I have been working in the child welfare system for 35 years. Much has improved, but there is more we must do to protect children most at risk of harm.
Child protection is a tough job. Committed professionals decide which children are not safe in their homes. We expect them to get it right every time. But we have also come to expect that our child welfare system improve outcomes for any child in need of better circumstances. That is one of the reasons we will fail to keep the most at-risk children safe. We can fix it.
New York’s child welfare system was created to ensure that when a formal report of alleged neglect or abuse is made to the government, investigators determine if the child is safe. If not, the city intervenes to protect the child, on rare occasions by removing the child from the home. In 2023 there were reports made about 55,518 children that needed to be investigated, an average of 152 investigations every day of the year.
Over the past few decades, we have learned much about how to improve the system. We are far better at distinguishing poverty from neglect and helping children remain safely at home through evidenced-based interventions. As a result, we went from almost 50,000 children in foster care, with more than 30% residing in congregate settings, in the 1990s to fewer than 7,000 children in foster care and 900 in group care today.
Everyone benefits from the reforms. Children who safely stay at home are much more likely to get an education, hold down a good job, be stably housed, and contribute positively to their community.
But we continue to see tragic fatalities — of children known to the child welfare system and those who are not. Determining the safety of children is a herculean task that requires keen investigatory skills. It demands 100% focus.
However, the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS), the city agency responsible for this work, is now seen as being responsible for preventing all the city’s children from living at risk. We have somehow rejected the concept that “it takes a village” and have decided that ACS must protect all children and support all parents. This is misguided.
It’s true that significant school absences may indicate the need for a child welfare investigation, but ACS can’t be required to ensure that children go to school. It’s also true that failing to provide adequate nutrition or ensure that a child has clean clothes may indicate neglect. But ACS can’t be responsible for making sure all children are well fed and clothed.
ACS also should not be responsible for ensuring that all infants have diapers, that all parents have child care, and that other critical services be provided so families do not struggle. Somehow, though, ACS is now expected to get all this done. This dilutes ACS’ primary mission to protect children who are determined to be at risk.
ACS, for example, currently funds 30 Family Enrichment Centers and 11 partnerships that address community needs and promote strategies to reduce child welfare involvement. These are important, innovative programs. We should continue to fund them along with other programs that support child and family well-being.
Instead of these being associated with the city’s child protective agency, our schools, CBOs, religious institutions, hospitals and health care systems should be collectively responsible for addressing community needs and society’s systemic failures. Agencies like the Department for Youth and Community Development, Department of Education, the Department of Social Services and the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene should knit together our safety net that supports child and family well-being.
Many of the challenges families face are rooted in poverty. According to the Community Service Society, child poverty has remained virtually unchanged in recent years, with about 25% of city children living below the federal poverty level.
If more city agencies — and community-based organizations — are tasked with the responsibility, and given the resources to address poverty, ACS will be able to focus on its core mission. I bet we will also see fewer families needlessly reported to the system. This will lead to fewer investigations, allowing ACS to focus solely on ones where children may be at true risk of harm.
It is convenient and enticing to place the responsibility of all “child welfare” issues on the child welfare system, specifically ACS. But that doesn’t mean it is rational.
Richter is the CEO & executive director of JCCA, a 200-plus year old child welfare nonprofit that runs foster care, residential treatment facilities, mental health services, education programs, and more.