H. R. 2883 - The Funding Of The S.S. Follow The Money

H. R. 2883

One Hundred Twelfth Congress
of the
United States of America
AT T H E F I R S T S E S S I O N

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
the fifth day of January, two thousand and eleven

An Act
To amend part B of title IV of the Social Security Act to extend the child and
family services program through fiscal year 2016, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Child and Family Services
Improvement and Innovation Act’’.

TITLE I—EXTENSION OF CHILD AND
FAMILY SERVICES PROGRAMS
SEC. 101. STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES CHILD WELFARE SERVICES PRO-
GRAM.
(a) EXTENSION OF PROGRAM.—Section 425 of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 625) is amended by striking ‘‘2007 through 2011’’
and inserting ‘‘2012 through 2016’’.
(b) MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN STATE PLAN REQUIREMENTS.—
(1) RESPONSE TO EMOTIONAL TRAUMA.—Section
422(b)(15)(A)(ii) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 622(b)(15)(A)(ii)) is
amended by inserting ‘‘, including emotional trauma associated
with a child’s maltreatment and removal from home’’ before
the semicolon.
(2) PROCEDURES ON THE USE OF PSYCHOTROPIC MEDICA-
TIONS.—Section 422(b)(15)(A)(v) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
622(b)(15)(A)(v)) is amended by inserting ‘‘, including protocols
for the appropriate use and monitoring of psychotropic medica-
tions’’ before the semicolon.
(3) DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES TO ADDRESS DEVELOPMENTAL
NEEDS OF VERY YOUNG CHILDREN.—Section 422(b) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 622(b)) is amended—
(A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (16);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph
(17) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(18) include a description of the activities that the State
has undertaken to reduce the length of time children who
have not attained 5 years of age are without a permanent
family, and the activities the State undertakes to address the
developmental needs of such children who receive benefits or
services under this part or part E.’’.
H. R. 2883—2

(4) DATA SOURCES FOR CHILD DEATH REPORTING.—Section
422(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 622(b)), as amended by paragraph
(3) of this subsection, is amended—
(A) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (17);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph
(18) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(19) contain a description of the sources used to compile
information on child maltreatment deaths required by Federal
law to be reported by the State agency referred to in paragraph
(1), and to the extent that the compilation does not include
information on such deaths from the State vital statistics
department, child death review teams, law enforcement agen-
cies, or offices of medical examiners or coroners, the State
shall describe why the information is not so included and
how the State will include the information.’’.

(c) CHILD VISITATION BY CASEWORKERS.—Section 424 of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 624) is amended by striking the 2nd subsection
(e), as added by section 7(b) of the Child and Family Services
Improvement Act of 2006, and inserting the following:
‘‘(f)(1)(A) Each State shall take such steps as are necessary
to ensure that the total number of visits made by caseworkers
on a monthly basis to children in foster care under the responsibility
of the State during a fiscal year is not less than 90 percent (or,
in the case of fiscal year 2015 or thereafter, 95 percent) of the
total number of such visits that would occur during the fiscal
year if each such child were so visited once every month while
in such care.
‘‘(B) If the Secretary determines that a State has failed to
comply with subparagraph (A) for a fiscal year, then the percentage
that would otherwise apply for purposes of subsection (a) for the
fiscal year shall be reduced by—
‘‘(i) 1, if the number of full percentage points by which
the State fell short of the percentage specified in subparagraph
(A) is less than 10;
‘‘(ii) 3, if the number of full percentage points by which
the State fell short, as described in clause (i), is not less
than 10 and less than 20; or
‘‘(iii) 5, if the number of full percentage points by which
the State fell short, as described in clause (i), is not less
than 20.
‘‘(2)(A) Each State shall take such steps as are necessary to
ensure that not less than 50 percent of the total number of visits
made by caseworkers to children in foster care under the responsi-
bility of the State during a fiscal year occur in the residence
of the child involved.
‘‘(B) If the Secretary determines that a State has failed to
comply with subparagraph (A) for a fiscal year, then the percentage
that would otherwise apply for purposes of subsection (a) for the
fiscal year shall be reduced by—
‘‘(i) 1, if the number of full percentage points by which
the State fell short of the percentage specified in subparagraph
(A) is less than 10;
‘‘(ii) 3, if the number of full percentage points by which
the State fell short, as described in clause (i), is not less
than 10 and less than 20; or
H. R. 2883—3

‘‘(iii) 5, if the number of full percentage points by which
the State fell short, as described in clause (i), is not less
than 20.’’.
(d) TECHNICAL CORRECTION.—Section 423(b) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 623(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘per centum’’ each place
it appears and inserting ‘‘percent’’.
SEC. 102. PROMOTING SAFE AND STABLE FAMILIES PROGRAM.
(a) EXTENSION OF FUNDING AUTHORIZATIONS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 436(a) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 629f(a)) is amended by striking all that follows
‘‘$345,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘for each of fiscal years 2012
through 2016.’’.
(2) DISCRETIONARY GRANTS.—Section 437(a) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 629g(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘2007 through 2011’’
and inserting ‘‘2012 through 2016’’.
(b) TARGETING OF SERVICES TO POPULATIONS AT GREATEST RISK
OF MALTREATMENT.—Section 432(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629b(a))
is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (8);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (9)
and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(10) describes how the State identifies which populations
are at the greatest risk of maltreatment and how services
are targeted to the populations.’’.
(c) REVISED PURPOSES OF FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES AND TIME-
LIMITED FAMILY REUNIFICATION SERVICES.—
(1) FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES.—Section 431(a)(2) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 629a(a)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(2) FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘family support services’
means community-based services designed to carry out the
purposes described in subparagraph (B).
‘‘(B) PURPOSES DESCRIBED.—The purposes described in
this subparagraph are the following:
‘‘(i) To promote the safety and well-being of chil-
dren and families.
‘‘(ii) To increase the strength and stability of fami-
lies (including adoptive, foster, and extended families).
‘‘(iii) To increase parents’ confidence and com-
petence in their parenting abilities.
‘‘(iv) To afford children a safe, stable, and sup-
portive family environment.
‘‘(v) To strengthen parental relationships and pro-
mote healthy marriages.
‘‘(vi) To enhance child development, including
through mentoring (as defined in section 439(b)(2)).’’.
(2) TIME-LIMITED FAMILY REUNIFICATION SERVICES.—Section
431(a)(7)(B) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629a(a)(7)(B)) is amended
by redesignating clause (vi) as clause (viii) and inserting after
clause (v) the following:
‘‘(vi) Peer-to-peer mentoring and support groups
for parents and primary caregivers.
‘‘(vii) Services and activities designed to facilitate
access to and visitation of children by parents and
siblings.’’.
H. R. 2883—4

(d) UNIFORM DEFINITIONS OF INDIAN TRIBE AND TRIBAL
ORGANIZATION.—Section 431(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629a(a)(5)
and (6)) is amended by striking paragraphs (5) and (6) and inserting
the following:
‘‘(5) INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘Indian tribe’ has the meaning
given the term in section 428(c).
‘‘(6) TRIBAL ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘tribal organization’
has the meaning given the term in section 428(c).’’.
(e) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS OF STATE SUMMARIES OF FINAN-
CIAL DATA; PUBLICATION ON HHS WEBSITE.—Section 432(c) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 629b(c)) is amended—
(1) by striking all that precedes ‘‘shall’’ and inserting the
following:
‘‘(c) ANNUAL SUBMISSION OF STATE REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary’’; and
(2) by adding after and below the end the following:
‘‘(2) INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED.—The compilation shall
include the individual State reports and tables that synthesize
State information into national totals for each element required
to be included in the reports, including planned and actual
spending by service category for the program authorized under
this subpart and planned spending by service category for the
program authorized under subpart 1.
‘‘(3) PUBLIC ACCESSIBILITY.—Not later than September 30
of each year, the Secretary shall publish the compilation on
the website of the Department of Health and Human Services
in a location easily accessible by the public.’’.
(f) GAO REPORT ON MULTIPLE SOURCES OF FEDERAL SPENDING
AND FAMILY ACCESS TO SERVICES.—Not later than 12 months after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of
the United States shall submit to Congress a report that—
(1) identifies alternative sources of Federal funding that
are being employed by States or other entities for the same
purposes for which funding is provided under subpart 1 or
2 of part B of title IV of the Social Security Act; and
(2) assesses the needs of families eligible for services under
such program, including identification of underserved commu-
nities and information regarding—
(A) the supports available for caseworkers to appro-
priately investigate and safely manage their caseloads;
(B) the length of the wait time for families to receive
substance abuse and other preventive services; and
(C) the number of families on waiting lists for such
services and the effect of the delay on healthy, successful
reunification outcomes for such families.
(g) TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.—
(1) Section 432(a)(8)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
629b(a)(8)(B)) is amended in each of clauses (i) and (ii) by
striking ‘‘forms CFS 101–Part I and CFS 101–Part II (or any
successor forms)’’ and inserting ‘‘form CFS–101 (including all
parts and any successor forms)’’.
(2) Section 433(c)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
629c(c)(2)) is amended—
(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ‘‘FOOD
STAMP’’ and inserting ‘‘SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSIST-
ANCE PROGRAM BENEFITS’’; and
H. R. 2883—5

(B) by striking ‘‘benefits benefits’’ each place it appears
and inserting ‘‘benefits’’.
SEC. 103. GRANTS FOR TARGETED PURPOSES.
(a) EXTENSION OF FUNDING RESERVATIONS FOR MONTHLY CASE-
WORKER VISITS AND REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP GRANTS.—Section
436(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 629f(b)) is amended—
(1) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ‘‘433(e)’’ and all that
follows and inserting ‘‘433(e) $20,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2012 through 2016.’’; and
(2) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘437(f)’’ and all that follows
and inserting ‘‘437(f) $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012
through 2016.’’.
(b) REVISION IN USE OF MONTHLY CASEWORKER VISITS
GRANTS.—Section 436(b)(4)(B)(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
629f(b)(4)(B)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘support’’ and insert ‘‘improve the quality
of’’; and
(2) by striking ‘‘a primary emphasis’’ and all that follows
and inserting ‘‘an emphasis on improving caseworker decision
making on the safety, permanency, and well-being of foster
children and on activities designed to increase retention,
recruitment, and training of caseworkers.’’; and
(c) REAUTHORIZATION OF REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP GRANTS TO
ASSIST CHILDREN AFFECTED BY PARENTAL SUBSTANCE ABUSE.—
(1) EXTENSION OF PROGRAM.—Section 437(f)(3)(A) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 629g(f)(3)(A)) is amended by striking ‘‘2007
through 2011’’ and inserting ‘‘2012 through 2016’’.
(2) REVISIONS TO PROGRAM.—Section 437(f) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 629g(f)) is amended—
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ‘‘METH-
AMPHETAMINE OR OTHER’’;
(B) in each of paragraphs (1), (4)(A), (7)(A)(i), and
(9)(B)(iii), by striking ‘‘methamphetamine or other’’;
(C) in paragraph (3), by striking subparagraph (B)
and inserting the following:
‘‘(B) REQUIRED MINIMUM PERIOD OF APPROVAL.—
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—A grant shall be awarded under
this subsection for a period of not less than 2, and
not more than 5, fiscal years, subject to clause (ii).
‘‘(ii) EXTENSION OF GRANT.—On application of the
grantee, the Secretary may extend for not more than
2 fiscal years the period for which a grant is awarded
under this subsection.
‘‘(C) MULTIPLE GRANTS ALLOWED.—This subsection
shall not be interpreted to prevent a grantee from applying
for, or being awarded, separate grants under this sub-
section.’’;
(D) in paragraph (6)(A)—
(i) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of clause (ii);
(ii) by striking the period at the end of clause
(iii) and inserting a semicolon; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(iv) 70 percent for the sixth such fiscal year; and
‘‘(v) 65 percent for the seventh such fiscal year.’’;
(E) in paragraph (7)—
H. R. 2883—6

(i) by striking ‘‘shall—’’ and all that follows through
‘‘(A) take’’ and inserting ‘‘shall take’’;
(ii) in subparagraph (A)(iv), by striking ‘‘; and’’
and inserting a period;
(iii) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(iv) by redesignating clauses (i) through (iv) of
subparagraph (A) as subparagraphs (A) through (D),
respectively, and moving each of such provisions 2
ems to the left; and
(F) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(10) LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
EXPENSES OF THE SECRETARY.—Not more than 5 percent of
the amounts appropriated or reserved for awarding grants
under this subsection for each of fiscal years 2012 through
2016 may be used by the Secretary for salaries and Department
of Health and Human Services administrative expenses in
administering this subsection.’’.
(3) EVALUATIONS.—Not later than December 31, 2012, and
not later than December 31, 2017, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services shall evaluate the effectiveness of the
grants awarded to regional partnerships under section 437(f)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 629g(f)) and shall publish
a report regarding the results of each evaluation on the website
of the Department of Health and Human Services. Each report
required to be published under this subsection shall include—
(A) an evaluation of the programs and activities con-
ducted, and the services provided, with the grant funds
awarded under such section for fiscal years 2007 through
2011, in the case of the evaluation required by December
31, 2012, and for fiscal years 2012 through 2016, in the
case of the evaluation required by December 31, 2017;
(B) an analysis of the regional partnerships awarded
such grants that have, and have not, been successful in
achieving the goals and outcomes specified in their grant
applications and with respect to the performance indicators
established by the Secretary under paragraph (8) of such
section that are applicable to their grant awards; and
(C) an analysis of the extent to which such grants
have been successful in addressing the needs of families
with methamphetamine or other substance abuse problems
who come to the attention of the child welfare system
and in achieving the goals of child safety, permanence,
and family stability.
SEC. 104. COURT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
(a) GRANT PURPOSES.—Section 438(a) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 629h(a)) is amended—
(1) in paragraph (2)—
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘; and’’ and
inserting ‘‘, including the requirements in the Act related
to concurrent planning;’’;
(B) in subparagraph (B), by adding ‘‘and’’ at the end;
and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(C) to increase and improve engagement of the entire
family in court processes relating to child welfare, family
preservation, family reunification, and adoption;’’; and
H. R. 2883—7

(2) in paragraph (4)—
(A) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘(4)’’;
(B) by striking the period and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and
(C) by adding after and below the end the following:
‘‘(B) to increase and improve engagement of the entire
family in court processes relating to child welfare, family
preservation, family reunification, and adoption.’’.
(b) SINGLE GRANT APPLICATION.—Section 438(b)(2) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 629h(b)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(2) SINGLE GRANT APPLICATION.—Pursuant to the require-
ments under paragraph (1) of this subsection, a highest State
court desiring a grant under this section shall submit a single
application to the Secretary that specifies whether the applica-
tion is for a grant for—
‘‘(A) the purposes described in paragraphs (1) and (2)
of subsection (a);
‘‘(B) the purpose described in subsection (a)(3);
‘‘(C) the purpose described in subsection (a)(4); or
‘‘(D) the purposes referred to in 2 or more (specifically
identified) of subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of this para-
graph.’’.
(c) AMOUNT OF GRANT.—Section 438(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
629h(c)) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(c) AMOUNT OF GRANT.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to each of subparagraphs
(A), (B), and (C) of subsection (b)(2) that refers to 1 or more
grant purposes for which an application of a highest State
court is approved under this section, the court shall be entitled
to payment, for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2016, from
the amount allocated under paragraph (3) of this subsection
for grants for the purpose or purposes, of an amount equal
to $85,000 plus the amount described in paragraph (2) of this
subsection with respect to the purpose or purposes.
‘‘(2) AMOUNT DESCRIBED.—The amount described in this
paragraph for any fiscal year with respect to the purpose or
purposes referred to in a subparagraph of subsection (b)(2)
is the amount that bears the same ratio to the total of the
amounts allocated under paragraph (3) of this subsection for
grants for the purpose or purposes as the number of individuals
in the State who have not attained 21 years of age bears
to the total number of such individuals in all States the highest
State courts of which have approved applications under this
section for grants for the purpose or purposes.
‘‘(3) ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.—
‘‘(A) MANDATORY FUNDS.—Of the amounts reserved
under section 436(b)(2) for any fiscal year, the Secretary
shall allocate—
‘‘(i) $9,000,000 for grants for the purposes
described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a);
‘‘(ii) $10,000,000 for grants for the purpose
described in subsection (a)(3);
‘‘(iii) $10,000,000 for grants for the purpose
described in subsection (a)(4); and
‘‘(iv) $1,000,000 for grants to be awarded on a
competitive basis among the highest courts of Indian
tribes or tribal consortia that—
H. R. 2883—8

‘‘(I) are operating a program under part E,
in accordance with section 479B;
‘‘(II) are seeking to operate a program under
part E and have received an implementation grant
under section 476; or
‘‘(III) has a court responsible for proceedings
related to foster care or adoption.
‘‘(B) DISCRETIONARY FUNDS.—The Secretary shall allo-
cate all of the amounts reserved under section 437(b)(2)
for grants for the purposes described in paragraphs (1)
and (2) of subsection (a).’’.
(d) EXTENSION OF FEDERAL SHARE.—Section 438(d) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 629h(d)) is amended by striking ‘‘2002 through
2011’’ and inserting ‘‘2012 through 2016’’.
(e) TECHNICAL CORRECTION.—Effective as if included in the
enactment of the Safe and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster
Children Act of 2006, section 8(b) of such Act (120 Stat. 513)
is amended by striking ‘‘438(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 638(b))’’
inserting ‘‘438(b)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629h(b)(1))’’.
SEC. 105. DATA STANDARDIZATION FOR IMPROVED DATA MATCHING.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Part B of title IV of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 621–629i) is amended by adding at the end the
following:

‘‘Subpart 3—Common Provisions
‘‘SEC. 440. DATA STANDARDIZATION FOR IMPROVED DATA MATCHING.
‘‘(a) STANDARD DATA ELEMENTS.—
‘‘(1) DESIGNATION.—The Secretary, in consultation with an
interagency work group established by the Office of Manage-
ment and Budget, and considering State perspectives, shall,
by rule, designate standard data elements for any category
of information required to be reported under this part.
‘‘(2) DATA ELEMENTS MUST BE NONPROPRIETARY AND INTER-
OPERABLE.—The standard data elements designated under
paragraph (1) shall, to the extent practicable, be nonproprietary
and interoperable.
‘‘(3) OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—In designating standard data
elements under this subsection, the Secretary shall, to the
extent practicable, incorporate—
‘‘(A) interoperable standards developed and maintained
by an international voluntary consensus standards body,
as defined by the Office of Management and Budget, such
as the International Organization for Standardization;
‘‘(B) interoperable standards developed and maintained
by intergovernmental partnerships, such as the National
Information Exchange Model; and
‘‘(C) interoperable standards developed and maintained
by Federal entities with authority over contracting and
financial assistance, such as the Federal Acquisition Regu-
latory Council.
‘‘(b) DATA STANDARDS FOR REPORTING.—
H. R. 2883—9

‘‘(1) DESIGNATION.—The Secretary, in consultation with an
interagency work group established by the Office of Manage-
ment and Budget, and considering State government perspec-
tives, shall, by rule, designate data reporting standards to
govern the reporting required under this part.
‘‘(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The data reporting standards
required by paragraph (1) shall, to the extent practicable—
‘‘(A) incorporate a widely-accepted, non-proprietary,
searchable, computer-readable format;
‘‘(B) be consistent with and implement applicable
accounting principles; and
‘‘(C) be capable of being continually upgraded as nec-
essary.
‘‘(3) INCORPORATION OF NONPROPRIETARY STANDARDS.—In
designating reporting standards under this subsection, the Sec-
retary shall, to the extent practicable, incorporate existing non-
proprietary standards, such as the eXtensible Business
Reporting Language.’’.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect on October 1, 2012, and shall apply with respect
to information required to be reported on or after such date.
SEC. 106. PROVISIONS RELATING TO FOSTER CARE OR ADOPTION.
(a) EDUCATIONAL STABILITY FOR EACH FOSTER PLACEMENT.—
Section 475(1)(G) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 675(1)(G))
is amended—
(1) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘the placement’’ and inserting
‘‘each placement’’; and
(2) in clause (ii)(I), by inserting ‘‘each’’ before ‘‘placement’’.
(b) FOSTER YOUTH ID THEFT.—Section 475(5) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 675(5)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subparagraph (G);
(2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (H)
and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(I) each child in foster care under the responsibility
of the State who has attained 16 years of age receives
without cost a copy of any consumer report (as defined
in section 603(d) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act) per-
taining to the child each year until the child is discharged
from care, and receives assistance (including, when feasible,
from any court-appointed advocate for the child) in inter-
preting and resolving any inaccuracies in the report.’’.
(c) DESCRIPTION OF ADOPTION SPENDING.—Section 473(a)(8) of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 673(a)(8)) is amended by inserting ‘‘, and
shall document how such amounts are spent, including on post-
adoption services’’ before the period.
(d) INCLUSION IN ANNUAL REPORT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
ON CHILD VISITATION BY CASEWORKERS.—Section 479A(6) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 679b(6)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subparagraph (A); and
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph
(C) and inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
‘‘(B) the total number of visits made by caseworkers
on a monthly basis to children in foster care under the
responsibility of the State during a fiscal year as a percent-
age of the total number of the visits that would occur
H. R. 2883—10

during the fiscal year if each child were so visited once
every month while in such care; and’’.
SEC. 107. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise provided in this title,
this title and the amendments made by this title shall take effect
on October 1, 2011, and shall apply to payments under parts B
and E of title IV of the Social Security Act for calendar quarters
beginning on or after such date, without regard to whether regula-
tions to implement the amendments are promulgated by such date.
(b) DELAY PERMITTED IF STATE LEGISLATION REQUIRED.—If the
Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that State
legislation (other than legislation appropriating funds) is required
in order for a State plan developed pursuant to subpart 1 of part
B, or a State plan approved under subpart 2 of part B or part
E, of title IV of the Social Security Act to meet the additional
requirements imposed by the amendments made by this title, the
plan shall not be regarded as failing to meet any of the additional
requirements before the 1st day of the 1st calendar quarter begin-
ning after the first regular session of the State legislature that
begins after the date of the enactment of this Act. If the State
has a 2-year legislative session, each year of the session is deemed
to be a separate regular session of the State legislature.

TITLE II—CHILD WELFARE
DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
SEC. 201. RENEWAL OF AUTHORITY TO APPROVE DEMONSTRATION
PROJECTS DESIGNED TO TEST INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES
IN STATE CHILD WELFARE PROGRAMS.
Section 1130 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a–
9) is amended—
(1) in subsection (a)—
(A) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
‘‘(2) LIMITATION.—During fiscal years 2012 through 2014,
the Secretary may authorize demonstration projects described
in paragraph (1), with not more than 10 demonstration projects
to be authorized in each fiscal year.’’.
(B) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(3) CONDITIONS FOR STATE ELIGIBILITY.—For purposes of
a new demonstration project under this section that is initially
approved in any of fiscal years 2012 through 2014, a State
shall be authorized to conduct such demonstration project only
if the State satisfies the following conditions:
‘‘(A) IDENTIFY 1 OR MORE GOALS.—
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The State shall demonstrate that
the demonstration project is designed to accomplish
1 or more of the following goals:
‘‘(I) Increase permanency for all infants, chil-
dren, and youth by reducing the time in foster
placements when possible and promoting a
successful transition to adulthood for older youth.
‘‘(II) Increase positive outcomes for infants,
children, youth, and families in their homes and
communities, including tribal communities, and
H. R. 2883—11

improve the safety and well-being of infants, chil-
dren, and youth.
‘‘(III) Prevent child abuse and neglect and the
re-entry of infants, children, and youth into foster
care.
‘‘(ii) LONG-TERM THERAPEUTIC FAMILY TREATMENT
CENTERS; ADDRESSING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.—With
respect to a demonstration project that is designed
to accomplish 1 or more of the goals described in clause
(i), the State may elect to establish a program—
‘‘(I) to permit foster care maintenance pay-
ments to be made under part E of title IV to
a long-term therapeutic family treatment center
(as described in paragraph (8)(B)) on behalf of
a child residing in the center; or
‘‘(II) to identify and address domestic violence
that endangers children and results in the place-
ment of children in foster care.
‘‘(B) DEMONSTRATE READINESS.—The State shall dem-
onstrate through a narrative description the State’s
capacity to effectively use the authority to conduct a dem-
onstration project under this section by identifying changes
the State has made or plans to make in policies, procedures,
or other elements of the State’s child welfare program
that will enable the State to successfully achieve the goal
or goals of the project.
‘‘(C) DEMONSTRATE IMPLEMENTED OR PLANNED CHILD
WELFARE PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT POLICIES.—
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—The State shall demonstrate that
the State has implemented, or plans to implement
within 3 years of the date on which the State submits
its application to conduct the demonstration project
or 2 years after the date on which the Secretary
approves such demonstration project (whichever is
later), at least 2 of the child welfare program improve-
ment policies described in paragraph (7).
‘‘(ii) PREVIOUS IMPLEMENTATION.—For purposes of
the requirement described in clause (i), at least 1 of
the child welfare program improvement policies to be
implemented by the State shall be a policy that the
State has not previously implemented as of the date
on which the State submits an application to conduct
the demonstration project.
‘‘(iii) IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW.—The Secretary
may terminate the authority of a State to conduct
a demonstration project under this section if, after
the 3-year period following approval of the demonstra-
tion project, the State has not made significant
progress in implementing the child welfare program
improvement policies proposed by the State under
clause (i).’’;
(C) in paragraph (5), by inserting ‘‘and the ability
of the State to implement a corrective action plan approved
under section 1123A’’ before the period; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(6) INAPPLICABILITY OF RANDOM ASSIGNMENT FOR CONTROL
GROUPS AS A FACTOR FOR APPROVAL OF DEMONSTRATION
H. R. 2883—12

purposes of evaluating an application to con-
PROJECTS.—For
duct a demonstration project under this section, the Secretary
shall not take into consideration whether such project requires
random assignment of children and families to groups served
under the project and to control groups.
‘‘(7) CHILD WELFARE PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT POLICIES.—
For purposes of paragraph (3)(C), the child welfare program
improvement policies described in this paragraph are the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(A) The establishment of a bill of rights for infants,
children, and youth in foster care that is widely shared
and clearly outlines protections for infants, children, and
youth, such as assuring frequent visits with parents, sib-
lings, and caseworkers, access to attorneys, and participa-
tion in age-appropriate extracurricular activities, and
procedures for ensuring the protections are provided.
‘‘(B) The development and implementation of a plan
for meeting the health and mental health needs of infants,
children, and youth in foster care that includes ensuring
that the provision of health and mental health care is
child-specific, comprehensive, appropriate, and consistent
(through means such as ensuring the infant, child, or youth
has a medical home, regular wellness medical visits, and
addressing the issue of trauma, when appropriate).
‘‘(C) The inclusion in the State plan under section
471 of an amendment implementing the option under sub-
section (a)(28) of that section to enter into kinship
guardianship assistance agreements.
‘‘(D) The election under the State plan under section
471 to define a ‘child’ for purposes of the provision of
foster care maintenance payments, adoption assistance pay-
ments, and kinship guardianship assistance payments, so
as to include individuals described in each of subclauses
(I), (II), and (III) of section 475(8)(B)(i) who have not
attained age 21.
‘‘(E) The development and implementation of a plan
that ensures congregate care is used appropriately and
reduces the placement of children and youth in such care.
‘‘(F) Of those infants, children, and youth in out-of-
home placements, substantially increasing the number of
cases of siblings who are in the same foster care, kinship
guardianship, or adoptive placement, above the number
of such cases in fiscal year 2008.
‘‘(G) The development and implementation of a plan
to improve the recruitment and retention of high quality
foster family homes trained to help assist infants, children,
and youth swiftly secure permanent families. Supports for
foster families under such a plan may include increasing
maintenance payments to more adequately meet the needs
of infants, children, and youth in foster care and expanding
training, respite care, and other support services for foster
parents.
‘‘(H) The establishment of procedures designed to assist
youth as they prepare for their transition out of foster
care, such as arranging for participation in age-appropriate
extra-curricular activities, providing appropriate access to
cell phones, computers, and opportunities to obtain a
H. R. 2883—13

driver’s license, providing notification of all sibling place-
ments if siblings are in care and sibling location if siblings
are out of care, and providing counseling and financial
support for post-secondary education.
‘‘(I) The inclusion in the State plan under section 471
of a description of State procedures for—
‘‘(i) ensuring that youth in foster care who have
attained age 16 are engaged in discussions, including
during the development of the transition plans required
under paragraphs (1)(D) and (5)(H) of section 475,
that explore whether the youth wishes to reconnect
with the youth’s biological family, including parents,
grandparents, and siblings, and, if so, what skills and
strategies the youth will need to successfully and safely
reconnect with those family members;
‘‘(ii) providing appropriate guidance and services
to youth whom affirm an intent to reconnect with
biological family members on how to successfully and
safely manage such reconnections; and
‘‘(iii) making, when appropriate, efforts to include
biological family members in such reconnection efforts.
‘‘(J) The establishment of one or more of the following
programs designed to prevent infants, children, and youth
from entering foster care or to provide permanency for
infants, children, and youth in foster care:
‘‘(i) An intensive family finding program.
‘‘(ii) A kinship navigator program.
‘‘(iii) A family counseling program, such as a family
group decision-making program, and which may
include in-home peer support for families.
‘‘(iv) A comprehensive family-based substance
abuse treatment program.
‘‘(v) A program under which special efforts are
made to identify and address domestic violence that
endangers infants, children, and youth and puts them
at risk of entering foster care.
‘‘(vi) A mentoring program.
‘‘(8) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection—
‘‘(A) the term ‘youth’ means, with respect to a State,
an individual who has attained age 12 but has not attained
the age at which an individual is no longer considered
to be a child under the State plans under parts B and
E of title IV, and
‘‘(B) the term ‘long-term therapeutic family treatment
center’ means a State licensed or certified program that
enables parents and their children to live together in a
safe environment for a period of not less than 6 months
and provides, on-site or by referral, substance abuse treat-
ment services, children’s early intervention services, family
counseling, legal services, medical care, mental health serv-
ices, nursery and preschool, parenting skills training, pedi-
atric care, prenatal care, sexual abuse therapy, relapse
prevention, transportation, and job or vocational training
or classes leading to a secondary school diploma or a certifi-
cate of general equivalence.’’;
(2) by striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
‘‘(d) DURATION OF DEMONSTRATION.—
H. R. 2883—14

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), a demonstra-
tion project under this section may be conducted for not more
than 5 years, unless in the judgment of the Secretary, the
demonstration project should be allowed to continue.
‘‘(2) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—In no event shall a dem-
onstration project under this section be conducted after Sep-
tember 30, 2019.’’;
(3) in subsection (e)—
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘(which shall provide,’’
and all that follows before the semicolon;
(B) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (6);
(C) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8);
and
(D) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
‘‘(7) an accounting of any additional Federal, State, and
local investments made, as well as any private investments
made in coordination with the State, during the 2 fiscal years
preceding the application to provide the services described in
paragraph (1), and an assurance that the State will provide
an accounting of that same spending for each year of an
approved demonstration project; and’’;
(4) by redesignating subsection (g) as subsection (h);
(5) by striking subsection (f) and inserting the following:
‘‘(f) EVALUATIONS.—Each State authorized to conduct a dem-
onstration project under this section shall obtain an evaluation
by an independent contractor of the effectiveness of the project,
using an evaluation design approved by the Secretary which pro-
vides for—
‘‘(1) comparison of methods of service delivery under the
project, and such methods under a State plan or plans, with
respect to efficiency, economy, and any other appropriate meas-
ures of program management;
‘‘(2) comparison of outcomes for children and families (and
groups of children and families) under the project, and such
outcomes under a State plan or plans, for purposes of assessing
the effectiveness of the project in achieving program goals;
and
‘‘(3) any other information that the Secretary may require.
‘‘(g) REPORTS.—
‘‘(1) STATE REPORTS; PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.—Each State
authorized to conduct a demonstration project under this sec-
tion shall—
‘‘(A) submit periodic reports to the Secretary on the
specific programs, activities, and strategies used to improve
outcomes for infants, children, youth, and families and
the results achieved for infants, children, and youth during
the conduct of the demonstration project, including with
respect to those infants, children, and youth who are pre-
vented from entering foster care, infants, children, and
youth in foster care, and infants, children, and youth who
move from foster care to permanent families; and
‘‘(B) post a copy of each such report on the website
for the State child welfare program concurrent with the
submission of the report to the Secretary.
‘‘(2) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary shall submit
to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Rep-
resentatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate—
H. R. 2883—15

‘‘(A) periodic reports based on the State reports sub-
mitted under paragraph (1); and
‘‘(B) a report based on the results of the State evalua-
tions required under subsection (f) that includes an analysis
of the results of such evaluations and such recommenda-
tions for administrative or legislative changes as the Sec-
retary determines appropriate.’’; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(i) INDIAN TRIBES OPERATING IV–E PROGRAMS CONSIDERED
STATES.—An Indian tribe, tribal organization, or tribal consortium
that has elected to operate a program under part E of title IV
in accordance with section 479B shall be considered a State for
purposes of this section.’’.

TITLE III—BUDGET PROVISIONS
SEC. 301. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.
The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined
by reference to the latest statement titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of
PAYGO Legislation’’ for this Act, submitted for printing in the
Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Senate Budget Com-
mittee, provided that such statement has been submitted prior
to the vote on passage.




Speaker of the House of Representatives.




Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.




*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

EXACTLY - What Law or Statute?

We would like to know - EXACTLY - what Law or Statute we or the parents violated. We would also like a copy of the court order, signed by a judge, that gave OCS permission to kidnap our FOUR grand children. Not a doctored and back dated copy, but the real one.


*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Junk Psychology For Dollars

For those who think Child Services is not a conspiracy to kidnap kids for profit on a national level, read this. Most everything we have been posting for months is right here from someone we have never met. Numerouse times. They have stolen our grand children. All FOUR of them. (No, we have NOT forgotton).

---   PROBLEM STATEMENT   ---

I. State and federally funded Child Protective Service agencies are arbitrarily seizing children from non-abusive homes in the absence of evidence or realistic cause to believe that the child is in danger of harm, and in gross violation of their own protocols, state and federal regulations, and the Constitution of the United States.

II. For both parent and child there can be nothing in our life experience more devastating than the abrupt, brutal, and unwarranted enforced separation by strangers. The parent-child bond is our strongest instinct, superceding all else. To have this bond abruptly severed by strangers who possess unhindered power, and who give no thought or consideration to the fear, anxiety, and trauma that their actions cause, is a crime against humanity. Yet it is happening to 4600 American children per day, right here in the United States. Small children believe their parents to be all-powerful, like super heroes. They believe that their parents possess an all-powerful ability to shelter and protect them from any threat. When parents are powerless to prevent strangers from abducting the child from all that is safe and familiar to him/her, a fundamental belief system within the child is broken forever, along with the child's ability to feel safe and secure in their world. As parents are forced to sit by placidly, under the threat of never seeing their child again, a small child may believe that the parents gave him/her away because he or she was "bad", and the child's belief in their parents love is also destroyed. In a small child's mind he or she will be thinking: "Why aren't mom and dad fighting the bad guys and taking me home?" We have received many `phone calls from parents who have been devastated when their child screams at them: "You LET them TAKE ME away!" This is an act of emotional and psychological terrorism against a child.

III. The law states that a child can only be removed from his or her home as a last resort, and only when the child is at imminent risk of serious harm. The problem is that the SS (social services) does not follow established law & policy, and nobody makes them. They face no consequences for appalling and illegal behavior. The police must submit to the whims of the SS. Judges  go along with the SS, allowing them to control court process, rather than fulfilling their judicial canons by insisting that due process is followed, laws adhered to, and that procedural error is not tolerated. Few parents are criminally charged with anything, rather, they are subjected to a highly irregular "civil" proceeding that makes a complete mockery of our judicial system. Parents are often told they may not speak or present exculpatory evidence.

       Children are not allowed to be present or express their wishes if they want to go home. The SS claims that this would "involve the child in adult issues" and "traumatize them". However, the instant a child says they want to be adopted, the SS runs them into the courtroom, stating that they must "honor the child's wishes."

IV. Federal statistics say that there are approximately 3 million reports of suspected child abuse and neglect each year. The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services documents 900,000 as "substantiated", leaving over 2 million families per year falsely accused of child maltreatment! Of the "substantiated" cases, 68% do NOT involve child maltreatment, according to the federal authorities. This figure is escalating at an alarming rate each year as over zealous reporting and frivolous intervention by the SS spins out of control.

V. Actual acts of child abuse or severe neglect are not the primary allegations used  To seize children from their families., meaning deliberate acts, willfully committed with the intent to harm - contrary to public assumption. The SS employs a method known as the "Clinical Model", in which the behaviors of the child are use to claim that there is some sort of obscure psychological abuse in the home that has traumatized the child.
Therefore, if your child exhibits any normal, predictable behavior of childhood:
outgoing, quite, active, shy, placid, disobedient, obedient, neat, messy, loud, easy going, or temperamental -
any behavior will be used to "prove" that the child is "acting out their inability to verbalize the trauma." NOTHING is just plain normal predictable, unpredictable human behavior as it has existed for 3 million years. EVERYTHING has some deep, dark, bizarre (and completely illogical..) "meaning", that can only be seen by 23 year-old, childless, poorly educated social workers with little life experience, and all of which supports the prevailing political climate that ALL parents are inadequate and abusive, so children must be raised by the state. Welcome to "Junk Psychology For Dollars"!
VI. The state gains entrée' into private homes via the filing of a report of suspected child maltreatment. A report may be filed anonymously by anyone, a vindictive neighbor, a stranger who saw you yell at your child at the grocery store, a disgruntled employee, an ex-spouse, a teacher, a day care provider, someone whose romantic interest you rejected, or any unstable busybody. "Abuse" reports are filed (and investigated) for head lice (usually contracted at school..), diaper rash,  taking your child to the ER too often, leaving your child in the car while you run into the store, ear infections, not sending a snack or mittens to school, parents arguing in front of child, home schooling, spanking; ANY bruise, injury, or scrape inevitably incurred in the normal course of childhood; poverty issues, dirty clothing, no electricity, ANY "nudie" photos of toddlers playing in the sprinkler or in the tub. A yeast or urinary tract infection is now likely to bring an allegation of sexual abuse, although they are a common result of antibiotic use, careless hygiene, or a diet high in simple carbohydrates. Normal, innocent people do not tend to be suspicious and defensive, so they usually cooperate when the SS knocks on their door. We universally hear: "We have nothing to hide, so we invited them in, served them coffee, and were open and honest. Now our children are gone, and we don't know how this could happen in this country!"
VII.   Once the SS gains entree' the family is put under a powerful, and distorted, microscope. "Social workers" will ask bizarre and invasive questions. Do the parents ever argue? Do they ever raise their voices? This is documented as "domestic violence." No surprise here, the majority of the funding for domestic violence programs is channeled through CPS. If parents deny domestic abuse or child abuse, they are condescendingly told that they are "in denial", and this is all "part of the syndrome." Admitting - confessing - is one of the requirements. Truth is not important. Saying the right things to keep federal funding flowing, is.  You could be asked, as could your child (even a three or four year-old) if you have ever touched them in the chest or genital are. Obviously, after bathing, wiping, applying ointment, etc., any parent must answer "yes." Anyone who admits to having a drink occasionally is labeled "alcoholic and dysfunctional." (Powerful, wealthy politicians evidently have an exemption). Under the SS microscope every word, inflection, and action is attributed with the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous "meanings." If you have ever bounced a check, you have a "criminal record"; if your child is shy, they are "fearful and withdrawn"; if they are outgoing and active, they are "acting out due to the trauma."  This is crazy, you say? Oh good, you're catching on now!
       Once a child is seized by the state the parents are offered a sham civil court      proceeding. In most cases the parents are never actually charged with anything. In many states you must not only be charged, but convicted of a crime to lose your drivers license. But, you can lose your children from an anonymous `phone call, with NO involvement from law enforcement, and NO charges of Any wrong-doing. The SS controls the courtroom and employs the tactic of delay to keep families separated. Parents may go to scheduled court dates 30 - 50 - 80 times, only to be told, after waiting in the hall all day, that their case has been continued - yet again. This can, and does, go on for months, and, even years, while children are separated from their families. If parents actually get inside the court room they are usually told they may not speak - and usually their court appointed attorneys won't do much speaking either. Exculpatory evidence is either not allowed, or "disappears" from the case file.

VII.   These cases degenerate into an exercise in character assassination and slander by the SS where actual acts of child abuse or neglect that place the child at "imminent risk of serious harm" are not even discussed. Rather, vague, obscure, and distorted allegations about the parents personalities comprise the bulk of the court room testimony, including the parents "denial", "hostility", and "uncooperativeness." Judges should be questioning - and striking - such testimony Based on relevance, but they don't. The SS rules the court room and the judges simply abdicate their sworn oath and go along. The new federal law gives the SS 15 months to seek Termination of Parental Rights and have the child adopted out, so, children are being put up for adoption based on the timeline, even when parents have not had a chance to answer the initial allegations, and in the absence of any evidence or charges that they have harmed their child! Social workers routinely perjure themselves under oath without ever facing admonishment (let alone charges) from a judge. This system is a SCAM, and makes a mockery of our most fundamentally held beliefs in our country.
VIII. These children are placed in state contracted foster homes and institutions. All get federal benefits. Residentials and institutions hold multi-million dollar contracts with the social service agencies. Children are drugged, restrained, put in straight-jackets (they call them "safety coats" now); they are sexually, physically, and emotionally abused and tormented. Abuse that is far, far more egregious than the initial allegations made against the parents, and which would be prosecuted criminally were it to occur anywhere else.
In 2000 Time magazine printed a special issue on foster abuse and fatalities, calling it "America's shame." We've been calling it that for years. Abuse reports against foster homes and other SS contracted facilities is covered up. Police tell us that, if they receive abuse reports concerning a foster home, they have been directed to turn such reports back to the SS, so they self-investigate - which means they throw the complaints in the dumpster.
Why is this happening? One factor is unmonitored federal funding ($14. Billion per year). The other is a huge industry that is providing private profit through Medicaid fraud. Service providers (vendors) hold multi-million dollar contracts with the social service agencies. The families are ordered to engage in "services" with the contracted vendors, all of whom bill Medicaid at astronomically inflated rates for "services" that are often inappropriate, unnecessary, and completely irrelevant to the families situation, or to child maltreatment.
Families are coerced into participating by intimidation and the threat of losing their children. In return for the fraudulently collected profits, the contracted vendors provide manufactured "evidence" of child maltreatment to support the SS claim that they need to keep the child in foster care. In return for this they receive more federal funding. 
As an example, the Massachusetts DSS receives $700. Million a year in state funding alone. Not bad. Behind the money there is a socialist ideology that children should be raised by the state. Yes, even here in America. This agenda was promoted by people like Dr. C. Henry Kempe in the 1970's. An open supporter of the Communist party regime who instructed: "We must remove children from the crude influence of their families and, frankly, nationalize them." Dr. Kempe emphasized the need for a "stealthy, incremental approach" to implementing the agenda to make families obsolete.

This is a huge, complex, ugly picture. We don't want to believe it can happen here in our beloved country. But it is.4600 times per day. So I am impelled to reach out to EVERY sane, rational American with a conscience to stand up and let your voice be heard... before it's too late.
Thank-you for your time.
Nev Moore
Justice for Families
http://www.justiceforfamilies.com/

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Child "Protection" Services? Soviet Communist Party educators

FROM: http://www.crossroad.to/text/responses/ChildAbuse.htm

This message is to bring awareness. It seems that Child Protective Services (CPS) does "target" Christians with the threat of removing children from Christian homes. "Christians" are labeled as teaching "hatred" to children. They especially seem to frown upon Christian families that homeschool.

Below are some facts, questions, quotes, links etc... to help you understand this disturbing trend. Please note that there ARE children in the U.S. that are being abused and DO need help....however, the current system (CPS) actually puts children at greater risk, destroys innocent families and seems to have an agenda of eventually making all children "wards of the state" to further, perhaps, a New World view.

#1 Child Protective Services (CPS) has VAST power. This power can be weilded against any parent simply by an anonymous phone call to CPS. Anyone that doesn't "like you" and or doesn't agree with your beliefs... can report you and then start a basic inquisition style "witchhunt" similar to what occurred in the middle ages.

#2 "There is a strong anti-Christian sentiment among many CPS workers. Christians are known to believe in corporal punishment, which is tantamount to abuse in 'child-saver' circles. Christians are also seen as rigid and intolerant, unfit to rear children for the New World Order. Homosexual case workers, aware of Christian teachings regarding their lifestyle, are often hostile to parents who display their faith. The New York State Council of Family and Child Caring Agencies (CFCCA) warns that parents who...display an "over involvement in religion" are suspect". (Brenda Scott- "out of Control").

#3 "These are not isolated incidents. Every year, it is estimated that over 1 million people are falsely accused of child abuse or child neglect in this country". (*Brenda Scott-Investigative Reporter- from her book "Out of Control").

#4 Most case workers for CPS are not parents and many are homosexual. They are not interested in helping families (as they claim). They only get funds from the government if the child is removed from the home and placed in foster care...some 12 billion dollars per year.

#5 "Religious" families tend to be targeted...especially if the parents teach their children that homosexuality is wrong. Case workers tend to see that as teaching children to "hate" and then claim the parents are psychologically abusing their children and then can infact remove the children from the home.

#6 If CPS comes knocking at your door, there is a 40% chance they will take your child regardless if you have done anything wrong or not.

#7 It IS a HORRIBLE thing for children to be abused or neglected...and children that are experiencing abuse or neglect DO need help. However, many children who are NOT abused or neglected ARE taken out of the home thus destroying healthy families and traumatizing children unjustly.

#8 MORE abuse, sexual abuse and neglect occurs while in foster care than in the original home. Thus, the system that is supposed to be helping children actually puts children at risk. See : http://www.cpswatch.com/stats/

#9 Hillary Clinton, in her book "It takes a Village" often quotes Dr. C. Henry Kempe...(see website The New American) :

"We must remove the children from the crude influence of families," Soviet Communist Party educators were instructed at a conference in 1918. "We must take them over and, to speak frankly, nationalize them." Dr. C. Henry Kempe, the most influential American advocate of home visitation programs, subscribed wholeheartedly to that concept."  (From Beware the Child Protectors by William Norman Grigg at  <http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1999/08-30-99/vo15no18_beware.htm>
)

#10 The general public is under the FALSE assumption that children are only removed if there is evidence of abuse or neglec t. 

#11 Social workers are allowed to violate constitutional rights. 

#12 Innocent parents may appear on computer registers and be branded "child abuser" for life. 

#13 In many states if a child is in foster care for 18 months then the child is placed for adoption...meanwhile due to redtape and slowness by CPS case workers it may take longer than that for the innocent family to prove themselves innocent. Unfortunately, MANY families who are proven innocent STILL lose their parental rights even though there is no evidence and the case has been written up as "invalid". 

#14 CPS is empowered to intervene into a home if they feel a child is at "risk". Making "at risk" assessments is arbitrary and unsupervised. A Norman Polansky risk assessment worksheet may be used...for example it is a strike against a parent if there is no television in the home. If a parent makes a comment about the "trash" on television these days then it is a strike against the parent etc... (Brenda Scott, "Out of Control"). Also dolls must be available to boys and trucks must be available to girls or it is a strike against the parent in this "at risk" assessment. 

#15 Sexual education is taught in schools, but, if a child "knows" about sex or repeats similar things as to what they heard at sex ed, then the parents can be brought into questioning and end up losing their parental rights.

#16 Families are known to be a stumbling block to educating children for a global community. Again, government funding is not given to CPS if the case worker tries to "help" the family...but, rather money is only given if the case worker removes the child from the home. 

#17 "Throughout America, an average of 3,000 children a day are stolen from their homes and placed in foster care to fuel a multi-billion dollar money-making machine." See: National Outrage- http://www.nationaloutrage.org/ 

#18 "The Federal government provides tremendous financial incentives to maintain foster care programs. See: http://home.rica.net/rthoma/foster05.htm 

#19 Abuse is widespread within foster care homes, so why are they taking children from innocent families and placing these children in homes where they will probably be abused or neglected for the very first time? http://home.rica.net/rthoma/foster04.htm 

#20 "Child protective agencies nationwide are forcibly removing more children from their homes even when the agencies' own investigations establish that the children have not been abused or neglected, according to reports submitted by state agencies to the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN).... Once in foster care, state agencies further reported, children were much more likely to be maltreated than they are in their own homes." See: http://www.cpswatch.com/reports/nccan.htm 

#21 "America's child protection system has immense power.  It operates in secrecy. It enjoys total immunity.Parents and children have few meaningful rights.  Under current law, the system created to protect children has become America's greatest source of family and child abuse". See : http://www.childprotectionreform.org/ 

#22 Many interrogations include strip searches, even when there has been no substantiated evidence of any wrong doing by a parent.  See : http://home.rica.net/rthoma/invest03.htm 

#23 "According to Hillary Rodham Clinton, "There is no such thing as other people's children." One must respect a certain consistency in the First Lady's moral perspective: After all, as an attorney at Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Mrs. Clinton was a legal adviser to Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan, a financial institution whose motto might well have been, "There is no such thing as other people's money." However, by laying custodial claim to all children in the name of the state, Mrs. Clinton is promoting a doctrine that is much more dangerous than financial fraud: parens patriae, the "parenthood of the state." See :http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1996/vo12no14/vo12no14_child.htm 

#24 "Parents will find the numbers reported by their own government alarming," said Cheryl Barnes, Director of CPSWatch, Inc., an organization that monitors child welfare agencies. "The public is under the impression that children are removed from their families only in cases of severe and life-threatening abuse or neglect." See: http://www.cpswatch.com/press/080100.htm 

#25 "These folks are fed by a child abuse industry to the tune of well over 12 billion dollars," said Susan Jackson, a family advocate and member of CPS Watch. "Cash harvested by social workers, diagnosticians, attorneys, foster homes and group homes, to name a few..." See : http://www.cpswatch.com/press/080100.htm 

#26 "Pennsylvania, Kansas and New Jersey led the states, where nearly half (43%) of the foster care placements in 1998 came from families where child protective services (CPS) workers unsubstantiated allegations of child mistreatment ".(percentage removed even though unsubstantiated for abuse or neglect) See :http://www.tcbchronicles.com/0700/nccan.htm#Table Two 

#27 ""Our investigators discovered that children are eleven times more likely to be sexually abused in state care than they are in their own homes." See :http://www.tcbchronicles.com/0700/nccan.htm#Table One 

Additional links

 American Freedom Alliance : http://www.afaorg.net/Children.htm

 Child Protective Services Watch : http://www.cpswatch.com/

 Family Alert http://www.familyalert.org/

 Vocal http://www.vocalny.org/

 __________________________________________________________________

Cherish your children, love them as Christ loves you. Please share this message with others. 

_________________________________________________________________

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Fed Up Grand Parents, Vanished Grand Children By OCS and Child Trafficking

We have four grandchildren that have been stolen by OCS for profit. Be it for slick willie and his wife's 1997 deal or CAPTA, The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act under which the Federal government provides the funding, by means of grants, that support state Child Protective Services (CPS). We have been told that our three oldest grand kids are in North Carolina. We are starting to believe this is a lie. We are starting to believe that the lie has been perpetrated to stop our calls for visitation.  We are starting to believe that we are going to look up email addresses and send letters. Undeniable proof that we have tried to contact the keepers of our grand children. Proof we will expose. We are naming names and addresses of those we attempt to contact. If they do not answer, we will report that as well. Starting with the Governor and President of the USA whom we have already contacted and received NO response. We have two Senators and a Congressman. We have Governors counsels and committees of all kinds to contact. We have alleged, concerned OCS workers and supervisors. We have the FBI whom we have already talked to. The CIA and US Marshal are next.

The Youngest grandson has been stolen from his caretaker at three months old. His whereabouts are unknown. He was stolen based on lies. They called it a "Safety Net". Typical of OCS (CPS) and their underhanded methods. The kid was fine where he was. (No money in that).

The fight against bullying and terrorism should start at home.


*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

CPS (OCS) Threat to You and Your Children; CAPTA

Re posted from: http://theautonomist.com/iindv/articles_stand/soccult/cps.php

CPS Threat to You and Your Children

[Article Recovered from Hacked Autonomist]

What would you call a country where terrorists enter the homes of totally innocent people, take their children on groundless accusations and give those children to people and institutions where they are physically, sexually, and psychologically abused, and frequently die, and commit these crimes with complete government protection and immunity from prosecution, and do this regularly in every part of that country? These child kidnappers and abusers go under the euphamistic banner of Child Protective Services, and the country where they carry out these atrocities is The United States of America.


This horror in the land was unleashed in 1988 when the Federal Government enacted CAPTA, The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act under which the Federal government provides the funding, by means of grants, that support state Child Protective Services (CPS).

Since that enactment, CPS has become a growth industry that seeks more and more children because the size of their grants is determined by the number of children they kidnap ("rescue"). What happens to those children is no concern of the government, the courts, or least of all, CPS. This description is no exaggeration. It is, if anything, an understatement.
If This is not Terrorism, What Is?Parents who are not aware of CPS may not be terrified, but any who know what is going on, must be. There is a "1 in 25 chance" for each child you have, of being the subject of a child abuse/neglect investigation by CPS this year, which almost always means, you will lose one or more of your children?and you certainly won't keep them without a fight.
"Many children are taken from fit and loving parents solely based upon false allegations reported anonymously to a hotline, or as a result of a caseworker?s own personal judgment, or even by someone with a vendetta ..."
"The State gains entry into private homes following the filing of a report of suspected child maltreatment. This report may be filed anonymously by anyone: a vindictive neighbor, a teacher, a day care provider, or an unstable busybody. You can lose your children from an anonymous phone call, with NO involvement from law enforcement, and NO charges of any wrong-doing. CPS controls the courtroom and employs the tactic of delay and ?hide the ball? to keep families separated. This can go on for months and even years while children are separated from their families."
If you think this is just the result of a misguided concern for children's welfare you are mistaken. It's all about money. Big money!
At least $200 million is directly budgeted by the federal government to support CAPTA, but the program costs more than $3.3 billion when social services, adoption services, and medicaid are included.
"Service providers, called vendors, hold multi-million dollar contracts with CPS. Families are ordered to engage in "services" with these contracted vendors, all of whom bill Medicaid at enormously inflated rates for "services" that are often inappropriate, unnecessary, and completely irrelevant to the families situation, or to child maltreatment."
"Behind the money is the socialist ideology that children should be raised by the state. This agenda was promoted by Dr. C. Henry Kempe (author of the Battered Child Syndrome) in the 1970's. An open supporter of the Communist party, he stated "We must remove children from the crude influence of their families and, frankly, nationalize them." Dr. Kempe emphasized the need for a "stealthy, incremental approach" to implementing the agenda to make families obsolete."
"Families are coerced into participating by intimidation and the threat of losing their children. In return for fraudulently collected profits, the contracted vendors provide manufactured "evidence" of child maltreatment to support the claim that they need to keep the child in foster care. ..."
How Bad Is It?
"Federal statistics say that there are approximately 3 million reports of suspected child abuse and neglect each year. The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services documents 900,000 as 'substantiated', leaving over 2 million families per year FALSELY ACCUSED. Of the 'substantiated' cases, 68% do NOT involve child maltreatment, according to the federal authorities."
According to Emerich Thomas who has devoted the last five years to research in the field of child welfare and foster care, "well over 500,000 of our children in one or another form of state-provided alternative care. An estimated 365,000 of our children are removed from their homes for their "protection" each year in these United States."
Acording to, "author Seth Farber:
'Only a small minority of these children have been separated from parents who are dangerous to them. The overwhelming majority have been separated from loving and responsible parents. One does not need to be a child psychologist to realize the devastating effect of removing a child from parents with whom he or she is deeply bonded.'"
"Conservative columnist Thomas Sowell explains that of those child abuse reports accepted for investigation about half are eventually dismissed, 'but not before children have been strip-searched, interrogated by a stream of social workers, police officers, and prosecutors, psychologically tested, and sometimes placed in foster care. Such actions usually occur without search warrants, parental consent, court hearings, or official charges--and often solely on the basis of the anonymous telephone call.'"
"Mark Soler, of the National Youth Law Center, describes some of his experiences in litigating against the foster care industry:
'We have seen children in an Arizona juvenile detention center tied hand and foot to their beds, and a Washington State facility in which two children were held for 5 days at a time in a cell with only 25 square feet of floor space.
'We have seen children hogtied in State juvenile training schools in Florida--wrists handcuffed, ankles handcuffed, then placed stomach down on the floor, and wrists and ankles joined together behind their backs. In the training school in Oregon children were put in filthy, roach-infested isolation cells for weeks at a time.
'In the Idaho training school, children were punished by being put in strait jackets, and being hung, upside down, by their ankles.'
In Massachusetts, "many of the children taken from parents by DSS [Massachusetts version of CPS] are heavily drugged with adult doses of anti-psychotic drugs, and are restrained in horrifyingly violent ways, when drugs have a bad effect.
"Drugs help DSS effectively in their mission to break children. For example, one sixteen year old boy in DSS custody, Justin (a pseudonym), is being given Depakote, Wellbutrin,and Zyprexa, all very powerful chemicals. Even one of these can cause severe problems, never mind all three. Poor Justin cannot sleep, because they give him these drugs before bed, and they cause dreadful insomnia. Then, tired and irritable, the child can be labeled as far more unmanageable.
"In addition, many of these children are restrained like animals, when the drugs cause behavior problems. Justin, for example, incarcerated at Robert F. Kennedy Center, a residential center in Lancaster, Massachusetts was pinned upside down on the floor by a large man, face down in the rug, with a knee in his back, and so much weight on him that he could not breathe. In his attempt to breathe, Justin moved his head back and forth so desperately, that he got bad rug burns on his face and elbows.
"If a parent did this to a child, DSS would quickly take the child away at gunpoint, and the parent would probably never get the child back. DSS, however, does this sort of thing quite regularly, with no fear of the consequences."
The Child Trafficking Racket
If anyone else except this government protected class of thugs literally kidnapped children and farmed them out to suffer indescribeable abuse they would be called traffickers?because that is what they are.
The following is a long excerpt, but it is the best summation of what is really going on I've seen, and in spite of it's length, it is brief compared to extent of the horror CPS really is.

From the legislative desk of Senator Nancy Schaefer 50th District ofGeorgia November 16, 2007 THE CORRUPT BUSINESS OF CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES BY: Nancy Schaefer Senator, 50th District My introduction into child protective service cases was due to a grandmother in an adjoiningstate who called me with her tragic story. Her two granddaughters had been taken from herdaughter who lived in my district. Her daughter was told wrongly that if she wanted to seeher children again she should sign a paper and give up her children. Frightened and young,the daughter did. I have since discovered that parents are often threatened into cooperationof permanent separation of their children. The children were taken to another county and placed in foster care. The foster parentswere told wrongly that they could adopt the children. The grandmother then jumped throughevery hoop known to man in order to get her granddaughters. When the case finally came tocourt it was made evident by one of the foster parent?s children that the foster parents had,at any given time, 18 foster children and that the foster mother had an inappropriaterelationship with the caseworker. In the courtroom, the juvenile judge, acted as though she was shocked and said the two girlswould be removed quickly. They were not removed. Finally, after much pressure beingapplied to the Department of Family and Children Services of Georgia (DFCS), the childrenwere driven to South Georgia to meet their grandmother who gladly drove to meet them.After being with their grandmother two or three days, the judge, quite out of the blue, wroteup a new order to send the girls to their father, who previously had no interest in the case andwho lived on the West Coast. The father was in ?adult entertainment?. His girlfriend workedas an ?escort? and his brother, who also worked in the business, had a sexual charge broughtagainst him. Within a couple of days the father was knocking on the grandmother?s door and took thegirls kicking and screaming to California. The father developed an unusual relationship with the former foster parents and soon movedback to the southeast, and the foster parents began driving to the father?s residence andpicking up the little girls for visits. The oldest child had told her mother and grandmotheron two different occasions that the foster father molested her. To this day after five years, this loving, caring blood relative grandmother does not evenhave visitation privileges with the children. The little girls are in my opinion permanentlytraumatized and the young mother of the girls was so traumatized with shock when thegirls were first removed from her that she has not recovered. Throughout this case and through the process of dealing with multiple other mismanagedcases of the Department of Family and Children Services (DFCS), I have worked with otherdesperate parents and children across the state because they have no rights and no one withwhom to turn. I have witnessed ruthless behavior from many caseworkers, social workers,investigators, lawyers, judges, therapists, and others such as those who ?pick up? thechildren. I have been stunned by what I have seen and heard from victims all over the stateof Georgia. In this report, I am focusing on the Georgia Department of Family and Children Services(DFCS). However, I believe Child Protective Services nationwide has become corrupt andthat the entire system is broken almost beyond repair. I am convinced parents and familiesshould be warned of the dangers. The Department of Child Protective Services, known as the Department of Family andChildren Service (DFCS) in Georgia and other titles in other states, has become a ?protectedempire? built on taking children and separating families. This is not to say that there are notthose children who do need to be removed from wretched situations and need protection.This report is concerned with the children and parents caught up in ?legal kidnapping,?ineffective policies, and DFCS who do does not remove a child or children when a child isenduring torment and abuse. In one county in my District, I arranged a meeting for thirty-seven families to speak freelyand without fear. These poor parents and grandparents spoke of their painful, heartwrenching encounters with DFCS. Their suffering was overwhelming. They wept andcried. Some did not know where their children were and had not seen them in years. Ihad witnessed the ?Gestapo? at work and I witnessed the deceitful conditions under whichchildren were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals, off of school buses, and outof homes. In one county a private drug testing business was operating within the DFCSdepartment that required many, many drug tests from parents and individuals for profit. Inanother county children were not removed when they were enduring the worst possible abuse.Due to being exposed, several employees in a particular DFCS office were fired. However,they have now been rehired either in neighboring counties or in the same county again.According to the calls I am now receiving, the conditions in that county are returning tothe same practices that they had before the light was shown on their deeds.Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, I am convinced there is no responsibilityand no accountability in the system. I have come to the conclusion: that poor parents often times are targeted to lose their children because they do not have the where-with-all to hire lawyers and fight the system. Being poor does not mean you are not a good parent or that you do not love your child, or that your child should be removed and placed with strangers; that all parents are capable of making mistakes and that making a mistake does not mean your children are always to be removed from the home. Even if the home is not perfect, it is home; and that's where a child is the safest and where he or she wants tobe, with family; that parenting classes, anger management classes, counseling referrals, therapy classes and on and on are demanded of parents with no compassion by the system even while they are at work and while their children are separated from them. This can take months or even years and it emotionally devastates both children and parents. Parents are victimized by "the system" that makes a profit for holding children longer and "bonuses" for not returning children; that caseworkers and social workers are oftentimes guilty of fraud. They withhold evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights. However, when charges are made against them, the charges are ignored; that the separation of families is growing as a business because local governments have grown accustomed to having taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets; that Child Protective Service and Juvenile Court can always hide behind a confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions and keep the funds flowing. There should be open records and "court watches"! Look who is being paid! There are state employees, lawyers, court investigators, court personnel, and judges. There are psychologists, and psychiatrists, counselors, caseworkers, therapists, fosterparents, adoptive parents, and on and on. All are looking to the children in state custody to provide job security. Parents do not realize that social workers are the glue that holds "the system" together that funds the court, the child's attorney, and the multiple other jobs including DFCS's attorney. that The Adoption and the Safe Families Act, set in motion by President Bill Clinton,offered cash "bonuses" to the states for every child they adopted out of foster care. Inorder to receive the "adoption incentive bonuses" local child protective services need more children. They must have merchandise (children) that sell and you must haveplenty of them so the buyer can choose. Some counties are known to give a $4,000 bonus for each child adopted and an additional $2,000 for a "special needs" child.Employees work to keep the federal dollars flowing; that there is double dipping. The funding continues as long as the child is out of the home. When a child in foster care is placed with a new family then "adoption bonus funds" are available. When a child is placed in a mental health facility and is on 16 drugs per day, like two children of a constituent of mine, more funds are involved; that there are no financial resources and no real drive to unite a family and help keep them together; that the incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them has disappeared and who in protective services will step up to the plate and say, "This must end!" No one, because they are all in the system together and a system with no leader and no clear policies will always fail the children. Look at the waste in government that is forced upon the tax payer; that the "Policy Manuel" is considered "the last word" for DFCS. However, it is too long, too confusing, poorly written and does not take the law into consideration; that if the lives of children were improved by removing them from their homes, there might be a greater need for protective services, but today all children are not always safer. Children, of whom I am aware, have been raped and impregnated in foster careand the head of a Foster Parents Association in my District was recently arrested because of child molestation; that some parents are even told if they want to see their children or grandchildren, they must divorce their spouse. Many, who are under privileged, feeling they have no option, will divorce and then just continue to live together. This is an anti-family policy, but parents will do anything to get their children home with them. fathers, (non-custodial parents) I must add, are oftentimes treated as criminals without access to their own children and have child support payments strangling the very life out of them; that the Foster Parents Bill of Rights does not bring out that a foster parent is there only to care for a child until the child can be returned home. Many Foster Parents today use the Foster Parent Bill of Rights to hire a lawyer and seek to adopt the child from the real parents, who are desperately trying to get their child home and out of the system; that tax dollars are being used to keep this gigantic system afloat, yet the victims, parents, grandparents, guardians and especially the children, are charged for the system's services. that grandparents have called from all over the State of Georgia trying to get custody oftheir grandchildren. DFCS claims relatives are contacted, but there are cases that prove differently. Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage and grandparents, and parents too, lose all connections to their heirs. that The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in 1998 reported that six times asmany children died in foster care than in the general public and that once removed to official "safety", these children are far more likely to suffer abuse, including sexual molestation than in the general population. That according to the California Little Hoover Commission Report in 2003, 30% to 70% of the children in California group homes do not belong there and should not have been removed from their homes.

A Free Country?
If you live in the United States you live in a country where you can never be sure your children are not going to removed from your home, from their school or a bus, to be mistreated and abused, very likely to never be seen by you again. Does the fact that this is done in the guise of "protecting" children fool you into thinking it is anything other than kidnapping and trafficking in children?
If you were not already convinced that America is no longer a free country by the fact that thugs of the DEA can take your property without ever even charging you with a crime, that CPS can take you children on virtually no evidence at all should not only convince you America has become an oppressive police state, but it should terrify you—which, of course is exactly their intent.

—Reginald Firehammer

Lawsuit says CPS workers shortchanged on OT pay

"Child-welfare investigators and caseworkers responsible for protecting Texas children are forced to work off the clock and shortchanged on overtime pay, the U.S. Department of Labor alleges in a lawsuit filed Wednesday.

The lawsuit, in federal court in Austin, claims 800 current and former employees of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services Child Protective Services division are owed more than $1 million in back overtime wages. The government also is seeking damages equal to that amount."

"The lawsuit, which stems from a statewide investigation into the agency's employment practices since June 2008, alleges that supervisors instruct employees not to record all hours they work, that payroll records are not kept, and that the nonpayment of overtime is continuing."

"CPS denied the allegations..."

"The federal Fair Labor Standards Act requires that covered employees be paid at least the $7.25 minimum wage for all hours worked. Those who work more than 40 hours in any week also must be paid overtime at 1½ times their regular rate of pay, including commissions, bonuses and incentive pay."

http://www.chron.com/business/article/Lawsuit-says-CPS-workers-shortchanged-on-OT-pay-1683983.php


That's about $1200 for each worker. This is the best part. "...including commissions, bonuses and incentive pay"

Commissions, bonuses and incentive pay for what? Taking children, putting them in foster care and then adoption? The more the merrier? How would they get commissions, bonuses and incentive pay if not?

One question... If say, a social worker comes by your house at about 7PM and forcefully takes your kids and he is not getting paid, would that meen he would not be working in an official capacity? Wouldn't he just be another joe blow kidnapping kids?

Would CPS (OCS) have employment records that would prove he was "on duty" at that time?


*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207