Human Services committee advances bill to expand rights for independent youth and limit DCF use of children’s Social Security benefits

Matthew Bernstein, the state Child, Youth and Family Advocate, and Lauren McPhee, deputy advocate, told the House Human Services Committee on Feb. 26 that H.582 contains important reforms but raises complex implementation questions. "This is a serious undertaking," Bernstein said, urging careful statutory language and stronger child-centered decision-making.

The testimony focused on two high-profile elements: measures to preserve Social Security survivor and disability benefits for children in custody, and new limits and reporting requirements for restraint, seclusion and transportation. Bernstein recommended replacing an existing draft clause that would allow the department to "may" use children’s benefits for limited purposes with stronger statutory protection so children are treated "equally" regardless of the source of their income. He urged statutory language over an executive order to ensure long-term stability.

Advocates also pressed for low-barrier certification for so-called "independent youth" — young people who lack parental support but do not fit traditional foster care pathways — and for including the youth’s attorney and the youth themselves in early notification and shared decision making. McPhee recommended that notification occur "at the point of initial screening for Social Security benefits," noting the department already conducts screenings and that early notice could permit joint planning with the youth and counsel.

On restraint, seclusion and transport, witnesses argued for clearer statutory standards, shorter maximum seclusion times and more frequent monitoring than the draft's current 15-minute checks. They warned that routing oversight to the Family Services Division for certification could increase mistrust and practical barriers for youth, and suggested relying on existing program certifications (McKinney-Vento liaisons, HUD/HOP-funded programs) or targeted alternatives instead of a single DCF-driven process.

A witness recounted a transport incident to illustrate the problem: when a state fleet car failed, state police responded and transported a youth in hard shackles for a three-hour trip to nonsecure treatment — a routine the witness said was traumatic and arbitrary, not risk-based. The anecdote was used to argue for uniform transport rules so the manner of transport does not depend on which agency is available.

Panelists also discussed data and reporting: advocates want timely incident reports and access to available video/audio for attorneys and oversight offices and recommended preserving the bill’s reporting and data-collection requirements while resolving language placed into rulemaking.

Treasury legislative affairs director Peter Trombley told the committee the state treasurer's office can assist with ABLE accounts and other custodial arrangements but that operational details — who holds accounts, contract costs and safeguards to avoid affecting SSI eligibility — need further conversations with DCF and vendors.

After the testimony and a set of narrow drafting changes (including language to require licensing entities to notify Adult Protective Services when they identify neglect in a licensed program), the committee voted to approve version 2.1 of the bill. The clerk recorded affirmative votes from Representatives Bishop, Cole, Donahue, Estes, Garfano, McGuire, McGill, Noyes, Steady and Wood; the motion was reported as approved and Representative Noyes will present the bill to the floor.

The committee’s next steps include technical drafting to reconcile definitions, specifying who may certify youth and clarifying limits on use of Social Security funds; witnesses and staff said they will continue discussions about implementation details, data flows and who must be notified when incidents occur.