by Mary Boo, assistant director
On April 10, more than 100 kinship caregivers and child advocates from almost every state gathered in Washington, D.C. to tell their members of Congress about why they need a federally supported subsidized guardianship program. While promoting the Kinship Caregiver Support Act, these dedicated advocates explained why guardianship is a necessary option and how the legislation could immediately help more than 15,000 foster children and youth across the country leave care permanently and safely.
I spent the day with two grandparents from Staten Island, New York, who know firsthand how important a guardianship option is. These dedicated individuals have adopted their niece and nephew and are foster parents to four of their grandchildren, and need support to make ends meet with their now large and unplanned family. Adoption isn't the right option for their grandkids but they see real limitations as foster parents. Several of the children have serious medical problems, but the grandparents cannot get them care without a birth parent's permission. They have had to cancel appointments and reschedule them more than a month later when they have not gotten the permission in time. New York has no subsidized guardianship option, so a federal subsidized guardianship program would definitely improve the lives of these children.
The Kinship Caregiver Support Act has significant bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate. We hope to see it pass into legislation soon. If you would like to write to your member of Congress to urge passage, please visit the Kids Are Waiting web site.
Showing posts with label financing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label financing. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Friday, February 15, 2008
Key House Leader Introduces Broad Child Welfare Reform Bill
On February 14, Representative Jim McDermott (D-WA), chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support (which has jurisdiction over the nation’s child welfare system) introduced The Invest in KIDS Act, which seeks the first comprehensive reform of the U.S. child welfare system in nearly 30 years.
“Every American kid deserves a safe home and a secure life, and in the case of vulnerable children, it is up to us to make sure that happens,” McDermott said.
The legislation (HR 5466) would:
• provide additional funding to help states in their efforts to strengthen families and protect vulnerable children;
• make all foster children eligible for assistance for the first time (only 43% of foster children received federal aid in 2006);
• provide assistance to states to improve and retain their child welfare workforce;
• eliminate the aging out of foster kids at age 18 by extending support to the age of 21; and,
• provide financial support to grandparents and other relatives who want to care for foster children.
These critical changes would provided needed support that help vulnerable children have permanent families, and ensure that those families have the support they need.
Children can't wait. The time for reform is now.
“Every American kid deserves a safe home and a secure life, and in the case of vulnerable children, it is up to us to make sure that happens,” McDermott said.
The legislation (HR 5466) would:
• provide additional funding to help states in their efforts to strengthen families and protect vulnerable children;
• make all foster children eligible for assistance for the first time (only 43% of foster children received federal aid in 2006);
• provide assistance to states to improve and retain their child welfare workforce;
• eliminate the aging out of foster kids at age 18 by extending support to the age of 21; and,
• provide financial support to grandparents and other relatives who want to care for foster children.
These critical changes would provided needed support that help vulnerable children have permanent families, and ensure that those families have the support they need.
Children can't wait. The time for reform is now.
Monday, December 17, 2007
House Tribal Bill Introduced
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.
“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.
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.
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.).
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.
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, 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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
