Do people realize the agencies play a large role when placing foster children in homes?

I just did a Google search and there are more that I could count in MY state. Half of what came up was complaints against many of the agencies.

I think how it works, is, the state removes the children, puts them in the "care" of the agency, they pay the agency for the day the child is in care, the child is placed in a home that was screened by the agency.

When the agency places a child, they are required to do certain things, like report back how the child is doing in the home, the criminal status of the household, AND when there is a successful adoptive placement the agency receives a lump sum (the person I talked to said they received about $10,000 per placement) for getting a child out of the system.

Some of these set up more profitable group homes with a much larger child to caregiver ratio and where they can demand more money for these kids. In addition to that, some even get children diagnosed with disorders, again raising the amount that can fetch for their care.

Why do people just ignore these things happening?

Gaia Raain II

It's different in every state. In Oregon, agencies can't have that much involvement. DHS handles everything. The only thing agencies are allowed to do is paperwork. They process paperwork and submit it to the people who need it. They have no involvement with the kids, whatsoever. All placement (foster, kinship, guardianship, or adopt) goes directly through the DHS caseworker. The agency has no say in this process, nor any involvement. They represent us at committee (again, submitting paperwork).

In some states, PAP's are actually required to use an agency whether or not they're adopting through foster care. DHS doesn't do any of it. (I know Arizona is like that.) This has set up some really creepy situations. For instance, PAP's in Arizona are frequently harassed, asked for money that wasn't in the contract, etc., and they can't say or do anything because if they do, the agency will refuse to work with them, and pass it along to all the OTHER agencies. You'd think this would be a good thing for the kids, but the agencies are trying to make the biggest buck possible. When that's the ultimate goal, the kids aren't even in the picture.

At any rate, I really think adoption agencies should get their hands out of the foster care cookie jar. I wish I had known better when we started the process. We should have gone straight to DHS and stuck with them.

sweetjane

It is a growing trend of foster care, for people to use 'private agencies' as a go-between. Generally, the AP's are still not charged, but tax payers are charged and state run foster care funds are charged for the operational costs. Supposedly, these private agencies 'help' AP's with the process and give more individual care to the children and AP's. Since I have never experienced any problems with the process or individual care through the basic state agency, I can't comment on how much more 'wonderful' private agencies are....but I do know that they are taking money from the state in order to place these children....which seems like a bad thing. Honestly, there are many people who will simply not adopt through foster care. They seem to believe that foster children are deficient in some way...and that a private agency will 'weed out' the bad ones. All in all, I simply cannot get behind any org. making money off the sale of children....even if the money they make doesn't come from the AP's, but the state. Someone is still paying for it, which means that children who are not accepted into the private agencies will suffer from the lack of funds.

Looney Tunes

Because nobody gives a **** about "damaged goods."

.......if they did, things would be different than when I was in foster care...but same stuff, different day.

opedial

Because the capitalist society outsources everything, including children.

I could not imagine dealing with a privatized foster care system. Ick.

BOTZ

In my state there is EXACTLY one agency that deals with the state social services system (DHS/DCFS) in foster care. Additionally, they ONLY become involved in foster-to-adopt situations -- or those that will very likely become foster-to-adopt.

The state's own department handles all foster placements that have reunification as the current, primary goal.

Yes, the 'bonus' that is paid for 'clearing the books' is utterly revolting (even in its intention, let alone its use) and the over-prescription and overuse of medications in children is astounding and unconscionable.

When problems exist that are slow and difficult to solve, and rife with politics and money, humans get uncomfortable with the level of commitment required of them to SEE that change happens. That discomfort turns people away. Not okay...just true.

â™¥â™¥Ritaâ™¥â™¥

My state does not give out finders fees to agencies when a child is placed for adoption.....bu!!sh!t.

If this happens it happens in states where foster care is privatized and contracted. Not all states do that.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: