JEFFERSON CITY 鈥 State welfare officials would be prohibited from taking as much as $9 million in federal benefits granted to children in foster care programs under legislation advancing in the Missouri House.
In action Monday, the House gave first-round approval to legislation affecting an estimated 1,300 of the 12,000 kids in foster care.
The measure, which mirrors similar changes enacted in other states, would stop officials from taking Social Security benefits owed to the children for their current expenses and instead put them toward future 鈥渦nmet needs鈥 when they age out of the state system.
鈥淭hat money belongs to children who are wards of the state,鈥 said the sponsor, Rep. Hannah Kelly, R-Mountain Grove.
Kelly, who has been a foster parent, said the change could help the children as they transition to their own housing.
People are also reading…
鈥淣obody wants to be in foster care,鈥 Kelly said.
鈥淭hey are our children. And we are still taking, taking, taking from these children,鈥 said Rep. Raychel Proudie, D-Ferguson.
Under current law, state agencies are allowed to be designated as the payee for Social Security benefits for children in their custody. The measure also includes benefits administered by the Veterans Administration and the Railroad Retirement Board.
In current practice, the state uses those benefits to pay foster parents and group homes for food, housing and other daily needs.
If the measure becomes law, the Missouri Department of Social Services would only be able to use the children鈥檚 money for longer-term costs, ranging from housing to tuition.
The Congressional Research Service shows Missouri was among 38 states in 2018 that used a total of $179 million in benefits on behalf of children in foster care to reimburse the costs of providing care for those children.
A showed the projected cost in Missouri to be $9.3 million.
The push has had mixed results in other states.
In November, the Arizona Department of Child Safety adopted a program that creates savings accounts for children in foster care.
In October, however, California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a proposal to stop the use of the benefits for everyday needs, saying it would cost too much.
The measure needs a final House vote before it can move to the Senate for further debate.
The legislation is Hous