[Senate Hearing 118-667]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-667
PROTECTING THE HUMAN
RIGHTS OF FOSTER CHILDREN
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LAW
of the
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 14, 2023
__________
Serial No. J-118-48
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
www.judiciary.senate.gov
www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
60-436 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois, Chair
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina,
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota Ranking Member
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut JOHN CORNYN, Texas
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah
CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey TED CRUZ, Texas
ALEX PADILLA, California JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
JON OSSOFF, Georgia TOM COTTON, Arkansas
PETER WELCH, Vermont JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
LAPHONZA BUTLER, California THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
Joseph Zogby, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
Katherine Nikas, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director
Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law
JON OSSOFF, Georgia, Chair
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee,
PETER WELCH, Vermont Ranking Member
LAPHONZA BUTLER, California JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
Jessica Jensen, Democratic Chief Counsel
Josh Divine, Republican Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Ossoff, Hon. Jon................................................. 1
Blackburn, Hon. Marsha........................................... 6
WITNESSES
Jones Gaston, Hon. Rebecca....................................... 2
Prepared statement........................................... 20
Perez, Jose A.................................................... 4
Prepared statement........................................... 30
PROTECTING THE HUMAN
RIGHTS OF FOSTER CHILDREN
----------
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2023
United States Senate,
Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1 p.m., in
Room 226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Ossoff,
Chair of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Ossoff [presiding], and Blackburn.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JON OSSOFF,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA
Chair Ossoff. The Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law
will come to order. And I'll begin just by letting everybody
know that there's a vote on the floor right now, Senators with
a variety of other obligations. But we know Ms. Gaston, that
you've got a hard stop after about an hour, so we're going to
go ahead and begin, and Members will come and go throughout the
hearing.
Eight months ago, the Subcommittee opened a bipartisan
inquiry into the safety and human rights of children in foster
care across the United States, because protecting America's
most vulnerable children from abuse and neglect is a moral
imperative.
We're talking about the most vulnerable children in the
United States. Children who have been abused and neglected.
Children who have been trafficked. And for these children,
State foster agencies are meant to be a sanctuary, a safe
haven, and often a last resort.
Naturally, I take the greatest interest and have the
highest obligation in and to children in my home State of
Georgia. And as a result, the Subcommittee as part of this
inquiry, has undertaken a deep dive case study into the safety
of foster care in Georgia, where we have found significant
evidence that children have been left vulnerable to abuse and
neglect, where children have been trafficked, harmed after
being placed with unfit caregivers, placed in isolation and
conditions akin to solitary confinement at group homes.
And the Subcommittee recognizes that these represent
national dynamics and trends and challenges that impact the
safety and welfare of vulnerable children across the country.
So today we're going to dive deeper into the Federal
Government's efforts and responsibilities to protect children
in foster care from abuse, from neglect, from sex trafficking,
hearing from distinguished witnesses, representing the
Department of Health and Human Services, and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation.
We will hear first from Rebecca Jones Gaston, who is the
Commissioner of HHS Administration for Children and Families,
and the previous Director of Child Welfare for the State of
Oregon. Commissioner, again, we know you have other commitments
this afternoon, and we will work to accommodate your schedule
and appreciate your attendance.
And after Commissioner Jones Gaston, we will hear from
Deputy Assistant Director Jose Perez of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, who helped lead Operation Cross Country which
recovered 200 victims of sex trafficking, many of them children
who had gone missing.
If the witnesses would please rise and raise your right
hands so you can be sworn in.
[Witnesses are sworn in.]
Chair Ossoff. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
answered in the affirmative. Please take your seats.
And Commissioner Jones Gaston, we will begin with your
opening statement when you're ready.
And just a reminder, both, to please ensure that the red
light under your microphone is illuminated when you wish to
speak. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF HON. REBECCA JONES GASTON, COMMISSIONER,
ADMINISTRATION ON CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES, DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, WASHINGTON, DC
Commissioner Jones Gaston. Chairman Ossoff, Ranking Member
Blackburn, and distinguished Members of the Committee, thank
you for the opportunity to appear today on behalf of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
I'm Rebecca Jones Gaston, Commissioner for the
Administration for Children, Youth and Families, within the
Administration for Children and Families.
Thank you also for the years of strong bipartisan support
and partnership on child welfare prevention efforts, which
provided the foundation for and enabled the passage of the
Family First Prevention Services Act, FFPSA. ACYF is committed
to supporting parents, caregivers, and children through
holistic and proactive approaches that focus on keeping
families together and preventing unnecessary involvement with
the foster care system.
I hear routinely from young people and families that have
experienced the child welfare system, that many families could
have stayed safely together if support for their concrete needs
had been met. As part of our commitment to advance prevention
and family preservation, the lived experience of families
who've encountered the system will continue to be informing our
policies and our programs.
We're working with States and Tribes to shift the focus of
the child welfare systems, helping them implement Family First
and promoting cross system collaborations that recognize the
child welfare system alone cannot support family well-being.
This effort will take time and cannot be done solely at the
Federal level.
The President's Fiscal Year 2024 budget, including
proposals to reauthorize increased funding for and amend the
Promoting Safe and Stable Families Act, Title IV-B of the
Social Security Act, and the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act,
would expand and provide incentives for the use of the Title
IV-E Prevention Services program, and provide additional
support for Tribes and support youth who are at risk or victims
of commercial sexual exploitation and human trafficking.
ACYF's Children's Bureau provides leadership to improve the
safety, permanency, and well-being of children and families. We
partner with Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as
Tribal nations, directing the implementation of monitoring and
data systems designed to assess and ensure Tribal grant
recipients, States, and the courts meet established standards
and outcomes for the Federal child protection adoption and
foster care, and guardianship programs.
We participate in a variety of activities to carry out this
mission, such as funding essential services, supporting
innovation, sharing research, offering training and technical
assistance in monitoring child welfare services, and working
with States, Tribes, territories, to improve child welfare
delivery, achieve positive outcomes for children and families,
and ensure that every child and youth has a family and
permanency.
The Children's Bureau Regional Offices conduct ongoing
joint planning with States and Tribes for the development of
the strategic 5-year Child and Family Services plan, and
updates through the annual progress and services report.
Further, regional offices provide direct technical
assistance to grant recipients and, in partnership with other
divisions, conduct the Child and Family Services Review,
otherwise known as CFSR, Title IV-E eligibility under the
Social Security Act, and other reviews.
One of the most impactful means by which we assist States
in ensuring the safety, permanency, and well-being of children
and families they serve, is through regulatory action.
In September of 2023, the Biden-Harris administration
issued a ``final kinship rule'' and two proposed rules that
once implemented will have profound impacts on child well-being
in the child welfare systems in America.
These three rules are designed to remove barriers to
keeping families together, where eligible, allow for
reimbursement for legal representation to help stabilize
families, and reduce the need for more formal child welfare
system involvement, including fairness in the child welfare
system, and improve safe and appropriate placements for all
youth.
Collectively, along with the Family First Act, these
rulemakings represent perhaps the most substantial advances in
child welfare in a generation.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss ACYF's mission and
work. I look forward to working with Congress as part of our
shared collective efforts to ensure the safety, permanency, and
well-being of children and families. I'm happy to answer your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Commissioner Jones Gaston
appears as a submission for the record.]
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Commissioner Jones Gaston. We will
now hear from you, Deputy Assistant Director Perez.
STATEMENT OF JOSE A. PEREZ, DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Perez. Good afternoon, Chairman Ossoff, Ranking Member
Blackburn, Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to come to you here today to speak about an
important topic, human trafficking, which includes sexual
exploitation of children and sex trafficking.
My name is Jose Perez. I'm the deputy assistant director in
the FBI's Criminal Investigative Division. Under my
investigative responsibilities, I have our Violent Crime
Program, Transnational Organized Crime Program, and also, more
specifically for today, the Crimes Against Children Program.
We at the FBI have no more important mission than
protecting the most vulnerable among us, especially children.
This work is a priority in all our 56 field offices around the
country. We can't stop human trafficking alone, so we partner
closely with numerous State, Federal, and local law enforcement
agencies, as well as non-governmental, and non-profit agencies
on the front lines to address the threat across all angles and
provide valuable victim assistance as one coordinated team.
Human trafficking, or trafficking in persons, is a crime in
which a person is exploited for labor, services, or commercial
sex acts. It occurs in every region of the United States and
throughout the world, and is perpetrated by an array of actors
from individual criminals to more structured criminal
organizations.
Often trafficking occurs together with other criminal
conduct, such as financial crimes, narcotics trafficking,
online sexual exploitation of children, sextortion, and other
types of crimes of violence.
Sex trafficking of adults includes the recruitment,
solicitation, and transportation of a person for the purpose of
commercial sex facilitated through force, fraud, or coercion.
Any exploitation of a minor for commercial sex is human
trafficking. And child sex trafficking does not need to involve
any type of proven physical force or coercion.
Similarly, labor trafficking also includes a recruitment
harboring and transportation of a person, but for the purpose
of subjection to forced labor or involuntary servitude. Labor
trafficking can occur in any industry and is prevalent in
agriculture, domestic work, construction, landscaping,
factories, and manufacturing.
Human traffickers come from a wide variety of backgrounds
and demographic categories, and are oftentimes facilitated by
criminal enterprises and transnational criminal organizations.
Criminal enterprises often operate in plain sight and can
go undetected for decades affecting hundreds of victims before
being identified.
Victims often do not leave their situations because they
fear their traffickers, or have a distrust toward law
enforcement, or a lack of understanding of their basic rights.
Trafficking can affect anyone regardless of age, race, sex, or
ethnicity. Still, vulnerable populations tend to be at higher
risk for being trafficked.
Traffickers can and will identify and exploit
vulnerabilities, and they often control their victims'
resources, their safety, and their living and working
conditions. Traffickers can also have access to services that
can exert power over their victims. The FBI investigates all
forms of human trafficking, including child sex trafficking,
regardless of the victim's age or nationality.
But as I mentioned, we can't do it alone. We work with our
external partners, primarily National Center for Missing &
Exploited Children, or NCMEC. We have personnel embedded not
only to identify and locate victims, but also to help hold the
subjects accountable who are victimizing children. Social
welfare agencies are often some of our best partners in
identifying trafficking schemes, as well.
We collaborate with these organizations through
multidisciplinary teams, which are comprised of different
entities working together to coordinate forensic interviews,
medical exams, counseling, and other services. Additionally, we
combat human trafficking and child exploitation by working with
our Federal, State, and local partners.
Through the FBI's more than 85 child exploitation and human
trafficking task forces spread out around the country amongst
our 56 field offices consisting of hundreds of FBI agents and
over 800 task force officers, this approach has yielded many
positive results.
Just this month in Los Angeles, a man was sentenced to life
in prison for recruiting teenage girls and an adult for
commercial sex work. The subject advertised victims for
commercial sex on websites and facilitated responses to online
ads by arranging in-person meetings with their victims. The
subject victimized at least three minor girls and used threats
of force and coercion to traffic a young adult--all for his own
profit.
The Los Angeles Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking
Task Force coordinated with several law enforcement agencies
and NCMEC throughout this case. Still, we're working to build
more relationships and provide training to private
organizations because awareness is key and the problem is not
contained. Each of the FBI's 56 field offices receives regular
complaints regarding human trafficking and child exploitation.
We're also part of the ongoing DOJ Forced Labor Working
Group, as well as other working groups aimed at executing the
White House's National Action Plan to combat human trafficking.
We also have an entire division devoted to victim services and
a cadre of victim specialists who are key to integrating
victim-centered services in all of our Federal investigations.
Members of the Subcommittee, we appreciate your support in
this realm. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Perez appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Perez. And before I ask
questions, I'll yield in a moment to Ranking Member Blackburn
for her opening statement.
I just want to say, before I do that, I have observed few
Members of the Senate who have demonstrated a more sustained
commitment to child protection and the prevention of child
trafficking than Senator Blackburn. And we identified early in
this Congress that the protection of vulnerable children was an
important shared priority.
We've also collaborated with the introduction of the
Filling Public Safety Vacancies Act, to empower local law
enforcement with the resources they need, and are now working
together to try to pass our REPORT Act, which would, Mr. Perez,
as you alluded to, empower NCMEC to provide law enforcement
agencies with more and better information to prosecute online
child exploitation.
So, I thank Ranking Member Blackburn for her collaboration
and participation, and yield to you now, Senator, for your
opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE
Senator Blackburn. Well, and thank you for that.
And yes, I think our REPORT Act is scheduled to go on the
hotline today, and it already has a House Sponsor.
I want to thank each of you for being here. And Mr.
Chairman, thank you for the hearing and for building this out a
little bit.
Mr. Perez, I so appreciated your remarks, and we're doing
this at a time that I think so many people have lost sight of
how important it is to protect children. And to your point, Mr.
Perez, how important it is to go after these traffickers.
And they're out there, you know they exist, they're on
social media, and NCMEC is trying to go after them. And it is
vitally important that we go after these traffickers and these
people that are making a profit off of going after the most
vulnerable among us.
And I know the Chairman knows, some of you may know, for
the last several weeks I've been trying to figure out and to
subpoena the records for Jeffrey Epstein's plane to find out
who was on that plane.
I've been so disappointed that Chairman Durbin has
continued to block this because Jeffrey Epstein had, probably,
what is the most high-profile sex trafficking ring we've ever
seen, ever heard about. It was high-profile, high-dollar people
that were predators on these young girls.
And I don't know why there is a push to block these
records. We need to have access to this. We need to know who
was on that plane, who was participating in this. They redacted
those records in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. But getting to
the bottom of this is important.
And as we talk about protecting children and providing for
them, and the role of the Federal Government in this, for
goodness sakes, let's try to figure out what HHS has done with
85,000 migrant children, and where they are, whose hands they
are in, the labor trafficking that you talked about.
I find it unconscionable that 85,000 children we cannot
find. Just as I find it unconscionable that Chairman Durbin
would have continued to block my request to subpoena those
flight logs.
But we appreciate, so much, that you all are here today,
and Mr. Chairman, your leadership on these issues, I
appreciate. Thank you.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Senator Blackburn. And certainly,
we will ensure that our witnesses have the opportunity should
they wish, and should Senator Blackburn ask to respond to those
points.
I want to begin, Commissioner Jones Gaston, discussing the
role that HHS plays in protecting foster children across the
country.
The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act requires child
welfare agencies to have procedures to receive, screen, and
investigate reports of child abuse and neglect, and requires
those States to include child sex trafficking in their
definition of abuse and neglect. How does HHS ensure that State
child welfare agencies screen-in victims of child sex
trafficking in practice and not just as a matter of policy on
paper?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. So, the oversight of child
welfare agencies across the country that are IV-E agencies
receiving Federal funds from the Children's Bureau, we have a
oversight process called the Child and Family Services Review.
And that process involves case review, data review, and
interviews with young people, community members, parents that
are involved in the cases that are being reviewed. That's the
primary mechanism for oversight in the long term.
States are also required to have a Title IV-E plan that
they've submitted, and that includes the policies and
procedures that they have in place that adhere and follow
Federal law and regulation. And those plans are reviewed and
approved at the Children's Bureau.
Chair Ossoff. I appreciate that, and where I want to press
a little bit further here is, having a plan or a policy
documented on paper is an important start. If there are
failures to implement those plans or policies, if it's policy
without effective practice, then the objective of ensuring that
vulnerable children are protected may not be achieved.
Are there tools in statute or in practice that HHS either
has or lacks to ensure, for example, that this requirement that
child sex abuse cases be screened-in and not screened-out upon
a report or an allegation that these policies are implemented?
Do you need more tools in order to ensure that those policies
are implemented?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. So when the requirement came out
that child abuse--that calls to the hotline that indicated
concerns around trafficking needed to be screened-in, efforts
were made in providing technical assistance and support to
jurisdictions to understand what the law is and make plans for
how they were going to implement that practice.
Some required State legislative actions, some required
regulatory action at the State level. ACF has the overarching
Federal rules and regulations. Each State actually runs their
child welfare system and has their definition of what child
abuse and neglect are. So I want to make sure that's clear.
And then through the Child and Family Services Review that
I spoke about is one mechanism for review. We have regional
offices that do joint planning with agencies in regards to how
they are implementing the requirements that exist federally,
and technical assistance mechanisms that are available and
provided to State agencies regarding workforce training,
ability to connect with others that have already made changes
in regards to those rules and regulations.
And again, through the review process, or if an issue gets
raised up to us, there is then the process of possibly doing
partial reviews, where we're going in and seeing in a case
review process, if the Federal rules and regulations are being
followed in the actual practice on the ground.
Chair Ossoff. Okay. We'll dig in a little bit more on that
in a moment. First, I want to talk about children who are
reported missing or who run away and are recovered. Federal law
requires State child welfare agencies to have policies and
procedures in place to screen children who were recovered after
running away from foster care. And the purpose of that
screening is to determine whether they were victims of sex
trafficking and to provide appropriate services.
A 2022 HHS Inspector General Audit, examining the records
of children who were recovered after going missing from care
across five States, found that in most cases reviewed, there
was no evidence that these children had received the required
screening. My question for you is, how does HHS work with
States to improve compliance with those screening requirements?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. Well, first of all, the safety
of children is priority for us, and we are working really
closely with our partners in the Office of Trafficking in
Persons, and just last year issued an information memorandum
that identified, again, the requirements that exist, but also
resources for training and then doing technical assistance
through our regional offices to ensure that States have the
appropriate policies and practices in place, and identifying
technical assistance in their development of the various
assessment tools that they have, and in working in close
partnership with our, with our OTIP partners in regards to
continuing to provide training and learning opportunities for,
for the IV-E agencies that we serve.
Chair Ossoff. Okay. Let's talk a little bit about NCMEC and
we'll get into this with the FBI as well, but Commissioner,
under Federal Law, of course, State foster care agencies are
required to report children missing from care to the National
Center for Missing & Exploited Children or NCMEC, as well as to
the National Crime Information Center.
But an HHS OIG audit from March of 2023, reviewing data
collected from 46 State child welfare agencies across the
country, found that 45 percent of the missing child episodes in
the review sample, were never reported by States to NCMEC. So
how can HHS, and how does HHS work with these State agencies to
improve their compliance with the requirement that there be
reporting to NCMEC of children missing from care?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. So one of the mechanisms that
we've done is issue information memoranda and program guidance
in regards to the requirements and through our regional
offices, then doing review to make sure that the IV-E agencies
have the appropriate processes in place and offering them
technical assistance in areas where they identify they need
assistance in improving practice in regards to their workforce.
And again, working really closely with our OTIP partners in
making sure that we are providing assistance, technical
assistance, and awareness out to the IV-E agencies regarding
the tools that are available, and the technical assistance
that's available so that they can be working on improving their
practice.
Chair Ossoff. Let's talk about the medication of children
in foster care. So, to receive Federal funding for child
welfare services, States are required to have a plan for the
oversight of prescription medications, including psychotropic
and opioid medications that are prescribed to children in
foster care.
A 2018 HHS OIG Review for a sample of foster children in
five States found that one in three children in foster care who
were treated with psychotropic medications did not receive the
required treatment planning or medication monitoring.
What is HHS doing, what can HHS do to appropriately and
adequately monitor the use of psychotropic medication and the
State policies and procedures and practices governing the
medication of children with psychotropic drugs?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. The Child and Family Services
Plan, which is a 5-year plan that we do joint planning with
State agencies in, is one place where they are required to
report what their plans and strategies are for managing the
care of the children that they are over. And then there are
annual progress review reports that are submitted.
And so through that and the relationship with the regional
offices and the technical assistance that we provide, in
addition to the Child and Family Services review, which is a
periodic review, is opportunity for us to have conversations
and dig in with jurisdictions about what their practice looks
like, how they're doing, and what assistance they need to
continue to improve, or if they need assistance in identifying
examples of policies and procedures that they need to implement
at the State level.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you. And the Subcommittee's heard
substantial concern from advocates, attorneys, as well as
former foster youth about over medication and the appropriate
use of opioids and psychotropic medication for foster children.
So, we'll want to dig in a little more deeply there.
At this time, I would yield to Ranking Member Blackburn for
her first round of questions.
Senator Blackburn. And thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. And
I'm so pleased that you brought up the process of vetting these
sponsors, because this is something that causes us a tremendous
amount of concern and something that news reports have covered.
And periodically we will read about people that are improperly
vetted, and of course, the issue we have right now with the
85,000 migrant children who cannot be found.
And much of that we've seen reports of these children
working in factories. We have seen reports of these children
being in processing plants, food processing plants. So they're
being used for labor.
So, Ms. Gaston, I know it's a little bit too much to do in
a hearing and a 5-minute questioning, but what I would like for
you to submit to the record is what you send to the States as
best practices for vetting these individuals. And also, the
amount of time that generally is spent on vetting these people
who are going to be sponsors. These are vulnerable children,
and they are expecting someone to take care of them. And the
fact that it is a check the box process as has been reported in
some instances, I think we should all hope that we do better
than that for these children. So, if you will submit that for
the record, I would appreciate that.
Commissioner Jones Gaston. So ACF is absolutely committed
to the safety and well-being of the children that are served
through our programs. ACYF has a purview over the child welfare
system. My colleagues at the Office of Refugee Resettlement
have purview over the sponsor----
Senator Blackburn. I'm aware of that.
Commissioner Jones Gaston [continuing]. That I believe
you're speaking to. And I will be working with them to make
sure the information that you're requesting----
Senator Blackburn. That's right.
Commissioner Jones Gaston [continuing]. Is submitted.
Senator Blackburn. That's right. We need to have that for
the record, because there should be a best practices, and we
should not read more reports about children who are being used
for child labor, children that are being put in sex trafficking
rings, children who have sponsors who are improperly vetted and
abuse them. We can do better than that. So, thank you.
Mr. Perez, let me come to you for a moment. I've talked a
little bit about the need for us to have more transparency,
more accountability, more commonsense solutions. And as we look
at the persistence of trafficking and especially the sex
trafficking that takes place of children, and the Tennessee
Bureau of Investigations gave me a stat. Once every 2 minutes,
a child in this country is bought or sold for sex. Once every 2
minutes. These are little ones.
So, when we talk about the things that are wrong, whether
it's the migrant children, whether it's the foster children,
whether it is children that are being recruited and groomed, if
you were on this side of the dais, and you said, ``Here are
some immediate things that you could do.'' What would you
encourage? Where would you encourage us to go first?
Mr. Perez. Thank you for the question, Senator. I would say
number one, when we're talking about resources there's kind of
a few lanes with that. We can always do more with more
resources. We always want to be strategic with what we have and
make sure we're implementing and aligning those resources
properly.
If I was going to point to one thing, one of our biggest
challenges when we're talking about human trafficking, and I
touched on some links to transnational organized crime, or
let's say more sophisticated criminal actors operating in some
organized fashion--our biggest challenge across the board is
the ability to defeat end-to-end encryption.
Traditionally, our recipe for success in defeating criminal
actors, really across the board historically, lawfully
identifying an organization, identifying ways to exploit
communications, money movements, those kinds of things, and
through lawful access through legal process from the court,
obtain proper information from communications, those kinds of
things.
The ability to move to end-to-end encryption does not
really require that much level of sophistication. Many off-the-
shelf applications accessible to children are end-to-end
encrypted. Our inability to exercise use of legal process to
obtain that information, to identify the proper means and
methods of a criminal organization to then defeat it, are
incredibly hampered by the use of end-to-end encryption.
Senator Blackburn. So having the REPORT Act pass, which
would require--would enable NCMEC to hold things that come in
on the cyber tip line longer, would be helpful?
Mr. Perez. Generally, ma'am, we try not to comment on
pending legislation, but again, any ability to allow us----
Senator Blackburn. Okay.
Mr. Perez [continuing]. Use of proper----
Senator Blackburn. All right.
Mr. Perez [continuing]. Legal authority would be
beneficial.
Senator Blackburn. That--that sounds good. Now, when you
talk about transnational crime and identifying organizations,
I've got to bring this forward again, because I asked Director
Wray about this a couple of weeks ago when he was before us,
and we've got one of the biggest, most well-known most high-
profile sex trafficking rings ever in this Jeffrey Epstein
case.
And Director Wray didn't give me a very complete answer
when I asked about transparency around that case, and about
releasing those flight logs so we can know who all else is
involved in this. And you talk about the need to get
information from these organizations and information from the
court.
Why would you not release these flight logs? Why would
there be a protection of not going after releasing this
information? Why would you not make public that information?
Why would you not make public all of the video that has been
captured from Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach townhouse, which the
FBI has?
Mr. Perez. Ma'am, I'm aware of the interaction with
Director Wray from, I believe, last week or the week before.
Our team would be happy to work on any formal responses. I'm
not aware of any subpoenas that have come to the FBI for formal
requests, but we----
Senator Blackburn. No, you haven't gotten a subpoena
because the Chairman ended up adjourning twice before I could
bring forward my request for a subpoena. But you're talking
about the need--the need to get this information from these
groups, and here you have a group, an organization, and we
can't get the information.
And it is just ridiculous that we are sitting here, we have
laws on the books, we have expectations of agencies, and we
have a need for information. You've got it. We can't get it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Ranking Member Blackburn. I want
to continue, Mr. Perez, with a discussion about the National
Center for Missing & Exploited Children as well as NCIC, the
National Crime Information Center.
According to data from NCMEC's website, in 2022, there were
359,000 entries into the NCIC database for missing children--
359,000.
How does the FBI track and prioritize which missing child
cases are federally investigated? What is the burden sharing
between local, State, and Federal agencies when those reports
come in? And how do you decide what gets escalated, what gets
referred, and who the lead agency is for a particular case?
Mr. Perez. Thank you, sir. We receive information or
allegations, if you will, of a kidnapping from a variety of
different elements. It could be from a private citizen, it
could be from local law enforcement, or from NCMEC. Reports of
missing children might not necessarily equate to something that
gives us judicial authority or statutory authority to
investigate.
Usually how we identify and prioritize these would be, if
there's indication of a child--a child of tender years, 12 and
under, who's gone missing based on some type of suspicious
circumstances, with some indication that it was involuntary or
that they're being held against their will, or that they were,
again, taken from an environment against their will and being
held, then that is something we would immediately deploy
resources to.
Usually in these instances, local police are usually the
first responders, if you will, in this instance where a family
member or a victim of the child might--would probably call
local law enforcement, we would immediately engage in those
situations. We have regularly, I've been a part of a number of
those. And when it's a child of tender years, really
regardless, if there's an immediate identification of some type
of suspicious circumstances, we will launch resources to embed
with the local police to make that determination.
Oftentimes, this could be a runaway situation, but we want
to vet that out and work with our local partners. So if
there's--as far as a lead agency, that can kind of ebb and
flow, we will work continuously with our local partners through
our task forces or otherwise to determine really just the best
avenue ultimately for prosecution.
But in those instances, when a child has gone missing under
truly suspicious circumstances where we believe it's a
kidnapping, that is a all-hands-on-deck scenario for an entire
FBI field division potentially, where we're going to work and
really put our badges to the side, regardless of the
department, and the number one priority there is the recovery
of that child, secondarily, making sure we identify that--the
subject and hold them accountable.
Chair Ossoff. I appreciate that breakdown and it's
instructive. I would note that last month NCMEC testified
before this Subcommittee that children who go missing from
foster care are especially vulnerable to being trafficked. And
we've heard from experts, advocates, attorneys who represent
victims of child sex exploitation and trafficking who have
testified to the particular vulnerability of foster children to
trafficking.
You testified in your opening statement that each of the
FBI's 56 field offices have received complaints about human
trafficking, reports of human trafficking, and that the FBI is
working to build more relationships and awareness. Talk about
what that means. How are relationships and awareness a piece of
this enforcement and investigation process?
Mr. Perez. So, the relationship piece, sir, really goes
across all our programs and violations, if you will, at a field
office level. So we continually look to engage with our
Federal, State, local law enforcement partners to identify
violations, human trafficking, child exploitation, really a
variety of threats, if you will, that we can offer assistance.
So, whether there is an immediate Federal nexus or not,
we're always looking to provide resources to local law
enforcement.
In addition to that, we regularly engage through private
sector outreach, and interactions with non-government agencies
or organizations, who might have access to information or might
be what we would refer to as a trip wire, an element where
someone can provide us advance, real-time notice of some type
of threat. So, we do that through our field offices.
We have a section of partner engagement. We have a number
of entities throughout the field offices and at headquarters
that really drives interaction with private sector, with non-
government entities. Our Victim Services Division expends a lot
of time working with local police departments, too, to try to
build that relationship to when we do identify victims of a
Federal crime, to make sure we're providing proper victim
services. So, I would say that's regular engagement.
On the human trafficking piece, we're also working to
really share best practices on prosecutions, on investigations,
so that we can be better at investigating, holding people
accountable, prosecuting these cases, and then providing the
necessary services to the victims. So, we do that, again,
through communication and collaboration.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Perez.
Commissioner Jones Gaston, we discussed earlier in this
hearing some of the requirement standards, conditions of
receiving Federal support for State governments and State
agencies. HHS provides many millions of dollars each year to
State foster care systems nationwide, and as a condition of
receiving Federal funding, those State foster care agencies and
State welfare systems are subject to monitoring by HHS. We've
discussed some of that.
You described in your testimony that one of the primary
ways that HHS monitors State foster care performance are the
Child and Family Services Review process. And among other
things that process, the CFSR process, measures whether States
are adequately assessing risk and managing safety threats to
children, whether they are making concerted efforts properly to
address reports of abuse and neglect, to assess risk, again,
assess risk, and manage safety. First of all, why is it
important that HHS monitor States' performance in this area?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. Well, safety for children is
paramount. And our oversight of the application and
implementation of Federal requirements in child welfare
agencies is a piece of that. The ability to have appropriate
responses and timeliness is critical. And again, as has been
stated, for vulnerable children and being, being able to
provide protections for children that need it.
The CFSR process, as stated, is our primary monitoring tool
that we have. However, I do want to just note that we also have
the ongoing relationship and work that the regional offices do
with the State agencies during that monitoring process, but
also as issues arise and the ability to talk about how things
are being implemented, questions that we might have about the
outcomes that children are experiencing are an important part
of that.
Chair Ossoff. And so, for States that are not in
substantial conformity with those Federal standards we
discussed--adequately assessing risk and managing safety
threats--what is HHS' role in helping to improve their
performance?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. So, the CFSR process involves a
sampling of cases where there's a deep dive into the following
of the procedures and requirements at the Federal level,
conversations and interviews with young people, parents, foster
parents, community members, partners all involved in family and
children's lives. And then it is assessed whether or not they
are in compliance or not in conformity with the, the expected
measure.
If there's non-conformity, then there is a process that
plays out around building a program improvement plan. And that
is done with our team and the State agency's team in
identifying what strategies are going to be employed, what is
the benchmark that they're working toward improving to, and
then having ongoing conversations and check-ins along the way
during that 2-year period. If at the end of that program
improvement plan, the State still has not successfully met the
set measure in the plan, then there is a financial penalty that
is applied to that agency.
Chair Ossoff. And am I correct that Georgia DFCS is one of
those State child welfare programs that was penalized because
it did not complete its program improvement plan?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. Yes. Every State that's been
through a Child and Family Services Review has been involved in
a program improvement plan. Georgia, at the end of the third
round of the CFSR, did not successfully meet the marker in the
program improvement plan, and was issued a penalty.
Chair Ossoff. In addition to monitoring by HHS, Federal law
requires States to establish citizen review panels comprised of
members who have expertise in child welfare to evaluate and
issue annual reports on the States' efforts to fulfill its
child protection obligations. Why is it important for States to
have these panels in place?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. Child welfare can't do its work
alone. The work of protecting children and working with
families is, in fact, a community and societal responsibility.
And so having citizens of the community as part of an
assessment process and digging into doing case reviews and
giving a non-agency perspective on what's happening around a
particular case or overall in regards to the agency's
practices, is important to be able to have diverse perspectives
and insight into what's happening in order to be able to really
fully continue to focus on and--continued improvement in
practice and striving for better and better outcomes.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Commissioner. I want to take a
moment and note since there's been some lively discussion, some
criticism earlier of the Full Committee's engagement on these
issues that protecting children from sexual exploitation has
been one of this Committee's--when I say this Committee, I mean
the Full Senate Judiciary Committee--top priorities in this and
the last Congress.
The Full Committee held a hearing on kids' safety online. I
expect, based upon conversations with Chair Durbin, that next
month there will be a hearing with Big Tech CEOs to discuss
their failures to protect children from online exploitation.
And Chair Durbin and Ranking Member Graham have issued
subpoenas to three of those CEOs. This year the Committee has
reported to the full Senate six bipartisan bills to help
protect child safety online. And one of those, for example, is
my and Ranking Member Blackburn's REPORT Act.
And I understand that in the previous Congress, Senator
Blackburn and Chair Durbin led legislation that was signed into
law that eliminated statutes of limitation for Federal civil
suits by survivors of childhood sex abuse.
I also have a note here from Chair Durbin making clear his
intention and willingness to work with Senator Blackburn on a
bipartisan basis to obtain records relevant to the Jeffrey
Epstein case, that Ranking Member Blackburn noted. And so I
want to make sure that that was made clear for the record since
Chairman Durbin has another engagement at this time and isn't
here.
I want to continue with the FBI, Mr. Perez, and dig in
further on the efforts that are being made to investigate and
prosecute the trafficking and exploitation of children. In
August of this year, the FBI reported that during Operation
Cross Country--and I believe you were intimately involved in
this operation--that 200 victims of sex trafficking, many of
whom were children and who had gone missing, were recovered.
Were all the children who were reported missing, all the
children who were found who had gone missing, had they been
reported properly to NCIC as a missing child at the time that
they were recovered by law enforcement?
Mr. Perez. Sir, I do not have that answer. I can tell you
that when we encounter--a few things, we look to identify
locations of victims and also at times through identification.
Sometimes when we say ``identification,'' that could be in an
online case where we've identified a child victim that's being
exploited, and then there's also a ``locate''--meaning that
we've actually physically located a child that's being
exploited. I don't have information to speak specifically if
all those children were entered into NCIC or not, sir.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Perez. Are you familiar with
child advocacy centers? These are the national, regional, and
local organizations that help coordinate the investigation,
treatment, and prosecution of child abuse?
Mr. Perez. Yes, sir.
Chair Ossoff. In your view, why are these child advocacy
centers valuable partners for the FBI and other law enforcement
agencies to help recover missing and trafficked children?
Mr. Perez. So, one of our strategies is, when it comes to
exploitation of children and adults, we look to take a victim-
centered trauma-informed approach, meaning that beyond holding
the perpetrators accountable, we want to make sure that we're
providing the proper care and techniques when discussing the
abuse with the victim, and ensuring that we do not continue a
pattern of abuse. So, we do that.
We've taken steps internally within the FBI to expand that,
to develop what we refer to as our child adolescent forensic
interviewers, meaning that every time we encounter a child
victim, we have trained personnel, professional personnel who
are fully dedicated to have those communications and ensure
that we get proper information, but at the same time that we're
not re-victimizing a child. We seek to do that across the
country.
However, resources being limited, there's oftentimes where
we look to really augment those resources through the Child
Advocacy Center. So we'll partner up with those elements
depending, sometimes, if our resources are not available or
either provide a venue for the interview or those kinds of
things. So it's an invaluable partner. It really just augments
our ability to treat victims in an informed way, in a sensitive
way to make sure that we prevent re-victimization.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Perez.
Commissioner, we've got about 6 minutes till you have to
depart. We talked about the CFSR process. We've talked about
the program improvement plans that are developed jointly
whether issued to States that are in substantial non-conformity
with the Federal standards, for example, on assessing risk and
managing safety threats to children.
You noted that penalties can be assessed in some cases
where the program improvement plan is not fully, properly,
successfully implemented.
Earlier when we were talking about, for example, the
requirement under CAPTA that States include child sex
trafficking and their definition of abuse and neglect, or that
the requirement that child welfare agencies screen-in victims
of child sex trafficking in practice and not just in policy.
And that's an important distinction because putting
something in a policy manual is not always the same thing as
implementing that policy in practice by your State partners.
Here we're talking about State child welfare and foster care
agencies.
In the case of a CFSR, you have a remedy: the PIP program,
penalties associated with non-compliance. So, before we get
into remedies on other aspects, my first question is, is that
working? Is that driving an improvement in performance, an
improvement in compliance with these Federal standards by State
foster cases?
I ask this because as we contemplate legislative solutions
to strengthen the protection of vulnerable children across the
country, we need to understand whether the tools with which
we've already empowered you are sufficient as you are
implementing them.
Commissioner Jones Gaston. Thank you, Chairman. The CFSR,
we're in our fourth round. It has been in place since the early
2000s. And I had mentioned earlier that every State when they
go through the review ends up in some form of a program
improvement plan. Many jurisdictions have been able to actually
successfully exit their program improvement plan without a
penalty. And so to that end, I would say that the review
process does work in the instance of being able to hone in,
identify strategies in partnership with the States.
I think continued quality improvement is something that we
are continually working on with the levers we do have and the
technical assistance we can provide. The oversight of the child
welfare system--rather, I'll correct that. The oversight of the
Federal implementation and the Federal rules sits with ACF. The
actual implementation of the child welfare system and the
running of the child welfare system is at the local level, at
the State level.
And so it does require partnership and working really
closely with the jurisdiction in that balance between practice
and policy, as you're indicating.
Chair Ossoff. And so, in the other conditions,
requirements, and standards, you know, CFSR, you have a program
improvement plan process. There are penalties where there's
failure to implement the program improvement plan. It sounds to
me like what you're saying is that you think that those
incentives are driving States--not in all cases, we discussed
Georgia--faced a penalty for not successfully completing its
program improvement plan, but other States are--many States
are, according to your testimony, completing those program
improvement plans successfully. And the sense I'm getting is
that you think that's working.
For Federal standards that are not captured directly by the
CFSR asking you earlier, for example, if a State does not
successfully implement policies and procedures to screen
children who are recovered after they've been missing for sex
trafficking. And this OIG report looked at five States and
found that in most cases there was no evidence that the
children had been appropriately screened by the State
agencies--to be clear, not by HHS, but by the State agencies.
When we were discussing that problem, what I heard was you
can provide technical assistance, you can provide best
practices, you can remind States of the Federal standards, but
do you have a remedy akin to the program improvement plan and
the penalties associated with it? Are there sticks and carrots,
or are there just best practices that you communicate to the
best of your ability within the confines of your relationship
with that State agency?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. Well, the other mechanisms that
we have are to do partial reviews. If there's an issue that
comes to our attention, we can go in and do a partial review,
which in many ways would mirror the CFSR process, but around a
particular issue and can issue corrective action plans,
depending on the area in which it sits, as far as the
legislative statutory driver would depend on what the mechanism
is, and whether or not there is a significant financial penalty
that can be in employed or not.
Chair Ossoff. I've got you for about three more minutes. So
please drill down on those partial reviews as concisely and
precisely as you can, what those corrective action plans entail
and what happens if States don't successfully implement them?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. The partial reviews would be
looking at whatever the particular issue. So, they usually come
about because an issue has been raised, or there is a concern
around following a particular Federal requirement and digging
into that.
The reviews would include talking with individuals, the
case review--similar case review processes as we would do in
the CFSR and working with the jurisdiction in regards to what
they have done and then issuing a corrective action plan.
And then regarding the penalties and the actions beyond
that, would depend on what the circumstance was and was it tied
to a CFSR review and those sort of things. And happy to be able
to have my team--work with my team to get back with you around
the various funding streams, and the mechanisms that we have
related to penalties related to those different funding
streams, if that makes sense.
Chair Ossoff. Yes. We're going to adjourn here in a moment
to let you attend to that engagement that you have. But this is
where I would like your commitment here at this hearing, that
you and your colleagues will be responsive as you have been
thus far, and provide the technical assistance that this
Subcommittee may need to consider how statutes might change so
that you have the tools you need to hold these State agencies
accountable.
The reason that we are looking so intensely at this issue--
and I believe that both you, Commissioner, and you, Mr. Perez,
at the FBI share this commitment based upon this testimony--is
because what is happening to foster children across the United
States is unacceptable.
The placements in homes where the caregivers are not
appropriately vetted--and this Subcommittee has heard testimony
from the mother of a child who was murdered by one of those
unvetted caregivers--it's unacceptable.
The number of children who are going missing from foster
care across the United States, and the number of children who
are then likely, according to NCMEC statistics, victims of sex
trafficking is unacceptable.
The reports that this Subcommittee has received about
congregate care settings that sound comparable to detention or
incarceration, and which drive some of these children,
according to the testimony we've heard, to run away, because in
a State foster agency, what is meant to be their sanctuary,
they're treated like prisoners, and then upon running away find
themselves preyed upon by traffickers. It's unacceptable.
And the reason that we are holding these hearings is to
understand, in large part, what Congress can do about it. So,
your testimony here today has helped to inform us.
But we need to go deeper, Commissioner, on whether the
tools that are at your disposal are sufficient to drive the
kind of change that is urgent.
Because as Ranking Member Blackburn said, citing the
statistic about how frequently a child in this country is
bought or sold or sexually trafficked, there is absolute
urgency every day that we protect these children.
And we're going to continue to press you, and I hope
continue to work with you to improve these systems.
Thank you, both, for your testimony here today. Please, I
just want a one-word commitment from each of you that you will
timely and fully to the best of your ability respond with
further information and technical assistance the Subcommittee
may require moving forward. Commissioner?
Commissioner Jones Gaston. We'd be happy to do that.
Chair Ossoff. Mr. Perez?
Mr. Perez. Yes, sir.
Chair Ossoff. Thank you, both, for being here. And the
Subcommittee will adjourn momentarily following this important
note.
The hearing record will remain open for 1 week for
statements to be submitted into the record. Questions for the
record may be submitted by Senators by 5 p.m. on Thursday,
December 21st.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:04 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]