Committee hears bill to let families keep foster home licenses when former foster youth with juvenile adjudications remain in home

The Committee on Child Welfare and Foster Care heard testimony on House Bill 2524, a bill that would change KSA 65‑5‑16 to allow the Department for Children and Families to grant or allow maintenance of a family foster home license when a person who was formerly in the secretary's custody resides in the home. Jesse, assistant reviser, told the committee the bill directs DCF to permit licensure in cases where the resident otherwise qualifies and was placed in the home by the secretary and is between ages 18 and 26; the department may also permit licensure for older residents in limited circumstances and the statute provides an administrative appeal for denials.

Why it matters: Supporters said the bill removes a barrier that forces families who adopt or otherwise provide permanency for youth with juvenile adjudications to stop fostering other children or to evict the young adult when they turn 18. Testimony emphasized the practical harms of the current rule and the difficulty of placing youth who have juvenile justice involvement.

What the bill would change: Under the reviser's summary, KSA 65‑5‑16 currently bars licensure when certain convictions or adjudications exist for residents or employees; HB 2524 would permit DCF to grant or maintain a license if the person placed by the secretary is in the specified age range and the applicant otherwise meets licensing requirements. The bill adds a departmental review and final administrative decision process for appeals of denials.

Testimony and reactions: Jonathan Stahl, a foster parent who testified remotely, described adopting a youth who later had to leave the home at 18 because the youth had a prohibitive juvenile charge. "You can either tell him he has to move out, at 18," Stahl said, and recounted subsequent homelessness and trafficking risks for the young man. Stahl urged the committee to consider the bill as a way to preserve permanency and family connections for vulnerable youth.

Rebecca Gerhardt, DCF director of permanency and licensing, said the agency supports the bill's purpose but requested clarifying amendments. Gerhardt asked the committee to change language that would "shall grant" a new license so the department retains discretion to establish a new license rather than being required to do so; she also requested clarifying edits to cross‑references and noted Kansas's criminal history list is broader than federal Title IV‑E guidance.

Provider and advocacy support: Angela Hedrick, vice president of operations for KVC Kansas, said KVC sponsors roughly 450 foster homes (about 46% of which serve teens or youth with complex behavioral needs) and urged the committee to adopt language that lets families continue providing a household for youth who achieve permanency. Crystal Hedrick, CEO of the Children's Alliance of Kansas, said the bill supports legal permanency and cited 603 youth over age 15 who exited foster care in FY25 through adoption, emancipation, guardianship or sole family options.

OCA position and safety language: Carrie Leonard of the Office of the Child Advocate said OCA strongly supports the bill's goals but recommended amending mandatory language so DCF can evaluate new safety concerns. Leonard proposed adding a procedural requirement for the secretary to implement review procedures when safety concerns arise after a licensure decision.

Next steps: The committee closed the hearing on HB 2524 without a committee vote; supporters and DCF indicated they would work on amendment language to preserve safety and administrative clarity.

Ending: The committee moved on to other business after closing the HB 2524 hearing and did not take final action on the bill during this meeting.