State Foster Care Agencies Take Millions Of Dollars Owed To Children In Their Care

[WhiskeyGrinder]

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/22/988806806/state-foster-care-agencies-take-millions-of-dollars-owed-to-children-in-their-ca

Roughly 10% of foster youth in the U.S. are entitled to Social Security benefits, either because their parents have died or because they have a physical or mental disability that would leave them in poverty without financial help. This money — typically more than $700 per month, though survivor benefits vary — is considered their property under federal law.

The Marshall Project and NPR have found that in at least 36 states and Washington, D.C., state foster care agencies comb through their case files to find kids entitled to these benefits, then apply to Social Security to become each child's financial representative, a process permitted by federal regulations. Once approved, the agencies take the money, almost always without notifying the children, their loved ones or lawyers.

At least 10 state foster care agencies hire for-profit companies to obtain millions of dollars in Social Security benefits intended for the most vulnerable children in state care each year, according to a review of hundreds of pages of contract documents. A private firm that Alaska used while Hunter was in state care referred to acquiring benefits from people with disabilities as "a major line of business" in company records.

(snip)

State foster care agencies collected more than $165 million from these children in 2018 alone, according to the most recent survey data from the research group Child Trends. And the number is likely much higher, according to Social Security Administration data for 10 states obtained by a member of Congress and shared with The Marshall Project and NPR. In New York, California and a handful of other states, foster care is run by counties, many of which also take this money, our reporting shows.

[enough]

1. Is our society essentially depraved? NT

[Wounded Bear]

4. Yes. Profit above all else is our creed...

[HAB911]

2. System gets you coming and going

on the other end, wait until they get their hands on you in assisted living or memory care

[Hassin Bin Sober]

3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the state pay foster parents?

I’m assuming it’s like being in a nursing home on Medicaid. You sign over your social security.

Not that I agree with it but I’m not surprised.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

5. From the article:

Nationwide, foster care agencies are funded through a complicated web of federal and state grants and subsidies, paid for by taxpayers. Children's Social Security benefits were not intended to be one of those funding streams, according to federal law.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

6. Yeah, it helps to read the entire article, eh?

There’s this little gem:

States first turned to for-profit companies to mine foster children for cash during the Reagan era. In a 1989 profile, The Washington Post reported that Maximus had brought "modern business management to the heart of the American underclass."

The firm gets paid by public agencies to help them reduce costs and increase the efficiency of programs intended for people in poverty, including public assistance, health care and child support. Its motto is "Helping Government Serve the People."

[csziggy]

7. How can minors sign over their benefits? They are not old enough to do that

Apparently the money is being taken by the states without the children or any representatives (if there are any) being notified. Taking their benefits for years and then kicking the kids out of the systems at age eighteen with nothing is appalling. At least some of the money should be set aside for the children to have a nest egg when they go out on their own.

[Thunderbeast]

8. Sorry...I do not understand the outrage here

Social Security benefits are designed to meet the basic needs of the recipient. If the state has taken on the responsibility of this care (through payments to foster families), then the state is entitled to claim these funds through the Representative Payee process.

If a disabled person is in jail or a state mental hospital, SSI or SSD benefits are suspended. The person's basic needs are being funded from public sources. AFDC payments to parents from state welfare systems are also discontinued.

For a minor, I see little difference in the purpose of the payments whether the benefit is for disability, parental retirement, or survivor situations.

I just don't understand the outrage here.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

9. From the article:

Nationwide, foster care agencies are funded through a complicated web of federal and state grants and subsidies, paid for by taxpayers. Children's Social Security benefits were not intended to be one of those funding streams, according to federal law.

[dsc]

10. Several reasons

1) The feds have said, repeatedly, and in this thing called a law, that the money in question belongs to the children.

2) The agencies do nothing at all once a child ages out, so they wind up on the streets.

Instead that money should be put in an account for them, and given to them on their 18th birthday or when they are aged out.

[Elessar Zappa]

11. The benefits

of the accumulated SS money should go to the kids when they turn 18. The state isn't entitled to the money.

[Thunderbeast]

15. ALL kids leaving foster care need supports

Denying the foster care system a legitimate source of revenue squeezes budgets used for every kid.

[stopdiggin]

17. think that's a misreading of the actual situation -(nt)-

[stopdiggin]

14. You're right.

People are pretending like this money is supposed to be banked (held in trust or the equivalent) until the child is of age. That's poppy cock. Survivor benefits were always intended for the ongoing needs and upkeep of the beneficiaries. And the situation is virtually the same if a child is living with a parent. That money is (almost invariably) going towards food, clothing, education needs, medical care ...

There is nothing particularly underhanded -- or indeed even particularly surprising -- going on here. If these children are entitled to benefits, then it's probably a good idea that somebody is making sure they are enrolled. The foster system could certainly use a lot of attention (and perhaps funding?) -- but this particular grievance, if it even qualifies as that, doesn't really send me.
----- -----

[RobinA]

12. I Would Need To See

some actual proof of this. I worked for a county Children & Youth agency for years and I find this laughable on many levels. Maybe it just isn't something that is done in my state - PA. I'm not saying it has never happened, but it seems unlikely that it would be a major problem.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

13. I mean...it's right there in the article.

The Marshall Project and NPR have found that in at least 36 states and Washington, D.C., state foster care agencies comb through their case files to find kids entitled to these benefits, then apply to Social Security to become each child's financial representative, a process permitted by federal regulations. Once approved, the agencies take the money, almost always without notifying the children, their loved ones or lawyers.

[stopdiggin]

16. if the proper notification was given?

(and I would agree there probably should be some obligation there) would you still see this as out of order? Shouldn't somebody be getting the benefits? And if the state (agency) is footing the bill for care and housing, medical ... ?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

18. Again, it's in the article:

Nationwide, foster care agencies are funded through a complicated web of federal and state grants and subsidies, paid for by taxpayers. Children's Social Security benefits were not intended to be one of those funding streams, according to federal law.

[stopdiggin]

19. you seem to be a bit stuck on 'not intended'

which is a bit different from immoral or unethical. This is just the way things have unfolded over time. Article also states that the practice is perfectly legal (after one would suppose some review?) -- and is practiced in the vast majority of jurisdictions.

This would not seem to be an equivalent to somebody bilking the Medicaid system for vast amounts of fraud ....
(although I would agree with you that notification and an accounting should be made to intended recipients)

[AZProgressive]

20. I think people would be upset if it was their benefits

Thanks for posting.