that it was becoming harder to find suitable host families. It said the department specifically told Aspect that an audit found the group only complying with host family screening requirements 67.7 percent of the time. It’s unclear from the report why the State Department did not stop awarding Aspect grants at that point.

After finding a number of violations in Scranton, Colvin said the state would sanction Aspect by reducing the number of students it can bring over by 15 percent. Based on the fees it charges, the penalty, Colvin wrote, will result in a revenue loss of $540,000.

However, there is no mention in the report whether Aspect will have to return any of the $1 million of taxpayer-funded grants it received for the 2008-2009 school year. The State Department did not respond to repeated requests for clarification.

Despite conditions, Tanzanian student says ‘thank you’

Meanwhile, Tanzanian student Musa Mpulki has since returned home. Before he left, he told CNN he did not want to upset his mother, so he never told her that he had little to eat during his nine-month stay in the home of a 72-year-old man who had signs on his refrigerator that some food was only for family.

Although his housing situation was a nightmare, Mpulki said the students at the school made him appreciate America, and he said he appreciated the State Department grant that brought him to the United States.

«I guess I like to say, ‘Thank you very much the government of the United States for to bring me here to get a good experience at the school and a good education.’ »


Problemer: Bytte familie, trusler, ingen hjelp, rettssak

Emma Tollersrud / Publ. 21. juli 2009

Kjenner du noen som har negative erfaringer med utvekslingsopphold i utlandet? Send en e-post til 2286@aftenposten.no1 eller ring på 02286. Du kan også sende SMS/MMS til 2286.

Da Anne Bardoz (17) fra Tønsberg dro på utveksling, ble hun lovet en trygg vertsfamilie med god råd og ordnede forhold. I stedet ble hun møtt av den virkelige skyggesiden av det amerikanske samfunnet. Nå advarer hun andre studenter.

Anne fikk ingen varm velkomst da hun ankom Scranton, Pennsylvania i august i fjor. Vertsfamilien hun først ble plassert hos, hadde hverken tid eller råd til å ha en student fra utlandet boende hos seg. Anne fikk ikke den økonomiske støtten hun hadde rett på.

– Jeg måtte kjøpe all maten min selv, og brukte omtrent alle pengene mine på det. Jeg følte meg ikke velkommen der i det hele tatt, sier Anne.

Uutholdelige forhold

Etter to måneder hadde samarbeidsproblemene blitt så store at hun måtte bytte vertsfamilie. Anne reiste gjennom Speak Education, som samarbeider med Aspect Foundation i USA. De hadde store problemer med å finne en ny familie, og til slutt endte hun opp hos en tidligere kollega av den ansvarlige Aspect-representanten.

Når de må bruke sine egne for å løse situasjonen, sier det noe om hvor desperate de er, og hvor tvilsom denne virksomheten er, sier Anne.

I det nye hjemmet ble Anne møtt av det verste synet hun noen gang hadde sett. Gulvet var dekket av hundeavføring, luften var tett av tobakksrøyk og stanken var enorm. Hygienen var så dårlig, at huset kort tid etter ble erklært ulovlig å bo i, av politiet.

– Vertsfamilien eide tre hunder og to katter, som aldri ble sluppet ut av huset. De gjorde fra seg overalt, til og med på klærne og i sengen min. Det ble aldri rengjort, sier Anne til Aftenposten.

Utbredt problem

Kombinasjonen av minimale mengder søvn og liten tilgang på ordentlig mat ble situasjonen uutholdelig. Anne forteller at det var en stor belastning.

  • Som utvekslingsstudent var jeg alene i en helt ny og ukjent situasjon, langt borte fra mennesker jeg kjente og stolte på. Hjemmet ble alt annet enn den trygge rammen det skulle være, sier hun.

«Jeg fikk nesten ikke gå ut av huset, og etter hvert fikk jeg ikke bruke PC. Det var også sterkt begrenset hvor mye jeg kunne ringe hjem»Anne Bardoz (17)

I amerikanske medier har det den siste tiden kommet frem flere lignende saker som viser at Anne ikke er alene. Bare i Scranton har flere av studentene rapportert om usle boforhold, med underernæring, trange og skitne leiligheter og utrygge forhold, ifølge CNN2. Det har blitt rettet sterk kritikk mot mangelfull kontroll og omsorgssvikt.

Annes klassekamerat Carlos Villareal kom fra Colombia til svært dårlige forhold i et amerikansk hjem i Scranton.

Se CNNs intervju med Carlos her:3

Tvilsom industri

Situasjonen har sjokkert de amerikanske kontrollorganene, som nå har satt i gang en omfattende granskning. I et brev til utenriksminister Hillary Clinton krever senator Bob Casey nye reformer4 og en grundig etterforskning av forholdene i Pennsylvania.

Kritikere mener det er snakk om en ytterst tvilsom og pengegrisk industri, som har ført til mange tilfeller av vanstell og psykisk, fysisk og seksuelt misbruk, skriver AP. Studenter har også blitt plassert hos tidligere domfelte og de har blitt frastjålet store beløp.

Det er Aspect Foundation som har ansvaret for utvekslingsstudentene i Scranton, og totalt tar de imot over 1000 studenter hvert år. Ifølge AP har organisasjonen beklaget forholdene på det sterkeste, og sagt at de alt i alt har et godt rykte på seg.

Tre uker

Anne Bardoz har derimot ikke ett godt ord å si om organisasjonene Speak og Aspect. Straks hun hadde flyttet inn i det nye hjemmet, forsto hun at hun måtte ut derfra så fort som mulig. Men da hun kontaktet organisasjonene for å få byttet vertsfamilie, var det ingen hjelp å få. De hadde ingen andre familier tilgjengelig.

  • Jeg prøvde flere ganger, og henvendte meg til mange forskjellige mennesker langt oppover i systemet. Det eneste de sa var at jeg måtte vente, sier Anne.

I tre uker måtte hun vente. Hun visste ikke hvem andre hun kunne kontakte, og det var heller ikke mye foreldrene fikk gjort. Dermed måtte hun lete helt på egenhånd.

– De eneste jeg kunne snakke med var de som selv hadde plassert meg der, vel vitende om forholdene der, sier Anne.

Hun oppfordrer andre utvekslingsstudenter til å orientere seg om hvilke rettigheter man har og hvem man kan kontakte utenom organisasjon. Utvekslingsstudenter har krav på både advokathjelp og hjelp fra skolen, dersom det oppstår problemer.


Utvekslingsstudenter i USA har strenge regler å forholde seg til. Det gjelder både skole, fritid, innetider, økonomi og samarbeid med vertsfamilien.

Fordi den første vertsfamilien mente at Anne hadde brutt disse reglene, var hun i en såkalt «Probation-periode», en form for husarrest. Det ble tre ekstremt lange uker i det skitne huset.

– Jeg fikk nesten ikke gå ut av huset, og etter hvert fikk jeg ikke bruke PC. Det var også sterkt begrenset hvor mye jeg kunne ringe hjem, sier Anne, som karakteriserer reglene for utvekslingsstudenter og Probation-ordningen som manipulerende og potensielt skadelig.

Etter hvert ble Anne så fortvilet at hun var nær ved å gi opp. Hun orket ikke mer, og ville hjem til Norge. Alt hun ønsket var å booke nærmeste fly hjem til Norge.

  • Jeg var to minutter fra å reise hjem, som eneste utvei. Men så til slutt kontaktet jeg rektoren på skolen. Jeg måtte ordne absolutt alt selv, sier Anne.

Først da løste situasjonen seg. Rektoren fikk høre om de fryktelige forholdene og lot straks Anne bo hos seg, resten av året.

Tar inn for mange

Etter både terrorangrep og finanskrise har stadig færre amerikanere sagt seg villige til å ta i mot utenlandske studenter, og det har vært svært vanskelig for organisasjonene å finne gode hjem. Myndighetene i Pennsylvania advarte mot mangelen i 2006.

Samtidig har de et klart ansvar for å skaffe gode, kvalifiserte vertsfamilier. På Speaks egne hjemmesider står det at vertene må fylle ut detaljerte søknader og gjennomføre personlige intervjuer. Og først når familiemedlemmenes bakgrunn, hjemmets standard, studentens rom osv er godkjent, kan studenten flytte inn.

Danielle Grijalva, leder for Committee for Safety of Foreign Exchange Students, sier til AP at utvekslingsorganisasjonene tar imot flere enn de kan håndtere. Det til tross for at føderale myndigheter har satt en grense for hvor mange som kan tas inn.

Anne Bardoz mener mange tar imot studenter fordi de blir lovet økonomiske gevinster fra organisasjonene.

Vil ha tilbake pengene

Anne betalte 70.000 kroner i studieavgift for å få delta i utvekslingsprogrammet til Speak. Hun kan ikke forstå hva de pengene har gått til.

– Det eneste som var i orden var flybilletten. Og den koster ikke 70.000 kroner. Speak Education ga meg ikke det de hadde lovet, og da mener jeg at jeg bør få pengene tilbake, sier hun. har i flere dager forsøkt å få tak i Speak Norge, men uten å lykkes.

2009 May 31: The Times Tribune: Local neglect allegations open door to a world  where students are shuffled from home to home
2009 Jul 16: CNN: Exchange students live American nightmare
2009 Jul 16: VG Nett: Norske Anne opplevde utvekslingsmareritt i USA
2009 Jul 16: The Times Tribune: State Department punishes exchange student company as criminal probe widens
2009 Jul 19: The Times Tribune: Exchange student neglect happened a decade ago, host parent says
2009 Jul 21: Aftenposten: Jeg var to minutter fra å reise hjem
2009 Jul 23: The Times Tribune: Exchange students say complaints were ignored by program officials
2009 Jul 24: The Times Tribune: Foreign-exchange coordinator arrested/Scranton, Pennsylvania
2009 Oct 01: The Times Tribune: Casey calls for improved foreign exchange student rules
2009 Oct 16: US Department of State: Management Review of Youth Programs Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs: Report Number ISP-I-10-16, October 2009
2009 Oct 23: The Times Tribune: Changes recommended for foreign-exchange programs after Scranton scandal
2010: CSFES Press Release: U.S. Department of State is proposing to amend regulations for hosting exchange students

US Department of state uttalelse om Scranton saken

Når utvekslingsåret går dårlig

For de fleste av utvekslingselevene som reiser ut som utvekslingselev blir utvekslingsåret et godt år. Mange strever desverre voldsomt. Det kan være mange grunner til det:

  • Hjemlengsel
  • Kjemien er dårlig mellom eleven og vertshjemmet
  • Vertshjemmet er skittent, lukter vondt eller faller fra hverandre.
  • Representant og vertsfamilien er gode venner (interessekonflikt).
  • Konflikt mellom representant og vertsfamilie.
  • Mye kjeft og beskyldninger.
  • Trusler fra vertsforeldre og/eller utvekslingsorganisasjonen.
  • Dårlig økonomi.
  • Seksuelle tilnærmelser, overgrep, mishandling.
  • Alkohol eller stoffproblemer i hjemmet.
  • Du føler deg utrygg uten egentlig å kunne sette fingeren på det. En av vertsforeldrene har selvmotsigende utsagn og liker deg det ene øyeblikket men ikke i det neste. Du vet liksom ikke helt hvor du har dem.
  • Utvekslingseleven blir hverken hørt eller trodd av utvekslingsorganisasjonen.
  • Ingen hjelp å få.

Noen ganger kan det være at utvekslingseleven er for kravstor. Da må du forsøke å justere forventninger og krav etter standarden i det nye landet. Bare du vette om det er du eller vertsfamilien som er urimelig. Om det er vertsfamilien eller utvekslingsorganisasjonen som er problemet er det flere muligheter:

  • Identifiser problemet så godt dere kan.
  • Ta bilder, behold tekstmeldinger og videresend til foreldrene deres som sikkerhet.
  • Fortell med en gang foreldrene deres hva problemet er (selv om du kanskje tror at du innbiller deg at det er et problem). Få dem til å mase på utvekslingsorganisasjonen i Norge.
  • Snakk med rektor/lærer/helsesøster/venners foreldre og be om hjelp.
  • Om du trenger å bytte hjem, spør folk du kjenner om du kan bo hos dem – ikke vent på organisasjonen. De er ofte ikke interessert i å finne nytt hjem til dere.
  • Norske ambassader/konsulater i nærheten av der du bor kan ofte gi deg råd om advokater, psykologer o.l. i utvekslingslandet. Foreldrene dine kan kanskje hjelpe deg med dette. Google er en god venn.
  • Her er en liste over nødnumre i utlandet.
  • Foreldre har rett til å ta kontakt med skolen barnet deres går på.
  • Ha kontakt med vertsfamilien om dere ønsker det.
  • Husk på kjøpskontrakten. Utvekslingsorganisasjonen din plikter å oppfylle punktet/markedsføringen som lover et trygt hjem. I Norge er det SIU (Senter for internasjonalisering av utdanning) dere kan klage til om utvekslingsorganisasjonen nekter å gjøre noe.
  • Vær saklige.

Om dere lurer på noe er det bare å ta kontakt med meg, Lise Almenningen, på margarethesdatter (at) – I USA kan dere ta kontakt direkte med eieren av CSFES, Danielle Grijalva på dgrijalva (at)