Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Welfare Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee defeats proposal requiring independent review of child welfare system after lengthy debate
Summary
The committee rejected a bill (SB 727) that would have required the Department of Human Services to hire an independent third party to conduct a comprehensive review of child welfare, with a completion target of September 2026. Senators debated whether a study or direct legislative action offered a better path.
The committee defeated a committee substitute for Senate Bill 727 after a long hearing that included testimony from national child‑welfare experts and extensive floor debate.
The substitute would have required the Department of Human Services to procure an independent third party to conduct a comprehensive review and assessment of West Virginia’s child welfare system, including abuse and neglect court processes, child welfare laws, education system interaction, opportunities for efficiency, transparency and accountability, and other areas listed in the bill. The draft set a completion date of September 2026 and required DHS to pay for the study; it also required the third party to be bound by DHS confidentiality laws.
Lynn Johnson, former Assistant Secretary for Family Support in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, told the committee the problems were "absolutely fixable" and emphasized urgency: "When we do the right thing for kids in foster care and we improve those systems, you improve the entire culture of this state," she said. Dr. John DeGarmo, founder and director of the Foster Care Institute, urged sustained support for foster parents and community‑based services and described recruitment and retention problems among caseworkers and foster families.
Several senators said they supported the goal but opposed another large, statewide study. The senior senator from the fourth warned past expensive contracts — including a large failed IT contract and other prior reviews — had not produced change and said the state needed executive commitment and concrete action, not another study. Other senators asked for amendments to require the study to identify out‑of‑state placements and opportunities to develop in‑state treatment capacity and to evaluate private and faith‑based programs as potential partners; those amendments were adopted.
The committee took a roll call vote on a motion to report the substitute to the full Senate with a recommendation of passage but with double reference to finance. The clerk recorded 6 in favor and 8 opposed; the chair declared the bill defeated.
