Committee advances bill to limit initial training for provisional foster homes

Representative Randy Torres (District 17) introduced House Bill 19 21 and an amendment that struck a paragraph the division requested be removed from the original text.

"This bill aims to make it easier for people, especially relatives, to become foster parents in Arkansas by reducing the training requirements," Representative Randy Torres said when presenting House Bill 19 21. He described the bill's core limits: an initial cap of 15 hours of training to be approved and 6 hours annually to remain approved. Torres also said the Division of Children and Family Services (DCFS) could lower those requirements if necessary.

Tiffany Ryan, identified in committee as director for the Division of Children and Family Services, explained that the amendment removed a provision that would have barred closing a provisional foster home or removing a child based solely on differences in training hours between provisional and traditional foster homes. Ryan said provisional homes (relatives or "fictive kin") will still receive training and currently receive six hours focused on trauma and caring for relatives.

Committee members asked whether provisional foster homes would still receive training and whether the change would make the training legal practice rather than policy. Ryan replied that provisional families will still receive training and that DCFS has already worked since 2023 to revise kinship and traditional foster home training.

No members registered public opposition. The committee voted to adopt the amendment and then voted to pass the bill "as amended." The motion carried by voice vote.

Why it matters: Sponsors said the bill reduces barriers for relatives and other provisional caregivers to be approved quickly, allowing children to be placed faster while preserving discretion for DCFS to require additional training when appropriate.

What remains unclear: The transcript records that the division will set rules to further streamline provisional approvals; the text did not include the department's proposed rule language or implementation timeline in committee testimony.