On Friday, December 14, Congressmen Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) introduced the Tribal Foster Care and Adoption Access Act of 2007 (H.R. 4688), which will provide Indian tribes with the same direct access to federal funding for foster care and adoption services that states currently receive. The legislation—a companion bill to the act of the same name introduced in the Senate by Senator Baucus—will provide federal funding that will allow tribes to establish independent foster care and adoption programs.
“Tribal adoption and foster care services should be on equal footing with states, and this bill will do just that,” Congressman Pomeroy said. “This bill will allow tribes to provide their children with the culturally appropriate care they deserve.”
The federal government currently reimburses states for eligible foster care and adoption assistance costs incurred as part of providing foster care or adoption assistance to children under their jurisdiction. However, under existing law, tribal spending on foster care and adoption may only be reimbursed through contracts with the states in which they are located. The Tribal Foster Care and Adoption Access Act will allow tribes to receive direct reimbursement for eligible costs related to foster care services, adoption assistance services, employee training and education, administrative costs related to case planning and case management, and establishment and operation of required data collection systems.
This legislation requires tribal adoption and foster care programs to meet the same federal performance requirements as states to ensure the safety of and accountability for children placed in tribal foster care programs.
Congressmen Weller (R-IL), Blumenauer (D-OR) and Camp (R-MI) joined Congressman Pomeroy as original co-sponsors of this bill.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Monday, December 10, 2007
Proposed Legislation Would Eliminate Funding Lookback
In November, Representative Shelly Berkley (D-NV) introduced the important Partnership for Children and Families Act (H.R. 4207), which would expand the federal/state partnership for foster and adopted youth through the federal Title IV-E program.
Eliminating Income Links for Title IV-E
Under current law, a foster child is eligible for federal Title IV-E support only if his family meets the income test of the 1996 Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. Eligibility for Title IV-E adoption assistance is also linked to AFDC eligibility or eligibility for the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. For both adoption assistance and foster care maintenance, the Partnership for Children and Families Act would eliminate the AFDC income eligibility restriction. It would also eliminate the SSI eligibility requirement for adoption assistance.
Now more than 10 years old, the AFDC standard has never been adjusted for inflation. Because of this lookback, thousands of abused and neglected children no longer receive support from the federal government—between 1998 and 2004 an estimated 35,000 fewer foster children were eligible for federal IV-E support. (Download detailed report on the lookback.)
During that same period, the decrease in IV-E-eligible children translated into an estimated $1.9 billion loss in federal support to the states. States must support all children in foster care, regardless of income. Thus, states have less funding for other services—such as family support and preservation services, programs to safely reunite children with their families, or efforts to find new adoptive or guardianship families.
Linking federal foster care support to AFDC also requires staff to spend time determining families’ incomes as of 1996. Precious time and money are wasted determining eligibility—resources that would be far better spent protecting children and ensuring that they leave foster care to permanent families.
Supporting Reinvestment
The bill would also allow states to reinvest saved federal foster care funds in other child welfare services if the state reduces its foster care population from an approved baseline. Currently federal funds are lost when states reduce their caseloads. With this bill, the federal and state dollars saved could instead be invested into services that children and families need, including:
▪Services that reduce the need for foster care entry, including family support and preservation services.
▪Intensive reunification services for children in foster care.
▪Services for children who leave care to return to their parents, live with relatives, or are adopted by new families so that children do not re-enter foster care.
This legislation is long overdue. It's time for the federal government to partner with states to support all children, not just those born to the poorest families.
Eliminating Income Links for Title IV-E
Under current law, a foster child is eligible for federal Title IV-E support only if his family meets the income test of the 1996 Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. Eligibility for Title IV-E adoption assistance is also linked to AFDC eligibility or eligibility for the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. For both adoption assistance and foster care maintenance, the Partnership for Children and Families Act would eliminate the AFDC income eligibility restriction. It would also eliminate the SSI eligibility requirement for adoption assistance.
Now more than 10 years old, the AFDC standard has never been adjusted for inflation. Because of this lookback, thousands of abused and neglected children no longer receive support from the federal government—between 1998 and 2004 an estimated 35,000 fewer foster children were eligible for federal IV-E support. (Download detailed report on the lookback.)
During that same period, the decrease in IV-E-eligible children translated into an estimated $1.9 billion loss in federal support to the states. States must support all children in foster care, regardless of income. Thus, states have less funding for other services—such as family support and preservation services, programs to safely reunite children with their families, or efforts to find new adoptive or guardianship families.
Linking federal foster care support to AFDC also requires staff to spend time determining families’ incomes as of 1996. Precious time and money are wasted determining eligibility—resources that would be far better spent protecting children and ensuring that they leave foster care to permanent families.
Supporting Reinvestment
The bill would also allow states to reinvest saved federal foster care funds in other child welfare services if the state reduces its foster care population from an approved baseline. Currently federal funds are lost when states reduce their caseloads. With this bill, the federal and state dollars saved could instead be invested into services that children and families need, including:
▪Services that reduce the need for foster care entry, including family support and preservation services.
▪Intensive reunification services for children in foster care.
▪Services for children who leave care to return to their parents, live with relatives, or are adopted by new families so that children do not re-enter foster care.
This legislation is long overdue. It's time for the federal government to partner with states to support all children, not just those born to the poorest families.
Senators Seek to Improve the Adoption Process
by Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
On November 19, Senators Clinton and Rockefeller introduced the Adoption Improvement Act (S. 2395), which is designed to speed the adoptions of children from foster care. The legislation would provide $50,000,000 in funding to retain prospective adopters as they go through the process of adopting from foster care.
“We have made important advances in the child welfare system since the Adoption and Safe Families Act was introduced a decade ago, but we still have work to do in order to increase the number of adoptions nationwide,” Senator Clinton said, “This initiative will help the tens of thousands of children still waiting for families find permanent, loving homes.” (Read full statement.)
The legislation is designed to address barriers to adoption that were identified in a recent study by the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute in collaboration with Harvard University and the Urban Institute. The study found that each year, about 240,000 people in the United States will seek information about adopting a child from foster care. Only a very small fraction of these prospects end up actually adopting a foster child. As a result, thousands of needy children will remain in foster care and thousands of prospective parents will remain childless.
Research shows that prospective adoptive parents often face a number of barriers that discourage them from adopting children out of foster care, including difficulty in accessing the child welfare agency and unpleasant experiences during critical initial contacts with the child welfare agency, as well as ongoing frustration with the agency or aspects of the process.
To address these barriers, the act would provide funding to at least 10 child welfare agencies to enable them to implement projects to effect long-range improvements in the adoption process by increasing prospective adoptive parent access to adoption information and strengthening such agencies’ responsiveness to prospective adoptive parents.
This legislation would be a good first step to helping ensure that all 114,000 children waiting to be adopted have the best opportunities to find a forever family of their own. “I believe that success today is when we hear of a child who has found a loving home, and when we see a sad situation turn into an inspirational story of hope,” Senator Rockefeller said. “But success tomorrow will be when we reach each and every child – when not one is left wondering who is there to love them, when not one is left without a nurturing home.”
On November 19, Senators Clinton and Rockefeller introduced the Adoption Improvement Act (S. 2395), which is designed to speed the adoptions of children from foster care. The legislation would provide $50,000,000 in funding to retain prospective adopters as they go through the process of adopting from foster care.
“We have made important advances in the child welfare system since the Adoption and Safe Families Act was introduced a decade ago, but we still have work to do in order to increase the number of adoptions nationwide,” Senator Clinton said, “This initiative will help the tens of thousands of children still waiting for families find permanent, loving homes.” (Read full statement.)
The legislation is designed to address barriers to adoption that were identified in a recent study by the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute in collaboration with Harvard University and the Urban Institute. The study found that each year, about 240,000 people in the United States will seek information about adopting a child from foster care. Only a very small fraction of these prospects end up actually adopting a foster child. As a result, thousands of needy children will remain in foster care and thousands of prospective parents will remain childless.
Research shows that prospective adoptive parents often face a number of barriers that discourage them from adopting children out of foster care, including difficulty in accessing the child welfare agency and unpleasant experiences during critical initial contacts with the child welfare agency, as well as ongoing frustration with the agency or aspects of the process.
To address these barriers, the act would provide funding to at least 10 child welfare agencies to enable them to implement projects to effect long-range improvements in the adoption process by increasing prospective adoptive parent access to adoption information and strengthening such agencies’ responsiveness to prospective adoptive parents.
This legislation would be a good first step to helping ensure that all 114,000 children waiting to be adopted have the best opportunities to find a forever family of their own. “I believe that success today is when we hear of a child who has found a loving home, and when we see a sad situation turn into an inspirational story of hope,” Senator Rockefeller said. “But success tomorrow will be when we reach each and every child – when not one is left wondering who is there to love them, when not one is left without a nurturing home.”
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Federal Funding and Culturally Competent Services Needed for Tribes
By Lisa Wilson, former foster youth, Montana
I am the oldest of 11 siblings. When I was born, neither of my parents had a drinking or drug problem. After having five children, my mom started using to relieve stress. My dad started using, and soon, he was using and selling meth. My mom and dad were good parents when they were clean, but when they were using, they turned into completely different people.
Social services became involved in 1995 and sent my brothers and sisters and me to four different foster families. I felt like my heart had been ripped out of me when they took us all away.
My mom was court ordered into drug treatment. She went to treatment, took a parenting class, attended AA meetings and looked for a job. My mom was going to do whatever they told her to do to get us back.
My dad attended a parenting class too. He was the only father in a class full of mothers because there weren’t any services for fathers. After my dad took that class, he never hit my mom again.
My dad was the bad guy in the eyes of my mother’s workers, who thought that getting rid of him would be the best thing for her. They never took into consideration the fact that she had never parented without my dad. The workers expected her to stay sober, attend all of her meetings, work full time, and raise eight children – all by herself.
My brothers and sisters and I were reunited with our parents for a while, but there were no supportive services for me or my siblings. Everything in our family had changed and we didn’t know how to handle it.
My dad continued to struggle with drugs and relapsed. He was ordered to stay away from our family. My mom made some poor choices, and my parents’ parental rights were subsequently terminated.
My siblings and I were separated into different foster homes and I aged out of foster care at the age of 18. Four of my brothers are now living with me and we are gradually healing together. I am married and have two children of my own. As I raise my own children, I am constantly reminded of what I missed as a child.
I believe that if federal child welfare funding was available to tribes in my state, there would have been more culturally competent supportive services for my family and we may never have had to be torn apart. My family has endured a lot of pain and suffering that could have been prevented had my parents received the help they needed to successfully raise my siblings and me.
I am the oldest of 11 siblings. When I was born, neither of my parents had a drinking or drug problem. After having five children, my mom started using to relieve stress. My dad started using, and soon, he was using and selling meth. My mom and dad were good parents when they were clean, but when they were using, they turned into completely different people.
Social services became involved in 1995 and sent my brothers and sisters and me to four different foster families. I felt like my heart had been ripped out of me when they took us all away.
My mom was court ordered into drug treatment. She went to treatment, took a parenting class, attended AA meetings and looked for a job. My mom was going to do whatever they told her to do to get us back.
My dad attended a parenting class too. He was the only father in a class full of mothers because there weren’t any services for fathers. After my dad took that class, he never hit my mom again.
My dad was the bad guy in the eyes of my mother’s workers, who thought that getting rid of him would be the best thing for her. They never took into consideration the fact that she had never parented without my dad. The workers expected her to stay sober, attend all of her meetings, work full time, and raise eight children – all by herself.
My brothers and sisters and I were reunited with our parents for a while, but there were no supportive services for me or my siblings. Everything in our family had changed and we didn’t know how to handle it.
My dad continued to struggle with drugs and relapsed. He was ordered to stay away from our family. My mom made some poor choices, and my parents’ parental rights were subsequently terminated.
My siblings and I were separated into different foster homes and I aged out of foster care at the age of 18. Four of my brothers are now living with me and we are gradually healing together. I am married and have two children of my own. As I raise my own children, I am constantly reminded of what I missed as a child.
I believe that if federal child welfare funding was available to tribes in my state, there would have been more culturally competent supportive services for my family and we may never have had to be torn apart. My family has endured a lot of pain and suffering that could have been prevented had my parents received the help they needed to successfully raise my siblings and me.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
New Report Supports Direct Funding for Tribes
A new report, "Time for Reform: A Matter of Justice for American Indian and Alaskan Native Children," found that American Indian and Alaskan Native children are overrepresented in the nation's foster care system at more than 1.6 times the expected level, according to a new report by the National Indian Child Welfare Association (NICWA) and the national, nonpartisan Kids Are Waiting campaign, a project of The Pew Charitable Trusts. Yet tribal governments are excluded from some of the largest sources of federal child welfare funding.
Federal support for child welfare services in tribal communities is a patchwork of funding streams, most of which are discretionary and provides extremely limited levels of support. As a result, tribal governments have limited ability to provide services, and find themselves managing crises rather than responding to the core issues that put children at risk.
The Tribal Foster Care and Adoption Access Act of 2007, introduced in Congress by Senator Max Baucus, recognizes the special needs of American Indian and Alaskan Native children in foster care. This bipartisan legislation would allow tribes direct access to federal foster care and adoption funds and would create accountability measures to ensure that tribes meet the needs of the children in their care. According to Senator Baucus, "This bill provides tribes with the ability to serve their children directly with culturally appropriate care and understanding."
Federal support for child welfare services in tribal communities is a patchwork of funding streams, most of which are discretionary and provides extremely limited levels of support. As a result, tribal governments have limited ability to provide services, and find themselves managing crises rather than responding to the core issues that put children at risk.
The Tribal Foster Care and Adoption Access Act of 2007, introduced in Congress by Senator Max Baucus, recognizes the special needs of American Indian and Alaskan Native children in foster care. This bipartisan legislation would allow tribes direct access to federal foster care and adoption funds and would create accountability measures to ensure that tribes meet the needs of the children in their care. According to Senator Baucus, "This bill provides tribes with the ability to serve their children directly with culturally appropriate care and understanding."
House Bill Seeks Adoption Assistance Equality
This month, Representative Jim Cooper (D-TN) introduced HR 4091, a companion bill to the Senate's Adoption Equality Act (S 1462). the bill, which has nine co-sponsors, would de-link Title IV-E adoption assistance eligibility from the old Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program requirements. By removing the link between a child's eligibility for adoption assistance from the child's biological parent's income, the legislation makes it easier for children to receive the support they need after they leave foster care to a permanent, loving adoptive family.
NACAC strongly supports this legislation and hopes to see it move quickly through Congress.
NACAC strongly supports this legislation and hopes to see it move quickly through Congress.
Adoptees Should Have Access to Birth Records
Earlier this month, the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute released a report recommending that all states amend their laws to ensure that adoptees have access to their birth records. "For the Records: Restoring a Right to Adult Adoptees" found that:
• Prohibiting adopted people from having access to their personal information raises significant civil rights concerns and causes potentially serious, negative consequences for their physical and mental health.
• There is no evidence that, in those states that allow access, such access has caused problematic behavior by adoptees or harm to birth mothers.
• There is no rise in abortion rates and drop adoption rates in states with access (as some opponents feared); in fact, it appears just the opposite occurs.
The Institute recommends that:
• Every state should amend its laws to restore unrestricted access for adult adopted persons to their original birth certificates.
• Further research examine the experiences of adopted persons, birth parents, and adoptive parents in relation to access to records.
• Prohibiting adopted people from having access to their personal information raises significant civil rights concerns and causes potentially serious, negative consequences for their physical and mental health.
• There is no evidence that, in those states that allow access, such access has caused problematic behavior by adoptees or harm to birth mothers.
• There is no rise in abortion rates and drop adoption rates in states with access (as some opponents feared); in fact, it appears just the opposite occurs.
The Institute recommends that:
• Every state should amend its laws to restore unrestricted access for adult adopted persons to their original birth certificates.
• Further research examine the experiences of adopted persons, birth parents, and adoptive parents in relation to access to records.
Research Shows Importance of Post-Adoption Services
Two new articles highlight the need for ongoing support for children adopted from the foster care system. The first, "Adopted foster youths’ psychosocial functioning: a longitudinal perspective," in the November 2007 issue of Child & Family Social Work compared youth adopted from foster care with adopted non-foster children. Researchers asked parents to complete an inventory of behavioral problems at about two, four, and eight years after the adoption. The authors founds that "a striking number" of the former foster children had behavior problems, far exceeding those found in the general population.
The second article, "Influences of Risk History and Adoption Preparation on Post-Adoption Services Use in U.S. Adoptions," in the October issue of Family Relations, found the usage of post-adoption services (including casework, support groups, and clinical services) during the six-year study period. Those families who adopted children with special needs were more likely to use clinical post-adoption services. As the abstract notes, the study "[f]indings support the need for long-term post-adoption services for adoptive families, especially for families who adopt a child with special needs."
The federal government must dedicate new resources to enable states to create and maintain effective post-adoption services.
The second article, "Influences of Risk History and Adoption Preparation on Post-Adoption Services Use in U.S. Adoptions," in the October issue of Family Relations, found the usage of post-adoption services (including casework, support groups, and clinical services) during the six-year study period. Those families who adopted children with special needs were more likely to use clinical post-adoption services. As the abstract notes, the study "[f]indings support the need for long-term post-adoption services for adoptive families, especially for families who adopt a child with special needs."
The federal government must dedicate new resources to enable states to create and maintain effective post-adoption services.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
New Legislation Helps Youth Adopted as Teens
By Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
On September 27, President Bush signed into law the College Cost Reduction and Access Act (HR 2669), which included the Fostering Adoption to Further Student Achievement Act amendment, making it possible for teens in foster care to be adopted without losing access to college financial aid. Under the law, youth who are adopted after their 13th birthday will not have to include their parents' income in the calculations for determining their need for financial aid.
As Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) explained when he first introduced the legislation in 2005, “[I]f a teenager is adopted, he or she can lose out on…college financial aid [due to] his or her adopted parents’ financial situation, but if the teen stays in the system and ‘ages-out’…he or she is probably eligible for all available loans and grants…. The benefits of family and education should go hand in hand, not stand in opposition to each other.”
NACAC has met foster youth who had to make the terrible choice between having a permanent family and pursuing a college education. As a teenager, Sheila lived in foster care with her aunt. She knew that if she remained in foster care, she would receive financial assistance that would enable her to go to college. “If my aunt adopted me,” Sheila explained, “I would lose my benefits. I mean adoption is great and everything, but you sacrifice a lot.”
We are delighted that Congress has reduced one barrier that would have forced some youth to choose between education and family, and hope that Congress goes even further to ensure that all former foster youth who are adopted as teens have full access to needed educational support.
On September 27, President Bush signed into law the College Cost Reduction and Access Act (HR 2669), which included the Fostering Adoption to Further Student Achievement Act amendment, making it possible for teens in foster care to be adopted without losing access to college financial aid. Under the law, youth who are adopted after their 13th birthday will not have to include their parents' income in the calculations for determining their need for financial aid.
As Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) explained when he first introduced the legislation in 2005, “[I]f a teenager is adopted, he or she can lose out on…college financial aid [due to] his or her adopted parents’ financial situation, but if the teen stays in the system and ‘ages-out’…he or she is probably eligible for all available loans and grants…. The benefits of family and education should go hand in hand, not stand in opposition to each other.”
NACAC has met foster youth who had to make the terrible choice between having a permanent family and pursuing a college education. As a teenager, Sheila lived in foster care with her aunt. She knew that if she remained in foster care, she would receive financial assistance that would enable her to go to college. “If my aunt adopted me,” Sheila explained, “I would lose my benefits. I mean adoption is great and everything, but you sacrifice a lot.”
We are delighted that Congress has reduced one barrier that would have forced some youth to choose between education and family, and hope that Congress goes even further to ensure that all former foster youth who are adopted as teens have full access to needed educational support.
Friday, September 21, 2007
It's Time to Support Kinship Caregivers
On September 10, the Center for Law and Social Policy released a response to Senator Gordon Smith's July 26, 2007 Call for Papers to Examine the Needs of Grandparent and Other Relative Caregivers. The paper highlights research that shows the value of kinship care:
• Children living with kinship foster parents are as safe or safer than other children in foster care.
• Children with kinship foster parents experience fewer moves while in care than children with non-relatives.
• Children with kin foster parents are more likely to live with their brothers and sisters.
• If they re-unify with their birth parents, children who live with kin in foster care are less likely to re-enter care than children who had been with non-relative foster parents.
• Children living with kinship foster parents have fewer behavior problems and feel better about being in foster care.
The report identifies obstacles that face kinship foster parents including lack of support they receive, the difficulties they may face making educational and medical decisions while their kin are in foster care, and a lack of information about available services. In conclusion, the report calls for federal support of subsidized guardianship stating:
"Few relative caregivers would ever describe raising their relative's child as providing a pubic service but, in fact, that is exactly what they are doing. ... Subsidized guardianship can support children in legal guardianships—just as adoption subsidies help children in adoptive families—and increase permanency for more children. Federal dollars are already used to provide assistance to foster and adoptive parents to aid them in providing for the children they are raising; it only makes sense that relative caregivers receive similar support." Specifically, the report calls on Congress to support the Kinship Caregiver Support Act.
We strongly agree.
• Children living with kinship foster parents are as safe or safer than other children in foster care.
• Children with kinship foster parents experience fewer moves while in care than children with non-relatives.
• Children with kin foster parents are more likely to live with their brothers and sisters.
• If they re-unify with their birth parents, children who live with kin in foster care are less likely to re-enter care than children who had been with non-relative foster parents.
• Children living with kinship foster parents have fewer behavior problems and feel better about being in foster care.
The report identifies obstacles that face kinship foster parents including lack of support they receive, the difficulties they may face making educational and medical decisions while their kin are in foster care, and a lack of information about available services. In conclusion, the report calls for federal support of subsidized guardianship stating:
"Few relative caregivers would ever describe raising their relative's child as providing a pubic service but, in fact, that is exactly what they are doing. ... Subsidized guardianship can support children in legal guardianships—just as adoption subsidies help children in adoptive families—and increase permanency for more children. Federal dollars are already used to provide assistance to foster and adoptive parents to aid them in providing for the children they are raising; it only makes sense that relative caregivers receive similar support." Specifically, the report calls on Congress to support the Kinship Caregiver Support Act.
We strongly agree.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
More support needed for grandparents and other kinship caregivers
by JJ Hitch, former foster youth, Michigan
My experience with foster care is considered a successful case all the way around. My three younger siblings and I had one kinship placement. We were able to stay together and were adopted by our grandparents. Though my story looks good on paper, in reality it was extremely difficult.
At age 10, I took on the role as the parent to my three younger siblings after my mother suffered a nervous breakdown. I was responsible for getting my siblings up in the morning and making sure they ate breakfast and brushed their teeth. I helped them make their lunches and walked them to school. When I returned home, I cooked dinner, did the dishes, helped my siblings with their homework and cleaned the house. I did this every single day for three years.
As the oldest child, I felt it was my duty to protect my younger siblings from the abuse my father inflicted, so I endured most of it. I blamed myself for not being able to completely protect my siblings. When my youngest sister was six, she packed her toys and clothes and ran away to our grandparents, who lived two blocks from our house. My nine-year-old brother soon followed.
When social services became involved, a caseworker told my family that if my siblings and I couldn’t stay with our grandparents, we would go into foster care and probably get split up. Out of all the tribulations I struggled with, nothing made my heart ache as much as that statement did. At the time, my siblings were like my own children. I did not suffer the things that were inflicted upon me for someone to uproot us from the only loving bond we had to other human beings.
When we moved in with our grandparents, I thought life would be simple. I thought I could finally relax. Reality soon hit us like a ton of bricks. My grandparents were told their house was too small, they had too many animals, they didn’t make enough money, they couldn’t sign fieldtrip permission slips … the list went on. We were forced to move to a bigger house and spent countless sleepless nights bringing the new house up to DHS’s standards before we could move in.
My grandparents’ income couldn’t handle a new mortgage, two car payments, four new mouths to feed, therapy bills for my siblings and me, medication, school clothes and supplies, and adoption costs. To be completely honest, my grandparents just couldn’t afford us.
There was almost no financial assistance available for my grandparents. After falling behind on house and car payments, my grandparents eventually had to file bankruptcy. I carry guilt inside me to this day. There simply wasn’t any help out there for us. Grandparents shouldn’t have to trade the love they have for their grandchildren for financial ruin and despair. Had my grandparents been provided with the supportive services they needed to raise my siblings and me, they would not have had to endure the heartbreak of losing everything to hold onto the ones that mattered most to them.
My experience with foster care is considered a successful case all the way around. My three younger siblings and I had one kinship placement. We were able to stay together and were adopted by our grandparents. Though my story looks good on paper, in reality it was extremely difficult.
At age 10, I took on the role as the parent to my three younger siblings after my mother suffered a nervous breakdown. I was responsible for getting my siblings up in the morning and making sure they ate breakfast and brushed their teeth. I helped them make their lunches and walked them to school. When I returned home, I cooked dinner, did the dishes, helped my siblings with their homework and cleaned the house. I did this every single day for three years.
As the oldest child, I felt it was my duty to protect my younger siblings from the abuse my father inflicted, so I endured most of it. I blamed myself for not being able to completely protect my siblings. When my youngest sister was six, she packed her toys and clothes and ran away to our grandparents, who lived two blocks from our house. My nine-year-old brother soon followed.
When social services became involved, a caseworker told my family that if my siblings and I couldn’t stay with our grandparents, we would go into foster care and probably get split up. Out of all the tribulations I struggled with, nothing made my heart ache as much as that statement did. At the time, my siblings were like my own children. I did not suffer the things that were inflicted upon me for someone to uproot us from the only loving bond we had to other human beings.
When we moved in with our grandparents, I thought life would be simple. I thought I could finally relax. Reality soon hit us like a ton of bricks. My grandparents were told their house was too small, they had too many animals, they didn’t make enough money, they couldn’t sign fieldtrip permission slips … the list went on. We were forced to move to a bigger house and spent countless sleepless nights bringing the new house up to DHS’s standards before we could move in.
My grandparents’ income couldn’t handle a new mortgage, two car payments, four new mouths to feed, therapy bills for my siblings and me, medication, school clothes and supplies, and adoption costs. To be completely honest, my grandparents just couldn’t afford us.
There was almost no financial assistance available for my grandparents. After falling behind on house and car payments, my grandparents eventually had to file bankruptcy. I carry guilt inside me to this day. There simply wasn’t any help out there for us. Grandparents shouldn’t have to trade the love they have for their grandchildren for financial ruin and despair. Had my grandparents been provided with the supportive services they needed to raise my siblings and me, they would not have had to endure the heartbreak of losing everything to hold onto the ones that mattered most to them.
Monday, September 10, 2007
The Oregonian gives national attention to Kinship Caregiver legislation
On August 17, 2007, the Oregonian published an editorial on the Kinship Caregiver Support Act (S.661/HR.2118). NACAC is delighted to see national attention being paid to this important issue. As the Oregonian points out:
“The Kinship Caregiver Support Act would benefit millions of children being raised by their grandparents or other relatives because their parents are unable to care for them. The act would also help an additional 20,000 children leave foster care to join safe, permanent, loving families of relatives who would be too poor to provide this care without government assistance.
For more than a decade, child welfare agencies have become increasingly reliant on relatives as the first and best option when foster care is needed for a child who has been neglected or abused. To address this powerful trend, the new legislation would create a Kinship Navigator Program that helps such caregivers take full advantage of the child welfare system and other support services, and it would give states the option to use federal funds for subsidized guardianship payments to qualifying low-income families.”
JJ's story posted above illustrates the need for additional services and funding for kinship caregivers. As JJ so eloquently states, "Grandparents shouldn’t have to trade the love they have for their grandchildren for financial ruin and despair."
“The Kinship Caregiver Support Act would benefit millions of children being raised by their grandparents or other relatives because their parents are unable to care for them. The act would also help an additional 20,000 children leave foster care to join safe, permanent, loving families of relatives who would be too poor to provide this care without government assistance.
For more than a decade, child welfare agencies have become increasingly reliant on relatives as the first and best option when foster care is needed for a child who has been neglected or abused. To address this powerful trend, the new legislation would create a Kinship Navigator Program that helps such caregivers take full advantage of the child welfare system and other support services, and it would give states the option to use federal funds for subsidized guardianship payments to qualifying low-income families.”
JJ's story posted above illustrates the need for additional services and funding for kinship caregivers. As JJ so eloquently states, "Grandparents shouldn’t have to trade the love they have for their grandchildren for financial ruin and despair."
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Key Legislation to Extend Foster Care Introduced
by Christina Romo, NACAC Program Assistant
On May 24, 2007, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), introduced legislation that would extend foster care for young adults over the age of 18. The Foster Care Continuing Opportunities Act (S. 1512) would extend federal foster care funding for young adults 18 to 21, therefore improving services provided to youth making the transition from childhood to adulthood. As Senator Boxer said in an op-ed, "These are not just statistics – these are the lives of the young people who, without our help, have very limited options."
Each year, about 23,000 foster youth age out of care to a bleak future. No longer covered by foster care services, many have no one to turn to and no place to go. An alarming number of emancipated foster youth end up homeless or in jail. While turning 18 is exciting for most of America’s youth, it is a frightening prospect for those who are about to age out of foster care.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, over 50 percent of young adults age 18 to 24 are currently living at home (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March and Annual Social and Economic Supplements, 2006). With the knowledge that the average young adults in America are leaving home in their mid-20s, it is hard to expect 18-year-olds aging out of foster care to be ready for life on their own.
With the Foster Care Continuing Opportunities Act, Senator Boxer’s hope is that federal IV-E funding will be provided to states so that essential foster care services such as housing, food, and legal services will be provided to youth over the age of 18. Illinois, Arizona, Connecticut, and Florida currently offer support for foster youth over the age of 18, but state and local monies are used to fund continuing foster care support for youth in these states. Boxer proposes that federal IV-E funding should match state and county funds to provide foster care payments and additional costs for foster youth 18 to 21. This will allow youth to voluntarily remain in foster care until the age of 21, thus providing them with the services and support needed to transition more successfully into adulthood.
In the words of Senator Boxer, “We must do more for these young adults who deserve much better.”
On May 24, 2007, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), introduced legislation that would extend foster care for young adults over the age of 18. The Foster Care Continuing Opportunities Act (S. 1512) would extend federal foster care funding for young adults 18 to 21, therefore improving services provided to youth making the transition from childhood to adulthood. As Senator Boxer said in an op-ed, "These are not just statistics – these are the lives of the young people who, without our help, have very limited options."
Each year, about 23,000 foster youth age out of care to a bleak future. No longer covered by foster care services, many have no one to turn to and no place to go. An alarming number of emancipated foster youth end up homeless or in jail. While turning 18 is exciting for most of America’s youth, it is a frightening prospect for those who are about to age out of foster care.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, over 50 percent of young adults age 18 to 24 are currently living at home (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March and Annual Social and Economic Supplements, 2006). With the knowledge that the average young adults in America are leaving home in their mid-20s, it is hard to expect 18-year-olds aging out of foster care to be ready for life on their own.
With the Foster Care Continuing Opportunities Act, Senator Boxer’s hope is that federal IV-E funding will be provided to states so that essential foster care services such as housing, food, and legal services will be provided to youth over the age of 18. Illinois, Arizona, Connecticut, and Florida currently offer support for foster youth over the age of 18, but state and local monies are used to fund continuing foster care support for youth in these states. Boxer proposes that federal IV-E funding should match state and county funds to provide foster care payments and additional costs for foster youth 18 to 21. This will allow youth to voluntarily remain in foster care until the age of 21, thus providing them with the services and support needed to transition more successfully into adulthood.
In the words of Senator Boxer, “We must do more for these young adults who deserve much better.”
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
It’s a Matter of Justice—Tribes Should Have Access to Direct Federal Funding
by Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
On August 2, Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) introduced legislation that will provide Indian tribes with the same direct access to federal foster care and adoption funding that states receive. The Tribal Foster Care and Adoption Act of 2007 (S. 1956) will make it possible for tribes to establish independent foster care and adoption programs, and therefore provide culturally competent services to the many Native children in care in the U.S.
Enacted in 1980, the Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Act did not consider that thousands of American Indian children receive child welfare services through their tribal governments. This oversight has essentially made a class of children ineligible for federal entitlement services simply because of where they live in the United States.
As a recent General Accountability Office report noted: "Native American children ... experience higher rates of representation in foster care than children of other races or ethnicities. Just over 2 percent of children in foster care at the end of fiscal year 2004 were Native Americans, while they represented less than 1 percent of children in the United States."
Currently, to receive federal Title IV-E funding, tribes must negotiate separate contracts with the states in which they are located. These agreements are discretionary on the part of the state and less than half of the tribes in the United States have been able to develop an agreement with their state. The legislation would help children and families in the following ways:
• Tribes would be better able to offer permanency services for the children in their care—just as states do for the children under their guardianship and custody. With the current patchwork of funds that tribes use, continuity of services is almost impossible and it is challenging to achieve the goals of safety, permanence, and well-being for children and youth in their care.
• Many Native families, especially on reservations, have very low incomes and need support to be able to keep their children.
• Currently, states have about 12 sources of federal funds that they use for child welfare services. Tribes only have access to about six. As a result, when foster care caseloads increase, funds must be diverted from prevention and support services.
• Although the Indian Child Welfare Act rightly gave tribes have responsibility for tribal children in foster care, it did not provide the funding necessary to support tribal foster care programs. To currently access federal Title IV-E funding, tribes must develop agreements with their state to receive support to for their children and families. It’s a simple matter of justice that tribes should have access to these entitlement funds to meet the needs of their most vulnerable community members.
As Senator Baucus explains, “This bill provides Tribes with the ability to serve their children directly with culturally appropriate care and understanding. This bill serves some of our most vulnerable children and Congress must stand up for those kids. It is only logical to put Tribal adoption services on equal footing with the states, and I intend to work with my colleagues to do just that.”
The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Pete Domenici (R-NM), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Gordon Smith (R-OR), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), John McCain (R-AZ), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA.).
On August 2, Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) introduced legislation that will provide Indian tribes with the same direct access to federal foster care and adoption funding that states receive. The Tribal Foster Care and Adoption Act of 2007 (S. 1956) will make it possible for tribes to establish independent foster care and adoption programs, and therefore provide culturally competent services to the many Native children in care in the U.S.
Enacted in 1980, the Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Act did not consider that thousands of American Indian children receive child welfare services through their tribal governments. This oversight has essentially made a class of children ineligible for federal entitlement services simply because of where they live in the United States.
As a recent General Accountability Office report noted: "Native American children ... experience higher rates of representation in foster care than children of other races or ethnicities. Just over 2 percent of children in foster care at the end of fiscal year 2004 were Native Americans, while they represented less than 1 percent of children in the United States."
Currently, to receive federal Title IV-E funding, tribes must negotiate separate contracts with the states in which they are located. These agreements are discretionary on the part of the state and less than half of the tribes in the United States have been able to develop an agreement with their state. The legislation would help children and families in the following ways:
• Tribes would be better able to offer permanency services for the children in their care—just as states do for the children under their guardianship and custody. With the current patchwork of funds that tribes use, continuity of services is almost impossible and it is challenging to achieve the goals of safety, permanence, and well-being for children and youth in their care.
• Many Native families, especially on reservations, have very low incomes and need support to be able to keep their children.
• Currently, states have about 12 sources of federal funds that they use for child welfare services. Tribes only have access to about six. As a result, when foster care caseloads increase, funds must be diverted from prevention and support services.
• Although the Indian Child Welfare Act rightly gave tribes have responsibility for tribal children in foster care, it did not provide the funding necessary to support tribal foster care programs. To currently access federal Title IV-E funding, tribes must develop agreements with their state to receive support to for their children and families. It’s a simple matter of justice that tribes should have access to these entitlement funds to meet the needs of their most vulnerable community members.
As Senator Baucus explains, “This bill provides Tribes with the ability to serve their children directly with culturally appropriate care and understanding. This bill serves some of our most vulnerable children and Congress must stand up for those kids. It is only logical to put Tribal adoption services on equal footing with the states, and I intend to work with my colleagues to do just that.”
The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Pete Domenici (R-NM), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Gordon Smith (R-OR), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), John McCain (R-AZ), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA.).
Thursday, August 2, 2007
NACAC Passes New Position Statement
On July 25, NACAC passed the following position statement opposing restrictions that limit the pool of prospective foster and adoptive families.
Eliminating Categorical Restrictions in Foster Care and Adoption
Philosophy
Children and youth should not be denied a loving family due to restrictions on particular types or categories of prospective foster or adoptive parents. Limitations that prevent classes of individuals or groups from becoming foster or adoptive parents hurt children and youth who are in need of loving families. Experience and research have shown that diverse and non-traditional families can successfully parent children and youth in foster care and adoption.
Practice and Policy Recommendations
NACAC opposes rules, legislation, and practices that prevent the consideration of current or prospective foster or adoptive parents based on any of the following characteristics: age, race/ethnic background, gender, family size (including single parent status or number of siblings in the family), marital status, health or disability status, sexual orientation, gender identity, prior professional relationship with the child or youth, or status as foster care or adoption agency employee.
All child-placing agencies should fairly and equitably consider each applicant for certification as a foster or adoptive parent based on the individual’s or family’s ability to care for foster or adopted children and youth who need a family. Specific placement decisions should be made based on whether an individual or family can meet a specific child’s or youth’s needs.
For more information about NACAC's positions on a variety of issues, visit our web site.
Eliminating Categorical Restrictions in Foster Care and Adoption
Philosophy
Children and youth should not be denied a loving family due to restrictions on particular types or categories of prospective foster or adoptive parents. Limitations that prevent classes of individuals or groups from becoming foster or adoptive parents hurt children and youth who are in need of loving families. Experience and research have shown that diverse and non-traditional families can successfully parent children and youth in foster care and adoption.
Practice and Policy Recommendations
NACAC opposes rules, legislation, and practices that prevent the consideration of current or prospective foster or adoptive parents based on any of the following characteristics: age, race/ethnic background, gender, family size (including single parent status or number of siblings in the family), marital status, health or disability status, sexual orientation, gender identity, prior professional relationship with the child or youth, or status as foster care or adoption agency employee.
All child-placing agencies should fairly and equitably consider each applicant for certification as a foster or adoptive parent based on the individual’s or family’s ability to care for foster or adopted children and youth who need a family. Specific placement decisions should be made based on whether an individual or family can meet a specific child’s or youth’s needs.
For more information about NACAC's positions on a variety of issues, visit our web site.
More Support Needed for Young Mothers in Care
by Sabra Jackson, New York
In 2004, my two children, ages 10 years and 3years, were removed from my home and placed in foster care. I was one of the lucky ones: they were returned to me in 2005 and to date my children have made successful transitions to reunification.
I am a Parent Organizer for New York City’s Child Welfare Organizing Project, a parent advocacy organization that helps parents who are involved with the child welfare system. As a CWOP organizer, I help other parents learn how to become effective advocates and I advocate for child welfare reform.
Thankfully, my own children are able to live with me again and I can give them the stable and nurturing life they deserve. Unfortunately, this is not true for many young people in care. Some of the most frightening stories I hear are those of young foster girls becoming mothers. These girls, who are already victimized due to the abuse or neglect they received in their own homes, are being victimized again when their children are removed from them. The children are not being removed because they are being abused or neglected—they are being removed solely because these girls are in state custody. To add insult to injury, these young women are often denied a reasonable chance of ever getting their children back.
Young girls and boys who become parents while in foster care should be given a chance to be good parents to their children. The system should help them break the cycle of abuse and neglect. They should be supported with education, jobs, and housing, and should get guidance on how to prevent pregnancies in the first place.
If Congress wants to help these young people, it should provide enough funding to prevent the need to break families apart in the first place. When children do need to enter foster care, funding has to go to help parents get the services they need so that families do not have to be separated for long. And when parents can’t care for their children, we should permanently connect the children with relatives or other adults who can give them the love they need. In addition, teen pregnancy prevention programs should be in place to educate young people; transition services should help them learn how to manage their money and stay in school; and funding should be available to help them become educated and employed.
I’m lucky that my children were able to come back home and I can watch them grow into young adults under my own roof. They are lucky too. We need to do more for those young people who are not so lucky.
In 2004, my two children, ages 10 years and 3years, were removed from my home and placed in foster care. I was one of the lucky ones: they were returned to me in 2005 and to date my children have made successful transitions to reunification.
I am a Parent Organizer for New York City’s Child Welfare Organizing Project, a parent advocacy organization that helps parents who are involved with the child welfare system. As a CWOP organizer, I help other parents learn how to become effective advocates and I advocate for child welfare reform.
Thankfully, my own children are able to live with me again and I can give them the stable and nurturing life they deserve. Unfortunately, this is not true for many young people in care. Some of the most frightening stories I hear are those of young foster girls becoming mothers. These girls, who are already victimized due to the abuse or neglect they received in their own homes, are being victimized again when their children are removed from them. The children are not being removed because they are being abused or neglected—they are being removed solely because these girls are in state custody. To add insult to injury, these young women are often denied a reasonable chance of ever getting their children back.
Young girls and boys who become parents while in foster care should be given a chance to be good parents to their children. The system should help them break the cycle of abuse and neglect. They should be supported with education, jobs, and housing, and should get guidance on how to prevent pregnancies in the first place.
If Congress wants to help these young people, it should provide enough funding to prevent the need to break families apart in the first place. When children do need to enter foster care, funding has to go to help parents get the services they need so that families do not have to be separated for long. And when parents can’t care for their children, we should permanently connect the children with relatives or other adults who can give them the love they need. In addition, teen pregnancy prevention programs should be in place to educate young people; transition services should help them learn how to manage their money and stay in school; and funding should be available to help them become educated and employed.
I’m lucky that my children were able to come back home and I can watch them grow into young adults under my own roof. They are lucky too. We need to do more for those young people who are not so lucky.
Senate Passes Key Legislation/Action Needed in House
On July 20, the U.S. Senate passed the Higher Education Access Act of 2007 (H.R. 2669) with an amendment that would allow foster youth adopted after age 10 to maintain their financial aid eligibility as if they remained in foster care, regardless of their adoptive parents’ income. Originally part of the Fostering Adoption to Further Student Achievement Act co-sponsored by Senators Norm Coleman and Mary Landrieu, the legislation would remove a barrier that currently forces some youth to choose between adoption and higher education. Currently youth who age out of care qualify for virtually all loans and grants, while those who are adopted must factor in their parents’ income, even though these parents have not had the opportunity to save for college.
NACAC has met many former foster youth who had to make the terrible choice between having a permanent family and pursuing a college education. As a teenager, Sheila lived in foster care with her aunt. She knew that if she remained in foster care, she would receive financial assistance that would enable her to go to college. “I’m smart and very good with money,” Sheila explains. “If my aunt adopted me, I would lose my benefits. I mean adoption is great and everything, but you sacrifice a lot. It is crazy the way the system works.”
The U.S. House of Representatives’ version of the bill does not include this provision, and if your representative is on the Committee on Education and Labor (see list below), we urge you to ask him or her to support inclusion of the Senate’s FAFSA provision during reconciliation of the House and Senate versions of this legislation. (The list of those members who will actually be involved in reconciliation has not yet been finalized, but we would like you to act now since action may happen before Congress recesses next week.)
Committee on Education and Labor
Democrats
George Miller, Chairman
Rush D. Holt
Dave Loebsack
Joe Courtney
Republicans
Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, Ranking Member
The best way to reach your representative is to call the main Congressional switchboard at 202-224-3121. To find your Representative’s direct address, phone number, or e-mail, visit http://www.house.gov/writerep.
NACAC has met many former foster youth who had to make the terrible choice between having a permanent family and pursuing a college education. As a teenager, Sheila lived in foster care with her aunt. She knew that if she remained in foster care, she would receive financial assistance that would enable her to go to college. “I’m smart and very good with money,” Sheila explains. “If my aunt adopted me, I would lose my benefits. I mean adoption is great and everything, but you sacrifice a lot. It is crazy the way the system works.”
The U.S. House of Representatives’ version of the bill does not include this provision, and if your representative is on the Committee on Education and Labor (see list below), we urge you to ask him or her to support inclusion of the Senate’s FAFSA provision during reconciliation of the House and Senate versions of this legislation. (The list of those members who will actually be involved in reconciliation has not yet been finalized, but we would like you to act now since action may happen before Congress recesses next week.)
Committee on Education and Labor
Democrats
George Miller, Chairman
Rush D. Holt
Dave Loebsack
Joe Courtney
Republicans
Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, Ranking Member
The best way to reach your representative is to call the main Congressional switchboard at 202-224-3121. To find your Representative’s direct address, phone number, or e-mail, visit http://www.house.gov/writerep.
Action Needed on Guardianship Legislation
A new report from the Government Accountability Office confirms that children of color are over-represented in care and highlights that the federal government needs to act to address this disparity.
As the leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee note in a press release, the report recommends subsidized guardianship as one solution to the problem since so many foster children of color are in the care of relatives. Congressman Charles Rangel explains, “Every foster child dreams of a permanent home. For far too many African American children, this is a dream deferred. We need to work to reduce barriers to permanency for all foster children, but such an effort is particularly necessary for Black children. The GAO report highlights several reforms that might make a positive difference, including providing federal assistance for relatives providing permanent homes for foster children."
The time for action is now. States currently get federal support for foster care and adoption but not for guardianship. Subsidized guardianship is an important permanency option because it allows children and youth to have a permanent, legal family when termination of parental rights is not possible or is not the right option for a particular family.
About 20,000 children have lived for a year or more with relatives in foster care, but they cannot leave the system because they do not have any other options. A court has ruled that reunification with the parents or adoption is not feasible. The caregivers often cannot afford to give up the financial assistance that helps them meet these children’s needs. Subsidized guardianship would provide them with permanence now!
NACAC is asking you to contact your U.S. senators and your representative in support of subsidized guardianship. There are two pending bills that would make subsidized guardianship a reality, and provide other necessary support to kinship caregivers. Please contact your represehttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifntatives today to ask them to sign on as co-sponsors of the Kinship Caregiver Support Act (Senate Bill 661 or House Resolution 2188).
Take Action Today!
CALL: A call is best, and all members of Congress can be reached by calling 202-224-3121.
WRITE: Mailing addresses for senators are: The Honorable [Senator’s name], U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510. For representatives, address your letter to: The Honorable [Representative’s name], U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
To find your Representative’s direct address, phone number, or e-mail, visit http://www.house.gov/writerep. For Senators, go to http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.
As the leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee note in a press release, the report recommends subsidized guardianship as one solution to the problem since so many foster children of color are in the care of relatives. Congressman Charles Rangel explains, “Every foster child dreams of a permanent home. For far too many African American children, this is a dream deferred. We need to work to reduce barriers to permanency for all foster children, but such an effort is particularly necessary for Black children. The GAO report highlights several reforms that might make a positive difference, including providing federal assistance for relatives providing permanent homes for foster children."
The time for action is now. States currently get federal support for foster care and adoption but not for guardianship. Subsidized guardianship is an important permanency option because it allows children and youth to have a permanent, legal family when termination of parental rights is not possible or is not the right option for a particular family.
About 20,000 children have lived for a year or more with relatives in foster care, but they cannot leave the system because they do not have any other options. A court has ruled that reunification with the parents or adoption is not feasible. The caregivers often cannot afford to give up the financial assistance that helps them meet these children’s needs. Subsidized guardianship would provide them with permanence now!
NACAC is asking you to contact your U.S. senators and your representative in support of subsidized guardianship. There are two pending bills that would make subsidized guardianship a reality, and provide other necessary support to kinship caregivers. Please contact your represehttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifntatives today to ask them to sign on as co-sponsors of the Kinship Caregiver Support Act (Senate Bill 661 or House Resolution 2188).
Take Action Today!
CALL: A call is best, and all members of Congress can be reached by calling 202-224-3121.
WRITE: Mailing addresses for senators are: The Honorable [Senator’s name], U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 20510. For representatives, address your letter to: The Honorable [Representative’s name], U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
To find your Representative’s direct address, phone number, or e-mail, visit http://www.house.gov/writerep. For Senators, go to http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.
Monday, July 9, 2007
Hearing Announced on Aging Out
The House Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, announced hearings on youth who age out of foster care. The hearing will take place on Thursday, July 12, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in room B-318 Rayburn House Office Building, and will feature the testimony of many youth who left foster care with no family to call their own.
In announcing the hearing, Chairman McDermott (D-WA) stated, “When most children reach the age of 18, their parents continue to support and help them during their transition into adulthood. As the de-facto parents of foster children, we should do no less. We need to evaluate whether we are meeting that obligation, or whether we are simply showing these kids the door without sufficient support, resources and skills to succeed.”
NACAC is pleased to see this hearing take place and delighted that youth will be heard from directly. We encourage anyone who is interested in submitting written testimony to do so, by the deadline of August 2.
In announcing the hearing, Chairman McDermott (D-WA) stated, “When most children reach the age of 18, their parents continue to support and help them during their transition into adulthood. As the de-facto parents of foster children, we should do no less. We need to evaluate whether we are meeting that obligation, or whether we are simply showing these kids the door without sufficient support, resources and skills to succeed.”
NACAC is pleased to see this hearing take place and delighted that youth will be heard from directly. We encourage anyone who is interested in submitting written testimony to do so, by the deadline of August 2.
Key Foster Care Reform Legislation Announced
Senators Norm Coleman (R-MN) and Mary Landrieu (D-LA) introduced the Fostering Adoption to Further Student Achievement Act (S. 1488) on May 24. This legislation would enable foster youth adopted after their 13th birthday to remain eligible for the same federal financial aid they would have received if they had remained in foster care. As Senator Coleman explained when he first sponsored the legislation in 2005, “Right now, if a teenager is adopted, he or she can lose out on some or all college financial aid depending on his or her adopted parents' financial situation, but if the teen stays in the system and 'ages-out' to 18 without being adopted, he or she is probably eligible for all available loans and grants given their personal financial situation…. The benefits of family and education should go hand in hand, not stand in opposition to each other. This bill would ensure that foster children don’t have to make an impossible choice between a family or an education.”
NACAC has met many former foster youth who had to make the terrible choice between having a permanent family and pursuing a college education. As a teenager, Sheila lived in foster care with her aunt. She knew that if she remained in foster care, she would receive financial assistance that would enable her to go to college. “I’m smart and very good with money,” Sheila explains. “If my aunt adopted me, I would lose my benefits. I mean adoption is great and everything, but you sacrifice a lot. It is crazy the way the system works.”
Passage of the Fostering Adoption to Further Student Achievement Act would ensure that youth like Sheila do not have to make these heart-wrenching decisions.
NACAC has met many former foster youth who had to make the terrible choice between having a permanent family and pursuing a college education. As a teenager, Sheila lived in foster care with her aunt. She knew that if she remained in foster care, she would receive financial assistance that would enable her to go to college. “I’m smart and very good with money,” Sheila explains. “If my aunt adopted me, I would lose my benefits. I mean adoption is great and everything, but you sacrifice a lot. It is crazy the way the system works.”
Passage of the Fostering Adoption to Further Student Achievement Act would ensure that youth like Sheila do not have to make these heart-wrenching decisions.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Senator Rockefeller Introduces Important Adoption Legislation
by Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
NACAC was delighted to see that Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) recently re-introduced the Adoption Equality Act, which would make all children with special needs eligible for federal adoption assistance. By removing the link between a child's eligibility for adoption assistance from the child's biological parent's income, the legislation makes it easier for children to receive the support they need after they leave foster care to a permanent, loving adoptive family.
The legislation would also allow states flexibility in developing criteria for determining whether a child's continuation in the home would be contrary to the safety or welfare of the child. States would also be required to re-invest the money saved as a result of this bill into their state child abuse and neglect programs. NACAC hopes to see the legislation move forward this year to provide needed support to vulnerable children and their new families.
NACAC was delighted to see that Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) recently re-introduced the Adoption Equality Act, which would make all children with special needs eligible for federal adoption assistance. By removing the link between a child's eligibility for adoption assistance from the child's biological parent's income, the legislation makes it easier for children to receive the support they need after they leave foster care to a permanent, loving adoptive family.
The legislation would also allow states flexibility in developing criteria for determining whether a child's continuation in the home would be contrary to the safety or welfare of the child. States would also be required to re-invest the money saved as a result of this bill into their state child abuse and neglect programs. NACAC hopes to see the legislation move forward this year to provide needed support to vulnerable children and their new families.
Movement to Reform Federal Finanacing Grows
Last month, a coalition of child welfare organizations issued a call for the 110th Congress to reform federal child welfare financing to better serve children and families. In its announcement, the Partnership to Protect Children and Strengthen Families highlighted the need for a system that protects children by:
• supporting the full range of services necessary to prevent child abuse and neglect;
• ensuring that all children who have been abused and neglected have the services and supports they need to heal; and
• guaranteeing that the half a million children in foster care get the help they need to thrive and to return to their families or to live permanently with adoptive families or legal guardians.
The partnership is a coalition of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, the American Public Human Services Association, Catholic Charities USA, the Center for Law and Social Policy, the Child Welfare League of America, the Children's Defense Fund, the National Child Abuse Coalition, and Voices for America's Children. The recommendations call for investing in the entire continuum of services for children and families, supporting all children (not just poor children) who have been abused and neglected, providing post-permanency support, and much more.
• supporting the full range of services necessary to prevent child abuse and neglect;
• ensuring that all children who have been abused and neglected have the services and supports they need to heal; and
• guaranteeing that the half a million children in foster care get the help they need to thrive and to return to their families or to live permanently with adoptive families or legal guardians.
The partnership is a coalition of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, the American Public Human Services Association, Catholic Charities USA, the Center for Law and Social Policy, the Child Welfare League of America, the Children's Defense Fund, the National Child Abuse Coalition, and Voices for America's Children. The recommendations call for investing in the entire continuum of services for children and families, supporting all children (not just poor children) who have been abused and neglected, providing post-permanency support, and much more.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Youth Voices Can and Should Be Heard
The Public Children Services Association of Ohio (PCSAO) recently launched the My Story Project, an opportunity for foster youth to create photo and video expressions of what foster care reform would mean in their lives.
Why should youth participate? Because too many kids are spending too many years in foster care, and changes need to be made. Many are waiting to go home; others are waiting for a permanent family. Current or former foster youth know this better than anyone.
PCSAO will be creating a Web site to showcase the resulting projects, and will feature them in a film festival in September.
All youth who participate by submitting their stories by July 1, 2007, will receive a My Story Project T-Shirt, be entered into a drawing to win an iPod Nano, and have a chance to advocate on behalf of other youth. We encourage you to tell any current or former foster youth you know about this exciting opportunity to raise their voices in a call for reform.
Why should youth participate? Because too many kids are spending too many years in foster care, and changes need to be made. Many are waiting to go home; others are waiting for a permanent family. Current or former foster youth know this better than anyone.
PCSAO will be creating a Web site to showcase the resulting projects, and will feature them in a film festival in September.
All youth who participate by submitting their stories by July 1, 2007, will receive a My Story Project T-Shirt, be entered into a drawing to win an iPod Nano, and have a chance to advocate on behalf of other youth. We encourage you to tell any current or former foster youth you know about this exciting opportunity to raise their voices in a call for reform.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Subsidized Guardianship Legislation Introduced in House
By Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
On May 10, 2007, Congressman Danny Davis (D-IL) and Congressman Tim Johnson (R-IL) introduced H.R. 2188, the Kinship Caregiver Support Act to mark the 10th anniversary of Illinois’ highly successful subsidized guardianship program. As Davis explained, this bill would provide kinship caregivers with the necessary resources to meet their children’s needs.
Currently federal financial assistance is available only to foster and adoptive families, with only a few states having a waiver that enables them to receive federal support for guardianship families. In his statement, Davis noted:
“Adoption is not a viable option for many children to exit foster care. For example, courts explicitly rule out this permanency option for approximately 20,000 children in relative care each year. Moreover, adoption is not equally availed by families of all races and ethnicities, especially those in African-American and Native-American communities. Thus, subsidized guardianship is an important path to permanency for many abused and neglected children."
In addition to federally funding subsidized guardianship, the bill would:
• implement additional supports for kinship caregivers, such as establishing informational navigator programs to assist grandparents and relatives in accessing appropriate services and supports
• allow states to establish separate licensing standards for relative foster parents and non-relative foster parents and require state agencies to provide prompt notice to all adult relatives when children are removed from parental custody
• expand eligibility for the Foster Care Independence Program so that education and training vouchers as well as independent living services are available to young people who exit foster care after age 14 to guardianship or adoption
Congressman Johnson, in a press statement, explained that the Kinship Caregiver Support Act serves not only meets the aims of family cohesiveness but long-range savings in tax dollars as well: “We are now in effect penalizing grandparents who have the heart and compassion to raise their own but not always adequate means,” Rep. Johnson said. “We can achieve family unity and all the blessings that confers along with saving resources over the long-term. This is a common-sense, bipartisan proposal that deserves to become law.”
This bill is a companion to Senate bill 661 of the same name, introduced by Senators Clinton (D-NY) and Snowe (R-ME).
On May 10, 2007, Congressman Danny Davis (D-IL) and Congressman Tim Johnson (R-IL) introduced H.R. 2188, the Kinship Caregiver Support Act to mark the 10th anniversary of Illinois’ highly successful subsidized guardianship program. As Davis explained, this bill would provide kinship caregivers with the necessary resources to meet their children’s needs.
Currently federal financial assistance is available only to foster and adoptive families, with only a few states having a waiver that enables them to receive federal support for guardianship families. In his statement, Davis noted:
“Adoption is not a viable option for many children to exit foster care. For example, courts explicitly rule out this permanency option for approximately 20,000 children in relative care each year. Moreover, adoption is not equally availed by families of all races and ethnicities, especially those in African-American and Native-American communities. Thus, subsidized guardianship is an important path to permanency for many abused and neglected children."
In addition to federally funding subsidized guardianship, the bill would:
• implement additional supports for kinship caregivers, such as establishing informational navigator programs to assist grandparents and relatives in accessing appropriate services and supports
• allow states to establish separate licensing standards for relative foster parents and non-relative foster parents and require state agencies to provide prompt notice to all adult relatives when children are removed from parental custody
• expand eligibility for the Foster Care Independence Program so that education and training vouchers as well as independent living services are available to young people who exit foster care after age 14 to guardianship or adoption
Congressman Johnson, in a press statement, explained that the Kinship Caregiver Support Act serves not only meets the aims of family cohesiveness but long-range savings in tax dollars as well: “We are now in effect penalizing grandparents who have the heart and compassion to raise their own but not always adequate means,” Rep. Johnson said. “We can achieve family unity and all the blessings that confers along with saving resources over the long-term. This is a common-sense, bipartisan proposal that deserves to become law.”
This bill is a companion to Senate bill 661 of the same name, introduced by Senators Clinton (D-NY) and Snowe (R-ME).
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Bans on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Parents Are Bad for Kids and the Nation
By Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
The Urban Institute recently released Adoption and Foster Care by Lesbian and Gay Parents in the United States, which includes the following key findings:
• An estimated 2 million GLB individuals are interested in adopting.
• An estimated 65,000 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.
• An estimated 14,000 foster children are living with lesbian or gay parents.
The report also notes that a national ban on GLB foster care would cost the country at least $87 million to $130 million, with costs to individual states ranging from $100,000 to $27 million.
More importantly, the report notes that if a national ban were implemented from 9,000 to 14,000 children would be displaced, severing critical bonds with approved, caring parents and harming the children. Moves in foster care have been shown to be particularly damaging to children, affecting their education, mental health, behavior, and more.
NACAC opposes bans on gay and lesbian foster and adoptive parenting, and this report makes clear that such bans are bad for children and youth. Children and youth in foster care need families to help them grow and thrive. We should not exclude an entire group of parents who can offer them a safe, stable, loving home.
The Urban Institute recently released Adoption and Foster Care by Lesbian and Gay Parents in the United States, which includes the following key findings:
• An estimated 2 million GLB individuals are interested in adopting.
• An estimated 65,000 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.
• An estimated 14,000 foster children are living with lesbian or gay parents.
The report also notes that a national ban on GLB foster care would cost the country at least $87 million to $130 million, with costs to individual states ranging from $100,000 to $27 million.
More importantly, the report notes that if a national ban were implemented from 9,000 to 14,000 children would be displaced, severing critical bonds with approved, caring parents and harming the children. Moves in foster care have been shown to be particularly damaging to children, affecting their education, mental health, behavior, and more.
NACAC opposes bans on gay and lesbian foster and adoptive parenting, and this report makes clear that such bans are bad for children and youth. Children and youth in foster care need families to help them grow and thrive. We should not exclude an entire group of parents who can offer them a safe, stable, loving home.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
We Must Do More for Foster Children
By William A. Thorne, Jr., Judge, Utah Court of Appeals; Member, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care
There are half a million kids in this country in foster care today. There are 800,000 kids who will be in foster care this year. That is about the population that was evacuated from New Orleans before Katrina. And we were ready to move mountains to help those people—justifiably—they needed help. And yet people don’t seem to be getting upset that we have half a million kids who also need help.
I issue a challenge to all of you: If these kids were your children, would we be satisfied with what we do for them and on their behalf?
I can’t tell you how angry I am when I hear or read stories like Jessica’s below. When we take kids away from their families, we ought to do better for them. Nobody should have to live the life that Jessica went through. That’s why I joined the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care hoping to make a difference.
Enough is enough. More than 20,000 kids are going to age out of the system this year. 20,000 Jessicas. One expert came to us at the Commission and told us that of the 20,000 who age out, 60 percent will be homeless, in jail, or dead in two years. Jessica is a remarkable success and she has my admiration for having gotten where she is today.
I wouldn’t have been able to get where Jessica has without a family behind me. I listen to youth like Jessica, and they ask, “Where do I have to go for Thanksgiving?” “Where in the world is there a Christmas present for me under a tree?” “Who will be a grandparent to my children?”
We send more than 20,000 of these youth out into the world every year, and we have half a million whom we subject to this kind of risk. In spite of these failures, successes are possible. One of the things the Pew Commission talked about was how to reorient the resources so that we achieve better outcomes. We need to spend money smarter so that we do better by children. The Pew Commission recommendations suggest ways to do just that.
These aren’t your kids over here, or your kids over there—these are our kids. And we owe them the same thing we owe our own children.
There are half a million kids in this country in foster care today. There are 800,000 kids who will be in foster care this year. That is about the population that was evacuated from New Orleans before Katrina. And we were ready to move mountains to help those people—justifiably—they needed help. And yet people don’t seem to be getting upset that we have half a million kids who also need help.
I issue a challenge to all of you: If these kids were your children, would we be satisfied with what we do for them and on their behalf?
I can’t tell you how angry I am when I hear or read stories like Jessica’s below. When we take kids away from their families, we ought to do better for them. Nobody should have to live the life that Jessica went through. That’s why I joined the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care hoping to make a difference.
Enough is enough. More than 20,000 kids are going to age out of the system this year. 20,000 Jessicas. One expert came to us at the Commission and told us that of the 20,000 who age out, 60 percent will be homeless, in jail, or dead in two years. Jessica is a remarkable success and she has my admiration for having gotten where she is today.
I wouldn’t have been able to get where Jessica has without a family behind me. I listen to youth like Jessica, and they ask, “Where do I have to go for Thanksgiving?” “Where in the world is there a Christmas present for me under a tree?” “Who will be a grandparent to my children?”
We send more than 20,000 of these youth out into the world every year, and we have half a million whom we subject to this kind of risk. In spite of these failures, successes are possible. One of the things the Pew Commission talked about was how to reorient the resources so that we achieve better outcomes. We need to spend money smarter so that we do better by children. The Pew Commission recommendations suggest ways to do just that.
These aren’t your kids over here, or your kids over there—these are our kids. And we owe them the same thing we owe our own children.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Permanent Families Matter
By Jessica Delgado, former foster youth, Pennsylvania
My early life was filled with chaos and abuse due to my mother’s drug abuse. We never had clothes. We had holes in our shoes and lice in our hair. We went to school and people would make fun of us. Caseworkers would come and check on my brothers and sisters and me and we would lie. Kids get scared when they think they might be taken away from their mom. At least we know what it is like with our mom.
At 13, I thought "I can’t live like this" and I ran away. Eventually I had to call social services about my family’s situation and we all entered foster care when I was 15. I spent some time with a foster family but ended up in a group home. When I turned 18 I was released from the group home with no permanent place to go.
Immediately after being released from the system my therapy was discontinued. I was left to get a job and take care of myself. I had not been prepared to deal with the outside world alone. I had no one to rely upon. I was afraid of what path my life was about to take. Wondering how was I going to make it on my own led me into a depression. Let me give credit to a counselor that I had in the group—she did temporarily provide me with a place in her home. Do to my emotional problems, I managed to disrupt that relationship.
One of lowest point in my life was when I turned 19. My depression had taken its toll on me, which then led me to alcohol. As far as a family, it was the local pub. Every day and every single chance I got I went there and drank. Holidays, I was at the pub. Along with drinking, tattoos and piercings were the out for my unhappiness. I was going downhill really fast. Eventually I got pregnant. What in the world was I going to do with a child? Barely knowing the father of my child just added more stress to my life.
After having my daughter Angelina and struggling for a few years, I’ve finally found a family in Angelina’s paternal grandparents. Phyllis and Derrick are like parents to me. They have accepted me as family. They provided Nina and I with so much support. Derrick helped me with my finances, and Phyllis still listens to me, encourages me to move on in a better direction of my life. I've learned a lot about living a more balanced life from Phyllis and a few other strong women. I have expressed to them that without their love, support, and encouragement, my life would have been a bitter story.
Thankfully, even with all of the struggles and abuse, my life has managed to turn around for the better. And now instead of alcohol being my out, speaking out about it gives me a more fulfilling and satisfying perception on life.
Through all of this, I realize that permanency is so important, and is probably one of the main factors of what makes someone feel secure and loved. I still can't understand why providing me with a family or support system was not a priority with social services during my time with them. Why do we seem to think that these children or teenagers who have been neglected, abused, or abandoned are ready for the real world just because of they are 18? Whether it's 5, 10,or 18 years of age, love, family, consistency, security, and patience are all an important part in shaping the type of people we will grow up to be.
My early life was filled with chaos and abuse due to my mother’s drug abuse. We never had clothes. We had holes in our shoes and lice in our hair. We went to school and people would make fun of us. Caseworkers would come and check on my brothers and sisters and me and we would lie. Kids get scared when they think they might be taken away from their mom. At least we know what it is like with our mom.
At 13, I thought "I can’t live like this" and I ran away. Eventually I had to call social services about my family’s situation and we all entered foster care when I was 15. I spent some time with a foster family but ended up in a group home. When I turned 18 I was released from the group home with no permanent place to go.
Immediately after being released from the system my therapy was discontinued. I was left to get a job and take care of myself. I had not been prepared to deal with the outside world alone. I had no one to rely upon. I was afraid of what path my life was about to take. Wondering how was I going to make it on my own led me into a depression. Let me give credit to a counselor that I had in the group—she did temporarily provide me with a place in her home. Do to my emotional problems, I managed to disrupt that relationship.
One of lowest point in my life was when I turned 19. My depression had taken its toll on me, which then led me to alcohol. As far as a family, it was the local pub. Every day and every single chance I got I went there and drank. Holidays, I was at the pub. Along with drinking, tattoos and piercings were the out for my unhappiness. I was going downhill really fast. Eventually I got pregnant. What in the world was I going to do with a child? Barely knowing the father of my child just added more stress to my life.
After having my daughter Angelina and struggling for a few years, I’ve finally found a family in Angelina’s paternal grandparents. Phyllis and Derrick are like parents to me. They have accepted me as family. They provided Nina and I with so much support. Derrick helped me with my finances, and Phyllis still listens to me, encourages me to move on in a better direction of my life. I've learned a lot about living a more balanced life from Phyllis and a few other strong women. I have expressed to them that without their love, support, and encouragement, my life would have been a bitter story.
Thankfully, even with all of the struggles and abuse, my life has managed to turn around for the better. And now instead of alcohol being my out, speaking out about it gives me a more fulfilling and satisfying perception on life.
Through all of this, I realize that permanency is so important, and is probably one of the main factors of what makes someone feel secure and loved. I still can't understand why providing me with a family or support system was not a priority with social services during my time with them. Why do we seem to think that these children or teenagers who have been neglected, abused, or abandoned are ready for the real world just because of they are 18? Whether it's 5, 10,or 18 years of age, love, family, consistency, security, and patience are all an important part in shaping the type of people we will grow up to be.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Children and Youth Like Me and My Siblings Need Families and Stability
By Michael Drake, former foster youth, West Virginia
In 1998, when I was 12, the state decided that my sister and brothers and I couldn’t safely stay with our mother. After a short stay at a shelter, we were placed together in a foster family. When they decided to stop doing foster care, we were sent to another shelter.
I asked my workers to find my aunt, uncle, or other relatives, but no one did. I was so frustrated and upset, that I ran away. They wanted to do a psychological evaluation on me due to the fact that I had been running away and showing behavior that they deemed was abnormal. So I was placed in a mental health facility in Ohio. In the three months that I was there, they said that I really didn’t have any mental health issues.
After I left there, my siblings and I were placed with a foster family. About a week later our mother gave up her rights to me and my siblings. We stayed with that foster family for about a year, which was the most permanent placement I ever had in foster care.
Between 14 and 18, I moved more than 15 times, bouncing between shelters, group care facilities, and foster families. I did not live with my brothers and sister and rarely got to spend time with them. I tried to remind them that we were still a family, but it was hard.
I wish the state had done more to help our mom keep the family together. If the state had invested the same money they spent putting us in all those placements into weekly visits with our mother and had given her skill lessons, it might not have escalated to us needing to go into permanent foster care.
At 18, I “aged out” of foster care without any family at all. So did my brother Randy. My sister was adopted and my youngest brother remains in foster care. In my opinion, foster care destroyed our whole sense of family in the end. We can’t sit down together and feel like we are siblings. It becomes more like, “Oh, I know that person” but it’s not like, “Oh, he’s my brother.”
In 1998, when I was 12, the state decided that my sister and brothers and I couldn’t safely stay with our mother. After a short stay at a shelter, we were placed together in a foster family. When they decided to stop doing foster care, we were sent to another shelter.
I asked my workers to find my aunt, uncle, or other relatives, but no one did. I was so frustrated and upset, that I ran away. They wanted to do a psychological evaluation on me due to the fact that I had been running away and showing behavior that they deemed was abnormal. So I was placed in a mental health facility in Ohio. In the three months that I was there, they said that I really didn’t have any mental health issues.
After I left there, my siblings and I were placed with a foster family. About a week later our mother gave up her rights to me and my siblings. We stayed with that foster family for about a year, which was the most permanent placement I ever had in foster care.
Between 14 and 18, I moved more than 15 times, bouncing between shelters, group care facilities, and foster families. I did not live with my brothers and sister and rarely got to spend time with them. I tried to remind them that we were still a family, but it was hard.
I wish the state had done more to help our mom keep the family together. If the state had invested the same money they spent putting us in all those placements into weekly visits with our mother and had given her skill lessons, it might not have escalated to us needing to go into permanent foster care.
At 18, I “aged out” of foster care without any family at all. So did my brother Randy. My sister was adopted and my youngest brother remains in foster care. In my opinion, foster care destroyed our whole sense of family in the end. We can’t sit down together and feel like we are siblings. It becomes more like, “Oh, I know that person” but it’s not like, “Oh, he’s my brother.”
Monday, May 7, 2007
Facilitated Openness Can Benefit Children Adopted from Care
By Diane Riggs, NACAC communications specialist
When my parents adopted in the early ’60s, adoption was not something we shared openly. Today, most adoptive parents don’t keep such secrets and realize how important past ties are to their children. Given the proven value of openness, we must consider how safe contact with birth family members can benefit children adopted from care.
Facilitated contact, though difficult at times, can help children:
• The promise of birth family contact can help some youth accept adoption. A recent study found that before agreeing to an adoption plan, “adolescents needed to be told early that adoption would not preclude contact with their birth families.”
• Contact with past caregivers can ease the adoption transition and keep children from worrying about whether they are okay.
• By promoting contact with important figures from children’s past, adoptive parents show respect for their children.
• Helping children face family realities is better than allowing them to invent nightmares.
• Keeping in touch can ease worries and promote information exchange.
• Contact can help youth reconcile disparate pieces of their identity.
When pondering contact, parents must put their children’s well-being first, and never force contact if the children are unwilling. Barb Fischer, an adoptive, foster, and kinship parent in Minnesota, encourages contact only after she confirms that it is in her child’s best interest.
After agreeing on contact, families must set rules about the amount/kind of contact, supervision needed, and how to avoid bad situations. Parents must also guide children through feelings and behaviors that may arise, and limit or stop contact that proves harmful.
Parents may find it hard to reach out to their child’s first family. Contact can, however, help children and teens gain a better sense of who they are and how they fit in their adoptive family.
When my parents adopted in the early ’60s, adoption was not something we shared openly. Today, most adoptive parents don’t keep such secrets and realize how important past ties are to their children. Given the proven value of openness, we must consider how safe contact with birth family members can benefit children adopted from care.
Facilitated contact, though difficult at times, can help children:
• The promise of birth family contact can help some youth accept adoption. A recent study found that before agreeing to an adoption plan, “adolescents needed to be told early that adoption would not preclude contact with their birth families.”
• Contact with past caregivers can ease the adoption transition and keep children from worrying about whether they are okay.
• By promoting contact with important figures from children’s past, adoptive parents show respect for their children.
• Helping children face family realities is better than allowing them to invent nightmares.
• Keeping in touch can ease worries and promote information exchange.
• Contact can help youth reconcile disparate pieces of their identity.
When pondering contact, parents must put their children’s well-being first, and never force contact if the children are unwilling. Barb Fischer, an adoptive, foster, and kinship parent in Minnesota, encourages contact only after she confirms that it is in her child’s best interest.
After agreeing on contact, families must set rules about the amount/kind of contact, supervision needed, and how to avoid bad situations. Parents must also guide children through feelings and behaviors that may arise, and limit or stop contact that proves harmful.
Parents may find it hard to reach out to their child’s first family. Contact can, however, help children and teens gain a better sense of who they are and how they fit in their adoptive family.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
African American Foster Youth Are Being Adopted
By Mary Ford, NACAC research associate
It is often assumed that African American children are less likely to be adopted. Although this is not true, African American children are adopted at a slower pace than other children. If one looks at longitudinal data carefully, African American children are more likely to be adopted than other children, and this increased likelihood coincides with the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA).
According to a 2006 article by Fred Wulczyn and colleagues, of almost 400,000 children who first entered foster care in six states between 1990 and 2002, 24 percent of African American children were eventually adopted, compared to 16 percent of white or Latino children. However, it took longer for these adoptions to occur. Further, the data show that children from urban areas who were placed with relatives were adopted at a higher rate (26 percent) than those placed in other forms of care. (See previous posts for more information on relatives as permanency resources for foster children. Learn more about NACAC's position on relative care.)
Wulczyn, in a 2003 article, suggests that “the adoption cycle for a given cohort may take up to 10 years to complete, and that African American children are in fact more likely to be adopted.”
ASFA provides states with incentives to find adoptive families for foster children and prioritizes child safety in all decisions concerning family preservation and reunification. Wulczyn and colleagues note that state policies implemented after ASFA (though they vary a lot) appear to have given inducement to pursuing adoption for more foster children.
However, the data also reveal that the growth in the rate of adoption for African American children may be connected to the decline in family reunification during the decade between 1990 and 2000. Wulczyn and colleagues plan to study the effects of ASFA on the process of family reunification in upcoming research.
To increase public child welfare accountability and accuracy—and to reveal important outcomes for children like those studied by Wulczyn and his colleagues—NACAC believes the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) process and AFCARS (Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System) should be changed to use longitudinal data, In addition, the federal government should continue to help states build their accountability systems by maintaining the federal match for State Automated Child welfare Systems.
It is often assumed that African American children are less likely to be adopted. Although this is not true, African American children are adopted at a slower pace than other children. If one looks at longitudinal data carefully, African American children are more likely to be adopted than other children, and this increased likelihood coincides with the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA).
According to a 2006 article by Fred Wulczyn and colleagues, of almost 400,000 children who first entered foster care in six states between 1990 and 2002, 24 percent of African American children were eventually adopted, compared to 16 percent of white or Latino children. However, it took longer for these adoptions to occur. Further, the data show that children from urban areas who were placed with relatives were adopted at a higher rate (26 percent) than those placed in other forms of care. (See previous posts for more information on relatives as permanency resources for foster children. Learn more about NACAC's position on relative care.)
Wulczyn, in a 2003 article, suggests that “the adoption cycle for a given cohort may take up to 10 years to complete, and that African American children are in fact more likely to be adopted.”
ASFA provides states with incentives to find adoptive families for foster children and prioritizes child safety in all decisions concerning family preservation and reunification. Wulczyn and colleagues note that state policies implemented after ASFA (though they vary a lot) appear to have given inducement to pursuing adoption for more foster children.
However, the data also reveal that the growth in the rate of adoption for African American children may be connected to the decline in family reunification during the decade between 1990 and 2000. Wulczyn and colleagues plan to study the effects of ASFA on the process of family reunification in upcoming research.
To increase public child welfare accountability and accuracy—and to reveal important outcomes for children like those studied by Wulczyn and his colleagues—NACAC believes the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) process and AFCARS (Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System) should be changed to use longitudinal data, In addition, the federal government should continue to help states build their accountability systems by maintaining the federal match for State Automated Child welfare Systems.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
All Kinds of Families Need Supportive Services
By Bevanjae Kelley, a grandmother raising her two granddaughters and a board member of the Child Welfare Organizing Project in New York
We were experiencing an empty nest, and I was going back to school to get my degree before my granddaughters, 4-year-old Cyré and 14-month-old Ayanna, came to live with me. Their mother, my daughter, was struggling, unable to recover from a traumatic childhood incident.
My daughter didn’t get the help she needed, and the law said she had only 15 months to comply. She wasn’t ready after 15 months. She told me her lawyer never returned her calls and that everyone she talked to said she would never get her kids back. I didn’t know anything about the system and neither did she.
When the 15 months was up, I was pressured to adopt. I would have preferred to be the girls’ guardian and not have to adopt them. Then my daughter wouldn’t have needed to terminate her parental rights.
I love and care for those girls and do all I can to meet their special needs. Cyré has now been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and everything has been a roller coaster ride these past few years. Both girls have also been diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder. I got help from a local program that serves families with children who have a mental illness. They help the family work through problems instead of calling ACS. They provide 24-hour access to a psychiatrist, a case manager who coordinated services with school, a respite provider who took the girls out three times a week, and a therapist who provided in-home family therapy once a week. We were part of that program for about two years and it was very helpful. We all have more coping strategies and things are so much better.
I really wish these same services could have been available to my daughter when the girls were young. Everything would have been different then.
We were experiencing an empty nest, and I was going back to school to get my degree before my granddaughters, 4-year-old Cyré and 14-month-old Ayanna, came to live with me. Their mother, my daughter, was struggling, unable to recover from a traumatic childhood incident.
My daughter didn’t get the help she needed, and the law said she had only 15 months to comply. She wasn’t ready after 15 months. She told me her lawyer never returned her calls and that everyone she talked to said she would never get her kids back. I didn’t know anything about the system and neither did she.
When the 15 months was up, I was pressured to adopt. I would have preferred to be the girls’ guardian and not have to adopt them. Then my daughter wouldn’t have needed to terminate her parental rights.
I love and care for those girls and do all I can to meet their special needs. Cyré has now been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and everything has been a roller coaster ride these past few years. Both girls have also been diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder. I got help from a local program that serves families with children who have a mental illness. They help the family work through problems instead of calling ACS. They provide 24-hour access to a psychiatrist, a case manager who coordinated services with school, a respite provider who took the girls out three times a week, and a therapist who provided in-home family therapy once a week. We were part of that program for about two years and it was very helpful. We all have more coping strategies and things are so much better.
I really wish these same services could have been available to my daughter when the girls were young. Everything would have been different then.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Kin Can and Do Provide Permanent Families for Foster Children
By Jennifer Miller, ChildFocus
Federal and state policies promote relative placements as the priority when children enter state custody. Recently, relatives have played an expanded role as resources for safety and permanency in the child welfare system. Relatives can help children preserve family relationships and help minimize the impact of separation from birth parent homes. (See CLASP's resource on kinship care.) They can provide support to birth parents working toward reunification. They are critical links for children in need.
When children cannot return home, relatives often provide permanence through adoption or guardianship. Adoptions by relatives increased from 15 to 21 percent between 1998 and 2000. By 2003, of the 50,000 children adopted from foster care, 23 percent were adopted by relatives. When adoption is not an option, guardianship is an increasingly viable permanency option. (Visit www.kidsarewaiting.com or www.cornerstone.to for more on guardianship.)
Relative adoption is particularly beneficial to African American children, who are vastly overrepresented in foster care. According to Penelope Maza of the Children’s Bureau, the percentage of African American children adopted by relatives increased each year since 2000, reaching a high of 25 percent in 2004. (Read full report.)
Relatives are often heroic—putting their lives on hold, delaying retirement, or using retirement years to parent again. Unfortunately, these same relatives are often marginalized. On the whole, children living with relatives receive fewer services, less oversight, and less funding than those living with unrelated caregivers. (Learn more: Children Cared for by Relatives: Who Are They and How Are They Faring? and Identifying and Addressing the Needs of Children in Grandparent Care.)
Reforms are needed to ensure that children living with relatives receive the help they need, including:
• Federal support for subsidized guardianship
• More flexible resources to prevent the need for children living with relatives to enter foster care
• More flexible funding to support relative adoptions; and
• Allowing states to set licensing and training standards for relatives that are different than those for unrelated caregivers
Kinship care is no longer a discrete program that sits off to the side of the child welfare system. Instead, it has become the face of child welfare and helps children achieve the safety, permanency and well-being they deserve. But relatives cannot do it alone. It is time to recognize and support this role for what it is: creating the next generation of healthy and productive citizens.
Federal and state policies promote relative placements as the priority when children enter state custody. Recently, relatives have played an expanded role as resources for safety and permanency in the child welfare system. Relatives can help children preserve family relationships and help minimize the impact of separation from birth parent homes. (See CLASP's resource on kinship care.) They can provide support to birth parents working toward reunification. They are critical links for children in need.
When children cannot return home, relatives often provide permanence through adoption or guardianship. Adoptions by relatives increased from 15 to 21 percent between 1998 and 2000. By 2003, of the 50,000 children adopted from foster care, 23 percent were adopted by relatives. When adoption is not an option, guardianship is an increasingly viable permanency option. (Visit www.kidsarewaiting.com or www.cornerstone.to for more on guardianship.)
Relative adoption is particularly beneficial to African American children, who are vastly overrepresented in foster care. According to Penelope Maza of the Children’s Bureau, the percentage of African American children adopted by relatives increased each year since 2000, reaching a high of 25 percent in 2004. (Read full report.)
Relatives are often heroic—putting their lives on hold, delaying retirement, or using retirement years to parent again. Unfortunately, these same relatives are often marginalized. On the whole, children living with relatives receive fewer services, less oversight, and less funding than those living with unrelated caregivers. (Learn more: Children Cared for by Relatives: Who Are They and How Are They Faring? and Identifying and Addressing the Needs of Children in Grandparent Care.)
Reforms are needed to ensure that children living with relatives receive the help they need, including:
• Federal support for subsidized guardianship
• More flexible resources to prevent the need for children living with relatives to enter foster care
• More flexible funding to support relative adoptions; and
• Allowing states to set licensing and training standards for relatives that are different than those for unrelated caregivers
Kinship care is no longer a discrete program that sits off to the side of the child welfare system. Instead, it has become the face of child welfare and helps children achieve the safety, permanency and well-being they deserve. But relatives cannot do it alone. It is time to recognize and support this role for what it is: creating the next generation of healthy and productive citizens.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
We Must Meet the Needs of Foster Children and Youth
by Joe Kroll, NACAC executive director
In March, the NACAC board approved a position statement (link) that states that the public child welfare system has primary responsibility to assess and address the cognitive, social, emotional, physical, developmental, and educational needs of children and youth who are or have been in the foster care system. To achieve this goal, NACAC seeks:
• Comprehensive assessments, conducted by a community-based, multi-disciplinary team, of a child’s or youth’s strengths and needs within 30 days of entering care, plus follow-up assessments
• Training of social workers, teachers, doctors, nurses, and others on the effects of abuse, neglect, and foster care placement
• A plan for provision of needed services, including continuing those services into adoption, guardianship, or reunification
To help achieve these goals, NACAC calls for legislation and rule changes that:
1. Require private and public medical insurance entities to cover mental health services at the same level as physical health services
2. Review Medicaid reimbursement rules and increase reimbursements and streamline the reimbursement process so that more providers accept Medicaid
3. Require HMOs to hire and retain qualified service providers, and when those providers are not available, to fully fund treatment received out of network
4. Fully support the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) program
To ensure educational continuity and success for foster children and youth, NACAC recommends (among other things):
1. Allowing foster children to remain in their school for a school year, in spite of placement moves, when it is in their best interests
2. Requiring agencies to consider school stability during placement decisions
3. Allowing a foster child to be immediately enrolled in school even if all typical requirements (records, immunizations, etc.) are not met
When a public agency takes custody of a child or youth, it must assume responsibility for providing the necessary services and support to achieve the best possible outcomes for that child or youth.
In March, the NACAC board approved a position statement (link) that states that the public child welfare system has primary responsibility to assess and address the cognitive, social, emotional, physical, developmental, and educational needs of children and youth who are or have been in the foster care system. To achieve this goal, NACAC seeks:
• Comprehensive assessments, conducted by a community-based, multi-disciplinary team, of a child’s or youth’s strengths and needs within 30 days of entering care, plus follow-up assessments
• Training of social workers, teachers, doctors, nurses, and others on the effects of abuse, neglect, and foster care placement
• A plan for provision of needed services, including continuing those services into adoption, guardianship, or reunification
To help achieve these goals, NACAC calls for legislation and rule changes that:
1. Require private and public medical insurance entities to cover mental health services at the same level as physical health services
2. Review Medicaid reimbursement rules and increase reimbursements and streamline the reimbursement process so that more providers accept Medicaid
3. Require HMOs to hire and retain qualified service providers, and when those providers are not available, to fully fund treatment received out of network
4. Fully support the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) program
To ensure educational continuity and success for foster children and youth, NACAC recommends (among other things):
1. Allowing foster children to remain in their school for a school year, in spite of placement moves, when it is in their best interests
2. Requiring agencies to consider school stability during placement decisions
3. Allowing a foster child to be immediately enrolled in school even if all typical requirements (records, immunizations, etc.) are not met
When a public agency takes custody of a child or youth, it must assume responsibility for providing the necessary services and support to achieve the best possible outcomes for that child or youth.
Monday, April 9, 2007
The Value of Adoption
By Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
In December 2006, Mary Eschelbach Hansen—assistant professor and director of undergraduate studies at American Unversity’s Department of Economics—published The Value of Adoption. Hansen found that every dollar spent on adoption from foster care—including money spent by the government, plus money spent by adoptive parents to help their children heal—yields between $2.45 and $3.26 in benefits to society:
“An adoption from foster care costs state and federal government about $115,000, but saves the government about $258,000 in child welfare and human service costs, netting a savings of $143,000 (Barth et al. 2006, adjusted for inflation to 2000 dollars). I show that each adoption nets between $88,000 and $150,000 in private benefits and $190,000 to $235,000 in total public benefits (in constant 2000 dollars). Thus each dollar spent on the adoption of a child from foster care yields between $2.45 and $3.26 in benefits to society.”
These societal benefits are largely due to the fact that adopted children, when compared to those who languish in long-term foster care, do better. As Hansen cites, adopted children are:
• 32 percent less likely to be incarcerated
• 15 percent more likely to be employed
• more likely to have higher incomes (after adjusting for time spent in school) and
• less likely to participate in welfare programs
These advances result in higher wages over the adopted individual’s lifetime. Other savings are due to lower crime rates for children who have been adopted.
It is time for the government to increase its investment in supporting adoption from foster care—it’s certainly good for children and youth who cannot return to their birth families, and it’s good economic sense.
In December 2006, Mary Eschelbach Hansen—assistant professor and director of undergraduate studies at American Unversity’s Department of Economics—published The Value of Adoption. Hansen found that every dollar spent on adoption from foster care—including money spent by the government, plus money spent by adoptive parents to help their children heal—yields between $2.45 and $3.26 in benefits to society:
“An adoption from foster care costs state and federal government about $115,000, but saves the government about $258,000 in child welfare and human service costs, netting a savings of $143,000 (Barth et al. 2006, adjusted for inflation to 2000 dollars). I show that each adoption nets between $88,000 and $150,000 in private benefits and $190,000 to $235,000 in total public benefits (in constant 2000 dollars). Thus each dollar spent on the adoption of a child from foster care yields between $2.45 and $3.26 in benefits to society.”
These societal benefits are largely due to the fact that adopted children, when compared to those who languish in long-term foster care, do better. As Hansen cites, adopted children are:
• 32 percent less likely to be incarcerated
• 15 percent more likely to be employed
• more likely to have higher incomes (after adjusting for time spent in school) and
• less likely to participate in welfare programs
These advances result in higher wages over the adopted individual’s lifetime. Other savings are due to lower crime rates for children who have been adopted.
It is time for the government to increase its investment in supporting adoption from foster care—it’s certainly good for children and youth who cannot return to their birth families, and it’s good economic sense.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Adoption Works!
by Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
Lamarr’s story (below) shows that adoption works and that children and youth—even teenagers—can find a permanent, loving family. Unfortunately not all young people find a family as Lamarr did. More than 3,000 children and youth in New York City are waiting for a family right now. Each year more than 700 youth age out of the city’s foster care system without legal family connections—more than 20,000 age out in each year in the U.S. Many of these young people have limited education and poor employment prospects. Too many leave care and end up homeless, incarcerated, and physically or mentally ill. A large number wish they had been adopted or lived permanently with a family under guardianship. Finding permanent families for all children must become a national priority.
Lamarr’s story (below) shows that adoption works and that children and youth—even teenagers—can find a permanent, loving family. Unfortunately not all young people find a family as Lamarr did. More than 3,000 children and youth in New York City are waiting for a family right now. Each year more than 700 youth age out of the city’s foster care system without legal family connections—more than 20,000 age out in each year in the U.S. Many of these young people have limited education and poor employment prospects. Too many leave care and end up homeless, incarcerated, and physically or mentally ill. A large number wish they had been adopted or lived permanently with a family under guardianship. Finding permanent families for all children must become a national priority.
Monday, April 2, 2007
My Adoption Story
By Lamarr Stapleton, former foster youth, New York
I was four when my brother and sisters moved in with our first foster family. It was decent. I was an A+ student. After a while, you’d forget you were in foster care. Then the agency says you have to move and the harsh reality that you’re in foster care hits you.
After we’d with the family for three years, the foster mother moved to Florida. My brother went to live with his dad, and my sisters and I were placed with a new family. My problem at the time was that I connected with people too quick. I got close to people and that was a problem when I had to leave.
Finally, my sisters and I moved in with Ms. Shirley Williams. Moving there went okay, but by then I was eight years old and I broke my habit of bonding with people quickly. Instead, I stayed close with my two sisters, the two people I knew I could count on. Things went well until my older sister went to live with her father. When we were all together, we had this chain that we were never going to break. My oldest brother was looking after my oldest sister, my oldest sister was looking after me, and I was looking after my youngest sister. After my brother and sister left, I was alone looking after my sister.
One day I just snapped and I wanted to see what it was like living on the other side of the education chain, I guess. I started skipping classes. I wasn’t smoking or drinking or anything, just school-wise, I wasn’t doing what I was supposed to be doing.
Ms. Williams helped me turn things around. She kind of pushed me on the right path, and eventually adopted me and my sister. I thank her for opening up her family to me. I guess about two years before we got adopted, that’s when I really started opening up to her and her family. It was like I thought, ‘Okay, we’re going to get adopted. I can feel it. I might as well let them in as family now.’
I know I gave my mother a hard time, because I am a hardheaded kid. Whenever she said ‘no,’ I said ‘yes.’ But over time, I learned that when she was telling me these things, it’s to help me learn from her. Now she’s not only my parent, she is my best friend and I can talk to her. I can talk to her sons too. It’s just a cool family.
I was four when my brother and sisters moved in with our first foster family. It was decent. I was an A+ student. After a while, you’d forget you were in foster care. Then the agency says you have to move and the harsh reality that you’re in foster care hits you.
After we’d with the family for three years, the foster mother moved to Florida. My brother went to live with his dad, and my sisters and I were placed with a new family. My problem at the time was that I connected with people too quick. I got close to people and that was a problem when I had to leave.
Finally, my sisters and I moved in with Ms. Shirley Williams. Moving there went okay, but by then I was eight years old and I broke my habit of bonding with people quickly. Instead, I stayed close with my two sisters, the two people I knew I could count on. Things went well until my older sister went to live with her father. When we were all together, we had this chain that we were never going to break. My oldest brother was looking after my oldest sister, my oldest sister was looking after me, and I was looking after my youngest sister. After my brother and sister left, I was alone looking after my sister.
One day I just snapped and I wanted to see what it was like living on the other side of the education chain, I guess. I started skipping classes. I wasn’t smoking or drinking or anything, just school-wise, I wasn’t doing what I was supposed to be doing.
Ms. Williams helped me turn things around. She kind of pushed me on the right path, and eventually adopted me and my sister. I thank her for opening up her family to me. I guess about two years before we got adopted, that’s when I really started opening up to her and her family. It was like I thought, ‘Okay, we’re going to get adopted. I can feel it. I might as well let them in as family now.’
I know I gave my mother a hard time, because I am a hardheaded kid. Whenever she said ‘no,’ I said ‘yes.’ But over time, I learned that when she was telling me these things, it’s to help me learn from her. Now she’s not only my parent, she is my best friend and I can talk to her. I can talk to her sons too. It’s just a cool family.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Fiscal Concerns Shouldn't Lead to Privatization
By Joe Kroll, NACAC executive director
In Michigan, the state Senate has proposed to contract out all licensed foster care services to private agencies to save funds. As one supporter of the move, Subcommittee Chairman Bill Hardiman (R-Kentwood), explained "We can no longer afford to simply make small cuts, slowly whittling away state services," he said in a statement. "I realize change is difficult, but it is necessary."
On the child welfare continuum, contracting represents the midpoit between public responsibility and full privatization. The private contracting of foster care services needs to be done carefully and thoughtfully and should be done only to improve outcomes for kids, not to save money. NACAC believes that private agencies should only be brought in to complement state efforts, not replace the state's fundamental responsibility to child welfare. The public agency must be properly funded to assiduously monitor and evaluate the success or failure of contracting. States, and the federal government, need to invest in protecting children and providing them with permanence.
States like Michigan may be driven to save money because they have been receiving less federal child welfare funding over the last 10 years. Michigan is one of the many states that has lost federal funding between 1998 and 2004, due in part to an outdated federal funding formula. Currently, federal foster care funding is tied to a child's birth family's income—at levels not updated since 1996.
As detailed in the report Time for Reform: Fix the Foster Care Lookback, between 1998 and 2004, 35,000 fewer foster children have been eligible for federal foster care assistance, which translates into an $1.9 billion loss to the states during this time. States are required by law to protect these children, so must tap into state funds to make up the difference. In 2006, the National Governors Association issued a statement that noted, "Congress, in consultation with states, should explore options to eliminate the outdated 'look back' provision... While recognizing that this could be a costly endeavor, Governors believe that ideally all children in care, regardless of family income or jurisdiction, should be treated equally."
It's time to eliminate the lookback to 1996, and for the federal government to support all children and youth in need for protection and permanency.
In Michigan, the state Senate has proposed to contract out all licensed foster care services to private agencies to save funds. As one supporter of the move, Subcommittee Chairman Bill Hardiman (R-Kentwood), explained "We can no longer afford to simply make small cuts, slowly whittling away state services," he said in a statement. "I realize change is difficult, but it is necessary."
On the child welfare continuum, contracting represents the midpoit between public responsibility and full privatization. The private contracting of foster care services needs to be done carefully and thoughtfully and should be done only to improve outcomes for kids, not to save money. NACAC believes that private agencies should only be brought in to complement state efforts, not replace the state's fundamental responsibility to child welfare. The public agency must be properly funded to assiduously monitor and evaluate the success or failure of contracting. States, and the federal government, need to invest in protecting children and providing them with permanence.
States like Michigan may be driven to save money because they have been receiving less federal child welfare funding over the last 10 years. Michigan is one of the many states that has lost federal funding between 1998 and 2004, due in part to an outdated federal funding formula. Currently, federal foster care funding is tied to a child's birth family's income—at levels not updated since 1996.
As detailed in the report Time for Reform: Fix the Foster Care Lookback, between 1998 and 2004, 35,000 fewer foster children have been eligible for federal foster care assistance, which translates into an $1.9 billion loss to the states during this time. States are required by law to protect these children, so must tap into state funds to make up the difference. In 2006, the National Governors Association issued a statement that noted, "Congress, in consultation with states, should explore options to eliminate the outdated 'look back' provision... While recognizing that this could be a costly endeavor, Governors believe that ideally all children in care, regardless of family income or jurisdiction, should be treated equally."
It's time to eliminate the lookback to 1996, and for the federal government to support all children and youth in need for protection and permanency.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
New Report Highlights Need for Subsidized Guardianship
By Mary Boo, NACAC assistant director
Last week, Kids Are Waiting and Generations United released Time for Reform: Support Relatives in Providing Foster Care and Permanent Families for Children. This valuable report details research that identifies the value of relative care and highlights the need for reform to better support relative caregivers. Key findings include:
• Children in relative foster care are as safe or safer than children placed with non-relative foster families.
• Relative foster placements tend to be more stable than placements with unrelated families.
• Brothers and sisters are more likely to be able to stay together when placed with relative foster parents.
• Relatives are often willing to adopt or become permanent guardians when reunification isn’t possible.
In spite of these positives, federal policy does not encourage relative care as it should. Many of relative caregivers are older and on fixed incomes, and they need help to care for their kin. Federal funds can be used to support these caregivers while the children remain in foster care, but not when they are ready and willing to help these children leave care to a permanent, loving family. Almost 20,000 foster children could leave care today if their caregivers could become legal guardians and receive the financial support available to adoptive families. It’s time for federally supported subsidized guardianship.
Last week, Kids Are Waiting and Generations United released Time for Reform: Support Relatives in Providing Foster Care and Permanent Families for Children. This valuable report details research that identifies the value of relative care and highlights the need for reform to better support relative caregivers. Key findings include:
• Children in relative foster care are as safe or safer than children placed with non-relative foster families.
• Relative foster placements tend to be more stable than placements with unrelated families.
• Brothers and sisters are more likely to be able to stay together when placed with relative foster parents.
• Relatives are often willing to adopt or become permanent guardians when reunification isn’t possible.
In spite of these positives, federal policy does not encourage relative care as it should. Many of relative caregivers are older and on fixed incomes, and they need help to care for their kin. Federal funds can be used to support these caregivers while the children remain in foster care, but not when they are ready and willing to help these children leave care to a permanent, loving family. Almost 20,000 foster children could leave care today if their caregivers could become legal guardians and receive the financial support available to adoptive families. It’s time for federally supported subsidized guardianship.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Subsidized Guardianship Was a Miracle for Me
By Rob Johnson, former foster youth, Illinois/Iowa
When I was 6, I went into foster care. No one told me why I had to leave home. But I am one of the fortunate ones. My story has a happy ending.
Three years after I entered foster care, my aunt was granted one of the first subsidized guardianships in Illinois. She could never have provided for me and my sisters without support to help defray the costs of raising three more children. With that support, I was able to leave foster care for good.
Finding safety, stability, and love had a wonderful effect on me. Once labeled a slow learner, I was told I wouldn't graduate eighth grade. After I had a permanent, loving home with my aunt, I did so well that I eventually earned a full academic scholarship to Drake University in Iowa, where I am studying business and have my own radio show.
I was able to find my miracle through subsidized guardianship, but other foster children are not so lucky.
The federal government should provide funds to states for children who leave foster care to live permanently with grandparents, aunts, uncles, or other guardians. In many cases, if relatives choose to become legal guardians rather than foster parents, they lose federal foster care assistance, which pays for things like food and clothing. That just isn't right.
To take a child away from his family is one of the most heartbreaking things you can do. To put him back with his relatives is one of the greatest gifts you can give. Other foster children deserve such an opportunity.
When I was 6, I went into foster care. No one told me why I had to leave home. But I am one of the fortunate ones. My story has a happy ending.
Three years after I entered foster care, my aunt was granted one of the first subsidized guardianships in Illinois. She could never have provided for me and my sisters without support to help defray the costs of raising three more children. With that support, I was able to leave foster care for good.
Finding safety, stability, and love had a wonderful effect on me. Once labeled a slow learner, I was told I wouldn't graduate eighth grade. After I had a permanent, loving home with my aunt, I did so well that I eventually earned a full academic scholarship to Drake University in Iowa, where I am studying business and have my own radio show.
I was able to find my miracle through subsidized guardianship, but other foster children are not so lucky.
The federal government should provide funds to states for children who leave foster care to live permanently with grandparents, aunts, uncles, or other guardians. In many cases, if relatives choose to become legal guardians rather than foster parents, they lose federal foster care assistance, which pays for things like food and clothing. That just isn't right.
To take a child away from his family is one of the most heartbreaking things you can do. To put him back with his relatives is one of the greatest gifts you can give. Other foster children deserve such an opportunity.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Senators Support Needed Foster Care Reform
by Joe Kroll, NACAC executive director
NACAC and many other child advocates were delighted to see the following language in a March 2, 2007 memo from Senators Max Baucus (D-MT) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA), chair and ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, to the leaders of the Senate Committee on the Budget:
"Child Welfare
Since the passage of the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act, 392,500 children from the child welfare system have been adopted into safe, permanent homes, and we should continue investments to promote adoption and post-adoption support. Still, 513,000 vulnerable children remain in foster care needing care and support. There are several innovative programs across the country that seek to better engage relative caregivers in the lives of children needing loving safe homes. We wish to explore legislative opportunities for assisting more children to find safe and loving placements with willing relatives when appropriate. There is also an ever increasing need for appropriate and effective child welfare services in Indian country including authorization for direct funding to Tribal governments from the Title IV-E program. … We also plan to explore the issue of child welfare financing and will consider multiple financing reform ideas as well as the ability of the child welfare system to respond to changing levels of need in the future."
We were thrilled to see emphasis on the need for post-adoption support, along with a new interest in helping children and youth achieve permanence through subsidized guardianship. NACAC also strongly supports direct Title IV-E funding for tribes, which would give the tribes financial resources to support the responsibility they already have for native children and youth in their care.
The Senators’ interest in exploring child welfare financing reform is also welcome news. Currently almost 90 percent of federal child welfare funding flows to states only after a child is removed from her family and placed in foster care. It’s time to align federal financing with the goal of achieving a permanent family for every child in care.
NACAC and many other child advocates were delighted to see the following language in a March 2, 2007 memo from Senators Max Baucus (D-MT) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA), chair and ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, to the leaders of the Senate Committee on the Budget:
"Child Welfare
Since the passage of the 1997 Adoption and Safe Families Act, 392,500 children from the child welfare system have been adopted into safe, permanent homes, and we should continue investments to promote adoption and post-adoption support. Still, 513,000 vulnerable children remain in foster care needing care and support. There are several innovative programs across the country that seek to better engage relative caregivers in the lives of children needing loving safe homes. We wish to explore legislative opportunities for assisting more children to find safe and loving placements with willing relatives when appropriate. There is also an ever increasing need for appropriate and effective child welfare services in Indian country including authorization for direct funding to Tribal governments from the Title IV-E program. … We also plan to explore the issue of child welfare financing and will consider multiple financing reform ideas as well as the ability of the child welfare system to respond to changing levels of need in the future."
We were thrilled to see emphasis on the need for post-adoption support, along with a new interest in helping children and youth achieve permanence through subsidized guardianship. NACAC also strongly supports direct Title IV-E funding for tribes, which would give the tribes financial resources to support the responsibility they already have for native children and youth in their care.
The Senators’ interest in exploring child welfare financing reform is also welcome news. Currently almost 90 percent of federal child welfare funding flows to states only after a child is removed from her family and placed in foster care. It’s time to align federal financing with the goal of achieving a permanent family for every child in care.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
It's Time for Subsidized Guardianship and Other Supports for Relative Caregivers
by Joe Kroll, NACAC executive director
On Monday, March 12, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) formally announced the reintroduction of the Kinship Caregiver Support Act, which would provide needed support to grandparents, aunts, uncles, and other relatives caring for vulnerable children and youth.
As Senator Clinton explained in a press conference, "So many grandparents and other relatives are making great personal sacrifices to provide safe and loving homes for the children in their care. These guardians often take on this responsibility unexpectedly, facing physical, emotional, and financial challenges," said Senator Clinton. "Too often, the deck is stacked against these caring relatives: difficulties gaining formal custody of the children in their care, enrolling children in school, authorizing medical treatment, retaining public housing, getting affordable legal services, and accessing benefits that could help them provide care. By taking common sense steps, we can remove these unnecessary barriers and address the unique challenges facing kinship caregivers struggling to do the right thing for our children," said Senator Clinton.
NACAC supports this legislation (see our position statements on kinship care and subsidized guardianship). We are particularly interested in seeing federal support for subsidized guardianship. Guardianship is a permanency option that is right for many of the children and youth in foster care who cannot return to their birth families, but for whom adoption is not the right option. I have been particularly moved by several youth in care who have spoken about the reasons guardianship would be the best permanency option for them:
Jackie Hammers-Crowell of Iowa, whose mother’s developmental delays prevented her from raising Jackie, explains why guardianship would have been better than aging out of care as she did: “Subsidized guardianship may have kept me with my extended birth family, saved the state money, and kept my mom’s parental rights from being needlessly, hurtfully terminated against our wills.” Montana resident Rob Carson had a similar experience. Although they couldn’t raise him, he had connections with his birth parents and did not want to relinquish those ties.
Nationally about 19,250 children live with relative foster parents with little hope of reunifying with their birth parents. Subsidized guardianship would enable them to leave foster care—thereby reducing administrative and court costs—while also supporting the relatives who care for them. We’ll pay relatives to care for children in foster care or adoption, but not when they choose guardianship—a valid permanency option that is right for many families.
On Monday, March 12, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) formally announced the reintroduction of the Kinship Caregiver Support Act, which would provide needed support to grandparents, aunts, uncles, and other relatives caring for vulnerable children and youth.
As Senator Clinton explained in a press conference, "So many grandparents and other relatives are making great personal sacrifices to provide safe and loving homes for the children in their care. These guardians often take on this responsibility unexpectedly, facing physical, emotional, and financial challenges," said Senator Clinton. "Too often, the deck is stacked against these caring relatives: difficulties gaining formal custody of the children in their care, enrolling children in school, authorizing medical treatment, retaining public housing, getting affordable legal services, and accessing benefits that could help them provide care. By taking common sense steps, we can remove these unnecessary barriers and address the unique challenges facing kinship caregivers struggling to do the right thing for our children," said Senator Clinton.
NACAC supports this legislation (see our position statements on kinship care and subsidized guardianship). We are particularly interested in seeing federal support for subsidized guardianship. Guardianship is a permanency option that is right for many of the children and youth in foster care who cannot return to their birth families, but for whom adoption is not the right option. I have been particularly moved by several youth in care who have spoken about the reasons guardianship would be the best permanency option for them:
Jackie Hammers-Crowell of Iowa, whose mother’s developmental delays prevented her from raising Jackie, explains why guardianship would have been better than aging out of care as she did: “Subsidized guardianship may have kept me with my extended birth family, saved the state money, and kept my mom’s parental rights from being needlessly, hurtfully terminated against our wills.” Montana resident Rob Carson had a similar experience. Although they couldn’t raise him, he had connections with his birth parents and did not want to relinquish those ties.
Nationally about 19,250 children live with relative foster parents with little hope of reunifying with their birth parents. Subsidized guardianship would enable them to leave foster care—thereby reducing administrative and court costs—while also supporting the relatives who care for them. We’ll pay relatives to care for children in foster care or adoption, but not when they choose guardianship—a valid permanency option that is right for many families.
Thursday, February 1, 2007
The Federal Government Needs to Support Birth Families
by Joe Kroll, NACAC executive director
The Green Book states: “It is generally agreed that it is in the best interests of children to live with their families. To this end, experts emphasize both the value of preventive and rehabilitative services and the need to limit the duration of foster care placements.” Federal funding, however, does not reflect this priority. Currently, 90 percent of federal funding can be used by states only after Title IV-E-eligible children have entered foster care or been adopted.
Since so much federal funding is for children who have entered care, states do not have sufficient resources to invest in birth family support and reunification. In recent years, we have seen the percentage of foster children who reunite with their birth families go down—from 62 percent in 1998 to 55 percent in 2003.
Children can reunify with their birth families when parents get needed support. In Nashville recently, I met Melissa, a mother who was addicted to drugs. She was at risk of losing her son Marley when she found Renewal House, an innovative drug treatment program that keeps parents and children together, rather than placing children away from their families in foster care. Melissa explains how hard it would have been for Marley to enter care rather than staying with her during treatment: “The pain of his mother being sick and gone … I know that would have been devastating. He would have gone through things he shouldn’t have to. None of it was his fault. To be able to heal with him while I was healing—that was just a beautiful thing.”
Annie was a meth user whose son Jory entered foster care in Oregon. She tried conventional drug treatment programs—like those offered to most birth parents—but they were not successful. It wasn’t until she found a comprehensive program that she was able to recover from her addiction and become a good parent to Jory. The program provided shelter, parenting support, and case management to help her form a more healthy relationship with Jory. “It was a very structured place,” Annie explains. “They had a parenting person and a manager on-site. … I had to have a plan and a goal sheet showing what I was going to accomplish while I lived there.” Today, clean for five years, Annie serves as a mentor to other mothers who are trying to overcome their addictions.
We need to reform child welfare financing so that there are more success stories like these. The federal government must significantly increase its investment in Title IV-B Parts 1 and 2, and provide states with increased flexibility in how they spend federal child welfare monies.
In addition, if states successfully reduce the use of foster care, they should be able to reinvest federal dollars saved into preventive and post-permanency services. Currently, when states reduce the number of IV-E eligible children in foster care, the federal government reduces its payment to the state. We recommend that the federal government provide states with an amount equal to the money saved in Title IV-E maintenance payments, training, and administration. This would provide an incentive to keep or move children out of care, while also beginning to address the vast imbalance in federal funding.
The Green Book states: “It is generally agreed that it is in the best interests of children to live with their families. To this end, experts emphasize both the value of preventive and rehabilitative services and the need to limit the duration of foster care placements.” Federal funding, however, does not reflect this priority. Currently, 90 percent of federal funding can be used by states only after Title IV-E-eligible children have entered foster care or been adopted.
Since so much federal funding is for children who have entered care, states do not have sufficient resources to invest in birth family support and reunification. In recent years, we have seen the percentage of foster children who reunite with their birth families go down—from 62 percent in 1998 to 55 percent in 2003.
Children can reunify with their birth families when parents get needed support. In Nashville recently, I met Melissa, a mother who was addicted to drugs. She was at risk of losing her son Marley when she found Renewal House, an innovative drug treatment program that keeps parents and children together, rather than placing children away from their families in foster care. Melissa explains how hard it would have been for Marley to enter care rather than staying with her during treatment: “The pain of his mother being sick and gone … I know that would have been devastating. He would have gone through things he shouldn’t have to. None of it was his fault. To be able to heal with him while I was healing—that was just a beautiful thing.”
Annie was a meth user whose son Jory entered foster care in Oregon. She tried conventional drug treatment programs—like those offered to most birth parents—but they were not successful. It wasn’t until she found a comprehensive program that she was able to recover from her addiction and become a good parent to Jory. The program provided shelter, parenting support, and case management to help her form a more healthy relationship with Jory. “It was a very structured place,” Annie explains. “They had a parenting person and a manager on-site. … I had to have a plan and a goal sheet showing what I was going to accomplish while I lived there.” Today, clean for five years, Annie serves as a mentor to other mothers who are trying to overcome their addictions.
We need to reform child welfare financing so that there are more success stories like these. The federal government must significantly increase its investment in Title IV-B Parts 1 and 2, and provide states with increased flexibility in how they spend federal child welfare monies.
In addition, if states successfully reduce the use of foster care, they should be able to reinvest federal dollars saved into preventive and post-permanency services. Currently, when states reduce the number of IV-E eligible children in foster care, the federal government reduces its payment to the state. We recommend that the federal government provide states with an amount equal to the money saved in Title IV-E maintenance payments, training, and administration. This would provide an incentive to keep or move children out of care, while also beginning to address the vast imbalance in federal funding.
Birth Moms Like Me Need Help
by Kelly Cates, recovering addict who reunified with her children, Maryland
My involvement with child protective services stems from my addition to drugs. I am a recovering addict. Because of my addiction, my parents ended up getting custody of my children through DSS for almost three years.
Four years ago, I ended up pregnant and I ended up having to go into this program, it’s the Center for Addiction and Pregnancy through Bayview Hospital. At that point I had gotten into counseling with my children and myself and the worker was having transportation to bring the girls to the counseling. They got me into parenting classes. They had funding to get me to the parenting classes. My one obstacle to reunifying with my girls was that I needed to get housing for us. Anything that I needed to help me with my process of being reunified with my children, the agency was helping me and backing me up every step of the way.
I couldn’t have done it on my own. If it wasn’t for all the resources and help that I had I wouldn’t have been able to get my girls back.
I have three girls and it has been such a miracle for us that we have been reunified and I know that it is rare. We are all very grateful. I get very emotional with these things that I can show up today and be their mom. I have had them in different extracurricular activities, now two of my daughter’s have been in gymnastics now for a while and they are doing very well. My two older girls each play instruments in school, we are very involved in our church.
There are so many women there that are in similar circumstances that I was and they need help and they look at me and say, “How did you get that assistance?” Because of funding cuts, many of those services are not available today especially the housing program which was crucial for me.
I think, all in all, the amount of money that they would be spending to keep a child in foster care would out-weigh what it would take to help a mother be reunited with their children.
My involvement with child protective services stems from my addition to drugs. I am a recovering addict. Because of my addiction, my parents ended up getting custody of my children through DSS for almost three years.
Four years ago, I ended up pregnant and I ended up having to go into this program, it’s the Center for Addiction and Pregnancy through Bayview Hospital. At that point I had gotten into counseling with my children and myself and the worker was having transportation to bring the girls to the counseling. They got me into parenting classes. They had funding to get me to the parenting classes. My one obstacle to reunifying with my girls was that I needed to get housing for us. Anything that I needed to help me with my process of being reunified with my children, the agency was helping me and backing me up every step of the way.
I couldn’t have done it on my own. If it wasn’t for all the resources and help that I had I wouldn’t have been able to get my girls back.
I have three girls and it has been such a miracle for us that we have been reunified and I know that it is rare. We are all very grateful. I get very emotional with these things that I can show up today and be their mom. I have had them in different extracurricular activities, now two of my daughter’s have been in gymnastics now for a while and they are doing very well. My two older girls each play instruments in school, we are very involved in our church.
There are so many women there that are in similar circumstances that I was and they need help and they look at me and say, “How did you get that assistance?” Because of funding cuts, many of those services are not available today especially the housing program which was crucial for me.
I think, all in all, the amount of money that they would be spending to keep a child in foster care would out-weigh what it would take to help a mother be reunited with their children.
Youth Need Families
by Mary Lee, former foster youth, Tennessee
At 12, I entered foster care due to abuse and neglect. My foster family was fine, but it wasn’t like having a real family. My foster parents treated their own children different than me. I wasn’t allowed to date. I wasn’t allowed to sleep at a friend’s house. I knew as soon as I turned 18 that I would be on my own.
Unfortunately, I was in care for more than four years before anyone in authority asked me what I wanted. Every six months I appeared before a judge whose questions to her focused on school and her placement. It wasn’t until I was 16 that the judge asked me what I wanted in life. I told him, “I want what everyone wants—I want a family of my own.” The judge turned to my caseworker and said, “Let’s find Mary a family.”
In spite of the judge’s words, the road wasn’t easy. Many people were discouraging. They were like, "You’re 16. You’re going to go off to college in a couple of years, why do you want a family?” They didn't understand it was about my entire life, it’s not just about my childhood. I want to know that I’m going to have a place to come home to during Christmas breaks. I want to know that I’m going to have a dad to walk me down the aisle. That I’m going to have grandparents for my children.
Luckily, a former caseworker and his wife stepped forward to adopt me. I was totally overwhelmed. I had this strong desire to have a family, so I was really excited that I was going to be a part of the family. As soon as I moved in, I really felt a part of their family, I felt included. And even now, looking back, it’s like I had been with them my whole life. The adoption was finalized a week before my 18th birthday. They waited too long. To spend four and half years in foster care—it’s a waste of my childhood that I’ll never get back.
If you have a caring family who loves you and supports you, then you can do whatever you want to do. You can be a successful adult. I don’t think you’re ever too old. Even today, I still call my mom and dad for advice, for money, just to have someone to talk to.
At 12, I entered foster care due to abuse and neglect. My foster family was fine, but it wasn’t like having a real family. My foster parents treated their own children different than me. I wasn’t allowed to date. I wasn’t allowed to sleep at a friend’s house. I knew as soon as I turned 18 that I would be on my own.
Unfortunately, I was in care for more than four years before anyone in authority asked me what I wanted. Every six months I appeared before a judge whose questions to her focused on school and her placement. It wasn’t until I was 16 that the judge asked me what I wanted in life. I told him, “I want what everyone wants—I want a family of my own.” The judge turned to my caseworker and said, “Let’s find Mary a family.”
In spite of the judge’s words, the road wasn’t easy. Many people were discouraging. They were like, "You’re 16. You’re going to go off to college in a couple of years, why do you want a family?” They didn't understand it was about my entire life, it’s not just about my childhood. I want to know that I’m going to have a place to come home to during Christmas breaks. I want to know that I’m going to have a dad to walk me down the aisle. That I’m going to have grandparents for my children.
Luckily, a former caseworker and his wife stepped forward to adopt me. I was totally overwhelmed. I had this strong desire to have a family, so I was really excited that I was going to be a part of the family. As soon as I moved in, I really felt a part of their family, I felt included. And even now, looking back, it’s like I had been with them my whole life. The adoption was finalized a week before my 18th birthday. They waited too long. To spend four and half years in foster care—it’s a waste of my childhood that I’ll never get back.
If you have a caring family who loves you and supports you, then you can do whatever you want to do. You can be a successful adult. I don’t think you’re ever too old. Even today, I still call my mom and dad for advice, for money, just to have someone to talk to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
