Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maryland bill would make ‘reasonable efforts’ for foster youth more concrete
Summary
HB 13-83 would define and require reviewable, concrete "reasonable efforts" in permanency planning for children in need of assistance to ensure services such as health, education and identification documents are timely and tailored to each child’s needs, backers said.
Delegate Michelle Guyton told the House Judiciary Committee that HB 13-83 aims to strengthen permanency planning for children in state care by making “reasonable efforts” specific and reviewable.
Guyton said many children in foster care have unique needs — from educational continuity to mental-health supports — that current general-language requirements leave to widely varying local practice. "Children all have very unique needs," she said, and the bill seeks to ensure placements are equipped to meet those needs and prepare youth for life after age 18.
Erica Lamon, advocacy director for Children's Rights at Maryland Legal Aid, told the committee the bill provides courts and advocates with clearer standards and makes it easier to hold local departments accountable. "HB 13 brings clarity, consistency, and accountability by defining reasonable efforts in concrete, reviewable terms," Lamon said.
Theresa Hessler of the Maryland Association of Resources for Families and Youth urged a favorable report, saying the bill requires attention to the full spectrum of a child's needs including identification documents, education, and housing stability. Diana Phillip of the Coalition to Protect Maryland's Children said the bill responds to concerns from foster parents, CASA volunteers and attorneys about inconsistent interpretations across jurisdictions.
A former foster youth, Macy Wilson, described gaps she experienced in education and services and said the bill would have helped her: "This bill finally makes sure that reasonable efforts are made and not us just being told things," she said.
Members questioned the fiscal note, which listed additional staff in some estimates. Supporters responded that the statutory changes largely make explicit the work social workers should already be doing and that the bill uses "including" language to identify examples of services rather than impose identical mandates for every child.
The committee closed the hearing after questions and discussion.
