DCF tightens sibling-connection and 'family time' policies; new forms and timelines for kinship staffing
Loading...
Summary
DCF presenters told the committee about new ‘family time’ terminology replacing 'visitation', a revised sibling-connection form and 90-day staffing cadence for unplaced sibling groups; DCF reported 73.8% of children are placed with at least one sibling and said 402 capacity-exception requests were approved with four denials.
A DCF presentation to the joint committee outlined policy changes intended to preserve sibling connections and clarify family-time expectations for children in care.
Director Rebecca Gerhardt said DCF adopted ‘family time’ language in January 2025 to emphasize time spent together and to align case-plan tasks with supervision-level decisions. "We presume family time to be in the best interest of children and families unless there's an identified present danger that cannot be mitigated," she told the committee.
Gerhardt walked the panel through revised forms that staff will use to document family-time frequency, supervision level and steps needed to move from supervised to unsupervised contacts (form PPS 30-53 and a new sibling-connection form). When all siblings are in the secretary's custody, DCF's policy sets a minimum frequency of twice-monthly in-person sibling connections plus allowances for extra phone/video contact. For siblings not initially placed together, the agency requires a plan to place them together as soon as possible and mandates a "sibling separation" staffing every 90 days until placement together or a sibling split is approved.
DCF provided data indicating about 73.8% of children in care are placed with at least one sibling (not necessarily the entire sibling group) and that between July 2024 and March 2026 the department had 402 requests for capacity exceptions to keep sibling groups together and approved all but four.
Why it matters: Sibling connections correlate with placement stability and better permanency outcomes. The committee pressed DCF about definitions (step-siblings vs. foster siblings), data collection (how family time is tracked), and how court orders intersect with agency policy. Deputy Secretary Tanya Keyes said permanency outcomes—adoption, reintegration and custodianship—are captured under the department’s broader "exit" measures and will be included in monthly reporting under the federal pilot.
Questions raised: Committee members asked whether foster siblings are covered by the sibling definition (DCF policy excludes foster siblings though their relationships may be considered in best-interest decision-making) and whether data exist on long-term outcomes of sibling splits. Gerhardt said DCF would follow up with specific case examples for the few exception denials and review whether the agency is tracking sibling split counts as a discrete metric.
Next steps: DCF will provide follow-up on denied exception cases and the committee asked for additional data showing how often family time occurs and where it takes place (office, home, library). The Office of the Child Advocate and DCF also discussed grievance and complaint procedures for families.
