AUSTIN — Plaintiffs in a long-running child-welfare lawsuit are again asking a federal judge to hold Texas in contempt of court, this time for what they cite as ignoring “glaring safety risks” in state foster care pointed out by her own monitors.
Lawyers for foster children have urged U.S. District Judge Janis Graham Jack to require the Department of Family and Protective Services, and a separate unit that inspects foster homes and other care facilities, to show why they shouldn’t be held in contempt for failing to make sweeping changes she’s demanded.
On Saturday, though, department spokesman Patrick Crimmins said last month’s critical report by court-appointed monitors fails to recognize “round-the-clock efforts made to comply” with Jack’s orders. The department will give the judge more details soon, he said.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers cited 10 different deficiencies in investigations, documenting of children’s and providers’ histories and state workers’ caseloads.
Rookie Child Protective Services workers who manage the cases and treatment plans of abused kids in state care are supposed to be given “graduated caseloads” as they learn on the job. But monitors found that 31% are carrying more cases as of their 15th day on the job than they’re supposed to, plaintiffs noted.
The state has failed to give such CPS workers rapid alerts when there’s an investigation into whether children they’re responsible for have been maltreated, plaintiffs said. Also, the state’s still not adequately documenting whether a foster child is exposed to sexually aggressive peers, they said.
“The epidemic of child-on-child sexual abuse will continue to rage in Texas foster care until it is acknowledged by the State and seriously addressed,” they said in a motion filed in Corpus Christi late Thursday.
Also, the Health and Human Services Commission unit that regulates foster-care providers acknowledged to Jack’s monitors that it lacks sufficient employees and information technology capabilities to analyze patterns of past contract and policy violations, the plaintiffs complained. Jack has ordered “heightened monitoring” of shoddy providers.
Jack, who slapped the state with $150,000 in fines last fall for not ensuring there are nighttime watches of kids in group settings, has said she’ll have a hearing in Dallas soon to discuss the report by her monitors, Kevin Ryan and Deborah Fowler.
Spokesmen for Gov. Greg Abbott did not respond to a request for comment. The Health and Human Services Commission, also a defendant in the 9-year-old suit, referred a reporter to Attorney General Ken Paxton. His office did not rebut the plaintiffs’ latest allegations.
Department spokesman Crimmins called the monitors’ report “extremely unfortunate.”
Among other failings, it “does not represent the literal round-the-clock efforts made to comply,” he said. “To the best of our ability, and considering child welfare practices, we have used the resources generously provided by the Legislature to meet the Court’s orders. We will be sharing details about all of these efforts with the Court while we continue to work with the monitors.”
Plaintiffs’ lawyers, though, said, “Shockingly, the report reveals widespread failings by the State to comply with the orders and tragic harm to children.” They urged Jack to impose “substantial monetary penalties” if the state doesn’t cure the violations of her orders within 30 days.
‘Priority None’
In one instance, though, they didn’t call for fines, instead listing improvements they said Jack should order immediately — to “secondary screenings” of reports about mistreatment of foster kids to the state’s child-abuse hotline.
The department’s Residential Child Care Investigations unit, or RCCI, looks into such tips, but only after verifying that the hotline correctly pinned “Priority 1” or “Priority 2” labels on them.
If not, a report is deemed “Priority None.” RCCI hands it off to the commission’s inspectors, but only for scrutiny as a possible minimum standards violation — more of a wrist slap, though monetary penalties for a provider are possible.
Of a sample of 174 reports that RCCI downgraded from investigation to no investigation, monitors determined that 33% were inappropriately downgraded to Priority None.
Last October, they said, a 17-year-old girl at an undisclosed location “got pills from other foster care residents and tried to overdose because she felt unsafe at the facility and mistreated by staff,” plaintiffs’ lawyers wrote. Also, according to the monitors’ report, hotline workers were told “she tried to swallow an ink pen.”
But RCCI talked to the girl’s roommate, who reportedly said she “faked” the suicide attempt, and then downgraded the allegation to Priority None. The monitors, though, said the case merited a neglect investigation because “other foster children were keeping their pills with them against policy, which raises concerns about appropriate supervision.”
Jack should “suspend all secondary screenings” by RCCI and make the unit thoroughly probe all hotline intakes slotted for investigation, “using the same standards” applied by CPS child-abuse investigators who probe reports of maltreatment in the community at large, the plaintiffs’ lawyers said.
Failure to prioritize and hustle on tips about possible danger to foster children “causes children to be harmed or face a substantial risk of serious harm,” they wrote.
