Child Welfare: An Overview of Federal Programs and Their Current Funding

Child welfare services are intended to prevent the abuse or neglect of children; ensure that children have safe, permanent homes; and promote the well-being of children and their families. As the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted, states have the primary obligation to ensure the welfare of children and their families. At the state level, the child welfare “system” consists of public child protection and child welfare workers, private child welfare and social service workers, state and local judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement personnel. These representatives of various state and local entities assume interrelated roles while carrying out child welfare activities, including investigating allegations of child abuse and neglect, providing services to families to ensure children’s safety in the home, removing children from their homes when that is necessary for their safety, supervising and administering payments for children placed in foster care, and ensuring permanency planning and regular case review for children in foster care. Most federal dollars dedicated to child welfare purposes are provided to state child welfare agencies, and federal involvement in child welfare is primarily tied to this financial assistance. In recent years, Congress has appropriated just above or below $8 billion in federal support dedicated to child welfare purposes. As a condition of receiving these foster care and other child welfare program funds, states must typically provide nonfederal funds of between 20Apart from the federal funding provided for programs described in this report, state child welfare agencies tap significant program resources—as much as$5.6 billion—from other federal funding streams, including the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant, the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG), and Medicaid. These federal funding streams have federal statutory goals, or support activities, that overlap with child welfare purposes. However, they are not solely dedicated to child welfare purposes and states are not necessarily required to use them for those specific purposes. Neither do states need to meet federal requirements specific to the conduct of their child welfare programs as a condition of receiving this “nondedicated” funding. This report begins with a review of federal appropriations activity in FY2014 as it relates to child welfare programs, including the effect of the automatic spending cuts, known as sequestration. The bulk of the report provides a short description of each federal child welfare program, including its purpose and recent (FY2012-FY2014) funding levels

Disrupting the Path from Childhood Trauma to Juvenile Justice: An Upstream Health and Justice Approach

A groundbreaking public health study funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Kaiser Foundation found astoundingly high rates of childhood trauma, including experiences like abuse, neglect, parental substance abuse, mental illness, and incarceration. Hundreds of follow-up studies have revealed that multiple traumatic adverse childhood experiences (or “ACEs”) make it far more likely that a person will have poor mental health outcomes in adulthood, such as higher rates of depression, anxiety, suicide attempts, and substance abuse. Interestingly, the original ACE Study examined a largely middle-class adult population living in San Diego, but subsequent follow-up studies have examined the prevalence of ACEs and its impact on mental health in other populations, including among people involved in the juvenile and criminal justice systems. Unsurprisingly, individuals entangled in those systems are more likely to have experienced higher numbers of these traumatic events, despite a frequent lack of access to critical mental health treatment, including the treatment necessary to address past childhood trauma. The ACEs framework for understanding health and mental health outcomes resulting from childhood trauma has received a high level of attention recently following an in-depth, multi-part series on these issues by National Public Radio (NPR) and other media. Because the ACEs public health research shows us that events in childhood can cause “toxic stress” and have a lasting impact on the mental health of a child well into adulthood, this framework provides us with an opportunity to consider how to more effectively intervene to stop the pathway from ACEs to juvenile justice system involvement and address the related health, mental health, developmental, and legal needs of children and their families. Before a child becomes an adult facing a mental health crisis or incarceration, attorneys, doctors, and other professionals can collaborate to disrupt that fate. This Article argues for a more upstream approach to address mental health using a medical-legal collaboration, based on the experiences of the authors, a law professor and medical school professor who work together to try to improve outcomes for children who have experienced trauma and their families. In Part I, we begin by examining the groundbreaking ACE studies, exploring the toxic stress and health and mental health outcomes that are associated with high rates of ACEs in childhood. Next, in Part II, we analyze the research revealing high rates of trauma and ACEs among populations involved in the juvenile justice system. Finally, we conclude in Part III by arguing for a more upstream public health and justice approach. We examine a particular problem in the city of Albuquerque, the largest urban area in New Mexico: children who have a particular ACE right from birth in the form of substance abuse by a household member. These infants are born with prenatal drug exposure and many experience symptoms of withdrawal in their first weeks of life, often quickly followed by an accumulation of additional forms of early childhood trauma. We discuss an approach through which the authors work to address those issues and disrupt the path from that childhood trauma to poor outcomes and juvenile justice system involvement. This approach engages attorneys with doctors and other health and developmental professionals to address ACEs among young children ages zero to three and their siblings, parents, and other caregivers. We advocate for an early, holistic, multi-generational, multi-disciplinary public health and justice approach to address ACEs early and improve the trajectory for children who have experienced childhood trauma