Institutions committee backs funding to stabilize women’s Kids Apart program, to phase in men’s pilot at Newport

The House Institutions Committee on Feb. 26 considered H.219, legislation that would codify the Kids Apart family-visitation program into statute and provide start-up funding to expand the program to a men’s facility. Committee members indicated support for asking appropriators to fund the Chittenden Regional Correctional Facility program in full and to provide initial funding to start a program at the Newport Correctional Facility, with the rollout and further expansion contingent on budget availability and a report back to legislative oversight bodies.

Committee members said the issue matters because Kids Apart supports incarcerated parents’ contact with children, a factor lawmakers said can improve family stability and long-term outcomes. “The program is incredibly valuable to the women that utilize it,” said Haley Summer, director of communications for the Department of Corrections, in testimony describing the program’s operations and recent study work to assess feasibility for expansion.

Witnesses from Lund and the Kids Apart program outlined how the existing Chittenden program operates and what is required to expand it. Ken Schatz, interim CEO of Lund, said the Chittenden program runs under a contract with DOC and that Lund supplements DOC funding with grants and fundraising. Kim LaRoche, director of parent-child center services at Lund, told the committee the Chittenden program’s total annual cost is $276,000 and that DOC currently provides $161,000 under contract; the program and partner organizations raise the remainder. Jessica Kell, Kids Apart parenting program coordinator, said the program’s grant currently covers gas cards and similar travel supports for caregivers to attend visits.

Committee members and witnesses discussed the draft fiscal plan the bill references. Committee staff and witnesses described a roughly $400,000 FY26 funding proposal tied to H.219: an appropriation of $400,000 for one year, of which witnesses and some committee members said about $115,000 would be used to make the Chittenden program “fiscally whole” (covering the difference between DOC’s $161,000 and the $276,000 program cost), and roughly $268,000 would be used to establish programming at Newport. Committee members repeatedly emphasized that any ongoing obligation beyond the one-year appropriation must be contingent on available funding and subject to the normal budget process.

The committee heard operational and feasibility details. Summer said the group conducting the study recommended Northern State Correctional Facility as the most feasible men’s site for an initial expansion because of its larger visitation space and larger sentenced population. Summer described staff- and space-related operational constraints, noting that facilities are short-staffed and that running separate child-focused visiting hours would pull staff offline from other duties. LaRoche and Kell described program elements that would be funded: a Kids Apart coordinator on-site, community case management, visitation coaching, gas cards and, when travel distances are large, hotel accommodations to enable family visits, plus parenting classes and supportive services.

The committee reviewed survey data from Northern used to gauge demand. According to testimony, on the day of a Northern survey there were about 414 men present; roughly 115 responded to the survey, and about 98 of respondents reported they had minor children (0–18). Committee members asked for clearer, committee-level data on how many men across DOC custody identify as parents and would want to participate; staff indicated DOC could gather and report those counts for other facilities.

Members discussed whether to treat Newport as a time-limited “pilot” or as phase 1 of a broader policy to provide Kids Apart services to all incarcerated parents. Some members said the long-running Chittenden program (in place by Lund’s account since 2003) should not be treated as a pilot, and several speakers urged statutory codification to ensure equal access for incarcerated fathers. Others cautioned that putting an ongoing funding obligation into statute without clear budget authority could create an unfunded mandate; several committee members asked for language making any multi-year commitment contingent on appropriations.

On funding sources, committee members and witnesses discussed the Justice Reinvestment funding pool that the committee has used previously and other potential federal earmarks. DOC staff said the $400,000 appropriation was not in the governor’s recommended budget; witnesses and some members pointed to Justice Reinvestment and other pots as likely areas to identify ongoing funds. Committee members asked Appropriations staff to view the committee’s intent—stabilize Chittenden funding and start Newport—as guidance when they consider budget language and whether to include funds in the BAA or governor’s recommended budget.

The committee asked Lund and DOC to provide additional details: a line-item budget for Chittenden’s full program cost, clear startup cost projections for Newport, and counts of incarcerated men statewide who self-identify as parents and would want to participate. The committee agreed to refine statutory language on page 4 of the draft (the program description) and to return to technical line-by-line work in a subsequent meeting. Committee staff said a formal memo and draft bill language would be circulated to Appropriations and that DOC and Lund would provide the requested data and any updates on federal earmark status.

Next steps: Committee members scheduled further bill drafting and review sessions, asked Appropriations staff to consider the committee’s funding intent, and directed DOC and Kids Apart/Lund to submit the requested budget and participation data to legislative oversight before the committee advances final language.