CCD Contacts:
Jill Kagan 703-256-9578
Kim Musheno 301-588-8252
May 30,
2002
The Honorable Ted
Kennedy
Chairman, Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions
SH-428
U.S.
Senate
Washington, DC 20510
ATTN: Linda Smith and Stephanie
Robinson
Dear Chairman Kennedy:
As
members of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD), we, the
undersigned national organizations, urge you to consider the full proposal for
reauthorization of the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention and Treatment Act
(CAPTA) put forward by the CCD Child Abuse Task Force and the National Child
Abuse Coalition. CCD is a coalition of approximately 100 national disability organizations
working together to advocate for national public policy that ensures the self
determination, independence, empowerment, integration and inclusion of children
and adults with disabilities in all aspects of society.
If
you plan to consider the House passed bill (H.R. 3839) as the starting point, we
support the changes already passed by the House in both Titles I and Title II
which address some important provisions from the National Child Abuse
Coalition/CCD Child Abuse Task Force proposal, and urge you to include our
additional recommendations as outlined below.
In Title I, we strongly support
retaining those provisions throughout which would give states the option of linking child protective services to
comprehensive health and developmental evaluations for reported children, and
strongly encourage including in the definitions, a reference to the Early and
Periodic Screening Diagnosis and Treatment program in Title XIX of the Social
Security Act (Medicaid). This
reference would in no way require or even infer an entitlement to linkages. That would remain a state option. It would only clarify what type of
screen Congress intended children reported as abused and neglected to receive
when referred by CPS. We also
strongly support the provision passed by the House which requires children under
age 3 who are reported to CPS to be referred to the Part C Early Intervention
Program of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA).
Page 2
In Title II, we strongly
support those improvements that
recognize the role that families of children with disabilities and parents with
disabilities must play in the development, implementation and receipt of child
abuse and neglect prevention services, and that respite and crisis services for
children with disabilities, who are at significantly higher risk of abuse and
neglect, are effective abuse and neglect prevention programs that should be
considered as core child abuse and neglect prevention services.
There are some provisions,
however, in the Coalitions' original proposal that would significantly improve
program direction and accountability that we urge you to include in the Senate’s
reauthorization bill. These same
recommendations have been put forth by the National Child Abuse
Coalition.
Focus on Funding Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention
Programs to Benefit Families
First, as written, the revised
Title II does nothing to prevent States from spending all of their funds on
statewide networking activities, rather than on the core services identified in
the Act that would directly benefit families. While we support statewide networking as
an important allowable use of Title II’s funds, it should not be the sole
purpose of the Title as delineated in the Purpose Section or as the primary
focus in the Authority Section. In fact, the federally-funded FRIENDS
National Resource Center for Community-Based Family Resource and Support
Programs has reported that over the last five years, all states but one have
spent funds on establishing and maintaining statewide networks. That task has been adequately
accomplished by the states. It is
time now to focus on the services which were meant to directly benefit
families.
Purpose
Therefore we urge adoption of
the Coalitions’ proposal that would amend the Purpose by deleting the current
language of Section 201 (a) (1) and replacing it with:
Section 201 (a) Purpose – It is the purpose of this
title to support statewide efforts to develop, operate, expand, enhance, and
network a core group of community-based family support services for the
prevention of child abuse and neglect.
Authority
n
Also, to clarify
Authority, delete Section 201 (b) (1) as written and replace with “financing the
start-up, maintenance, expansion, redesign, and networking of community-based
family support programs for the prevention of child abuse and neglect prevention
programs, [including parent mutual support, parent education, home visiting,
respite, and family support] that-”
n
Retain Section 201 (b) (A)
through (I) as written, but delete “or” on page 20, line 2 and replace with
“and”.
n
In Section 201 (b)(3),
since this section already says that only services identified by the
inventory and description of
current services as an unmet need can be funded, the language “to the extent
practicable given funding levels and community priorities,” is redundant and
should be deleted. It is also
confusing since respite and home visiting have been identified as core
services.
Page
3
Use of
Funds
The confusion at the state and
local levels about how funds are to be used (statewide networking vs. funding of
child abuse and neglect prevention programs) is partly due to the absence of a
specific section delineating “Use of Funds.” For clarity, a new section on Use of
Funds should be added that reads as follows (note that networking is still an
allowable use of funds):
(new) Section ___. USE OF FUNDS.
(1) In General – Each lead
entity awarded a grant under this Title shall use the grant funds
for:
(A)
Conducting an inventory of
need; and
(B)
financing the start-up,
maintenance, expansion, redesign, and statewide networking of family support
programs for the prevention of child abuse and neglect prevention, [including
parent mutual support, parent education, home visiting, respite, and family
support].
(2) Funds may also be used
for:
(A)
child abuse and neglect
public awareness activities,
(B)
statewide networking of
other related services delineated in Sec. 201 (b) (3),
(C)
operational support, training and
technical assistance to community-based family support programs for the
prevention of child abuse and neglect; or
(D)
Evaluation.
Improving Accountability
These provisions become even
more important if no changes are made to the current program's focus on
developing statewide networks rather than on provisions in our proposal that
would
have refocused Title II back on actually funding community-based child
abuse and neglect prevention services. Provisions must be included to
ensure that funds are being spent as Congress intended – on provision of direct
services to families for the purposes of preventing child abuse and
neglect.
Inventory of
Need
-- While a description of inventory of need is
required in the application section as written, it is also important that the
lead entity provide assurances that
the inventory will be conducted. This is the only way we can determine if states
are actually planning on expending funds on direct services for families. We
propose adding to Section 202, (2) (assurances) a new part (D) that
reads:
(D)
inventory of need for the core services identified in Sec. 206 (a) paragraph
(3)(A) in at least one of the previous two years, and will conduct such an
assessment every two years, and expend funds allotted under this Title to
address identified unmet needs for the community-based family support programs
for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.
Performance
Measures
-- We also propose in the
performance measures Section 207:
n
delete paragraph (1) and
replace with (1) shall demonstrate the effective development, operation,
networking and expansion of core services in community-based family support
programs for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.
n
in paragraph (3), after
"of this title" insert “by providing a line-item budget expenditure for each
core program from funds available under Title II.”
page
4
-- And finally, we propose
adding two sections that were in Title II of CAPTA prior to the 1996
consolidation to reinstate HHS's authority:
n
Section 208. Report. The Secretary shall
prepare and submit to the Congress at the end of each year a compilation and
analysis of any reports submitted by eligible states; and
n
Section 209. Withholding. Whenever the
Secretary, after reasonable notice to any State and opportunity for hearing with
the State, finds that there has been a failure to comply with any provision of
this Title, the Secretary shall notify the State that further payments will not
be made under this title until the Secretary is satisfied that there is no
longer any such failure to comply. Until the Secretary is so satisfied, no
further payments will be made under this title.
Uniformity of Definitions
We propose making some minor
modifications of the definition section for purposes of clarity and
uniformity.
Disability
The definition of disability
has changed since 1996 and would simply require a technical change. The correct reference is “section
602(a)(2) and section 632 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act.”
Family Support
Programs for the Prevention of Child Abuse and
Neglect
Paragraph 209 (3) is
inconsistent with the previous descriptions as written, since “family resource
and support programs” was changed to “family support programs for the prevention
of child abuse and neglect” throughout the House-passed bill. We therefore propose for purposes of
defining this term and for uniformity, in addition to changes already made,
language similar to that used in Section 206 (a) (3) by making the following
changes:
n
In Section 209 (3) Delete
“Family Resource and Support program” and insert “Family support programs for
the prevention of child abuse and neglect”
n
After “The term,” delete
“family resource and support program” and insert “family support programs for
the prevention of child abuse and neglect.”
n
In Section 209 (3) (A),
delete “and” in paragraph (3) (A) (iv), and insert
(vi)
respite
care;
(vii)
home visiting;
and
(vii)
family support
services.
Page 5
Additional
Necessary Definitions
For uniformity and to
strengthen intent about funding the core family support programs for the
prevention of child abuse and neglect, add the following new paragraphs (6) and
(7) to Sec. 209:
n
(6) MUTUAL SUPPORT
PROGRAMS. Mutual support
programs, that incorporate standards and demonstrate effectiveness, offer people
in parenting roles and their children the opportunity to share with each other,
in group meetings, strategies for strengthening their families, preventing child
abuse and neglect, and enhancing their personal growth and leadership potential,
in partnership with their communities, private and public agencies, and
volunteers.
n
(7) HOME VISITING
PROGRAMS. Home visiting programs
offer assistance and support on a voluntary basis to expectant parents and
families with newborns and children (in their own homes) by providing
information, referrals and reassurance about well-baby care, positive parenting,
and healthy child development for the purposes of meeting community needs,
promoting parent-child relationships and healthy child development, and
preventing child abuse and neglect.
Other Clarifying Language
Since respite, home visiting
and family support have been added as core services in Sec. 206 paragraph (3)
(A), “to the extent practicable” can be deleted from Section. 206, paragraph (3)
(B).
Authorization Level
We would also like to be on
record as supporting a more significant increase in the authorization
level. In order for the legislation
to have its desired effect, then a more significant investment is going to have
to be made. As the National Child
Abuse Coalition and others have documented, a funding level of $500 million for
these services, especially those such as parent mutual support, respite care and
home visiting that save billions of dollars in reduced out-of-home placements,
improved school performance, and in enhanced health and well-being, would still
only reach a small proportion of the nation’s families that would benefit from
such services.
We appreciate your attention to
these issues and look forward to working with you. If you have any questions or need
more information, please contact the CCD Child Abuse Task Force cochairs, Kim
Musheno, AUCD, 301-588-8252 or by email at kmusheno@aucd.org or Jill Kagan, National Respite
Coalition, at 703-256-9578 or by email at jbkagan@aol.com.
Sincerely,
American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry
American Academy of
Pediatrics
American Association of People
with Disabilities
American Association on Mental
Retardation
American Music Therapy
Association
American Psychological
Association
Association for the Education
of Community Rehabilitation Personnel
Association of Maternal and
Child Health Programs
Association of University
Centers on Disabilities
Brain Injury Association of
America
Consortium of Developmental
Disabilities Councils
Council on Learning
Disabilities
Easter
Seals
Epilepsy
Foundation
Federation of Families for
Children’s Mental Health
Higher Education Consortium for
Special Education
International Dyslexia
Association
National Association of
Orthopedic Nurses
National Association of
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers
National Association of School
Nurses
National Association of School
Psychologists
National Association of Social
Workers
National Center for Learning
Disabilities
National Respite
Coalition
Research Institute for
Independent Living
The Arc of the United
States
Tourette Syndrome
Association
United Cerebral Palsy
Association