Homeless in Arizona

Also when you read the article the folks at the DES seem more concerned about the money they get from the state to care for the children, then they care about the children. Of course that's what government usually ends up being about money!!! Source

Effort to speed up foster-care licensing debated

By Mary K. Reinhart The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Jan 30, 2013 10:49 PM

A Republican lawmaker wants to speed up foster-care licensing for married couples with high incomes and solid credit scores, a move state officials and foster-care advocates say would eliminate critical background requirements and could endanger children and jeopardize millions in federal funding. [It's not about the children, it's about the money the state gets for the kids from the Feds]

Freshman Rep. Warren Petersen of Gilbert is concerned that it takes too long for families to become licensed to foster or adopt children from the state and that too many kids are living in group homes and shelters.

But opponents of House Bill 2074 say it goes too far and could lead to more disruption for already-traumatized children by placing them with ill-prepared families who will be more likely to send them back.

“It allows families to get through faster, but it may also allow inappropriate families,” said Kay Ekstrom, a former foster parent and founder of Christian Family Care, a foster-care- and adoption-licensing agency. “You don’t want families to fail, and you don’t want the children to be hurt.” [I wonder will Christian Family Care receive less cash from the state if this bill passes???? I bet that is his real concern. And are we mixing government and religion here in violation of the Arizona Constitution]

The measure, to be heard today in the House Reform and Human Services Committee, would require the state to issue foster-care licenses within two weeks to couples who have been married at least 10 years, have a credit score of at least 720, earn $80,000 a year or more, have no criminal record and have raised a child at least as old as the child they’ll be caring for. [Now that sounds like a violation of the "Equal Protection" clause of the Arizona Constitution because it gives rich people special treatment]

Families would be exempt from home inspections and home studies, which, among other things, evaluate the parent’s own childhood, parenting philosophies and motivation. They also could skip the required 30 hours of training and child-abuse background checks on parents and others in the household. [Again that sounds like a violation of the "Equal Protection" clause of the Arizona Constitution because it gives rich people special treatment. And if you ask me the government should be doing any of this nit picky stuff to ANY family.]

Petersen, whose bill has bipartisan support, said the bureaucracy involved with getting a foster-care license discourages some families from applying. It takes an average of six months to become licensed. [Well then why not pass a law eliminating the bureaucracy instead of a bill giving rich people special rights]

“It’s bad enough that red tape hurts business, but when you have red tape hurting kids, that’s unacceptable,” he said in an interview. “I just want to get these kids into homes.” [Again then why not pass a law eliminating the bureaucracy]

Petersen said he’s open to working with the Department of Economic Security, which oversees Child Protective Services and regulates foster and adoptive parents, as well as child advocates and private licensing agencies to make changes to the bill. [It sounds like Petersen thinks that the government bureaucracies at DES and CPS are just as important as the children]

He plans to introduce an amendment in committee to address some of their concerns. It would require that parents submit fingerprints before they can become licensed, be Arizona residents for at least five years, sign an affidavit that their home meets foster-care standards and complete at least six hours of the 30-hour training. [That is increasing to the bureaucracy, not reducing it.]

Under Petersen’s amendment, the DES could require that the family complete the remaining classes after a foster child is placed as a condition of keeping their license and could perform a home inspection.

The amendment would extend foster-care licenses to two years from one year.

An internal DES analysis of the bill said it would cost the state at least $20 million in federal foster-care funding if criminal background and child-abuse checks aren’t conducted on all members of the household, as required by law. [So it sounds like DES is more concerned about losing the cash then it is about taking care of the children]

“This process does not insure child safety, nor does it insure that the needs of the child will be met,” the DES analysis said.

In addition, the department said it could be liable if potential foster parents who meet the requirements under HB2074 move ahead of others already in the licensing pipeline. It also could discourage people from applying.

“This may encourage litigation due to unequal treatment of applicants for foster home licensure,” the analysis said. “Current foster and adoptive families may be offended ... and view this criteria as having little merit in evaluating fitness or ability of the applicant to care for traumatized children.”

Foster parents and foster-care licensing agencies also oppose the bill because it eliminates basic safety requirements, and they say it could endanger children. [Yea, and the really important thing was not mentioned - it might cut into the money they receive from the government]

Andrea Fries, program manager for Arizona’s Children Association, said her agency would not be willing to recommend licensing a couple who qualified under Petersen’s expedited process. The non-profit is among about 30 agencies with state contracts to recruit, train and recommend licensure for foster parents and oversee the homes.

“No licensing agency will recommend licensure,” Fries said.

Opponents of the bill also say it plays into a common myth that wealthier married couples make more successful foster parents, when there’s no evidence to support that.

Petersen said that he chose the $80,000 figure because it’s about twice the median income and that he believes it would eliminate the debate over whether these families want to be foster parents for the money.

The credit score, he said, is a reliable predictor of someone’s commitment and responsibility. [You need a high credit score to make the government think you would be a good foster parent?? That is ridiculous!!!]

“I don’t think parenting has anything to do with income,” Fries said. “The credit score is not going to tell me that you can parent a child in foster care.”

Foster families receive a daily subsidy that starts at about $20 per child, as well as $150 a year per child for clothes and $82 a year to cover school supplies for all foster children in the home. [So it sounds like it is about money!!! Wow the state gives foster parents $7,300 a year for each child they adopt]

Fries, Christian Family Care’s Ekstrom and others said raising your own children does not adequately prepare you for caring for foster children who have been removed from their parents because of suspected abuse and neglect and are likely traumatized. [So it raising your own children doesn't prepare you for raising foster children just what does prepare you??]

“The multiple moves that children experience are probably what harm children the most,” said Ekstrom, who met with Petersen last week to voice her concerns. “The bottom line is protection of our kids ... from being moved, from being in an inappropriate home, from being in a place that isn’t prepared to parent them.”