[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 19985-19989]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES IMPROVEMENT ACT

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, yesterday, the House of Representatives 
passed the Senate amendment to S. 3525, which represents the bipartisan 
and bicameral agreement on the Child and Family Services Improvement 
Act of 2006.
  I was pleased to have introduced the Senate amendment with my friend 
and partner on the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Max Baucus. 
Senator Baucus and I were joined by Senator Orrin G. Hatch, and Senator 
John D. Rockefeller, Jr. and Senator Olympia J. Snowe. All of these 
members have a long history of support for important programs to 
improve the well-being of children.
  This important legislation reauthorizes the Promoting Safe and Stable 
Families Program which provides services to families for family 
support, family preservation, time-limited reunification of families, 
and for adoption and post-adoption services. These are critical funding 
streams, and the

[[Page 19986]]

reauthorization of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program 
ensures that families can rely on these preventative and supportive 
services.
  The legislation also aligns the Child Welfare Services Act with the 
prevention activities of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program 
by providing incentives to States to invest in prevention services 
while allowing States to continue current State spending on existing 
State priorities.
  S. 3525 provides support for increased caseworker visits as well as 
adopts a version of President Bush's proposal to provide a voucher for 
mentoring services for children of prisoners.
  Additionally, the legislation increases access for funding for Indian 
tribes, which was a key priority of both Senator Baucus and Senator 
Kent Conrad.
  The legislation that will soon be signed by the President also 
includes grants for regional partnerships to address the growing 
problem of methamphetamine and other substance abuse and addictions 
that have had a substantial impact on child welfare systems and 
services.
  Funding for these competitive grants was a key priority of mine, and 
I am pleased that the compromise we were able to work out with the 
House maintains the support for grants to improve the outcomes for 
children affected by methamphetamine abuse and addiction.
  Mr. President, the Senate Finance Committee did a great deal of work 
on issues relating to child welfare. We held the first full committee 
hearing in 10 years on child welfare, and we held an additional hearing 
on the effects of the methamphetamine epidemic on the child welfare 
system. We worked on a bipartisan basis to mark up and pass the 
Improving Outcomes for Children Affected by Meth Act of 2005. Key 
provisions of that bill are features in the legislation which will soon 
be signed into law.
  But there is more that can be done to strengthen and improve child 
welfare services. I intend to continue to work on a bipartisan basis to 
develop and enact reforms to ensure that all children have access to 
loving, permanent homes.
  I would like to take this opportunity to thank the staff who worked 
tirelessly to get this bill done. Members of Congress in both the House 
and the Senate are very well served by our staffs. These men and women 
care a great deal about these programs, and we are indebted to them for 
their insights and analysis.
  I am grateful to the talented staff from the office of Senator 
Baucus, specifically, Diedra Henry-Spires, Doug Steiger, and Michelle 
Easton. Additionally, I am grateful to Senator Rockefeller's extremely 
knowledgeable aid Barbara Pryor.
  I appreciate the work of the staff on the Subcommittee on Human 
Resources of the House Committee on Ways and Means, Matt Weidinger and 
Christine Calpin for the majority and Nick Gwyn and Sonja Nesbit for 
the minority.
  I also thank the dedicated analyst from the Congressional Research 
Service, Emilie Stoltzfus who provided staff with invaluable expertise 
on child welfare programs.
  Thanks to Christina Hawley Anthony from the Congressional Budget 
Office as well as legislative counsels Ruth Ernst and James Grossman.
  Finally, I appreciate the efforts of my own Finance Committee policy 
lead on this issue, Becky Shipp as well as Mark Hayes, Ted Totman, and 
Kolan Davis.
  Mr. President, because a formal conference was not convened on this 
bill, there is no conference report filed. However, the staff has 
prepared a section-by-section analysis of the Senate-House agreement 
for purposes of the legislative history.
  Mr. President, some will say this has been a ``do nothing congress.'' 
I couldn't disagree more, and I believe that the children and families 
served by this legislation would disagree as well.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the section-by-section 
analysis to which I referred be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


  S. 3525, THE CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2006, AS 
                                AMENDED

 (Prepared by the Staff of the U.S. House Committee on Ways and Means 
     and the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, September 27, 2006)

     Section 1--Short Title
       ``The Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006''
     Section 2--Findings
       The legislation makes a number of findings regarding the 
     provision of services under two child welfare programs 
     authorized under Title IV-B of the Social Security Act, the 
     Child Welfare Services (CWS) program and the Promoting Safe 
     and Stable Families (PSSF) program. The findings note the 
     importance of monthly caseworker visits in improving outcomes 
     for children. They also outline the relationship between the 
     entry of children into the child welfare system and their 
     parent's abuse of methamphetamine and other substances.
     Section 3--Reauthorization of the Promoting Safe and Stable 
         Families Program
     Current Law
       For fiscal year (FY) 2006, authorizes mandatory funding of 
     $345 million for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families 
     (PSSF) program (Title IV-B, Subpart 2 of the Social Security 
     Act) and discretionary funding of $200 million for each of 
     FYs 2002 through 2006.
     S. 3525
       The legislation extends the mandatory PSSF funding 
     authorization of $345 million for five years (FYs 2007 
     through 2011) and extends the discretionary funding 
     authorization of $200 million for each of those same five 
     years. The legislation expands the reporting requirement to 
     include both proposed spending and actual spending under the 
     CWS and PSSF programs, and at State option, other programs 
     that support child abuse prevention activities and child 
     welfare services. The legislation also prohibits HHS from 
     making any payment of PSSF funds to a State for 
     administrative costs that exceed 10 percent of total program 
     expenditures (Federal and non-Federal) of a State.
     Reason for Change
       The PSSF program supports four categories of services 
     provided to children and families: family preservation 
     services, community-based family support services, time-
     limited reunification services, and adoption promotion and 
     support services. The legislation recognizes the importance 
     of encouraging States to invest in these activities. Thus the 
     legislation provides for the $200 million increase in 
     mandatory PSSF funds over the next five years included in the 
     Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-171). In total 
     $345 million in mandatory funds (the recent $305 million 
     allotment of annual mandatory funds, plus a $40 million 
     annual increase provided under the Deficit Reduction Act of 
     2005) will be provided in each of FYs 2007 through 2011.
       The legislation also will ensure better oversight and 
     accountability of spending under the CWS and PSSF programs by 
     requiring States to report on projected and actual spending 
     under these two programs. Specifically, data on actual 
     spending will help track State investments for the four 
     priorities of the PSSF program.
     Section 4--Targeting of Promoting Safe and Stable Families 
         Program Resources
     Current Law
       Current law requires States to include assurances in their 
     PSSF plan that they will spend significant portions of their 
     PSSF funds in each of four priority areas: (1) family 
     preservation services; (2) community-based family support 
     services; (3) time-limited family reunification services; and 
     (4) adoption promotion and support services.
     S. 3525
       The legislation retains the four priorities of PSSF while 
     targeting the additional $40 million per year provided under 
     the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-171) to two 
     new priorities: (1) support for monthly caseworker visits; 
     and (2) competitive grants to promote the well-being of 
     children in or at risk of placement in the child welfare 
     system as a result of their parent's abuse of methamphetamine 
     or other substances.
       The legislation provides a total of $95 million to States 
     to support monthly caseworker visits of children in foster 
     care under the responsibility of the State, with a primary 
     emphasis on activities designed to improve caseworker 
     retention, recruitment, training, and ability to access the 
     benefits of technology. States will receive $40 million from 
     FY 2006 PSSF funds (with these funds available through FY 
     2009), $5 million in FY 2008, $10 million in FY 2009, and $20 
     million in each of FYs 2010 and 2011 to support monthly 
     caseworker visits. States cannot use these funds to supplant 
     any Federal funds already paid to the State under the Title 
     IV-E program that could be used for the purposes outlined 
     above.
       To promote the well-being of children affected by their 
     parent's abuse of methamphetamine or other substances, the 
     legislation provides a total of $145 million to the

[[Page 19987]]

     Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services 
     (HHS) to award competitive grants to regional partnerships to 
     pursue innovative approaches to help children and families. 
     Funding will be $40 million in FY 2007, $35 million in FY 
     2008, $30 million, in FY 2009 and $20 million in each of FYs 
     2010 and 2011. Partnerships must include the State child 
     welfare agency or an Indian tribe and at least one other 
     eligible partner, including: child welfare service providers 
     (non-profit and for-profit), community providers of health or 
     mental health services, local law enforcement agencies, 
     judges and court personnel, juvenile justice officials, 
     school personnel, the State agency responsible for 
     administering the substance abuse prevention and treatment 
     block grant (authorized under Title XIX-B, Subpart II of the 
     Public Health Services Act), and any other providers, 
     agencies, personnel, officials or entities related to the 
     provision of child and family services. Grants of between 
     $500,000 and $1 million per year will be awarded for 2 to 5 
     year periods.
       A priority will be given to grant applications that propose 
     to combat methamphetamine abuse, given its substantial affect 
     on child welfare in some areas. Funding for the grants must 
     be used to support the purposes of this program, which may 
     include family- based comprehensive long-term substance abuse 
     treatment services, early intervention and prevention 
     services, mental health services, parent skills training, and 
     replication of successful models for providing family-based 
     comprehensive long-term substance abuse treatment services. 
     Grantees must provide a 15 percent match in the first and 
     second year, a 20 percent match in the third and fourth year, 
     and a 25 percent match in the fifth year. In-kind 
     contributions can qualify towards the match requirement. The 
     Secretary of HHS must consult with State leaders to develop 
     performance indicators and reporting is required of all grant 
     recipients.
       The legislation also redirects current PSSF research 
     funding to support evaluation, research, and technical 
     assistance related to the above two PSSF funding priorities. 
     In each of FYs 2007 through 2011, at least $1 million must be 
     spent for research and technical assistance activities that 
     support monthly caseworker visits and at least $1 million 
     must be spent for research and technical assistance 
     activities with respect to the competitive grant program to 
     promote the well-being of children in or at risk of placement 
     in the child welfare system due to a parent's abuse of 
     methamphetamine or other substances.
     Reason for Change
       The targeting of funds to support monthly visits of foster 
     children is in response to research highlighting how monthly 
     visits lead to better outcomes for children. The Child and 
     Family Service Reviews (CFSRs) completed in each State found 
     a strong correlation between frequent caseworker visits with 
     children and positive outcomes for children, such as timely 
     achievement of permanency and other indicators of child well-
     being. However, despite the fact that nearly all States had 
     written standards suggesting monthly visits were State 
     policy, a December 2005 report completed by the HHS Office of 
     the Inspector General found that only 20 States were able to 
     produce reports showing whether caseworkers actually visited 
     children in foster care on at least a monthly basis. States 
     are encouraged to invest these resources in those activities 
     with proven effectiveness in supporting monthly caseworker 
     visits of foster children and should be cognizant that these 
     funds may not supplant what States already spend from their 
     Title IV-E programs for these activities. These resources are 
     intended to increase State investment in these important 
     areas.
       Parental substance abuse is a well-known problem affecting 
     the child welfare system, and the Office of Applied Studies 
     of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
     Administration reported that the number of new uses of 
     methamphetamines (meth) has increased 72 percent in the past 
     decade. A study by the National Association of Counties which 
     surveyed 300 counties in 13 States reported that meth abuse 
     is a major cause of child abuse and neglect. Forty percent of 
     all the child welfare officials in the survey reported an 
     increase in out-of-home placements due to meth abuse in 2005.
     Section 5--Allotments and Grants to Indian Tribes
     Current Law
       Requires that 1 percent of all mandatory PSSF funds, and 2 
     percent of any discretionary appropriations for the PSSF 
     program, be set aside for tribal programs. (The minimum 
     tribal funding provided is $3.45 million and the maximum 
     annual tribal funding possible is $7.45 million.)
       Out of the tribal funds reserved, Indian tribes or tribal 
     organizations with an approved plan must be allotted PSSF 
     funds (based on the relative share of tribal persons under 
     age 21 but only among tribes or tribal organizations with 
     approved plans). The Secretary of HHS may exempt a tribe from 
     any plan requirement that it determines would be 
     inappropriate for that tribe (taking into account the 
     resources, needs, and other circumstances of that tribe). 
     However, no tribe or tribal organization may have an approved 
     plan (or receive funds) unless its allotment is equal to at 
     least $10,000. Funds allotted are paid directly to the tribal 
     organization of the Indian tribe to which the money is 
     allotted.
     S. 3525
       The legislation increases the set-aside for tribal programs 
     to 3 percent of any discretionary funds appropriated. It also 
     increases the set-aside for tribal programs to 3 percent of 
     the mandatory funds authorized and which remain after the 
     separate reservation of funds is made for (1) monthly 
     caseworker visits, and (2) competitive grants to combat 
     methamphetamine and other substance abuse. Therefore, the 
     minimum funding available per year for tribal programs would 
     be $9.15 million and the maximum funding would be $15.15 
     million. The legislation eliminates the ability of the 
     Secretary of HHS to exempt tribes from the PSSF plan 
     requirements related to nonsupplantation, data reporting, and 
     monitoring. However, the Secretary retains the ability to 
     waive for Indian tribes the PSSF requirement to invest 
     significant amounts of program funds in each of the four PSSF 
     activities and to spend no more than 10 percent of PSSF funds 
     on administrative costs.
       The legislation also permits tribal consortia to have 
     access to an allotment of PSSF funds (and related technical 
     assistance) on the same basis as such funds are currently 
     available to Indian tribes. A tribal consortium's allotment 
     is to be determined based on the number of tribal persons 
     under age 21 in each tribe that is a part of the tribal 
     consortium. If tribes choose to apply collectively as a 
     consortium, the population of tribal persons under age 21 for 
     each tribe would be combined in order to determine the size 
     of the grant to the consortium, including whether the 
     consortium meets the $10,000 eligibility threshold in the 
     Act. A tribal consortium could select which Indian tribal 
     organization (among the tribes in the consortium) would 
     receive the direct payment of its allotment.
     Reason for Change
       The legislation recognizes the importance of assisting 
     tribes in their efforts to assist abused and neglected 
     children. The legislation significantly increases the amount 
     of funds provided to tribes and allows tribal consortia to 
     apply for PSSF funds. This step is being taken to encourage 
     the further development of tribal child welfare programs, 
     which largely serve severely disadvantaged communities and 
     families and can do so in a culturally appropriate manner. 
     Permanency outcomes for Indian children can be improved if 
     tribal consortia are able to have access to an allotment of 
     PSSF funding on the same basis as is currently available to 
     Indian tribes. This will facilitate smaller tribes' building 
     their own programs and will allow for administrative 
     efficiencies in tribal program administration.
       To collect additional data and ensure proper oversight of 
     these funds, tribes and tribal consortia interested in 
     applying for this substantial increase in PSSF funds will be 
     required to adhere to the same data and monitoring plan 
     requirements as States. This additional data will inform how 
     these funds have helped the tribes better ensure the safety, 
     permanency, and well-being of tribal children.
     Section 6--Improvements to the Child Welfare Services (CWS) 
         Program
     Current Law
       Up to $325 million annually is authorized on an indefinite 
     basis for the Child Welfare Services (CWS) program, which 
     provides funds to States to support a wide range of child 
     welfare activities. Federal funding represents 75 percent of 
     total funding for this program, and States are required to 
     contribute 25 percent of total CWS funding from State funds.
     S. 3525
       The legislation maintains the annual discretionary 
     authorization level of $325 million per year but limits the 
     funding authorization to FYs 2007 through 2011. The 
     legislation also specifies that the purpose of the CWS 
     program for which funds may be expended is to promote State 
     flexibility in the development and expansion of a coordinated 
     child and family services program that utilizes community-
     based agencies and that ensures all children are raised in 
     safe, loving families, by: (1) protecting and promoting the 
     welfare of all children; (2) preventing the neglect, abuse, 
     or exploitation of children; (3) supporting at-risk families 
     through services which allow children, where appropriate, to 
     remain safely with their families or return to their families 
     in a timely manner; (4) promoting the safety, permanence and 
     well-being of children in foster care and adoptive families; 
     and (5) providing training, professional development and 
     support to ensure a well-qualified child welfare workforce.
       The legislation eliminates the plan requirements related to 
     child day care standards and those related to the use of 
     paraprofessionals or volunteers and restates and renumbers 
     the remaining provisions with generally the same intent. It 
     rewrites the provision concerning policies and procedures for 
     children abandoned shortly after birth to assert that a State 
     must have in effect administrative and judicial procedures 
     for children who are abandoned at or shortly after

[[Page 19988]]

     birth (including policies and procedures providing for legal 
     representation of the children) to ensure expeditious 
     decisions can be made for their permanent placement. Further, 
     it clarifies that the State may include residential 
     educational programs as a living arrangement for children for 
     whom reunification, adoption, or guardianship have been ruled 
     out as permanency goals. This provision does not undermine 
     current State policies regarding placement of children in 
     adoptive homes and does not eliminate the 25 bed policy.
       Beginning October 1, 2007 (i.e. the beginning of FY 2008), 
     the legislation limits administrative funding to 10 percent, 
     but defines administrative funds to exclude caseworker 
     services and supervision of such services. Also beginning in 
     FY 2008, the legislation limits how much each State can 
     expend from Federal CWS funding for foster care maintenance 
     payments, adoption assistance payments, or child day care to 
     what the State can show that it spent for such purposes in FY 
     2005. Further, beginning with FY 2008, States are not allowed 
     to use State spending on foster care maintenance payments to 
     meet the State matching requirement to receive Federal CWS 
     fund in amounts that exceed what the State spent from such 
     funds in FY 2005.
       The legislation also adds new requirements to the CWS plan 
     the State submits to (1) describe how the State consults with 
     and involves physicians and other appropriate medical 
     professionals in the assessment of children in foster care 
     and in determining appropriate medical treatment, and (2) 
     develop a plan on how to respond, track and continue care for 
     children receiving child welfare services in the event of a 
     disaster.
     Reason for Change
       The legislation will reorganize and update the CWS program 
     and encourage more effective oversight. It also aligns the 
     program to be coterminous with the reauthorization of the 
     PSSF program to allow for better coordination between the two 
     programs. It will encourage States to invest funding in 
     prevention services, but allows each State to maintain in the 
     coming years its FY 2005 level of spending from Federal CWS 
     funds for foster care, adoption assistance and child care 
     purposes. It adds a new State planning requirement to ensure 
     consultation with medical professionals as well as State 
     planning to continue the availability of child welfare 
     services during a disaster.
     Section 7--Monthly Caseworker Standard
     Current Law
       There is no minimum Federal standard for monthly visits of 
     foster children in State custody.
     S. 3525
       The legislation requires the State to update its CWS State 
     plan by October 1, 2007 to describe its standards for the 
     content and frequency of caseworker visits of foster children 
     in State custody, which at a minimum must ensure that 
     children are visited on a monthly basis and that the 
     caseworker visits are well-planned and focused on issues 
     pertinent to case planning and service delivery to ensure the 
     safety, permanency, and well-being of children.
       The legislation also sets a minimum Federal standard 
     requiring each State and territory to achieve by October 1, 
     2011 monthly caseworker visits for at least 90 percent of 
     foster children in State custody, with the majority of those 
     visits occurring in the child's residence. Each State and 
     territory would be held accountable for its efforts and the 
     legislation prescribes a planning process to achieve this 
     goal. To receive FY 2008 CWS funds, States must submit to HHS 
     data for FY 2007 on the percentage of foster children visited 
     on a monthly basis by their caseworker and the percentage of 
     those visits that occurred in the child's residence. Based on 
     this data, HHS will work with each State to set target levels 
     for the State to meet to achieve a 90 percent monthly 
     visitation standard by FY 2012 and will establish these 
     target levels by June 30, 2008. Then, beginning in FY 2009, 
     States must achieve their annual goal for the percentage of 
     caseworker visits and the percentage of visits that occur in 
     the child's residence, or face an enhanced matching 
     requirement in order to draw down their full allotment of 
     Federal CWS funds. The share of non-Federal spending that is 
     required in a State that does not meet its visitation target 
     level in a year increases by a minimum of 1 percentage point, 
     up to a maximum of 5 percentage points, depending on the 
     degree to which the State has missed its target level; absent 
     the commitment of additional State funds, Federal funds would 
     be reduced to yield the modified State share of overall CWS 
     funding, consistent with the degree of the State's failure to 
     achieve its visitation target for that year.
       No later than March 31, 2010, HHS must submit to the House 
     Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on 
     Finance a report that outlines the progress States have made 
     in meeting their caseworker visitation standards and that 
     offers recommendations, developed in consultation with State 
     administrators of child welfare programs and members of State 
     legislatures, to assist States in meeting this standard.
     Reason for Change
       Holding States accountable for achieving monthly caseworker 
     visits for at least 90 percent of foster children responds to 
     research highlighting how monthly visits lead to better 
     outcomes for children. HHS shall work with the States to 
     establish a plan to achieve this goal by FY 2012 and States 
     are encouraged to invest the new PSSF resources provided in 
     FY 2006 and later fiscal years in activities that have been 
     shown to be effective in achieving increased caseworker 
     visitation of foster children. The above accountability 
     measure will ensure that, even in the case of a State that 
     fails to fulfill its specified level of caseworker visits, 
     the full Federal CWS allotment to a State will remain 
     available so long as that State increases its State CWS 
     spending modestly, according to the provisions of the 
     legislation.
     Section 8--Reauthorization of Program for Mentoring Children 
         of Prisoners
     Current Law
       The Mentoring Children of Prisoners program is administered 
     by HHS and makes competitive grants to support the 
     establishment or expansion and operation of programs that 
     provide mentoring services to children of prisoners.
     S. 3525
       The legislation reauthorizes the existing Mentoring 
     Children of Prisoners program through FY 2011 at such sums as 
     may be necessary and increases the HHS set-aside for 
     research, technical assistance, and evaluation from 2.5 
     percent to 4 percent. It authorizes a new 3-year pilot 
     program to provide vouchers to qualified mentoring groups to 
     offer services to individual children of prisoners, but 
     specifies both annual caps on funding for this purpose and 
     that at least $25 million must be available each year for 
     site-based grants provided under the program. The voucher 
     pilot program will be administered by a national group that 
     will work closely with HHS to manage the program with the 
     goal to distribute least 3,000 vouchers in the first year, 
     8,000 vouchers in the second year and 13,000 vouchers in the 
     third year. The legislation specifies that the national group 
     must identify in its voucher distribution plan how the group 
     will prioritize providing vouchers to children in areas which 
     have not been served under the current site-based mentoring 
     program. During the third year of this pilot HHS shall 
     provide a report based on an independent evaluation to the 
     House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on 
     Finance on the number of children who received vouchers for 
     mentoring services and any conclusions regarding the voucher 
     pilot program's effectiveness.
     Reason for Change
       The continuation of the Mentoring Children of Prisoners 
     program will enable public and private organizations to 
     establish or expand projects that provide one-on-one 
     mentoring for children of incarcerated parents and those 
     recently released from prison. At the same time, children 
     have not been able to access mentoring services in some 
     States and rural areas because of the absence of a site-based 
     grant to provide this service. The voucher pilot program will 
     evaluate the effectiveness of using vouchers to expand the 
     delivery of mentoring services to children of prisoners, 
     including to children in rural and underserved areas.
     Section 9--Reauthorization of the Court Improvement Program
     Current Law
       For each of FYs 2002 through 2006, an eligible highest 
     State court (with an approved application) is entitled to a 
     share of funds to assess and make improvements to its 
     handling of child welfare procedures. A set-aside of $10 
     million from the mandatory funds authorized and 3.3 percent 
     of any discretionary appropriation is provided from the PSSF 
     program to support the Court Improvement Program. To receive 
     its full allotment of these funds the court, in each of FYs 
     2002 through 2006, is required to provide at least 25 percent 
     of the expenditures for this purpose.
     S. 3525
       The legislation reauthorizes the funding for the Court 
     Improvement Program for 5 years, through FY 2011.
     Reason for Change
       The Court Improvement Program has played an important role 
     in assisting State courts in their efforts to expedite 
     judicial proceedings for at-risk children. The legislation 
     will ensure these funds continue to remain available, and is 
     in addition to the $100 million provided over FYs 2006 
     through 2010 under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 
     109-171) to support training and data collection efforts of 
     State courts.
     Section 10--Requirement for Foster Care Proceedings to 
         Include, in an Age-Appropriate Manner, Consultation with 
         the Child that Is the Subject of the Proceeding
     Current Law
       Current law does not include a standard for consulting with 
     children in court proceedings.
     S. 3525
       The legislation requires States to assure that in any 
     permanency hearing held with respect to the child, including 
     any hearing

[[Page 19989]]

     regarding the transition of the child from foster care to 
     independent living, the court or administrative body 
     conducting the hearing consults in an age-appropriate manner 
     with the child regarding the plan being proposed for the 
     child.
     Reason for Change
       Each child deserves the opportunity to participate and be 
     consulted in any court proceeding affecting his or her 
     future, in an age-appropriate manner.
     Section 11--Technical Amendments
     Section 12--Effective Dates
       The legislation will become effective on October 1, 2006, 
     except for provisions with other specified effective dates or 
     if HHS determines that a State legislature must act before 
     the State can comply with the changes.

                          ____________________