Caseworker tells court housing is primary barrier to Christopher Carter’s reunification

At a virtual juvenile-court review hearing, the department's foster care worker said housing is the primary barrier to Christopher Carter's reunification with his children and that the agency can explore assistance with a security deposit. The court received the court report and the department agreed to refer Carter for a new psychological evaluation.

The caseworker, Brenda Burgess, testified that Carter "has been compliant," is working full time and part time, has begun unsupervised visits and has met with Section 8, but "Right now, really, it's housing." Burgess said the department "could assist with, most likely, we could assist with, like, security deposit." Court counsel later confirmed the department would make a referral for a psychological evaluation after Carter missed an earlier appointment.

Why it matters: The department identified housing as the immediate, concrete barrier to progressing from longer visits to overnight or placement changes; the psychological evaluation is a commonly used assessment in these cases and its absence was noted by counsel and the court.

Most important facts: Burgess described Carter as compliant with services and beginning unsupervised visits; the department is assisting with transportation and is exploring housing supports. Counsel noted an outstanding psychological evaluation that the original provider would not reschedule; Department counsel said she would make a new referral. The court accepted the court report and set further proceedings.

Supporting details and context: Burgess said Carter has a vehicle and has provided insurance and that car seats were being purchased to enable safe transport. She said he is looking for housing and has met with Section 8. On the psychological evaluation, Burgess confirmed Carter missed the originally scheduled appointment and the provider would not reschedule; Department counsel said, "I'll make the referral." When asked about overnight parenting time, Burgess said she would not recommend overnights without Carter securing housing; she said longer day visits would be a next step.

What the court did next: The court took the court report into the record without objection and scheduled continuation of the hearing for additional testimony and follow-up. The department agreed to investigate deposit assistance and to arrange a referral for the psychological evaluation.

Less critical details: Department staff noted transportation challenges for some visits and that they had requested mileage reimbursement for a relative caregiver; efforts were under way to identify transportation and to arrange for the parent to be transported to the children if needed.