Child‑welfare offices press lawmakers on youth hearing rights, DYS safety concerns and body‑camera pilot

Two child‑welfare offices used the Smart Act hearing to press the legislature on policy and procedural changes they say are needed to protect children and improve oversight.

Chris Henderson, executive director of the Office of the Child Representative (OCR), described OCR’s limited budget footprint but emphasized its role representing children in multiple case types statewide. OCR announced a legislative bill to restore children’s rights to be heard in dependency and neglect proceedings after a Colorado Supreme Court decision (RMP) altered a prior 40‑year practice; Henderson said the proposal should have no fiscal impact because it seeks to restore an earlier statutory hearing right and that the office had bipartisan stakeholder support for sponsorship. OCR said it will circulate a concise one‑page summary to lawmakers and is available for stakeholder briefings.

The Child Protection Ombudsman, Stephanie Via Fuerte, walked the committee through the ombudsman’s statutory functions—confidential individual case intake (about 1,100 closed cases last year) and systemic policy investigations. Via Fuerte highlighted two issue briefs that raised substantial concerns at the Division of Youth Services (DYS): inadequate surveillance practices (notably cameras lacking audio), which impeded investigative findings into incidents where youth have allegedly been injured during restraint; and excessive strip searches not consistent with regulations. She said the DYS has started a pilot to test body‑camera systems (video+audio) at two facilities and that the Ombudsman will monitor results and report back.

Ombudsman staff also described system‑level projects: a new data system (in partnership with the University of Denver) due by fiscal year‑end to better measure outcomes rather than outputs; a mandatory‑reporting task force implementation; and a March 2026 release of an ICF evaluation of Colorado’s risk and safety assessment tool. The ombudsman noted its statutory limits—no subpoena power and no direct intervention in the courts—but said it can access records and issue formal recommendations; they said most agencies that received recommendations complied in nearly all instances.

Public comment followed: Steven Gladstone testified about his family court litigation and urged greater transparency and new legislation he calls the “Full Disclosure Act.” Committee members confined public comment to the record and indicated written testimony routes for detailed filings.

Why it matters: lawmakers were asked to consider a narrowly scoped statutory fix to restore hearing rights for children in D&N proceedings, and to watch Ombudsman findings and the March evaluation as basis for possible rule or statutory changes to improve youth safety and oversight. Both OCR and the Ombudsman asked for follow‑up engagement with the committees; OCR said its bill has bipartisan interest and materials would be provided to members.

Provenance: OCR presentation and Q&A (topic start SEG 1316; topic end SEG 1522); Ombudsman presentation and Q&A (topic start SEG 1712; topic end SEG 2160).