For decades, states have accepted federal benefits for foster children. This is starting to change

JEFFERSON CITY, Missouri – By the time Jesse Fernandez turned 18, the federal government had already paid out thousands of dollars in Social Security survivor benefits because of his mother’s death. But Jesse’s bank account was empty.

All of the money was used by Missouri’s foster care system or relatives responsible for her care.

“I was shocked,” said Jason White, Fernandez’s adoptive father.

“These dollars are a big deal,” he continued. “If they had been saved, or some of it saved, he would have had money for a car and an apartment for the first time.”

For decades, states have routinely applied for Social Security survivors and disability benefits on behalf of adopted children and then used that money to help cover the costs of foster care services. The tactic prevented states from spending millions of their own tax dollars on welfare programs.

But that is starting to change under pressure from child advocates, who say the practice is immoral and harmful to adopted children because it depletes funds that could have helped them transition to adulthood.

More than a dozen states have made at least some kind of review of the practice since Maryland became the first to do so in 2018. Colorado was the latest in April, when it enacted a law establishing a list of rights for adopted children , which stipulates that any benefits be used for your “individual needs.”

Similar measures were proposed this year in several states as part of an “incredible explosion of reform efforts,” said Amy Harfeld, director of national policy at the Child Advocacy Institute at the University of San Diego School of Law.

But change is not always easy.

Missouri legislation that advocates consider a national model failed to receive final approval Friday, despite previously passing both chambers. Supporters pointed to gridlock in the Republican-led legislature and concerns about an unrelated child custody amendment attached to the bill.

Both chambers of the Democrat-led Maine Legislature also passed a measure last month that would have prohibited the state from using federal survival benefits for foster children to reimburse their costs of foster care services. But the legislation didn’t reach the governor’s desk because lawmakers were unable to allocate the nearly $1.8 million needed to offset the proposed change.

“There is a strong and growing interest in implementing reforms,” said Meg Dygert, team leader at the National Association of Public Child Welfare Administrators.

But “addressing this issue is not without complexities,” she said. “To change practices, child welfare agencies must face significant financial, operational, technical, and legal challenges.”

An estimated 40,000 to 80,000 children in foster care receive or are eligible for Social Security benefits, typically due to the death of a parent or their own disability, according to a report released last month by the Children’s Advocacy Institute. These benefits typically pay hundreds of dollars per month per child, which amounts to millions of dollars annually to states.

In Missouri, the Children’s Division spent more than $9.3 million last year on foster care services from the accounts of about 1,400 adopted children who received Social Security benefits, according to legislative research staff.

Those federal disability payments would have totaled about $123,000 over 13 years for Alexus Brandon, said his adoptive mother, Brenda Keith. But Brandon, 21, didn’t get any of that when he got out of Missouri’s foster care system because the state used it all up, Keith said.

Brandon now receives monthly disability checks, but she has fallen behind on her rent payments and doesn’t have money to buy a car, making it harder to get a job.

If the state had set aside some of its child disability benefits for future use, “it would have helped me start my life,” Brandon said.

Missouri legislation would have required the Children’s Division to apply for Social Security benefits on behalf of eligible adopted children, but prohibited the agency from using that money for required foster care expenses. Instead, the benefits would have been reserved for children when they left foster care or were spent on “unmet needs” such as school, transportation or other items.

A similar measure passed the Republican-led Arizona Legislature last year and was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs. At the time, the state Department of Child Safety said it was collecting about $6.2 million annually in Social Security and veterans survivor benefits on behalf of adopted children and spending about $4 million of that amount on social assistance services.

“We shouldn’t be funding the government at the expense of abused children,” said Kendall Seal, vice president of policy at the Center for the Rights of Abused Children, which supported the measures in Arizona and Missouri.

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, a Democrat, also signed a law last year prohibiting the state from using child benefits to cover the state’s costs of food, clothing, housing and daily supervision of foster children. Instead, she directs those funds into savings accounts for children’s personal needs, including education and future housing expenses.

New Mexico’s children’s department announced last year that it would stop taking advantage of Social Security benefits for foster children and instead put that money into a child trust fund. The Massachusetts Children’s Agency said earlier this year that it was also ending the use of Social Security benefits for foster children to cover their costs.

Lawmakers in Missouri and Maine said they would try again next year to pass legislation that would limit the state’s use of federal benefits for foster children.

The Maine measure was sponsored by Democratic Rep. Amy Roeder, who adopted two children from foster care, including one who receives Social Security survivor benefits because his biological father died. While he was in the foster system, her son did not receive any of these monthly benefit payments. But Roeder said she is now saving funds until he is an adult to help pay for higher education or housing.

“Money is a cold comfort when you lose someone, but it’s something,” Roeder said, “even if it’s just a little boost to get you started.