Senate committee hears testimony on bill to conserve Social Security benefits for foster youth

The Michigan Senate Committee on Housing and Human Services on an organizational meeting day heard testimony on Senate Bill 18, introduced by Chair Senator Erwin, a proposal to screen for eligibility, use funds for a child’s special needs while in care and conserve any remaining Social Security or other benefits for the child after discharge from care.

The bill matters because witnesses said conserved benefits can provide housing, education and stability when foster youth age out. Former foster youth and advocates testified the state’s current practice has, in some cases, resulted in benefits paid on a child’s behalf being retained by the state general fund rather than conserved for the child.

Justin Caschetta, a former foster youth who testified by Zoom, described losing funds he said had been paid on his behalf: "I unfortunately lost, dollars 18,000, in social security benefits," he said, describing how the loss forced him to fend for himself after aging out. Amy Harfeld, national policy director for the Children’s Advocacy Institute, urged the committee to advance the bill, saying the practice "commandeering the assets of our most vulnerable children is done in the name of revenue maximization." Harfeld said about "5 to 10% of Michigan youth receive these benefits" and that the amounts "can amount to nearly $16,000 per child on average."

Legal Services of South Central Michigan’s Director of Advocacy Lisa Ruby testified about the importance of early application for benefits that create a record with the Social Security Administration and raised concerns about who serves as payee. "99% of the time it's the Department of Health and Human Services who makes itself the payee for the child's benefits," Ruby said, and she described cases where intervening to change the payee returned funds to the child or family — one example in which about $17,000 was ultimately made available after advocacy and a change of payee.

Multiple current and former foster youth testified in person and by Zoom about basic needs that went unmet while benefits were collected on their behalf. Alexia Roberts said state-collected benefits might have allowed her grandmother to provide adequate clothing, food and housing. Shantoria Hall described delaying high school graduation and extreme scarcity after entering care, saying she was "unable to make it to school every day during my senior year because I couldn't afford transportation." Donella Anderson cited specific program figures from her experience and said the state’s back-to-school allowance was "just 122" while foster youth received "$7.70 per month." Several witnesses, including Kimberly Chambers and Dylan White, described not knowing benefits existed or receiving them only briefly.

Representatives of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) told the committee the department has worked on conserving benefits and supports the bill as a framework to screen children, responsibly use funds for special needs while in care, conserve remaining funds for post-discharge stability and provide financial-literacy training for children 14 and older. Rachel Wineland, child-welfare policy and legislative specialist with MDHHS, said the department views conserved benefits as a tool to promote "child and family economic stability following discharge from care" and that implementation will require funding for screening, management, reporting and training.

Senators asked practical questions. Senator Santana requested additional detail on how Chafee/youth-transition funds are shared with aging-out youth; MDHHS said it would follow up. Senator Schenck asked for examples of "special needs" that might be covered; MDHHS cited educational supports such as tutoring and said determinations depend in part on Social Security Administration rules.

Chair Erwin told the committee the intention is to take testimony and return at a later meeting for a possible vote; the committee did not vote on SB 18 during this session. The committee clerk recorded multiple written supporters from advocacy groups at the close of testimony.

The record of testimony included several recurring themes: former foster youth who said they were not told of benefits or lost access, advocates who requested statutory clarity and safeguards, county and nonprofit caseworkers who described the administrative burden when benefits are treated as state revenue, and MDHHS staff who described pilot practices and said appropriations will be needed to operationalize conservation and reporting requirements.

Looking ahead, the committee indicated it will consider the bill again after receiving additional technical information and fiscal support requests from MDHHS.