Valley Courier Navajo adoption raises questions:
ALAMOSA — An attempt by foster parents to terminate parental rights and adopt a half-Navajo child has resulted in a jurisdictional question in the Alamosa County Court: Does the case stay in the Alamosa District Court or should it be moved to the Navajo Nation’s Tribal Judicial System?
Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
Saturday, October 22, 2011
Friday, October 21, 2011
Social Security Funds Being Used to Fund Child Welfare Fraud
Social Security Funds Being Used to Fund Child Welfare Fraud « Government RICO:
A major concern in foster care has been the number of placements a child must experience. Children are often moved multiple times during the length of stay in foster care. There are community organizations which design programs to assist with the emotional moves of these children. Children’s Rights has advocated for a reduction in the number of foster care placements in the courts.
Now, let’s step back and take a look at other possible reasons for multiple foster care placements of children.
Fraud. Yes, fraud.
Under Title IV-E methodologies, the relocation of a foster child to another foster home is an administrative cost. These costs, rarely found outside of the eyes of the child placing agencies, are false.
Title IV-E is a Federal Entitlement program for poor and destitute children to provide these children with food and shelter. Funding is taken from social security funds. Yes social security funds. Unlike other entitlement programs, this is an open ended program meaning that there are unlimited funds not subject to any cap. So there has been a concerted effort to maximize funds from Title IV-E because it’s an endless pit of funds as deep as social security itself.
The Title IV-E a/k/a social security fraud works like this: A child is placed in a foster home, then, the child is moved, for whatever reason a case worker can conjure, and placed in a new home. That administrative placement activity is then, billed, under Title IV-E payment rates.
Children are often placed in stranger foster parent homes rather than with relatives as relative placements do not fall under foster care payment structures. In English, if a state places a child with a relative, it loses out on foster care Title IV-E aka social security money. So the incentive is to place a child with strangers and move the child around (at least on paper) to jack up administrative costs reimbursed by the Feds (aka taxpayer) rather than place the child with family. Thus the main reason why states have been unsuccessful in adopting policies where a child is placed with family rather than strangers is that the State makes more money placing the child with strangers. Therefore child welfare practices is what’s good for the State’s budget, not what’s good for the child.
How States Take the Fraud Further and Maximize Their Theft of Taxpayer Monies While Failing to Provide for the Foster Child
Placing children with strangers is such a simplistic reimbursable cost activity that the administrative actors then take it to the next level. A child is placed with strangers and then the State falsifies the child’s documents by reporting that the child necessitated multiple placements thus jacking up the administrative expenses associated with placing the child, when, in actuality, the child remained in one placement.
To validate these allegations, one must possess the authority to contemporaneously review court case files and the child placing agency administrative cost filings to the state. As the court documents are, in some instances, under seal, or impossible to access due (i.e. shredding, lost, misplaced, stolen, FOIA). Thus the massive amounts of fraud in child welfare is being shield by child secrecy and protection laws thus the laws intended to protect the child are being used to hide the fraud taking place at the expense of the child and taxpayers.
Then, layer this with the name of God and impenetrable iron curtain of child welfare destroying the innate concepts of transparency and accountability, and you have the makings of a fraud scheme in child welfare. All billing in child welfare is a secret.
Package this particular “revenue-maximization scheme” in the lack of state administrative oversight of these privatized contracts and rates (see p.4 allegation #4), and you have identified the financial incentives for multiple placements in foster care (whether true or false claims).
www.bevertran.blogspot.com
A major concern in foster care has been the number of placements a child must experience. Children are often moved multiple times during the length of stay in foster care. There are community organizations which design programs to assist with the emotional moves of these children. Children’s Rights has advocated for a reduction in the number of foster care placements in the courts.
Now, let’s step back and take a look at other possible reasons for multiple foster care placements of children.
Fraud. Yes, fraud.
Under Title IV-E methodologies, the relocation of a foster child to another foster home is an administrative cost. These costs, rarely found outside of the eyes of the child placing agencies, are false.
Title IV-E is a Federal Entitlement program for poor and destitute children to provide these children with food and shelter. Funding is taken from social security funds. Yes social security funds. Unlike other entitlement programs, this is an open ended program meaning that there are unlimited funds not subject to any cap. So there has been a concerted effort to maximize funds from Title IV-E because it’s an endless pit of funds as deep as social security itself.
The Title IV-E a/k/a social security fraud works like this: A child is placed in a foster home, then, the child is moved, for whatever reason a case worker can conjure, and placed in a new home. That administrative placement activity is then, billed, under Title IV-E payment rates.
Children are often placed in stranger foster parent homes rather than with relatives as relative placements do not fall under foster care payment structures. In English, if a state places a child with a relative, it loses out on foster care Title IV-E aka social security money. So the incentive is to place a child with strangers and move the child around (at least on paper) to jack up administrative costs reimbursed by the Feds (aka taxpayer) rather than place the child with family. Thus the main reason why states have been unsuccessful in adopting policies where a child is placed with family rather than strangers is that the State makes more money placing the child with strangers. Therefore child welfare practices is what’s good for the State’s budget, not what’s good for the child.
How States Take the Fraud Further and Maximize Their Theft of Taxpayer Monies While Failing to Provide for the Foster Child
Placing children with strangers is such a simplistic reimbursable cost activity that the administrative actors then take it to the next level. A child is placed with strangers and then the State falsifies the child’s documents by reporting that the child necessitated multiple placements thus jacking up the administrative expenses associated with placing the child, when, in actuality, the child remained in one placement.
To validate these allegations, one must possess the authority to contemporaneously review court case files and the child placing agency administrative cost filings to the state. As the court documents are, in some instances, under seal, or impossible to access due (i.e. shredding, lost, misplaced, stolen, FOIA). Thus the massive amounts of fraud in child welfare is being shield by child secrecy and protection laws thus the laws intended to protect the child are being used to hide the fraud taking place at the expense of the child and taxpayers.
Then, layer this with the name of God and impenetrable iron curtain of child welfare destroying the innate concepts of transparency and accountability, and you have the makings of a fraud scheme in child welfare. All billing in child welfare is a secret.
Package this particular “revenue-maximization scheme” in the lack of state administrative oversight of these privatized contracts and rates (see p.4 allegation #4), and you have identified the financial incentives for multiple placements in foster care (whether true or false claims).
www.bevertran.blogspot.com
Child allegedly abused, killed by adoptive parents honored
WSVN-TV - Child allegedly abused, killed by adoptive parents honored:
SOUTHWEST MIAMI-DADE, Fla. (WSVN) -- The 10-year-old girl who police said was beaten to death by her adoptive parents, is being remembered with a street dedication.
Read more:
SOUTHWEST MIAMI-DADE, Fla. (WSVN) -- The 10-year-old girl who police said was beaten to death by her adoptive parents, is being remembered with a street dedication.
Read more:
N.H.-Life of Welfare benefits reduced from five years to three
Life of Welfare benefits reduced from five years to three:
The House Commerce Committee voted Thursday to reduce the lifetime of Welfare benefits from five years to three, although it does allow recipients to apply for a waiver and does not apply to children.
The House Commerce Committee voted Thursday to reduce the lifetime of Welfare benefits from five years to three, although it does allow recipients to apply for a waiver and does not apply to children.
Fed grant supports foster care program
Fed grant supports foster care program:
"FARGO (AP) - A $1.5 million federal grant will help extend a North Dakota program aimed at reducing American Indian families' need for foster care.
"FARGO (AP) - A $1.5 million federal grant will help extend a North Dakota program aimed at reducing American Indian families' need for foster care.
Deal reached to help older foster care children
Deal reached to help older foster care children - WSJ.com:
NEW YORK — New York City has reached an agreement on a proposed settlement of a lawsuit that claimed it allowed foster care children to fall into homelessness after leaving the system at age 18.
NEW YORK — New York City has reached an agreement on a proposed settlement of a lawsuit that claimed it allowed foster care children to fall into homelessness after leaving the system at age 18.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)