All those millions to CPS ...

Kane, I have called you a shill for the Child Protection INDUSTRY
and you have denied it several times.

Now you post this propaganda rooting for the caseworkers
by way of AFSCME and CWLA.

Literally LOBBYING for MORE FUNDING from Congress.

And you think this proves WHAT EXACTLY? grin



On Jun 9, 10:53 pm, "0:-]" wrote:
... yeah, sure.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearin...e=view&id=5133

[[[ Recognize this, Greg? I proved you were lying and were mistaken,
both, and I now challenge you to prove these witnesses are lying, boy!
You and your sick little friends.

If you didn't suffer from reading and emotional limitations in
comprehension, Greg, you'd see that your ****ed up friends, from the
past, and now, have been lying to you...or they are as screwed up as
you are. READ, have someone explain to you. This, my boy, is the
truth. If YOU can handle it. ]]]

House Committee on Ways and Means

Statement of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees (AFSCME)

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(AFSCME) represents 1.4 million state and local government and
nonprofit employees, including many thousands in the child welfare
system. Our child welfare members have the daunting task of
investigating allegations of abuse and neglect, and recommending
whether children should be removed from their homes. They provide
ongoing protective services to families whose children are at risk of
being removed due to abuse or neglect - helping to arrange for
services ranging from substance abuse and mental health counseling to
respite care to after school programs and doctor visits. They work
with families and children who have been placed temporarily in foster
care, moving as quickly as possible to reunify the family, or to
terminate parental rights so that a child can become eligible for
adoption, or to pursue other permanent-placement options. They
recruit and train foster and adoptive parents. They develop case
plans, conduct home visits, appear regularly in court, and produce
detailed documentation of all their work.

Unfortunately, child welfare caseworkers all too often do not receive
the support they need to attain positive outcomes for at risk children
and families. Caseloads and workloads are often two or three times
larger than those recommended by the Child Welfare League of America;
competency-based training and professional development opportunities
are lacking; meaningful supervision and mentoring is too often
unavailable; wages and benefits lag far behind other professions that
require similar educational backgrounds but without the responsibility
for the lives and well-being of vulnerable children; caseworkers risk
violent encounters on a daily basis; and they are often unfairly
blamed when a tragedy occurs despite their best efforts.

AFSCME commends the Subcommittee for recognizing the importance of the
Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) program within the child
welfare system, and for holding the May 23rd hearing. State and
county-run child welfare programs depend on adequate federal funding
to provide the wide array of services the PSSF program makes possible,
including prevention of child abuse and neglect, provision of
time-limited family reunification services, and adoption promotion.

Federal Funding for Child Welfare

AFSCME is alarmed that federal funding to protect vulnerable children
has remained flat over the past several years, a significant cut when
adjusted for inflation. Public child welfare systems across the
country have experienced dangerous financial shortfalls, resulting in
too large caseloads, too few home visits, difficulty in attracting and
retaining child welfare caseworkers, and lack of services for at-risk
families.

An Urban Institute study released just after the May 23rd hearing
found that state and local governments are attempting to plug the
funding gaps in child protective services - between 2002 and 2004,
state spending increased six percent and local spending increased 10
percent, while federal funding was virtually unchanged. The study
attributed overall growth in spending to higher expectations for the
quality or comprehensiveness of services, a continued increase in
adoption spending, and rising costs.

Title IV-E

State and local governments cannot continue to sustain the burden of
these necessary spending increases. Federal spending is not keeping
pace and in some instances is moving in the wrong direction. For
example, the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005
(DRA) requires that Title IV-E funding become more restrictive,
limiting federal matching funds for children placed in the care of a
relative, and for administrative costs for children who are at risk of
entering foster care. And, this is on top of Congress' failure to
eliminate the antiquated "look-back" to Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC) eligibility rules for Title IV-E financial
eligibility. The result is that half or less than half of all
children in out-of-home care are eligible to receive federal Title
IV-E matching funds, with states inevitably picking up the cost of
foster care for children ineligible for IV-E. AFSCME concurs with the
Casey Family Programs' recommendation that Title IV-E funds should be
made available to all children removed from their homes, including
those placed with relative caregivers and in subsidized guardianships,
and that Title IV-E funding eligibility should be adjusted for
inflation. We also agree that Title IV-E's entitlement funding
structure must be preserved and that IV-E funds should be made
available to children requiring services in their homes to help
prevent out-of-home placements.

PSSF Funding

The PSSF program (Title IV-B, subpart 2) is a key funding source for
states to provide prevention, reunification and adoption services. It
includes both mandatory and discretionary funding. Currently, the
mandatory funding level is $305 million annually. While the DRA
provides a one-year increase of $40 million for FY 2006, these funds
have not yet been appropriated. Moreover, Congress has failed to
appropriate the full $200 million in authorized discretionary funds -
in FY 2006, Congress approved only $89.1 million, a decrease of almost
$9 million from the FY 2005 level. Therefore, assuming the $40
million DRA increase is appropriated, the net increase for PSSF
funding in FY 2006 will be less than $30 million, bringing total
funding to $434 million this fiscal year, well below the authorized
level of $505 million.

We are pleased that the House draft reauthorization bill includes an
additional $40 million in annual mandatory funding for PSSF, and we
urge the Subcommittee to retain these additional funds. They will
enhance caseworkers' ability to visit foster children in their homes.
Also, states should be given the full two years to spend the
additional funds as they would have had they been made available at
the beginning of FY 2006. We strongly recommend that PSSF be fully
funded at the level of $505 million as adopted by the Subcommittee in
2001 and that the entire amount reauthorized for PSSF be mandatory
funding.

SSBG Funding

The Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) serves as a major source of
funding for states' child welfare systems, with 38 states spending
$194 million in SSBG funds in 2004 for child protective services.
These funds include some Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) dollars transferred into SSBG. We highlight this because SSBG,
which is under the jurisdiction of this Subcommittee, is threatened
with a reduction of $500 million in the President's proposed FY 2007
budget. This represents a 30 percent reduction in funding that would
devastate Child Protective Services (CPS) and other child welfare
programs and services.

Supported and Stable Workforce

The heart of the child welfare system is the caseworkers and
supervisors who respond to crises, visit children and families in
their homes, make judgments about where children can safely live, and
do whatever is necessary to protect and improve the lives of these
fragile families. Front-line workers cannot meet the high
expectations placed on them without significant investments towards
improving their work environments.

Most importantly, caseloads (the number of cases per caseworker) and
workloads (the amount of work required per case) must be reconfigured
to a manageable level. The Child Welfare League of America recommends
a caseload ratio of 12 to 15 children per caseworker. Very few child
welfare programs adhere to this ratio, with many demanding that
caseworkers carry caseloads two or three times as large while cases
become more complex. This results in high stress for the workforce
and reduced service capacity. In a survey of public agency
administrators, the American Public Human Services Association (APHSA)
found that the number-one issue in preventable turnover was that
"workloads are too high, demanding, or both." AFSCME recommends that
Congress establish a national caseload limit.

Child welfare caseworkers are also underpaid in comparison to jobs in
other sectors that require comparable education and responsibility.
Many caseworkers have steep student loan repayments. Inadequate
salaries and benefits lead to demoralization for those who remain in
child welfare and an exodus for many out of the system to less
stressful and more lucrative careers. AFSCME recommends that Congress
use its option to provide an additional 3.3 percent in discretionary
funds to allow for research, training, and evaluation of services in
the child welfare system. We also urge a greater investment in
caseworker training and student loan forgiveness. Regular pay
increases and employer-paid benefits are essential to recruit and
retain a stable and skilled workforce.

We are unaware of any evidence that states have misused Title IV-B
funds for administrative expenses. Therefore, we see no need to limit
the proportion of federal funds states can use to administer their
child welfare programs. While we agree that states should streamline
their administrative costs as much as possible to maximize spending on
services for children and families, a strong infrastructure is a
prerequisite to a well-functioning, complex system. At a minimum, we
urge the Subcommittee to exclude caseworkers from any funding
restrictions.

AFSCME's members who work in child welfare look to Congress to ensure
that they have the support and tools they need to help vulnerable
children and families. Mandatory, full funding for the PSSF program
would be an important advance in the funding structure. Additionally,
we urge the Subcommittee to appropriate the $40 million in additional
mandatory funds allocated in the DRA of 2005, protect the entitlement
structure for the Title IV-E program, and ensure rejection of the
proposed $500 million cut to the SSBG program. Adequate, dependable
federal funding is an important component in addressing the challenges
facing the child welfare workforce and the child welfare system
itself.

We appreciate the opportunity to share our views on this subject of
vital importance to our nation's children.