[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 121 (Tuesday, October 3, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H8690-H8694]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STRENGTHENING ABUSE AND NEGLECT COURTS ACT OF 2000
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
Senate bill (S. 2272) to improve the administrative efficiency and
effectiveness of the Nation's abuse and neglect courts and for other
purposes consistent with the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997.
The Clerk read as follows:
S. 2272
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Strengthening Abuse and
Neglect Courts Act of 2000''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Under both Federal and State law, the courts play a
crucial and essential role in the Nation's child welfare
system and in ensuring safety, stability, and permanence for
abused and neglected children under the supervision of that
system.
(2) The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (Public Law
105-89; 111 Stat. 2115) establishes explicitly for the first
time in Federal law that a child's health and safety must be
the paramount consideration when any decision is made
regarding a child in the Nation's child welfare system.
(3) The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 promotes
stability and permanence for abused and neglected children by
requiring timely decision-making in proceedings to determine
whether children can safely return to their families or
whether they should be moved into safe and stable adoptive
homes or other permanent family arrangements outside the
foster care system.
(4) To avoid unnecessary and lengthy stays in the foster
care system, the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997
specifically requires, among other things, that States move
to terminate the parental rights of the parents of those
children who have been in foster care for 15 of the last 22
months.
(5) While essential to protect children and to carry out
the general purposes of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of
1997, the accelerated timelines for the termination of
parental rights and the other requirements imposed under that
Act increase the pressure on the Nation's already
overburdened abuse and neglect courts.
(6) The administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the
Nation's abuse and neglect courts would be substantially
improved by the acquisition and implementation of
computerized case-tracking systems to identify and eliminate
existing backlogs, to move abuse and neglect caseloads
forward in a timely manner, and to move children into safe
and stable families. Such systems could also be used to
evaluate the effectiveness of such courts in meeting the
purposes of the amendments made by, and provisions of, the
Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997.
(7) The administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the
Nation's abuse and neglect courts would also be improved by
the identification and implementation of projects designed to
eliminate the backlog of abuse and neglect cases, including
the temporary hiring of additional judges, extension of court
hours, and other projects designed to reduce existing
caseloads.
(8) The administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the
Nation's abuse and neglect courts would be further
strengthened by improving the quality and availability of
training for judges, court personnel, agency attorneys,
guardians ad litem, volunteers who participate in court-
appointed special advocate (CASA) programs, and attorneys who
represent the children and the parents of children in abuse
and neglect proceedings.
(9) While recognizing that abuse and neglect courts in this
country are already committed to the quality administration
of justice, the performance of such courts would be even
further enhanced by the development of models and educational
opportunities that reinforce court projects that have already
been developed, including models for case-flow procedures,
case management, representation of children, automated
interagency interfaces, and ``best practices'' standards.
(10) Judges, magistrates, commissioners, and other judicial
officers play a central and vital role in ensuring that
proceedings in our Nation's abuse and neglect courts are run
efficiently and effectively. The performance of those
individuals in such courts can only be further enhanced by
training, seminars, and an ongoing opportunity to exchange
ideas with their peers.
(11) Volunteers who participate in court-appointed special
advocate (CASA) programs play a vital role as the eyes and
ears of abuse and neglect courts in proceedings conducted by,
or under the supervision of, such courts and also bring
increased public scrutiny of the abuse and neglect court
system. The Nation's abuse and neglect courts would benefit
from an expansion of this program to currently underserved
communities.
(12) Improved computerized case-tracking systems,
comprehensive training, and development of, and education on,
model abuse and neglect court systems, particularly with
respect to underserved areas, would significantly further the
purposes of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 by
reducing the average length of an abused and neglected
child's stay in foster care, improving the quality of
decision-making and court services provided to children and
families, and increasing the number of adoptions.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(a) Abuse and Neglect Courts.--The term ``abuse and neglect
courts'' means the State and local courts that carry out
State or local laws requiring proceedings (conducted by or
under the supervision of the courts)--
(1) that implement part B and part E of title IV of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et seq.)
(including preliminary disposition of such proceedings);
(2) that determine whether a child was abused or neglected;
(3) that determine the advisability or appropriateness of
placement in a family foster home, group home, or a special
residential care facility; or
(4) that determine any other legal disposition of a child
in the abuse and neglect court system.
(b) Agency Attorney.--The term ``agency attorney'' means an
attorney or other individual, including any government
attorney, district attorney, attorney general, State
attorney, county attorney, city solicitor or attorney,
corporation counsel, or privately retained special
prosecutor, who represents the State or local agency
administrating the
[[Page H8691]]
programs under parts B and E of title IV of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et seq.) in a
proceeding conducted by, or under the supervision of, an
abuse and neglect court, including a proceeding for
termination of parental rights.
SEC. 4. GRANTS TO STATE COURTS AND LOCAL COURTS TO AUTOMATE
THE DATA COLLECTION AND TRACKING OF PROCEEDINGS
IN ABUSE AND NEGLECT COURTS.
(a) Authority To Award Grants.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Attorney
General, acting through the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention of the Office of Justice Programs,
shall award grants in accordance with this section to State
courts and local courts for the purposes of--
(A) enabling such courts to develop and implement automated
data collection and case-tracking systems for proceedings
conducted by, or under the supervision of, an abuse and
neglect court;
(B) encouraging the replication of such systems in abuse
and neglect courts in other jurisdictions; and
(C) requiring the use of such systems to evaluate a court's
performance in implementing the requirements of parts B and E
of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et
seq.; 670 et seq.).
(2) Limitations.--
(A) Number of grants.--Not less than 20 nor more than 50
grants may be awarded under this section.
(B) Per state limitation.--Not more than 2 grants
authorized under this section may be awarded per State.
(C) Use of grants.--Funds provided under a grant made under
this section may only be used for the purpose of developing,
implementing, or enhancing automated data collection and
case-tracking systems for proceedings conducted by, or under
the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court.
(b) Application.--
(1) In general.--A State court or local court may submit an
application for a grant authorized under this section at such
time and in such manner as the Attorney General may
determine.
(2) Information required.--An application for a grant
authorized under this section shall contain the following:
(A) A description of a proposed plan for the development,
implementation, and maintenance of an automated data
collection and case-tracking system for proceedings conducted
by, or under the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court,
including a proposed budget for the plan and a request for a
specific funding amount.
(B) A description of the extent to which such plan and
system are able to be replicated in abuse and neglect courts
of other jurisdictions that specifies the common case-
tracking data elements of the proposed system, including, at
a minimum--
(i) identification of relevant judges, court, and agency
personnel;
(ii) records of all court proceedings with regard to the
abuse and neglect case, including all court findings and
orders (oral and written); and
(iii) relevant information about the subject child,
including family information and the reason for court
supervision.
(C) In the case of an application submitted by a local
court, a description of how the plan to implement the
proposed system was developed in consultation with related
State courts, particularly with regard to a State court
improvement plan funded under section 13712 of the Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 670 note) if
there is such a plan in the State.
(D) In the case of an application that is submitted by a
State court, a description of how the proposed system will
integrate with a State court improvement plan funded under
section 13712 of such Act if there is such a plan in the
State.
(E) After consultation with the State agency responsible
for the administration of parts B and E of title IV of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et seq.)--
(i) a description of the coordination of the proposed
system with other child welfare data collection systems,
including the Statewide automated child welfare information
system (SACWIS) and the adoption and foster care analysis and
reporting system (AFCARS) established pursuant to section 479
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 679); and
(ii) an assurance that such coordination will be
implemented and maintained.
(F) Identification of an independent third party that will
conduct ongoing evaluations of the feasibility and
implementation of the plan and system and a description of
the plan for conducting such evaluations.
(G) A description or identification of a proposed funding
source for completion of the plan (if applicable) and
maintenance of the system after the conclusion of the period
for which the grant is to be awarded.
(H) An assurance that any contract entered into between the
State court or local court and any other entity that is to
provide services for the development, implementation, or
maintenance of the system under the proposed plan will
require the entity to agree to allow for replication of the
services provided, the plan, and the system, and to refrain
from asserting any proprietary interest in such services for
purposes of allowing the plan and system to be replicated in
another jurisdiction.
(I) An assurance that the system established under the plan
will provide data that allows for evaluation (at least on an
annual basis) of the following information:
(i) The total number of cases that are filed in the abuse
and neglect court.
(ii) The number of cases assigned to each judge who
presides over the abuse and neglect court.
(iii) The average length of stay of children in foster
care.
(iv) With respect to each child under the jurisdiction of
the court--
(I) the number of episodes of placement in foster care;
(II) the number of days placed in foster care and the type
of placement (foster family home, group home, or special
residential care facility);
(III) the number of days of in-home supervision; and
(IV) the number of separate foster care placements.
(v) The number of adoptions, guardianships, or other
permanent dispositions finalized.
(vi) The number of terminations of parental rights.
(vii) The number of child abuse and neglect proceedings
closed that had been pending for 2 or more years.
(viii) With respect to each proceeding conducted by, or
under the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court--
(I) the timeliness of each stage of the proceeding from
initial filing through legal finalization of a permanency
plan (for both contested and uncontested hearings);
(II) the number of adjournments, delays, and continuances
occurring during the proceeding, including identification of
the party requesting each adjournment, delay, or continuance
and the reasons given for the request;
(III) the number of courts that conduct or supervise the
proceeding for the duration of the abuse and neglect case;
(IV) the number of judges assigned to the proceeding for
the duration of the abuse and neglect case; and
(V) the number of agency attorneys, children's attorneys,
parent's attorneys, guardians ad litem, and volunteers
participating in a court-appointed special advocate (CASA)
program assigned to the proceeding during the duration of the
abuse and neglect case.
(J) A description of how the proposed system will reduce
the need for paper files and ensure prompt action so that
cases are appropriately listed with national and regional
adoption exchanges, and public and private adoption services.
(K) An assurance that the data collected in accordance with
subparagraph (I) will be made available to relevant Federal,
State, and local government agencies and to the public.
(L) An assurance that the proposed system is consistent
with other civil and criminal information requirements of the
Federal government.
(M) An assurance that the proposed system will provide
notice of timeframes required under the Adoption and Safe
Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89; 111 Stat. 2115) for
individual cases to ensure prompt attention and compliance
with such requirements.
(c) Conditions for Approval of Applications.--
(1) Matching requirement.--
(A) In general.--A State court or local court awarded a
grant under this section shall expend $1 for every $3 awarded
under the grant to carry out the development, implementation,
and maintenance of the automated data collection and case-
tracking system under the proposed plan.
(B) Waiver for hardship.--The Attorney General may waive or
modify the matching requirement described in subparagraph (A)
in the case of any State court or local court that the
Attorney General determines would suffer undue hardship as a
result of being subject to the requirement.
(C) Non-federal expenditures.--
(i) Cash or in kind.--State court or local court
expenditures required under subparagraph (A) may be in cash
or in kind, fairly evaluated, including plant, equipment, or
services.
(ii) No credit for pre-award expenditures.--Only State
court or local court expenditures made after a grant has been
awarded under this section may be counted for purposes of
determining whether the State court or local court has
satisfied the matching expenditure requirement under
subparagraph (A).
(2) Notification to state or appropriate child welfare
agency.--No application for a grant authorized under this
section may be approved unless the State court or local court
submitting the application demonstrates to the satisfaction
of the Attorney General that the court has provided the
State, in the case of a State court, or the appropriate child
welfare agency, in the case of a local court, with notice of
the contents and submission of the application.
(3) Considerations.--In evaluating an application for a
grant under this section the Attorney General shall consider
the following:
(A) The extent to which the system proposed in the
application may be replicated in other jurisdictions.
(B) The extent to which the proposed system is consistent
with the provisions of, and amendments made by, the Adoption
and Safe Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89; 111 Stat.
2115), and parts B and E of title IV of
[[Page H8692]]
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et seq.).
(C) The extent to which the proposed system is feasible and
likely to achieve the purposes described in subsection
(a)(1).
(4) Diversity of awards.--The Attorney General shall award
grants under this section in a manner that results in a
reasonable balance among grants awarded to State courts and
grants awarded to local courts, grants awarded to courts
located in urban areas and courts located in rural areas, and
grants awarded in diverse geographical locations.
(d) Length of Awards.--No grant may be awarded under this
section for a period of more than 5 years.
(e) Availability of Funds.--Funds provided to a State court
or local court under a grant awarded under this section shall
remain available until expended without fiscal year
limitation.
(f) Reports.--
(1) Annual report from grantees.--Each State court or local
court that is awarded a grant under this section shall submit
an annual report to the Attorney General that contains--
(A) a description of the ongoing results of the independent
evaluation of the plan for, and implementation of, the
automated data collection and case-tracking system funded
under the grant; and
(B) the information described in subsection (b)(2)(I).
(2) Interim and final reports from attorney general.--
(A) Interim reports.--Beginning 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, and biannually thereafter until a
final report is submitted in accordance with subparagraph
(B), the Attorney General shall submit to Congress interim
reports on the grants made under this section.
(B) Final report.--Not later than 90 days after the
termination of all grants awarded under this section, the
Attorney General shall submit to Congress a final report
evaluating the automated data collection and case-tracking
systems funded under such grants and identifying successful
models of such systems that are suitable for replication in
other jurisdictions. The Attorney General shall ensure that a
copy of such final report is transmitted to the highest State
court in each State.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for
the period of fiscal years 2001 through 2005.
SEC. 5. GRANTS TO REDUCE PENDING BACKLOGS OF ABUSE AND
NEGLECT CASES TO PROMOTE PERMANENCY FOR ABUSED
AND NEGLECTED CHILDREN.
(a) Authority to Award Grants.--The Attorney General,
acting through the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention of the Office of Justice Programs and in
collaboration with the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, shall award grants in accordance with this section
to State courts and local courts for the purposes of--
(1) promoting the permanency goals established in the
Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89;
111 Stat. 2115); and
(2) enabling such courts to reduce existing backlogs of
cases pending in abuse and neglect courts, especially with
respect to cases to terminate parental rights and cases in
which parental rights to a child have been terminated but an
adoption of the child has not yet been finalized.
(b) Application.--A State court or local court shall submit
an application for a grant under this section, in such form
and manner as the Attorney General shall require, that
contains a description of the following:
(1) The barriers to achieving the permanency goals
established in the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997
that have been identified.
(2) The size and nature of the backlogs of children
awaiting termination of parental rights or finalization of
adoption.
(3) The strategies the State court or local court proposes
to use to reduce such backlogs and the plan and timetable for
doing so.
(4) How the grant funds requested will be used to assist
the implementation of the strategies described in paragraph
(3).
(c) Use of Funds.--Funds provided under a grant awarded
under this section may be used for any purpose that the
Attorney General determines is likely to successfully achieve
the purposes described in subsection (a), including
temporarily--
(1) establishing night court sessions for abuse and neglect
courts;
(2) hiring additional judges, magistrates, commissioners,
hearing officers, referees, special masters, and other
judicial personnel for such courts;
(3) hiring personnel such as clerks, administrative support
staff, case managers, mediators, and attorneys for such
courts; or
(4) extending the operating hours of such courts.
(d) Number of Grants.--Not less than 15 nor more than 20
grants shall be awarded under this section.
(e) Availability of Funds.--Funds awarded under a grant
made under this section shall remain available for
expenditure by a grantee for a period not to exceed 3 years
from the date of the grant award.
(f) Report on Use of Funds.--Not later than the date that
is halfway through the period for which a grant is awarded
under this section, and 90 days after the end of such period,
a State court or local court awarded a grant under this
section shall submit a report to the Attorney General that
includes the following:
(1) The barriers to the permanency goals established in the
Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 that are or have been
addressed with grant funds.
(2) The nature of the backlogs of children that were
pursued with grant funds.
(3) The specific strategies used to reduce such backlogs.
(4) The progress that has been made in reducing such
backlogs, including the number of children in such backlogs--
(A) whose parental rights have been terminated; and
(B) whose adoptions have been finalized.
(5) Any additional information that the Attorney General
determines would assist jurisdictions in achieving the
permanency goals established in the Adoption and Safe
Families Act of 1997.
(g) Authorization of Appropriation.--There are authorized
to be appropriated for the period of fiscal years 2001 and
2002 $10,000,000 for the purpose of making grants under this
section.
SEC. 6. GRANTS TO EXPAND THE COURT-APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATE
PROGRAM IN UNDERSERVED AREAS.
(a) Grants To Expand CASA Programs in Underserved Areas.--
The Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention of the Department of Justice shall
make a grant to the National Court-Appointed Special Advocate
Association for the purposes of--
(1) expanding the recruitment of, and building the capacity
of, court-appointed special advocate programs located in the
15 largest urban areas;
(2) developing regional, multijurisdictional court-
appointed special advocate programs serving rural areas; and
(3) providing training and supervision of volunteers in
court-appointed special advocate programs.
(b) Limitation on Administrative Expenditures.--Not more
than 5 percent of the grant made under this subsection may be
used for administrative expenditures.
(c) Determination of Urban and Rural Areas.--For purposes
of administering the grant authorized under this subsection,
the Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention of the Department of Justice shall
determine whether an area is one of the 15 largest urban
areas or a rural area in accordance with the practices of,
and statistical information compiled by, the Bureau of the
Census.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to make the grant authorized under this
section, $5,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2001 and
2002.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
General Leave
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on S. 2272.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, S. 2272, the Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act
of 2000, provides grants to allow States to improve the administrative
efficiency and effectiveness of child abuse and neglect courts
throughout the Nation. The bill gives the Attorney General the
authority to award grants to State and local courts; to provide
computerized case tracking and technical assistance; promote innovative
strategies to reduce case loads; and provide additional court-appointed
special advocates to assist in supporting children and courts.
Every child should have the opportunity to be whatever it is they
want to be, and it is our responsibility as a community and as parents
to provide them a nurturing environment so that every child can fulfill
their great promise.
The act of child abuse is incomprehensible to all of us. Child abuse
steals the innocence from our coming generation. The victims of child
abuse are not allowed to be children; they become adults all too soon.
We must give the States the tools to assist them in protecting our
children.
Child welfare is an example where State law is generally paramount.
The Federal Government supports State action by providing funds to
States for child welfare activities. Grants to States have been used to
expand and strengthen child welfare services. This bill is finely tuned
to assist States in this regard.
[[Page H8693]]
We must come together as a Nation to restore what has been stolen
from this generation. We must come together as a Nation to prevent and
stop the cycle of this terrible abuse.
I want to thank Senator DeWine of Ohio for bringing this important
bill forward, and I hope everyone will support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, while we seem to be making some progress reducing the
overall crime rate in this country, crimes against children,
particularly reports of child abuse and neglect, have grown by 41
percent over the last 10 years. In 1997, Congress passed the Adoption
and Safe Families Act to begin the process for accelerating time lines
and making other improvements designed to speed up the process of
securing safe, permanent, caring families for abused and neglected
children.
Unfortunately, in passing the law, Congress failed to recognize the
additional burdens of these time lines and other improvements would
exact on the already overburdened family and domestic relations courts.
Courts nationwide are struggling to meet the accelerated time lines and
other requirements of that legislation and, as a result, there are
substantial backlogs in processing of these cases.
This bill, which is supported by the Conference of Chief Justices and
the Conference of State Court Administrators, will help to further the
goals of the Adoption and Safe Families Act by authorizing $10 million
over 5 years to assist State and local courts in developing and
implementing automated case tracking systems for abused and neglect
proceedings. It also authorizes an additional $10 million to reduce
existing backlogs of abuse and neglect cases and $5 million to expand
the Court-Appointed Special Advocate, CASA, program into underserved
areas.
Mr. Speaker, I am familiar with this program. They have several
programs in Virginia. CASA volunteers do an excellent job in assisting
children in the court system, and I am delighted we are expanding this
system in the legislation.
In sum, this bill authorizes a total of $25 million to address this
pressing problem. I acknowledge that this is just a drop in the bucket
of what is necessary. However, it will help to alleviate an
overburdened family court system. And I encourage my colleagues not to
stop here.
The research tells us that children who experience abuse are four
times more likely to be involved in delinquent and criminal activity
than a child who has not been abused. Furthermore, those children are
more likely to be arrested 1 year earlier, commit twice as many
offenses and be arrested more frequently than youths who are not abused
or neglected.
But the statistic that should most concern us is that nearly 70
percent of youths arrested have a prior history of abuse and neglect,
which means that we already have the ability to identify those children
at risk of delinquency through child protection and child welfare
systems. By identifying those children and providing them with
appropriate intervention programs and services, we can drastically
decrease juvenile delinquency.
As the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Crime, I must express my
regret that this Congress has not made these improvements in proven
crime prevention initiatives a priority. H.R. 1501, the Consequences
for Juvenile Offenders Act, and H.R. 1150, which reauthorizes the
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act as originally
introduced in the House, would have provided increased funding for
juvenile crime prevention programs and services for at-risk youth.
These bills were loaded down in the House with slogans and sound
bites posing as amendments and then buried in a conference committee
that has not met for a year. It is unfortunate that this Congress chose
to play politics instead of choosing to address the problem of at-risk
youth in this country and to reduce juvenile crime.
In the end, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the passage
of the measure before us today. It is a good start and will provide
family courts with resources they need to enhance their tracking
systems and to begin reducing backlogs.
I look forward to working with my friends across the aisle next year
on juvenile justice legislation that builds upon the foundation started
today.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time as she
may consume to the distinguished gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce).
Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the honorable and
distinguished chairman for yielding me time and for his assistance in
this measure.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this measure, the
Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act, or SANCA. There is nothing
more tragic than the thought of a child who has been abused or
neglected, and nothing happier than a child finding the warmth and love
of a permanent adoptive family. Unfortunately, the period of time
between these two points during which a child's case is pending before
the courts can be a period of interminable delays, bureaucratic snags,
and a less-than-thorough accurate review of the child's case, all of
which can have a lasting negative effect on the child.
{time} 1745
Mr. Speaker, for those children who reach adulthood without permanent
placement and transition out of the foster care system, they begin
their adult lives with no sense of family, low self-esteem and little
direction for the future. Children are being removed from abusive homes
only to be abused once again by the system.
Healing can only begin for these children when they are in a safe and
permanent environment. But all too often these children languish in the
foster care system in a state of emotional limbo.
According to the National Center for Juvenile Justice, between 1991
and 1997, in my own home district of Franklin County, Ohio, 38 percent
of the children who are waiting permanent adoption because parental
rights have been severed have been in the system over 4 years. And
nationally, according to the Department of Health and Human Services,
children who are adopted from foster care leave the system between 3.5
and 5.5 years later.
This is simply too long for these children to wait for the love and
warmth of a permanent family. This is a good part of a childhood.
Congress began to address this situation in 1997 with the Adoption
and Safe Families Act. Without a doubt this is one of our crowning
achievements of the last session. But while ASFA's accelerated
timelines are essential to promoting stability and permanence for
abused and neglected children, these timelines, along with grossly
insufficient funding, have resulted in continued prolonged stays for
abused and neglected children in the foster care system and increased
pressure on our Nation's already overburdened abuse and neglect courts.
SANCA addresses the shortfalls of the Adoption and Safe Families Act
by making Federal funding available to State and local courts to reduce
case backlogs and to develop and implement automated case tracking
systems for abuse and neglect proceedings.
SANCA also provides funding for start-up grants to appoint the Court
Appointed Special Advocate for CASA, programs in underserved areas.
The foster care system cannot help abused and neglected children
without properly functioning State and local courts. The relatively
small amount of funding provided by SANCA will have a dramatic impact
on the lives of abused and neglected children.
SANCA is backed by the American Bar Association, the Conference of
Chief Justices, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court
Judges, among others. Clearly, this legislation is of vital importance
to abused and neglected children who need nothing more than the
stability and love that comes with the safe and permanent home. Mr.
Speaker, I urge my colleagues' support.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this bill will have the short-term effect of reducing
backlogs but will have the long-term effect of improving the lives of
many children. I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde),
the distinguished
[[Page H8694]]
chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary for bringing the bill to the
floor and thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) for her advocacy
in this issue. She is a former judge and is very knowledgeable on this
issue. I thank her for her advocacy on behalf of children.
Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, the strengthening Abuse and
neglect Courts Act of 2000 will build on the success of the Adoption
and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA) which required states to shorten
the length of time that children remain in foster care by filing
termination of parental rights petitions at 15 months.
Implementation of ASFA has resulted in an unprecedented 64 percent
increase in adoptions out of foster care since 1996.
As a direct result of ASFA, developed by the Committee on Ways and
means, new pressures have been put on state courts to hold permanency
hearings, implement permanency plans, make judicial findings and
finalize adoptions cases involving abused and neglected children in a
timely fashion.
The Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 2000 will increase
the efficiency and capacity of the nation's abuse and neglect courts by
providing funds to state courts to computerize a data collection and
case tracking system. This system will allow judges to track the number
of children under judicial care to monitor how these children are
faring. A case tracking system will allow judges to keep a running
account of the number and type of services offered to the family and
the results of these interventions. This information is critical to
keeping children safe and promoting permanency.
This Act will enable state and local courts to reduce existing
backlogs of children awaiting termination of parental rights or
finalization of adoption. According to the Department of Health and
Human Services there were over 103,000 children awaiting adoption in
1998. Grants provided to state courts under this Act will allow courts
to hire additional judges to hear these cases and to establish night
court sessions for hearing these cases.
The Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 2000 is a logical
next step to the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. We need courts
that work to reduce delays and keep children safe and in loving
families. This legislation does that and I wholeheartedly support it.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ose). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 2272.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________