releases: http://reichert.house.gov/press-release/reichert-questions-inslee-administrations-foster-care-oversight
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| http://reichert.house.gov/press-release/reichert-questions-inslee-administrations-foster-care-oversight | Reichert Questions Inslee Administration's Foster Care Oversight | 2014-10-27 | 2014 | 2014-10 | Republican | House | WA | Dave Reichert | R000578 | reichert.house.gov | legacy | Issaquah, WA – Friday, U.S. Congressman Dave Reichert (WA-8), Chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources, sent a letter to Washington State Governor Jay Inslee inquiring about the effectiveness of the administration’s oversight of the state foster care system. The letter is intended to provide oversight on the use of goals and quality measures by the administration designed to ensure that Washington’s foster youth are receiving the best possible care. The Human Resources Subcommittee oversees the nation’s foster care system. Reichert has served as its chair since the beginning of the 113th Congress and in that capacity has introduced and passed several pieces of legislation, including the Preventing Sex Trafficking and Improving Opportunities for Youth in Foster Care Act (H.R. 4058), whose key provisions were signed into law as part of P.L. 113-183 in September. The full text of Reichert’s letter to Governor Inslee is below. _______________ Governor Jay Inslee Office of the Governor PO Box 40002 Olympia, WA 98504-0002 Dear Governor Inslee, Protecting the young people of Washington has been one of my top goals throughout my career in public service, both as the Sheriff of King County and during my time in Congress. Because of this, and as the Chairman of the House committee with jurisdiction over the nation’s foster care system, I am concerned about recent changes your Administration made in how Washington’s foster care system sets goals and measures its performance. I am writing to seek more information about these new goals and measurements in order to ensure that our State’s foster youth are receiving the best possible services . This past July, your administration released the Children’s Administration Strategic Metrics Plan through the Washington Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS). This plan replaces the metrics and outcomes set forth in the Braam Settlement Agreement that expired in December 2013. The Braam Settlement set tangible and ambitious goals that the foster care system was expected to achieve. In contrast, your Administration’s plan appears to take a less comprehensive approach to monitoring and measuring the achievement of the foster care system, both by having fewer metrics as well as by setting lower expectations for system performance than was the case under the Braam Settlement. In order to better understand your Administration’s motivation in making these changes, I respectfully request that you answer the following questions: 1. Why did your Administration oppose the extension of the Braam Settlement? 2. Why does your Administration’s plan not include 19 of the 21 metrics required under the Braam Settlement? Please provide your rationale for not including each of these 19 excluded metrics. 3. For the Braam Settlement metrics your plan chose to retain (i.e. caseloads per caseworker and monthly health and safety visits), why does your plan set lower expectations for system performance than under the Braam Settlement? For example, the Braam Settlement expected foster children to receive a private, individual face-to-face health and safety visit at least once per month. In contrast, your plan fails to require that such visits be private, individual or face-to-face. Why? 4. Why does your plan focus on simply gathering data, as opposed to holding the foster care system accountable for achieving specific outcomes designed to better protect children? For example, under the Braam Settlement, 90 percent of caseworkers were expected to have a caseload of 18 cases or fewer; under your Administration’s plan, the foster care system simply is expected to report the number of CPS workers with more than 25 cases. 5. Do you believe that a foster care evaluation model should include metrics that are “one-and-done” (with the responsibility of the State to measure outcomes expiring if the metric has been achieved even once), or should performance always be measured against key benchmarks, so that the program is always held accountable for achieving important goals and evaluation is always a part of program management? 6. Why does your plan lack a timeframe for improvement by DSHS? I believe that using metrics and holding a system like foster care accountable for achieving key goals is an important safeguard for children, and something that should be incorporated into ongoing program operation. I look forward to receiving your responses to the questions above, and to working with you to ensure that our State’s foster youth are properly protected so they can grow up and become thriving, successful members of our community. Sincerely, Dave Reichert Chairman | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |