U.S. Senate, Committee on Finance

Hearing Date: May 22nd, 2024

Hearing Title: The Families First Prevention Services Act: Success, Roadblocks, and Opportunities for Improvement

Submitted by: Carl Roberts, Founder of Colorado Resilience

8035 Lee Drive, #202, Arvada, CO 80005

Carl@ColoradoResilience.org  Cell: 303-810-5279

Two people are walking by a river when they notice babies floating down the river. One starts grabbing the babies from the river, while the other runs upstream. The first asks, “Where are you going?! We have to save these babies,” and the other replies, “I’m going to see who’s throwing babies in the river.”

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Benjamin Franklin

“It’s easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.” Frederick Douglas

Undoubtedly, FFPSA was signed into law with these very principles and goals in mind. I am grateful for this opportunity to voice my opinion on the record.  I’ve been an advocate for family court, child welfare, and child support reform for over a decade and have a deep understanding of not only the problems and solutions but also what prevents solving these very broken systems.  As you know, the public’s perception, those of us with lived experience in these systems, is directly contrary to the more positive perceptions expressed to this Committee by the system leaders who are dependent on the perverse incentives of federal funding.

Almost every government program or system is created to treat downstream societal ills (pulling babies out of the river) instead of prevention. The very nature of treating issues or ills requires customers/people to treat. Helping and treating people requires budgets and funding. Prevention is the antithesis of treatment and, in turn, a threat to funding. You’d be hard-pressed to find a system leader who wants to shrink their budget or reduce the number of customers they serve. Altruistically, many system leaders may express their support for prevention, but practically, they advocate for more federal funding, which means expanding treatment and services.

When you combine perverse federal funding incentives with individual incentives to unwittingly enter these systems or to become customers, you have a very broken child welfare system that often causes more harm than good. A system that often diminishes child health, safety, and well-being. A system that millions of us with lived experience believe abuses and exploits children. A system that destroys families, lives, and dreams for profit.

UNDERLYING PROBLEMS

 Perverse Funding Incentives – promotes treatment over prevention.

Most child welfare programs and systems were created to treat societal ills, not prevent them. It might be called Child Protection Services (CPS), but it is federally funded based on how many children or families they treat. The number of customers served by the system. The more families they involve means the more funding they need to hire more people to serve. It’s a perverse federal incentive that hooks almost every system and state legislature. The solution here is simple. Change the incentives from system growth to reward system reduction instead. That simple paradigm change will spur prevention innovation and system solutions like never before, which is the basic premise of FFSPA.

Case in point is Kentucky passed rebuttable presumption of equal parenting in 2017. Between 2017 and 2021 Kentucky saw a 30.9% reduction in child abuse investigations and a 33.2% drop in child victims. A rebuttable presumption means that it takes a preponderance of evidence to declare a parent as unfit or unsafe and limit their role as a parent. By requiring evidence to substantiate an allegation, false allegations no longer work. This policy change removed the incentive to make false allegations and weaponize child welfare. It also reduced the number of system involved families by a third and saved Kentucky millions.

Categorization & Data Collection – failure to properly assess threats or mitigate risks.

Children who need protection generally fall into one of two groups: those who are in the middle of a custody dispute between their parents and those who are not. The risks and threats to a child’s safety and well-being are different, and each group requires different risk and threat assessments. At least here in Colorado, and I suspect it is the same throughout the country, CPS practices and policies fail to acknowledge the differences and, in turn, fail to properly assess the risk, mitigate the threat, and adequately protect our children.

The most significant threat to a child caught in the middle of their parent’s conflict is the risk of losing a safe and secure relationship with one of their parents or potentially both. Not only do CPS policies not acknowledge this exceedingly common threat, but its practices ignore that fact and do nothing to protect children from the harm of being weaponized by one of their parents.

Colorado Resilience’s (COR) primary focus is on custody-related cases. I’ll defer to the expertise of other advocates to address the many problems and solutions from the foster care and removal perspective. However, many of the underlying problems remain the same and can all be tied back to broad discretion and zero accountability for the systems or the individuals who work in the systems. All this, in the absence of independent, nongovernmental oversight, is the root cause of why child welfare continues to destroy families, lives, and dreams unabated.

Broad Discretion – allows for subjective opinions and biased decisions.

From a family court judge to a CPS case manager and almost everyone in between (including third-party paid professionals, GALs, child representatives, etc), rulings and decisions are not constrained by requiring facts or evidence. They have broad discretion to make decisions however they think is best. Case managers are empowered to make decisions based on their opinions, gut feelings, or biases. While CPS will claim its review team limits individual discretion, if that process worked well enough, we wouldn’t have needed FFPSA.

Bias can be gender, race, economic, or in small towns, based on who you know. Bias can be formed by how a falsely accused parent reacts to being interviewed by a case manager investigating a claim. If an innocent yet accused parent reacts in any way that is not acceptable to the interviewer, bias is formed. If the parent demands that the case manager do his or her job, bias is formed. It’s often a can’t-win situation for the parent, even if they say and do all the right things. If the accused is a poor, black man speaking with a young middle-class white girl, bias can be formed before they ever speak. If the girl wasn’t happy with being dumped by her boyfriend or her dad wasn’t around when she grew up, a safe and respectful father doesn’t stand a chance. Bias can cut both ways. Women with poor self-esteem, who had a bad relationship with their mom, can show their bias against other women to show who is in control. Undoubtedly, men can be biased too.

Zero Accountability – no consequence for prejudice, negligence or falsifying records.

There is zero accountability for CPS, almost no accountability for case managers, and zero recourse for families whose lives are ruined because of CPS negligence or malfeasance. Here are a couple of stories where the case manager was charged with a crime(s), but CPS comes away scott-free, and the affected families have no recourse.

Robin Niceta, an Arapahoe, CO, CPS caseworker, was convicted and sentenced to 4 years for making false allegations of child abuse against Aurora City Councilwoman, Danielle Jurinsky.

https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/robin-niceta-sentenced-four-years-prison-colorado-false-child-abuse-report-danielle-jurinsky/ CPS was not held accountable. No recourse for Jurinsky other than the satisfaction of Niceta going to jail.

Sandra Spraker, a Larimer, CO, CPS caseworker was arrested on 99 counts of falsifying documents and other on the job crimes. CPS was not held accountable and the long list of affected families won’t be compensated for the harm they incurred.

https://www.larimer.gov/spotlights/2023/12/29/former-caseworker-arrested-99-charges

In Steamboat, CO, Cindy Hayek and her fiancé were awarded $21M from Cindy’s ex-husband for false allegations and all the harm that caused Cindy and their children. No accountability for CPS and the case manager was promoted.

In Cortez, Colorado, one advocate was infuriated when she heard a case manager admitting to deciding against another mom because she hated her in high school. The advocate took the case to Child Protection Ombudsman (CPO) and nothing was done to the case manager.

Child welfare systems will continue to destroy families, lives, and dreams until they are held financially accountable for their systemic failures.

Weaponizing CPS – standard practice for vindictive parents trying to harm the other.

It’s widely recognized and understood by most that it’s common practice for a vindictive parent to call CPS and report a false allegation of child abuse and or domestic violence. It’s standard operating procedure in CPS and family court. The problem is pervasive and causes great emotional, psychological, and financial harm to the accused parent and their children. Not only are false allegations a form of domestic violence (coercive control) and cause substantial familial harm, but they are also an extraordinary waste of limited resources and desensitize others to true victims of abuse who need protection and help.

Colorado CPS data shows that roughly 110,000 hotline calls are made each year with apx 32% (35,000) being screened in (case opened) and 68% (75,000) screened out. Of the 35,000 cases opened, apx 20% (7,000) are substantiated and 80% (28,000) are closed as unsubstantiated. We believe that of the 103,000 (93%) calls screened out or closed as unsubstantiated, the vast majority, 85% or more were made with ill intent. That the caller was making a false allegation or trying to make a mountain out of a molehill to intentionally harm the accused parent. CPS believes that calls made with ill intent are much more rare, but admittedly, they don’t know the percentage and are doing nothing to curb the problem regardless of how often it occurs.

To the contrary, CPS leadership refuses to acknowledge or address this form of child abuse other than offering some placating lip service that they’ll look into it.  CPS refuses to give notice to all callers that knowingly making a false or malicious report is a criminal offense and that they can also be held civilly liable. CPS refuses because they believe giving such a notice would prevent someone from reporting a true child safety concern. CPS has no data, research, or study to substantiate that belief or policy.

Good, Kind, and Caring (unbiased) People – easily lied to and manipulated.

Human nature for most people is that they want to believe what is told to them. They’re not biased and simply want to protect children and whoever is in need of protection. They won’t push back very hard on what is told to them or have it validated by evidence or third party. Their natural instinct is to trust the allegation and then interview the kids and accused to sort it out. At this point, even kind and caring people can fall prey to their own unconscious or confirmation bias and get it wrong. Because they are good people, they want to believe other people are also good and it’s harder for them to believe someone would lie to them. They don’t question a person’s motive or validate their allegation until after the damage is done.

False Gender Narratives – infects CPS culture, promotes gender bias & discrimination.

Moms and dads have an equal opportunity to have their lives turned upside down and their families destroyed by CPS. But one of the biggest problems standing in the way of passing policies and implementing practices that protect us all equally, are some groups who masquerade as victim rights or child protection advocates and promote gender falsehoods and misinformation.

These influential groups want policymakers to believe that men are mostly perpetrators and women are only victims or protectors. They want their allegations of abuse to be believed without question or evidence. They want the accused to be presumed guilty, to be denied due process, and for their children to be denied a relationship with their father. They want to be able to weaponize CPS without accountability or fear of consequence.

They want to be able to gain a protection order by simply claiming fear, knowing the protection order will cut Dad off from the children and remove him from the family home. An often-used strategy is called the Silver Bullet. It is frequently used and promoted by unscrupulous lawyers because it works and there is no downside risk. It’s a very effective weapon that feminist groups want to ensure they can use whenever needed.

SOLUTIONS

Reward System Reduction – Incentivize Prevention Policies, Programs, and Practices

Reinforce the guardrails to help keep children and families on the high road to safer and more prosperous futures. This includes discouraging unnecessary system involvement, preventing weaponizing child welfare, and properly assessing threats and risks to child safety and well-being. Investing pennies on prevention upstream to save dollars on treatment downstream. Below is a partial list of low-cost, high-return-on-investment programs that will achieve the goals of FFPSA while simultaneously significantly reducing taxpayer spending.

Protect Both Parent-Child Relationships with Equal Vigor and Respect

Arizona, Arkansas, West Virginia, Florida, Missouri, and Kentucky have passed rebuttable presumptions of equal parenting. Kentucky was the first to pass it in 2017. Between 2017 and 2021, data shows a 33.2% reduction in child victims, a 30.9% reduction in child investigations, and an astounding 53% percent reduction in Domestic Relations and Domestic Violence cross-referenced court cases. Zero cost to implement, tremendous system savings, and protects the best interest of the child.

Automatically Provide Notice, Distinguish Into Two Groups, Collect & Track Data

  • Provide automatic notice to all calls to the CPS hotline that: all calls are recorded and that knowingly making a false or malicious report in a crime and that the caller could also be held liable if malicious intent is proven in a court of law. Zero cost to implement.
  • Immediately determine whether the child was previously, is currently, or will potentially be in the middle of a custody dispute, or not. Two groups, different threats, different risks. Zero cost to implement.
  • Even for calls that are screened out, data must be collected and tracked specific to each family and child. Which group a child is a part of. Source of the call. Reason call was screened out. Zero cost to implement.

These common-sense prevention steps will quickly reduce the number of cases, mitigate parents trying to weaponize CPS, and the immense resources wasted on false allegations. Zero cost to implement, tremendous system savings, and protects the best interest of the child.

Family Threat & Risk Assessments (who is the treat to child well-being)

Data shows that in custody related cases, hotline calls are more likely to be made with the ill intent to harm the other parent than they are to be reporting a true child safety concern. Said another way, most hotline callers have a motive to make a false or malicious report of child abuse. In parallel with investigating and assessing the complaint/concern, a baseline assessment must be conducted on both parents with equal importance of protecting the child’s safety and well-being.

Psychological abuse, emotional abuse, legal abuse, and coercive control are all forms of domestic abuse/domestic violence. Making a false allegation of child abuse IS child abuse and domestic abuse. CPS can and must recognize this fact and take all steps possible to intervene early and prevent it. Because once a false allegation is made, the unfolding process can cause significant trauma to the falsely accused parent and child(ren).

Assessing both parents and determining whether either is acting with malice is critical to early intervention and preventing child abuse. It’s critical to determine the toxic bully or psychological abuser early before they harm their children. CPS needs to be proactive in protecting children.

One such online assessment is offered by ReputationGuardian.nz. It needs further development, but it’s a start. People quickly assess themselves on issues of character and competence. They are asked about the four cores of credibility: integrity, intent, capabilities, and results. Then, they list five references who answer the same questions regarding the person. The process is the same for both parents, is minimally intrusive, and provides quick character reference checks to potentially preempt causing traumatic harm to a child and falsely accused parent.

NGO Family Advocates (all cases, when requested)

A Family Advocate’s purpose is to ensure the rights, liberties, and due process protections are upheld and enforced. Intended to be an advocate for the child or family who is the subject of CPS case, investigation, or removal. Family Advocates are not intended to be legal aid or represent people in court. Family Advocates will ensure CPS treats everyone, regardless of race, economics, or gender, with honesty, dignity, and respect by holding case managers and others to a higher standard of transparency and communication. Family Advocates would also help families navigate the system and connect them with resources they are entitled to.

It’s critically essential that all families who are the subject of a CPS case, investigation, or removal have a Family Advocate they can rely on to do right by themselves and their families.

NGO Independent System Oversight (2 phases)

Child welfare systems too often destroy the very children and families they were intended to protect and serve. The biggest reason these systemic failures persist is that DCFS/CPS has not been accountable to independent, objective oversight. State and county systems have their own internal oversight, but when government immunity and a CYA (cover-your-ass) mentality combine, few if any, people or systems are held to account. Because no one is held to account, there is no sense of urgency for fixing the problems.

Similar to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, which focuses on protecting children from societal threats, we need a National Center for Abused & Exploited Families which focuses on protecting families from harmful systems.

Phase 1 – Establish a Complaint Registry System (CRS). Include complaints across CPS, family court, child support, and domestic violence systems.

 Current compliant processes/systems are difficult and ineffectual at best. Only a small percentage are acted upon or responded to by the system and rarely is there a satisfactory outcome or resolution for the complainant. Instead of resolving claims or addressing issues, complaints languish, problems persist, and harm to the family becomes exponentially worse.

CRS would be a complaint registry, not a formal complaint system. It would collect basic claim information to facilitate reporting and oversight. As users select which system they are filing a complaint against and for what reason, CRS would provide instruction or guidance for filing their official, formal complaint directly with the appropriate system. Users would indicate in CRS if their complaint had been filed or not, providing any information available to cross-reference systems or track the formal complaint. The first phase of CRS would:

  • Give people a singular site to register their complaints informally,
  • Give help and guidance on how to file formal complaints,
  • Collect and aggregate complaint data to quickly identify system practices or people of concern,
  • Aggregate complaints against a single system or person for potential civil or criminal legal action,
  • Features and functions would evolve over time. (ex. automatically generated customer satisfaction surveys with each case opened and or after each system contact)

Phase 2 – Establish the National Center for Abused & Exploited Families (NCAEF) organization.

The purpose of NCAEF oversight is to help relevant state and county systems proactively identify problems with system practices, programs, or employees and quickly resolve them before they impact the lives of others.

By leveraging and aggregating CRS complaint data, NCAEF would engage with system leaders and state and federal policymakers to enact corrective legislation, administrative rules, and/or best practices so that systems can better protect the children and families they were created to serve. NCAEF will play a critical role in making systems better for families AND limiting government liability when it takes too long to solve problems while other families are harmed.

NCAEF would also become a catalyst for innovating programs that reinforce the guardrails of keeping children and families on the high road to safer and more prosperous futures. An innovation engine of prevention programs designed to keep babies from being thrown into the river. By casting off the traditional system constraints of bureaucratic thinking and treatment, truly focusing on prevention, reinventing how success is measured, incentivizing those metrics instead of treatment numbers, and focusing on system avoidance, states could invest millions to save billions.

Summary

Child welfare was established to protect the health, safety, and well-being of children. Its purpose and intent is good. The problem is in the execution. “The road to hell was paved with the best of intentions.”

There are many reasons why the current child welfare system often causes more harm than good. Some are listed above as are some innovative ideas as to how to solve problems.

Remove bias, eliminate subjective opinions, and limit broad discretion by requiring objective facts and evidence as the basis for any decision or ruling.

Require a preponderance to substantiate an allegation and quickly limit attempts to weaponize child welfare. Give notice that false or malicious reporting is a crime and attempts to weaponize child welfare will fall through the floor. Prosecute and hold accountable a couple of vindictive parents for making knowingly false allegations and false allegations will quickly become the exception instead of the rule.

All of that is easy, with zero or minor expense to implement. Children will be healthier, safer, and better off with two safe parents, flaws and all, caring, providing, and parenting them. And the savings to the systems is immense making greater resources available to the families and children truly in need.

Then with the easy stuff out way, create innovative programs that reward families for parents who choose to work together by minimizing family court involvement, not having a child support case, and by not having CPS involvement.

Change the paradigm and invest in families to keep babies from being thrown into the river.