Aging, Children and Youth, Legislative & Military Affairs- House

But we have, he has an amendment to that bill, um, that we will need to adopt first, so Representative Rye, if you will identify yourself, you are recognized to explain your amendment. Yes, ma'am. Uh oh, excuse me. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Glad to be with you today. Uh, the amendment is fairly simple. It's just a list of names, about 40 names that have added on to the our list of co-sponsors. Just a few, thank you. Oh. Oh OK, I think everyone has the amendment now. Are there any questions from committee on the amendment? Seeing none. Are you ready to close for your amendment? Yes, ma'am, and I really appreciate you. I want to explain just a tad to you, to you, Madam Chairman. This is actually an amendment. On the amendment? No, ma'am. OK, well, I need a motion to adopt the amendment. We have a motion to adopt the amendment. All in favor say aye, opposed no. Now you're recognized to present your bill. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Madam Chairman, this is basically just an extension of what we began back in 20019, of all the great singers, players in the state of Arkansas through the years and we picked up 5 new people that are actually should be in here that we're not there before. Yes, ma'am, I'm close. Are there any questions about committee? Representative Ry first. Oh, thank you, thank you, Chairman. Representative Wright, thank you for your um commitment to music in our state, such a key thing that I just, anyway, very important to human life, very important for us to continue to honor these people who've done a great thing, so I want to say thank you for that. Can you tell just a little bit about the people that we've managed to short summer of each one that we're adding this time, Representative Ryan dosentative Mary, we've got uh 5 people that were adding to the list and one is Albert King, which is a cousin of BB King. We have Justin Moore and Frank Seals, which are from Osceola and Royal Wade, uh, uh, chemist that's from, uh, Charlene Representative Charlene Foss area and then we have JR Rogers. So it's just folks that have actually got in here through the years and have made music a a great thing across our state. I have a follow-up chairman. So I don't, we don't have all day, but can you give us maybe one or two songs from those folks that we might remember or not, you don't have to sing it, but can you give us the titles of maybe corner two. Well, I can give you a song, but it won't be from these three, these 5, these are guitar players. Thank you. Any other questions by committee? Singan, is there anyone in the audience to speak for this bill? Against this bill Representative Ry, would you like to close for your bill? Madam Chairman, I'm closed. What's the will of the committee? Have a motion do pass all in favor say, I, I'm sorry, as amended, I have a motion do pass as amended. All in favor say aye. Oppose no. Congratulations, you passed your bill as amended. Thank you OK, committee, we're going to move to House Bill 1292. I represented Bentley. If you will. Introduce yourself, you will be recognized to present House Bill 1292. Thank you, Chairman of Committee. If it's OK with you, I'd like to bring Tiffany Wright from DHS to join me. She'll be able to explain the bill better than myself. Thank you. There you go. Hi, good morning. I'm Tiffany Wright. I'm the director for the division of Children and Family Services. And so this bill um is asking um to amend the residency requirements for adoptions and very specific populations of children who are in foster care, um, one of those populations is for um voluntary surrenders of infants under the age of 6 months, um, so when those children enter into foster care when we are ready, able to swiftly move them to permanency so they do not have to wait the 6 months, um, in foster care. in that home that's been selected to adopt them, um, this is a very small population that I'm talking about, um, the other part of this bill. is for um older youth who are in foster care waiting for adoption, um, we have seen where we have had um 17 year olds who are in programs like Job Corps, learning vocational skills, um, life skills, and, but they still desire to be adopted. They still desire to have a family, and many of them will have a case plan goal of APLA, which means another plane permanent living arrangement and a concurrent goal of adoption, but right. Now it's hard to seek out a family because we want them to essentially do both, right? And so, but the current requirement of the law says that they have to be in that adoptive home for 6 months. And so we're asking um for the, for the DCFS director to waive a residency requirement in very unique circumstances, um. So that those children and you, so those older youth can move to permanency through adoption and not age out of foster care without a family. Are there any questions by committee? Representative Eaton, you recognized. In this for the older kids, for example, I'd be worried about human trafficking. Is there any oversight on that? If you move to a family. Is there any oversight from you after that point? Um You mean once, once they're adopted, once their adoption finalizes? No. Once their adoption finalizes, that child is out of foster care. They exit foster care, um, to adoption. Follow up Um Also with that, I guess the vetting process to adopt in that. That's what I'm really concerned with. So, um, the, the normal process for adoption, um, seeking a family would be the same, so, um, these youth would go to adoption matching events through Project Zero. we would run what we call data matches to find appropriate families, right? And then, um, through that process we involve the court team, so that would be the attorney at Lytem if they have an assigned Cosa. And then if that team agrees, that's the collected family, then we would move them to permanency through adoption, but there's a lot of, there would be transition, there could be visits, things like that that would happen. It's not just a, oh, we found a family. Wave residency finalized. That's not what we're doing. We're still doing the entire process. We're just asking that we not have to wait till they turn 18 or 19 to finalize adoption if they choose to stay in foster care. Representative Tore recognized for a question. Yes, thank you. How will medically necessary health care be defined and then who decides if a child uh qualifies for this residential. Exemption. So medically necessary is already been in there, so that could be um if we have kids who are, um, need treatment, so mental health treatment and they're out of the home, but they were with the family, that interrupts that time of the 6 months, so the 6 months is consecutive and so when they need to exit the home for treatment or different things, then the 6 months is not consecutively happening. So is follow up. So, so this is defined somewhere else in the code as far as what, OK, and then for um sorry, I didn't answer the second part of your question. So the final decision is, it's asking the DCFS director to waive the residency requirement, but no adoption can finalize on our state without a juvenile judge. And so the court team would be heavily involved there. So while I say yes, they may say, I have some more questions, so no adoption can finalize in this state without a juvenile judge approving it and signing that. order of decree. OK. Follow up. Um, when, when it comes to the older children, um. As it relates to the life skills technical and vocational programs that they may be in who verifies that? I mean, how is that verified? Um, so, every, uh, child in foster care is keyed into an approved placement, so they all have to be in an approved placement and that's defined in another part of the law around what is an approved placement, um, through the child welfare licensing review board, and, and they have to meet certain standards, so they would be in those programs, um, for life skills, and they're your common ones. like Job Corps. That's a big one that comes out because I've had a couple of kids, um, at Job Corps and so that's you typically a one that we see where they're engaging and still want to be adopted. I actually have one right now. Thank you Representative McGruder, he recognized for a question. Uh, thank you, um. Thank you, Chair. I'm no expert on this, so I'm trying to get clarity uh in this situation, uh, got an email from a constituent with some concerns. So my first question is uh. What is the need of this uh. Bill. So this is a very small population of kids, um, but when it does happen, um, we wanna be able to have the flexibility. So like I can think back to maybe 2 or 3 kids and then like I said, I have 1 right now who still wishes to be adopted and she, um, is in a vocational program, um, so really while it is a small population of kids, um, it aligns with our values at DCFS about children needing, uh, children and youth needing families and Not aging out of the system, um, and with that one, because that's really what it's about, right? It's about that when you leave foster care, if you choose to at 18, you don't really have anyone. OK, and a follow up. Uh, does this, uh, Strip away any rights of the parents or the family members that want to uh adopt. So this is post-termination of parental rights. So adoption can't happen until a juvenile judge has said parental rights are terminated. So this is already after, um, family members have been vetted and and approved or not approved and that we're down, we're further down the stream, um, related to these kids, what you, where this comes from this population I'm talking about today are some of what we call long stayers who've been in. foster care for an extended period of time. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. McClure, you recognize her question. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, just a ballpark number again focusing on the older kids when they hit 16, about what percentage age out of and it's still still in the system, not adopted. I mean, Actually have that. Oh, thank you. Um, about, um, so in last state fiscal year, uh 177 children aged out of foster care. OK. Um, In your opinion, How, how many of these kids? Because the timelines were too long on the adoption process for the older kids, perhaps lost a family. That's hard to, it's hard for me to I just does it happen? Let's put that, I would say it could happen, um, it does happen, I think, waiting in foster care to find your forever family is disheartening. It's hard. You feel like no one's advocating for you and so if we have a window to advocate, we should definitely do that because permanency matters for kids. Thank you. Representative Torres, you recognize. Is there a provision to see the effectiveness of this program and if any adjustments need to be made in the future. Is that possible or? Um And We could probably track it somehow, um, just, you know, separately, again, it's small, um, I don't know that we'll necessarily hear about it a lot, but I think, I mean, we could always do follow up. Y'all could ask me if I've had any or somehow some level of tracking, um, since I'll be approving them, I will know if it if it's being used, that kind of thing. Again, it's very small population. Well, thank you. I'm just trying to, yeah, I understand how this works and I just wondered, you know, we always in the business world, we tend to do things and make changes and then it's always nice to know, have a feedback loop but did those changes really do what we intended them to do and so that's why I wanted to ask. I think one way you would see that is, um, watching older youth be adopted and um y'all will, um, those of you who are new to the committee after session, I'll get to present all kinds of beautiful charts and reports to you, um, every, uh, almost every other month and quarterly reports in state reports and so you'll start to see some of that and we really dive into that data, but always happy to meet outside of committee to talk about it if you have specific questions. You're welcome. Are there any other questions by committee? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't see you. Representative Springer, you're recognized. Good morning. Good morning. Thank you, Madam Chair. And you and I have already spoke this right about the concerns that I received, so you were going to take care of that. Am I correct? You gonna make contact with that parent. Well, I'm going, I'm going to share the information back with you. OK, alright, thank you so much. Any other questions by committee? OK, we do have a couple signed up to speak on the bill. Um, first, JP Tribble. To speak on the bill if you will recognize yourself, identify yourself, you'll be recognized. Good morning. Uh, Madam Chair and members of the committee. My name is JP Tribble. I'm an adoption attorney here in Little Rock, um, I have been working the field of adoption for, uh, this is my 13th year and have been practicing as a licensed attorney for 8, I've also been involved in adoption legislation, uh, since 2019. 1st of all, I'd like to make clear to the committee I'm not here to speak against the bill. Uh, from abroad matter of principle and philosophy. I believed that the bill is has good intentions, um, I do want to clarify that my practice is exclusively limited to private adoptions and primarily that would be non-relative adoptions. So we're not talking about stepparent adoptions and things of that nature, uh, would be any private. placement where a birth mother or birth parents would decide to place their children and adoption consumes about 85 to 90% of my practice. So having said that, uh, the reason I would like to speak on the bill, I would like to explain a little background, um, I do think it's probably a good idea for the Department of Human Services as they have proposed to split. Arkansas code 99213 up, 99 213 uh, addresses, uh, the residency requirements of minors to be adopted. It makes sense to split that between DHS adoptions where the state of Arkansas has legal custody of the children and private adoptions where the state is not involved. Um, Having said that, uh, I was involved in legislation, uh, in the last general assembly. In which there was a carveout created for children under the age of 6 months, uh, and that says that a six-month residency requirement is not required if a child to be adopted is less than 6 months of age at the time the petition for adoption is filed. The reason for that in this really, I would say applies in DHS adoptions and private adoptions is that if a child is removed from a home for reasons of abuse or neglect, obviously, that child has undergone a certain amount of uh trauma and they may have collateral mental health or emotional trauma issues. Uh, it's a good idea. that that child live in the proposed adoptive home to make sure that the adoptive parents and the child are a good fit. Um, when you're dealing with newborns, essentially children under the age of 6 months, uh, in particular where the parents, uh, Voluntarily place their child or in the alternative when we're speaking about DHS if a parent abandons their child, there isn't that emotional trauma. That occurs to the child, therefore, the 6 month waiting period is meaningless. That was the reason for this carve out in the last legislative session. The reason I'm here to speak on the bill is when, when 1292 was proposed, there's some language that was omitted in the section that would apply to private adoptions which the adoption attorneys I worked together with and myself agree we believe it was unintentional, but would have an effect on private adoptions. We are here before the committee to ask that that language be added back into the bill and the currently in 99213 says it's under, under the present law under section C1. This section does not apply to a minor who is less than 6 months of age at the time the petition for adoption is filed and under Uh, under the proposed bill. Section 992 13. A 2 Be says this subsection does not apply if the minor to be adopted is less than 6 months of age, it omitted at the time the petition for adoption is filed. So my only ask to the sponsors of the bill is that we have the language, it would be on um line 33 of the bill as amended. To have that read less than 6 months of age at the time the petition for adoption is filed. So having said that, I'm certainly open to any questions the committee may have. Other questions for this witness by the committee? Seeing no, thank you for your test. Oh, OK. Thank you, Chairman. Since I'm a member of the committee, I thought I would ask the question now since over there thinking in my brain, um. Would it be OK with you if we move this forward and then check with BLR to see exactly where we needed to place that wording because I think, I think it may be addressed, but, um, further up in there, but I don't have a lawyer here from there to verify that, so, so, uh, the, the language is mentioned earlier in the bill, but it says that for a child over 6 months of age, um, It, it says that uh the decree the final decree of adoption shall not be entered in an interlocutory decree of adoption does not become final until the minor has lived in the home for at least 6 months after a child placement agency licensed under the Child Welfare Agency Licensing Act or the petition for adoption is filed. That is governing a child who's over the age of 6 months. The issue at hand here is for children who are under the age of 6 months. I can give an example of how this would apply in real life. So you have a newborn. A child where the birth mother is desiring to place the child for adoption. Let's say she's been estranged from her husband for Years, 5 years. Uh, they don't live together, neither of them are aware of the other person's whereabouts, but, uh, for example, for financial reasons, they never got divorced. The birth mother has a partner and she becomes pregnant technically outside of marriage and she decides and her partner decide that they cannot, uh, for whatever their personal reasons are, keep the child and they want to place the child for adoption. Under the adoption code, notice is required to be given to the birth mother's estranged husband because he is still the legal father. What would happen in most cases is There would be an effort to find him and serve him with notice of hearing of the adoption and uh he of course would have the opportunity to consent, but the reality is oftentimes you can't find the birth father or excuse me, you can't find the birth mother's husband, who is not the birth father and publication has to be done uh in the newspaper for 4 consecutive weeks prior to the hearing for adoption. What would happen if you have out of state adoptive parents in this case. Then the attorneys would have to uh file an ICP ICPC request through the interstate placement on compact of children for the Arkansas Compact Administrator being the sending state, the home state, uh, the receiving state administrator in the adoptive parent state to approve the child returning to the home state. Pardon me, to approve the child returning to the adoptive parent state. To stay pending notice being given to the legal father through publication and hearing set that may be months down the road, then they would come back to Arkansas for the final hearing. Under present law, irrespective of when that hearing would be set. The decree could be finalized as soon as uh the hearing takes place. With the language being removed in the proposed bill, if the child were to surpass 6 months at that time, then you would have to wait another 6 months until the adoption could be finalized and there's no. sense for that happening because there's no trauma that has occurred to the child. It's just a waste of judicial economy for To have this pending for another 6 months. There, there's no point behind it. So all we're asking is that that language be added back into line 33. Representative Springer, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, since we have uh the director here, Ms. Wright, can you Speak to the the concern that has been voiced here you wanting to wait for legal counsel. Do you have any objections to what he's suggested. Do you have to wait for counsel? We can wait till to the closing at the end if that's OK, and we'll address it at that point. I think we have some other people here to talk, so at the end we'll address it, OK? All right, thank you. So may I make one clarification, uh, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, the, if you look in the bill that is under section 1A, just to be absolutely clear, this only applies to non-DHS adoptions, as it says in the very first line in an adoption where the child is not in custody of the Department of Human Services under subsection B would be all the language that applies specifically to children. in the department's custody. This would have no effect on that. So Any further questions? Seeing no further questions, thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam Chair. We also have Candy Cox signed up to speak on the bill. Excuse me. If you will introduce yourself, tell us who you're with. You're recognized. Got to turn myself on. Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Candy Cox and um I am the president of ABA Adoption, which is a child placement agency here in the state of Arkansas. Uh, we were founded in 2004, um, and I have been working in adoptions since uh 2 let's see, 2001 and so a lot of uh a lot of time spent in adoption. I basically here just as JP. to speak on this language that applies to uh child placement agencies and private adoption, not with DHS. So given the example that he just gave on a mother who may be married and how this would affect that finalization when the child has been in the home, um, another example of that would be, um, as I just had recently is a mom makes an adoption plan. She uh places uh the child for adoption and then so the child goes directly into the home from birth, but then there is um a a father that comes and uh tries to intervene into the adoption, then we have to go through the process of uh those hearings which can take months and some time, so this child at the time of adoption was 7 months. If we go with the way that the language is being proposed here and and stricken out from what it has been prior, that child would have to go, would be in the home for another 6 months after uh we went to court and the child's already been in the home for 7, so again, Mr. JP and I both are in agreement that we would just like for that language to go back to what it was, we believe that it was, you know, unintended but unintended can have some major consequences when it comes to private adoptions. And I'm happy to take any questions as well. Thank you. Are there any questions by committee? Singing Nan, thank you for your testimony. Thank you very much. Excuse me. Is there anyone else in the audience here to speak for or against the bill? Please introduce yourself and tell us who you're with and then you're recognized. Excuse me, is your microphone on? No. Thank you. OK, so I'll start over. My name is Priscilla Hardaway, and I have two relatives that are held in foster care. They're just holding them hostage. They have no reason to be there. I've already adopted their sibling, um, I've contacted several members of the committee. I've contacted uh Director Wright, um, Misha Martin, when she was the director, um, I'm here to speak against the bill. The department. can bypass any law that they want and hold children for as long as they want. This is just government overreach, they can adopt a person's relatives out to strangers without even trying to place the kid with the relative and the sibling. I've had 3 home studies done on my home. Passed every home study. I'm an educator past every background check passed every malnutrition check and they are still holding my relatives in foster care. Ma'am, I'm gonna pause you for a second and just ask you a question. I understand this is very emotional and personal to you, but are these examples you're giving? Do they pertain to this bill? They're younger than 6 months or they or they're older than younger than 6 months. Now they're older because they're holding them there and if this bill passes, other families are gonna be affected, they can just take a child from a relative place that child into in a a handpicked foster home that they want the child to be with and adopt. That child down immediately without even trying to have placement for relatives. This does not preserve families. This does nothing to keep children with their relatives, only 9% of children in foster care are being adopted by relatives. They're being given to strangers. Handpicked by the department and if you have the director approving adoptions just at will that pushes the the biological family out that cuts all ties, all connections with the biological family. Um, I see. Are you willing to take questions? Yes. Representative Torres, you recognize? Thank you. I've got a clarifying question this bill pertains to an adoption where child is not in the custody of Department of Human Service. So I'm a little confused. So are you saying that your family members are not in the or they are in the custody they are in the custody, but they were not supposed to be in the custody. The bill talks about them not being in custody and being in the custody of the department, the bill that I read laid out that the director would have authority to sign off on an adoption. Follow up. Yeah, so, but, but this legislation has to do with children that are not in the custody of DHS. So that's where I'm I'm confused. Madam Chairman, Are there any other questions by committee? Seeingan, thank you for your testimony today. OK, that's all we have to speak for or against or on the bill. So Representative Bentley, would you like to close for your bill? Chairman with the uh preview of the committee, I would like to pull this bill and address the one's concerned from our private adoption agencies. We are both so pro adoption, um, very much so. I want our kids to be able to put in adoption if necessary. So, um, given that question on there, we're gonna pull it back and visit with attorneys to make sure we get the wording right where it needs to be, and we'll bring it back if it's OK with the committee. We'll pull the bill and get that one question answered to make sure private adoptions get what they need because that's the last thing we want to do is causing an issue with our private adoption agencies in the state. I think that would a lot of the concerns of the committee as well as the ones who have testified, and we appreciate your willingness to do this and work on this, and you're pro adoptive stance. Thank you. Thank you very much. OK, committee, uh, we have no other bills, but we're gonna let Director Wright stay at the end of the table. She's going to just introduce herself, give you a small update on kind of what's new at DCFS. Yes, good morning. Um, so, uh, in my previous introduction, I'm Tiffany Wright and the director for division and Children and Family Services, um, just a little bit about myself, um. Um, I have been with DCFS for 15 years and started and the front lines fresh out of college, um, and worked my way through the um through different positions and just learning about the job and um where I got to where I am today. Um, so there is a lot, it's hard to say just one thing going on at DCFS or um tell everything that's going on, but always happy to have um conversations and share more about the work that we're doing. So I tried to go through. And just give some high level um things that are happening. So I think first and foremost, um, one of our, one of our core values is that we believe that every child in our state deserves a safe, stable family every day, and we put that work into um what I say is 3 buckets and so um safety permanency and well-being, um, for, for all kids in our state, um, and then a 4th 1 that's also very important, which is the workforce. So without a strong healthy workforce, um, permanency, safety and well-being, and, you know, it all kind of intertwines together. And so, um, I just some high level um data around kind of what's going on in the in these three buckets. So around safety, so last state fiscal year, there were 29,000 reports that came in off the child abuse hotline 24,000 of those are assigned to DCFS to um initiate and see alleged victims and ensure their safety across the state at the end, um. Of the state fiscal year, we had served uh um just over 9000 kids in their homes with their parents and providing them key prevention services. So one thing we've been really focusing on for the last um several years is how do we keep kids safe in their homes, in their communities and drive a community network in order to serve these families and so with the support of uh this committee, um, and many others, and we've had some key prevention efforts go into place. One of those is something. called intensive in-home services, which is a contract, um, that we have with 3 providers in our state who. Um, are providing key services around safety and then it kind of in an intense way to prevent removal. Um, we also have implemented Safecare across our state for the young population of children, um, younger kids, and then, um, continuing our work with 100 families or restore Hope. Hopefully you know what that is, but they're in 19 counties across our state doing key community um collective impact and really making a difference in both the reunification space. And in the prevention space, um, and really doing a great job of putting all community partners together in a room at a table and in um figuring out how do we engage and network, um, and works amongst each other. him, then of course, um, as it relates to the continued safety of kids who always working on our relationship with the child advocacy centers across the state and ensuring that DCFS is a team member on the MDT, which is a multidisciplinary team, um, those are very important, um. That's those are that's a very important resource and effort for DCFS. Um, we are also still, um, some of you may remember when we started rolling out structured decision making and safety organized practice. Uh, next month we're gonna get to start what we call the back end tools of that, which means, so right now we've been focusing on when our report is accepted at the hotline. Through investigation to those in-home cases. Now we're gonna start working on the back end tools around um. Foster care and safety and assessing how kids are safely returned to their parents, and that will be a big, um, systems change as it relates to the case plan and things that you might hear about, um, when we're working with families on what do they need to remedy the reasons that cause removal. Um, at the end of December we had officially rolled out team decision making, which falls underneath the umbrella of structured decision making. We were able to fill all of our positions, um, and have, um, team the team decision making model, which means when we're um doing an immediate safety plan or a removal we call what's uh we call a team decision making meeting and community partners come to the table, the family brings to the table who they would like to bring and we see what we can do in order to prevent that. if there's anything that we can do and how do we navigate that, um, around safety and does the family have commit a committed circle of support to help them while we make those critical decisions. Um, as of last Monday, we were at 3,398 children and youth in foster care. Um As at the end of January, 39.3% of those children um were with relative placements, um, that's, that is huge, um, my, I have a much higher goal than that because I do believe that children and youth need to be with their relatives that are safe and appropriate, um, and then, um, what you'll see is 38% of our adoptions are by relatives, um, and that is in the um annual report card that I'm happy to share with this committee, uh. That I had already presented but happy to reshare. Um And we, um, and that related to that 39% um we have really been trying to focus on, uh, we have a state goal, but then like how do we get counties and how do we get those counties to move through and really navigate what's happening with relatives and so we've been doing some very strategic meetings with our counties to to do that work. Um, and then of course this past November we hit underneath 200 children and youth available for adoption in our state. That's true waiting kids, so you might look at my annual report card and say you have over 200, well, we have a formula we use of about 20% we take off um for relatives um. And those are true kids that were doing active work around finding them a family, so making sure they're on the heart gallery, um, seeking out waiting families, trying to make appropriate matches and transition through adoption. And then we did, um, we, I had a staff person and I want to share a little bit. She's um very special to DCFS. She's been with us for several years, but she wrote in and said, I really think I could do some more work around permanency and how we move some, um, kids in foster care, um, long what we call long stays, kids who've been waiting in foster care longer than 24 months to permanency. And so we, um, shifted and let her job really become about case mining and looking at these long stayers in foster care and um we have Over over since that's been 2 years now, she is finalized some serious, um, adoptions and found families or family members that had been prior executed excluded years before back bringing them back, um, and so I'm just want to like these are the list of kids that she found that she um helped bring to permanency. I'm gonna read you your names because like they are real kids in our system that are home. Jose, Kimberly, Andre, Lucas, Diana, Ace, Nadia, faith and loyalty, Harold, Aden. Um, Jay and Jacob, and so those are some of our more complex kids y'all who were able to go home to a family and are safely home with a forever family or so of their family members, so just very strategic work that she's doing, um, and really keep, um, I keep her going. It's hard some days because she's dealing with different things and and see some of the hardest cases, but she's working diligently and very grateful for her work and we actually added to her, made a little another team um to enhance. that permanency work because it's very important to us, um. And then we are just continuing to listen to voices of the system, listen to people's experience and how do we make positive systems change and so we have a parent advisory council of parents who've been impacted by the system. Uh, we also have a youth advisory board with our youth who are impacted by the system and really listening to them. And then um we have amazing um partners across the state who are part of every Child Arkansas and really trying to figure out how do they help us get volunteers to help with certain things. How do we keep on foster parent recruitment and enhancing that um work and so, um, They are working um all together um as a collaborative and really trying to figure out what, what do we do to continue to enhance the foster parents we have across our state, um. And then hopefully in a couple of weeks we'll be announcing a connection campaign because we believe that kids who are in foster care should live as normal of a lifestyle as possible, and that means having connections even if you can't be with a relative or a fictive skin, um, and so what does that look like and how do we make your life normal as possible while you're in our system, so we've been working on that. Um, and then Related to workforce, um. We do have, we still have significant vacancies across the state, um, we are working through, we're um excitedly awaiting what will happen related to the pay plan, um, because we think that will be impactful. We're also exploring ways how we keep our staff safe while they're doing the work across the state as well as how do we be about their wellness because they see some of the worst things, um, I remember from my time, um, in the field that they, um, of what I saw, um, and so how do we help them? their own secondary trauma compassion, fatigue, so they can continue to do this work because without a healthy workforce, um, we, we won't succeed for kids in our state. And so, um, We, we, there's a model that 112 of them will be trained on this month, which is called Cert, which is a, um, it's tied it stands for uh we love acronyms at DCFS too. You'll have to learn that, um, components of enhancing clinical engagement in reducing trauma, so I can tell you what that's all about if you want to know more, um, but we are, um, there are some real heroes across the state. I think when we get to our levels we sometimes only hear all the things that are going wrong, and I have to try and remind myself that there are bright. spots and there are a lot of heroes doing work, so that's all I got. Sorry, I just rambled. I don't think anyone considers that rambling. Um, we appreciate your OK. A Uh, we appreciate your kind of impromptu. I didn't give her a whole lot of notice. I gave her a little notice to give it. Uh, are you willing to take questions on what you've told us today, not questions from everywhere, but just on what you've presented today, does anyone have a question on what she's presented and talked about today. Must have done a great job. OK, I'm happy to connect with you, um, if you, um, Blake has my cell phone number if you want to find me. I'm happy to have conversations, um, if you're frustrated about something happening or constituent is calling you. I'm happy to navigate that and look into what's going on and um support how I can and give and make sure you have all sides of the story. Thank you, Director Wright. Thank you for your support. This committee has historically been very supportive to our work and we can't do this without you. So thank y'all. Thank you and for what you do. OK. Committee, we, um, are going to recess. Um, without objection we're going to recess for 5 minutes. Hopefully have an amendment to the bill so we can go ahead and take care of that language and that bill today and not postpone that any later. So with that, we're adjourned or recessed, sorry, wrong word. I won't gabble for the recess. I'm just waving this for fun. OK, if you'll take your seats. Committee will come out of recess. And we need to address the amendment to House Bill 1292. The amendment is coming around to you members. OK, I believe all the members have a copy of the amendment, Representative Bentley, you'll introduce yourself again, you're recognized to present your amendment. Chair and committee, thank you so much. I appreciate the opportunity to get this fixed today so we can move this bill forward. If you guys remember on on line 33 on the front page, we had there for those children that are not in DHS custody. We wanted to make sure in subsection 2 this is less than 6 months of age at the time of the petition was filed for adoption, so we did exactly what those folks asked us to. do this amendment without that I'd appreciate a good vote on the amendment and take any questions if anybody had any. Are there any questions on the amendment? Representative Torres, you recognize. Can I make a motion to pass on this amendment? No other questions? Yes Make that motion. We have a motion do pass on the amendment. All in favor say aye, opposed no. Congratulations, you've adopted your amendment and now you're recognized to present House Bill 1292 as amended. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you committee. Again, this is a bill very targeted bill to help us get children into permanency in their homes as quick as possible. Again, very narrow, very targeted, and, and as always the judge has a final say none of these adoptions will take place without the juvenile court going through their due process to make sure we're getting these children into good homes and with that I'd appreciate, I will make a motion to pass since it's my bill in my committee, I'm a commission to pass, and I appreciate your support. As amended do pass as amended. I don't think there are, but is there anyone in the audience who would now wish to speak for or against the bill. OK, seeing none, you're closed for your bill. I'm closed. Thank you, Chairman. And she made a motion to pass all as amended. All in favor say aye, opposed no. Thank you, Representative Bentley, and congratulations,