Federal Child Welfare Oversight

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is the principal federal agency that regulates and funds federal child welfare initiatives.  The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), an operating division of HHS, is responsible for federal programs that promote the economic and social well being of families, children, individuals and communities.
 
The Children's Bureau (CB), one of four bureaus within the Administration for Children and Families works in conjunction with state and local agencies to deliver child welfare services.   The Bureau provides grants to states, tribes and communities for services such as, child protective services, family preservation and support, foster care, adoption and independent living.
 
The Children's Bureau administers nine state grant programs (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/programs_fund/index.htm#state) and six discretionary grant programs (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/programs_fund/index.htm#disc). Each of the state grant programs has its own legislatively mandated matching requirement and formula for allocation, but all require that funds be administered only by the state child welfare agency (or in some programs, Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations). The state agency is then authorized to contract with other public agencies and with private agencies for the direct provision of appropriate services. ACF policy requires a match from the grantees for all discretionary grant projects other than research.
 
The Children’s Bureau is also responsible for the collection and dissemination of child welfare statistics, the administration of child welfare information systems, and general oversight of the states’ child welfare systems.
 
Systems
 
Systems administered by the Children’s Bureau collect data from the states as well as aid the states in collection of data. The systems administered by CB are:
  • Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS):  AFCARS collects case-level information on all children in foster care for whom state child welfare agencies have responsibility for placement, care or supervision and on children who are adopted under the auspices of the state's public child welfare agency. AFCARS also includes information on foster and adoptive parents.
  • National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS):  NCANDS collects and analyzes annual data on child abuse and neglect submitted voluntarily by the states and the District of Columbia.  Data from the states are used systematically to measure the impact and effectiveness of CPS through performance outcome measures. NCANDS collects case-level data on all children who receive an investigation or assessment by a CPS agency. States that are unable to provide case-level data submit aggregated counts of key indicators.
  • Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System (SACWIS):  The SACWIS functions as the electronic case file for children and families served by the states' child welfare programs. Through federal funding, each state is encouraged to implement its own comprehensive automated case management tool.  These state systems produce the data that are sent to the Children’s Bureau systems such as AFCARS.  Currently, most states and the District of Columbia are at some stage of SACWIS planning, development, implementation, or operations.
  • National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD): NYTD will collect case-level information on youth in care including the services paid for or provided by the State agencies that administer the Chafee Foster Care Independence Program (CFCIP), as well as the outcome information on youth who are in or who have aged out of foster care.

 

The Child and Family Service Review
 
The Child and Family Service Review is the Department of Health and Human Service’s mechanism for monitoring that the state ís conforming with federal child welfare requirements.  The CFSR measures outcomes and results, and allows states to undertake corrective action if they are not found in substantial conformity with the law.
 
The CFSR takes place in three phases.  First, the state performs a self-assessment and submits the results to HHS.  Second, HHS evaluates the state child welfare system operations through case reviews and interviews with stakeholders and assesses each state's conformity with seven outcomes. Each state is also evaluated on seven systematic factors that pertain to agency operations: (1) the statewide information system; (2) the case review system; (3) training for child welfare staff, foster parents, and adoptive parents; (4) the quality assurance system; (5) the service array; (6) the responsiveness of the agency to the community; and (7) the licensing, recruitment, and retention of foster and adoptive parents.
 
CFSR Outcomes
  • Safety Outcome 1 – Children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect
  • Safety Outcome 2 – Children are safely maintained in their homes when possible
  • Permanency Outcome 1 – Children have permanency and stability in their living situations
  • Permanency Outcome 2 – The continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved
  • Well Being Outcome 1 – Families have enhanced capacity to provide for children’s needs
  • Well Being Outcome 2 – Children receive services to meet their educational needs
  • Well Being Outcome 3 – Children receive services to meet their physical and mental health needs
 
Third, States not conforming to any of these outcomes or systematic factors are required to submit a Program Improvement Plan.  The CFSR is an ongoing process that began in 2001.  Every state in the nation has been reviewed and is currently participating in the third phase, or PIP.  When a state completes the implementation of the PIP, the review process will begin again. All 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico completed their first review by 2004. No State was found to be in substantial conformity in all of the seven outcome areas or seven systemic factors. Since that time, States have been implementing their PIPs to correct those outcome areas not found in substantial conformity. The second round of reviews began in the spring of 2007.