Committee narrows bill to protect children’s survivor benefits; sends measure to appropriations

The House Health and Human Services Committee adopted a strike‑below amendment and recommended House Bill 25‑1271 to the Appropriations Committee with a favorable recommendation.

Sponsors framed the bill as a remedy to a practice in which counties sometimes use federal survivor benefits and related payments — benefits the child is entitled to — to offset foster‑care costs. Representative Gilchrist described a case in which twin children’s survivor benefits were used for their care; sponsors said children who enter foster care should be able to receive and conserve federal benefits that are theirs by statute or regulation, rather than have those funds diverted to pay the cost of foster care.

The committee approved a negotiated strike‑below amendment that narrows the bill’s immediate scope to Social Security survivor benefits (Title II). Sponsors and Department of Human Services staff said the Title II benefits are administratively more straightforward to identify and preserve; the larger category of Title XVI (Supplemental Security Income) and other benefit streams will remain under study and future stakeholder work. The amended language requires counties to determine Title II eligibility, enroll eligible children, keep accounting for conserved funds, and to release funds when custody ends or when the youth requires them.

Supporters included the Office of the Child’s Representative, Disability Law Colorado, CASA Colorado, advocacy organizations representing foster youth and several former foster youth who testified about how conserved benefits helped them with housing, education and other transition costs. Witnesses described cases where conserved survivor funds were used by families or counties to pay for a child’s needs after a parent’s death, and urged the policy change to ensure children get the funds intended for them.

County officials and Colorado Counties Inc. opposed or sought amendments. County testimony stressed implementation complexity, the need for state technical assistance, and the risk of shifting costs to county general funds. County witnesses noted the state child‑welfare block grant already faces a multi‑million dollar shortfall this fiscal year; they asked the General Assembly to provide funding to backfill county budgets if survivor benefits are conserved for children instead of being applied to immediate foster‑care costs.

Department of Human Services officials testified that the department would provide oversight, promulgate rules and offer technical assistance if the bill passes. They said counties are already required to screen children for federal benefits, but the department also acknowledged counties’ differing operational capacity and the need for implementation resources. Several testifiers urged a neutral, independent support mechanism to help young people manage conserved funds after emancipation.

In committee debate some members voiced concern about fiscal impacts on counties; others emphasized the moral case for returning funds to the child. Representative Gilchrist said the change will correct a longstanding practice and noted one Colorado county has already conserved survivor funds for children. Representative Brown, a co‑prime sponsor, said the practice is wrong even if it has been permitted, and urged the committee to act for children’s long‑term stability.

The committee adopted amendment L002 and voted to send the amended bill to the Appropriations Committee; the clerk recorded the vote as 10 yes, 3 no. Sponsors said they plan continued stakeholder work on Title XVI (SSI) and other benefit streams and to work with counties and the department on implementation details and funding needs.