U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

i

30–479 DTP 

" COMMITTEE PRINT ! 109TH CONGRESS

2nd Session 

WMCP: 

2006

109–9

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

REPORT

ON

P.L. 109–288, THE ‘‘CHILD AND 

FAMILY SERVICES IMPROVEMENT 

ACT OF 2006’’

OCTOBER 11, 2006

Prepared for the use of Members of the Committee on Ways and Means 

by members of its staff. This document has not been officially approved 

by the Committee and may not reflect the views of its embers.


congress.#13
ii

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

BILL THOMAS, California, Chairman

E. CLAY SHAW, JR., Florida 

NANCY L. JOHNSON, Connecticut 

WALLY HERGER, California 

JIM MCCRERY, Louisiana 

DAVE CAMP, Michigan 

JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota 

JIM NUSSLE, Iowa 

SAM JOHNSON, Texas 

PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania 

J.D. HAYWORTH, Arizona 

JERRY WELLER, Illinois 

KENNY C. HULSHOF, Missouri 

RON LEWIS, Kentucky 

MARK FOLEY, Florida 

KEVIN BRADY, Texas 

THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York 

PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin 

ERIC CANTOR, Virginia 

JOHN LINDER, Georgia 

BOB BEAUPREZ, Colorado 

MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania 

CHRIS CHOCOLA, Indiana 

DEVIN NUNES, California 

CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York 

FORTNEY PETE STARK, California 

SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington 

JOHN LEWIS, Georgia 

RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts 

MICHAEL R. MCNULTY, New York 

WILLIAM J. JEFFERSON, Louisiana 

JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee 

XAVIER BECERRA, California 

LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas 

EARL POMEROY, North Dakota 

STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, Ohio 

MIKE THOMPSON, California 

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut 

RAHM EMANUEL, Illinois 

Allison H. Giles, Chief of Staff

Janice Mays, Minority Chief Counsel

iii

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Overview ................................................................................................................... 1

Explanation of Provisions ....................................................................................... 2 

Congressional Budget Office Report ...................................................................... 8

Letters of Support .................................................................................................... 12

(1)

OVERVIEW

The Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-288), signed 

into law on September 28, 2006, makes a number ofimprovements to the nation’s 

child protection system. The legislation includes provisions to (1) reauthorize the 

Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) program, (2) target resources towards 

ensuring children in foster care are visited on a monthly basis by caseworkers and 

towards assisting regional partnerships with their efforts to combat the effects of 

parental substance abuse, particularly methamphetamine abuse, on the child protection system, (3) improve the Child Welfare Services (CWS) program, (4) reauthorize the Court Improvement Program, (5) reauthorize and improve the Mentoring 

Children of Prisoners Program, and (6) appropriate for fiscal year (FY) 2006 the additional $40 million in mandatory funding provided under the Deficit Reduction Act 

of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) for the PSSF program. 

The Committee on Ways and Means marked up an earlier version of this legislation (H.R. 5640), on June 29, 2006 and ordered the bill, as amended, favorably reported. The Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources 

held a hearing on May 23, 2006 on proposals to improve child protective services 

such as those supported by the PSSF and CWS programs. Witnesses at this hearing 

provided comments on draft legislation reflecting provisions subsequently introduced 

by Subcommittee on Human Resources Chairman Wally Herger (R-CA) and Ranking Member Jim McDermott (D-WA) as H.R. 5640. In recent years, the Subcommittee on Human Resources also has conducted a series of oversight hearings 

on various aspects of the child protection system, which generally indicated a need 

for improved oversight and accountability throughout these programs. 

On July 25, 2006, the U.S. House of Representatives amended S. 3525, as previously passed by the Senate by inserting the text of H.R. 5640 and sending the 

measure back to the Senate for its consideration. The final version of S. 3525, as 

amended, that is described in this report reflects agreement between Members of 

the House and the Senate on final provisions to be included in this legislation. The 

Senate unanimously passed S. 3525, as amended, on September 20, 2006, followed 

by the U.S. House of Representatives which unanimously passed the legislation on 

September 26, 2006.

2

Explanation of Provisions

S. 3525, The Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-

288) 

Section 1 -- Short Title 

‘‘The Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006’’

Section 2 -- Findings 

The legislation makes a number of findings regarding the provision of services 

under two child welfare programs authorized under Title IV-B of the Social Security 

Act, the Child Welfare Services (CWS) program and the Promoting Safe and Stable 

Families (PSSF) program. The findings note the importance of monthly caseworker 

visits in improving outcomes for children. They also outline the relationship between 

the entry of children into the child welfare system and their parent’s abuse of methamphetamine and other substances. 

Section 3 - Reauthorization of the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program 

Current Law 

For fiscal year (FY) 2006, authorizes mandatory funding of $345 million for the 

Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) program (Title IV-B, Subpart 2 of the 

Social Security Act) and discretionary funding of $200 million for each of FYs 2002 

through 2006. 

S.3525

The legislation extends the mandatory PSSF funding authorization of $345 million for five years (FYs 2007 through 2011) and extends the discretionary funding 

authorization of $200 million for each of those same five years. The legislation expands the reporting requirement to include both proposed spending and actual 

spending under the CWS and PSSF programs, and at State option, other programs 

that support child abuse prevention activities and child welfare services. The legislation also prohibits HHS from making any payment of PSSF funds to a State for administrative costs that exceed 10 percent of total program expenditures (Federal and 

non-Federal) of a State. 

Reason for Change 

The PSSF program supports four categories of services provided to children and 

families: family preservation services, community-based family support services, 

time-limited reunification services, and adoption promotion and support services. 

The legislation recognizes the importance of encouraging States to invest in these 

activities. Thus the legislation provides for the $200 million increase in mandatory 

PSSF funds over the next five years included in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 

(P.L. 109-171). In total $345 million in mandatory funds (the recent $305 million 

allotment of annual mandatory funds, plus a $40 million annual increase provided 

under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005) will be provided in each of FYs 2007 

through 2011. 

The legislation also will ensure better oversight and accountability of spending 

under the CWS and PSSF programs by requiring States to report on projected and 

actual spending under these two programs. Specifically, data on actual spending 

will help track State investments for the four priorities of the PSSF program. 

Section 4 -- Targeting of Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program Resources 

Current Law 

Current law requires States to include assurances in their PSSF plan that they 

will spend significant portions of their PSSF funds in each of four priority areas: 

(1) family preservation services; (2) community-based family support services; (3) 

time-limited family reunification services; and (4) adoption promotion and support 

services. 

S. 3525

The legislation retains the four priorities of PSSF while targeting the additional 

$40 million per year provided under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) 

to two new priorities: (1) support for monthly caseworker visits; and (2) competitive 

grants to promote the well-being of children in or at risk of placement in the child 

welfare system as a result of their parent’s abuse of methamphetamine or other substances. 

3

The legislation provides a total of $95 million to States to support monthly caseworker visits of children in foster care under the responsibility of the State, with 

a primary emphasis on activities designed to improve caseworker retention, recruitment, training, and ability to access the benefits of technology. States will receive 

$40 million from FY 2006 PSSF funds (with these funds available through FY 2009), 

$5 million in FY 2008, $10 million in FY 2009, and $20 million in each of FYs 2010 

and 2011 to support monthly caseworker visits. States cannot use these funds to 

supplant any Federal funds already paid to the State under the Title IV-E program 

that could be used for the purposes outlined above. 

To promote the well-being of children affected by their parent’s abuse of methamphetamine or other substances, the legislation provides a total of $145 million 

to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to award 

competitive grants to regional partnerships to pursue innovative approaches to help 

children and families. Funding will be $40 million in FY 2007, $35 million in FY 

2008, $30 million, in FY 2009 and $20 million in each of FYs 2010 and 2011. Partnerships must include the State child welfare agency or an Indian tribe and at least 

one other eligible partner, including: child welfare service providers (non-profit and 

for-profit), community providers of health or mental health services, local law enforcement agencies, judges and court personnel, juvenile justice officials, school personnel, the State agency responsible for administering the substance abuse prevention and treatment block grant (authorized under Title XIX-B, Subpart II of the 

Public Health Services Act), and any other providers, agencies, personnel, officials 

or entities related to the provision of child and family services. Grants of between 

$500,000 and $1 million per year will be awarded for 2 to 5 year periods. 

A priority will be given to grant applications that propose to combat methamphetamine abuse, given its substantial affect on child welfare in some areas. Funding 

for the grants must be used to support the purposes of this program, which may 

include family-based comprehensive long-term substance abuse treatment services, 

early intervention and prevention services, mental health services, parent skills 

training, and replication of successful models for providing family-based comprehensive long-term substance abuse treatment services. Grantees must provide a 15 percent match in the first and second year, a 20 percent match in the third and fourth 

year, and a 25 percent match in the fifth year. In-kind contributions can qualify towards the match requirement. The Secretary of HHS must consult with State leaders to develop performance indicators and reporting is required of all grant recipients. 

The legislation also redirects current PSSF research funding to support evaluation, research, and technical assistance related to the above two PSSF funding priorities. In each of FYs 2007 through 2011, at least $1 million must be spent for research and technical assistance activities that support monthly caseworker visits 

and at least $1 million must be spent for research and technical assistance activities 

with respect to the competitive grant program to promote the well-being of children 

in or at risk of placement in the child welfare system due to a parent’s abuse of 

methamphetamine or other substances. 

Reason for Change 

The targeting of funds to support monthly visits of foster children is in response 

to research highlighting how monthly visits lead to better outcomes for children. 

The Child and Family Service Reviews (CFSRs) completed in each State found a 

strong correlation between frequent caseworker visits with children and positive 

outcomes for children, such as timely achievement of permanency and other indicators of child well-being. However, despite the fact that nearly all States had written 

standards suggesting monthly visits were State policy, a December 2005 report completed by the HHS Office of the Inspector General found that only 20 States were 

able to produce reports showing whether caseworkers actually visited children in 

foster care on at least a monthly basis. States are encouraged to invest these resources in those activities with proven effectiveness in supporting monthly caseworker visits of foster children and should be cognizant that these funds may not 

supplant what States already spend from their Title IV-E programs for these activities. These resources are intended to increase State investment in these important 

areas. 

Parental substance abuse is a well-known problem affecting the child welfare system, and the Office of Applied Studies of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration reported that the number of new uses of 

methamphetamines (meth) has increased 72 percent in the past decade. A study by 

the National Association of Counties which surveyed 300 counties in 13 States reported that meth abuse is a major cause of child abuse and neglect. Forty percent 

4

of all the child welfare officials in the survey reported an increase in out-of-home 

placements due to meth abuse in 2005. 

Section 5 -- Allotments and Grants to Indian Tribes 

Current Law 

Requires that 1 percent of all mandatory PSSF funds, and 2 percent of any discretionary appropriations for the PSSF program, be set aside for tribal programs. (The 

minimum tribal funding provided is $3.45 million and the maximum annual tribal 

funding possible is $7.45 million.) 

ut of the tribal funds reserved, Indian tribes or tribal organizations with an approved plan must be allotted PSSF funds (based on the relative share of tribal persons under age 21 but only among tribes or tribal organizations with approved 

plans). The Secretary of HHS may exempt a tribe from any plan requirement that 

it determines would be inappropriate for that tribe (taking into account the resources, needs, and other circumstances of that tribe). However, no tribe or tribal 

organization may have an approved plan (or receive funds) unless its allotment is 

equal to at least $10,000. Funds allotted are paid directly to the tribal organization 

of the Indian tribe to which the money is allotted. 

S.3525

The legislation increases the set-aside for tribal programs to 3 percent of any discretionary funds appropriated. It also increases the set-aside for tribal programs to 

3 percent of the mandatory funds authorized and which remain after the separate 

reservation of funds is made for (1) monthly caseworker visits, and (2) competitive 

grants to combat methamphetamine and other substance abuse. Therefore, the minimum funding available per year for tribal programs would be $9.15 million and the 

maximum funding would be $15.15 million. The legislation eliminates the ability of 

the Secretary of HHS to exempt tribes from the PSSF plan requirements related 

to nonsupplantation, data reporting, and monitoring. However, the Secretary retains 

the ability to waive for Indian tribes the PSSF requirement to invest significant 

amounts of program funds in each of the four PSSF activities and to spend no more 

than 10 percent of PSSF funds on administrative costs. 

The legislation also permits tribal consortia to have access to an allotment of 

PSSF funds (and related technical assistance) on the same basis as such funds are 

currently available to Indian tribes. A tribal consortium’s allotment is to be determined based on the number of tribal persons under age 21 in each tribe that is a 

part of the tribal consortium. If tribes choose to apply collectively as a consortium, 

the population of tribal persons under age 21 for each tribe would be combined in 

order to determine the size of the grant to the consortium, including whether the 

consortium meets the $10,000 eligibility threshold in the Act. A tribal consortium 

could select which Indian tribal organization (among the tribes in the consortium) 

would receive the direct payment of its allotment. 

Reason for Change 

The legislation recognizes the importance of assisting tribes in their efforts to assist abused and neglected children. The legislation significantly increases the 

amount of funds provided to tribes and allows tribal consortia to apply for PSSF 

funds. This step is being taken to encourage the further development of tribal child 

welfare programs, which largely serve severely disadvantaged communities and 

families and can do so in a culturally appropriate manner. Permanency outcomes 

for Indian children can be improved if tribal consortia are able to have access to 

an allotment of PSSF funding on the same basis as is currently available to Indian 

tribes. This will facilitate smaller tribes’ building their own programs and will allow 

for administrative efficiencies in tribal program administration. 

To collect additional data and ensure proper oversight of these funds, tribes and 

tribal consortia interested in applying for this substantial increase in PSSF funds 

will be required to adhere to the same data and monitoring plan requirements as 

States. This additional data will inform how these funds have helped the tribes better ensure the safety, permanency, and well-being of tribal children. 

Section 6 -- Improvements to the Child Welfare Services (CWS) Program 

Current Law 

Up to $325 million annually is authorized on an indefinite basis for the Child 

Welfare Services (CWS) program, which provides funds to States to support a wide 

range of child welfare activities. Federal funding represents 75 percent of total funding for this program, and States are required to contribute 25 percent of total CWS 

funding from State funds. 

5

S.3525

The legislation maintains the annual discretionary authorization level of $325 

million per year but limits the funding authorization to FYs 2007 through 2011. The 

legislation also specifies that the purpose of the CWS program for which funds may 

be expended is to promote State flexibility in the development and expansion of a 

coordinated child and family services program that utilizes community-based agencies and that ensures all children are raised in safe, loving families, by: (1) protecting and promoting the welfare of all children; (2) preventing the neglect, abuse, 

or exploitation of children; (3) supporting at-risk families through services which 

allow children, where appropriate, to remain safely with their families or return to 

their families in a timely manner; (4) promoting the safety, permanence and wellbeing of children in foster care and adoptive families; and (5) providing training, 

professional development and support to ensure a well-qualified child welfare workforce. 

The legislation eliminates the plan requirements related to child day care standards and those related to the use of paraprofessionals or volunteers and restates 

and renumbers the remaining provisions with generally the same intent. It rewrites 

the provision concerning policies and procedures for children abandoned shortly 

after birth to assert that a State must have in effect administrative and judicial procedures for children who are abandoned at or shortly after birth (including policies 

and procedures providing for legal representation of the children) to ensure expeditious decisions can be made for their permanent placement. Further, it clarifies that 

the State may include residential educational programs as a living arrangement for 

children for whom reunification, adoption, or guardianship have been ruled out as 

permanency goals. This provision does not undermine current State policies regarding placement of children in adoptive homes and does not eliminate the 25 bed policy. 

Beginning October 1, 2007 (i.e. the beginning of FY 2008), the legislation limits 

administrative funding to 10 percent, but defines administrative funds to exclude 

caseworker services and supervision of such services. Also beginning in FY 2008, the 

legislation limits how much each State can expend from Federal CWS funding for 

foster care maintenance payments, adoption assistance payments, or child day care 

to what the State can show that it spent for such purposes in FY 2005. Further, 

beginning with FY 2008, States are not allowed to use State spending on foster care 

maintenance payments to meet the State matching requirement to receive Federal 

CWS fund in amounts that exceed what the State spent from such funds in FY 

2005. 

The legislation also adds new requirements to the CWS plan the State submits 

to (1) describe how the State consults with and involves physicians and other appropriate medical professionals in the assessment of children in foster care and in determining appropriate medical treatment, and (2) develop a plan on how to respond, 

track and continue care for children receiving child welfare services in the event of 

a disaster. 

Reason for Change 

The legislation will reorganize and update the CWS program and encourage more 

effective oversight. It also aligns the program to be coterminous with the reauthorization of the PSSF program to allow for better coordination between the two programs. It will encourage States to invest funding in prevention services, but allows 

each State to maintain in the coming years its FY 2005 level of spending from Federal CWS funds for foster care, adoption assistance and child care purposes. It adds 

a new State planning requirement to ensure consultation with medical professionals 

as well as State planning to continue the availability of child welfare services during 

a disaster. 

Section 7 -- Monthly Caseworker Standard 

Current Law 

There is no minimum Federal standard for monthly visits of foster children in 

State custody. 

S.3525

The legislation requires the State to update its CWS State plan by October 1, 

2007 to describe its standards for the content and frequency of caseworker visits of 

foster children in State custody, which at a minimum must ensure that children are 

visited on a monthly basis and that the caseworker visits are well-planned and focused on issues pertinent to case planning and service delivery to ensure the safety, 

permanency, and well-being of children. 

6

The legislation also sets a minimum Federal standard requiring each State and 

territory to achieve by October 1, 2011 monthly caseworker visits for at least 90 percent of foster children in State custody, with the majority of those visits occurring 

in the child’s residence. Each State and territory would be held accountable for its 

efforts and the legislation prescribes a planning process to achieve this goal. To receive FY 2008 CWS funds, States must submit to HHS data for FY 2007 on the percentage of foster children visited on a monthly basis by their caseworker and the 

percentage of those visits that occurred in the child’s residence. Based on this data, 

HHS will work with each State to set target levels for the State to meet to achieve 

a 90 percent monthly visitation standard by FY 2012 and will establish these target 

levels by June 30, 2008. Then, beginning in FY 2009, States must achieve their annual goal for the percentage of caseworker visits and the percentage of visits that 

occur in the child’s residence, or face an enhanced matching requirement in order 

to draw down their full allotment of Federal CWS funds. The share of non-Federal 

spending that is required in a State that does not meet its visitation target level 

in a year increases by a minimum of 1 percentage point, up to a maximum of 5 percentage points, depending on the degree to which the State has missed its target 

level; absent the commitment of additional State funds, Federal funds would be reduced to yield the modified State share of overall CWS funding, consistent with the 

degree of the State’s failure to achieve its visitation target for that year. 

No later than March 31, 2010, HHS must submit to the House Committee on 

Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance a report that outlines the 

progress States have made in meeting their caseworker visitation standards and 

that offers recommendations, developed in consultation with State administrators of 

child welfare programs and members of State legislatures, to assist States in meeting this standard. 

Reason for Change 

Holding States accountable for achieving monthly caseworker visits for at least 90 

percent of foster children responds to research highlighting how monthly visits lead 

to better outcomes for children. HHS shall work with the States to establish a plan 

to achieve this goal by FY 2012 and States are encouraged to invest the new PSSF 

resources provided in FY 2006 and later fiscal years in activities that have been 

shown to be effective in achieving increased caseworker visitation of foster children. 

The above accountability measure will ensure that, even in the case of a State that 

fails to fulfill its specified level of caseworker visits, the full Federal CWS allotment 

to a State will remain available so long as that State increases its State CWS 

spending modestly, according to the provisions of the legislation. 

Section 8 -- Reauthorization of Program for Mentoring Children of Prisoners 

Current Law 

The Mentoring Children of Prisoners program is administered by HHS and makes 

competitive grants to support the establishment or expansion and operation of programs that provide mentoring services to children of prisoners. 

S.3525

The legislation reauthorizes the existing Mentoring Children of Prisoners program 

through FY 2011 at such sums as may be necessary and increases the HHS setaside for research, technical assistance, and evaluation from 2.5 percent to 4 percent. It authorizes a new 3-year pilot program to provide vouchers to qualified mentoring groups to offer services to individual children of prisoners, but specifies both 

annual caps on funding for this purpose and that at least $25 million must be available each year for site-based grants provided under the program. The voucher pilot 

program will be administered by a national group that will work closely with HHS 

to manage the program with the goal to distribute least 3,000 vouchers in the first 

year, 8,000 vouchers in the second year and 13,000 vouchers in the third year. The 

legislation specifies that the national group must identify in its voucher distribution 

plan how the group will prioritize providing vouchers to children in areas which 

have not been served under the current site-based mentoring program. During the 

third year of this pilot HHS shall provide a report based on an independent evaluation to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance on the number of children who received vouchers for mentoring services and 

any conclusions regarding the voucher pilot program’s effectiveness. 

Reason for Change 

The continuation of the Mentoring Children of Prisoners program will enable public and private organizations to establish or expand projects that provide one-on-one 

7

mentoring for children of incarcerated parents and those recently released from prison. At the same time, children have not been able to access mentoring services in 

some States and rural areas because of the absence of a site-based grant to provide 

this service. The voucher pilot program will evaluate the effectiveness of using 

vouchers to expand the delivery of mentoring services to children of prisoners, including to children in rural and underserved areas. 

Section 9 -- Reauthorization of the Court Improvement Program 

Current Law 

For each of FYs 2002 through 2006, an eligible highest State court (with an approved application) is entitled to a share of funds to assess and make improvements 

to its handling of child welfare procedures. A set-aside of $10 million from the mandatory funds authorized and 3.3 percent of any discretionary appropriation is provided from the PSSF program to support the Court Improvement Program. To receive its full allotment of these funds the court, in each of FYs 2002 through 2006, 

is required to provide at least 25 percent of the expenditures for this purpose. 

S.3525

The legislation reauthorizes the funding for the Court Improvement Program for 

5 years, through FY 2011. 

Reason for Change 

The Court Improvement Program has played an important role in assisting State 

courts in their efforts to expedite judicial proceedings for at-risk children. The legislation will ensure these funds continue to remain available, and is in addition to 

the $100 million provided over FYs 2006 through 2010 under the Deficit Reduction 

Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) to support training and data collection efforts of State 

courts. 

Section 10 -- Requirement for Foster Care Proceedings to Include, in an 

Age-Appropriate Manner, Consultation with the Child that Is the Subject of the Proceeding 

Current Law 

Current law does not include a standard for consulting with children in court proceedings. 

S.3525

The legislation requires States to assure that in any permanency hearing held 

with respect to the child, including any hearing regarding the transition of the child 

from foster care to independent living, the court or administrative body conducting 

the hearing consults in an age-appropriate manner with the child regarding the 

plan being proposed for the child. 

Reason for Change 

Each child deserves the opportunity to participate and be consulted in any court 

proceeding affecting his or her future, in an age-appropriate manner. 

Section 11 -- Technical Amendments 

Section 12 -- Effective Dates 

The legislation will become effective on October 1, 2006, except for provisions with 

other specified effective date or if HHS determines that a State legislature must act 

before the State can comply with the changes.

8


CBO1.eps
9


CBO2.eps
10


CBO3.eps
11


CBO4.eps
12


IndianAffairs.eps
13


CCUSA.eps
14


CLASP1.eps
15


CLASP2.eps
16


CWLA.eps
17


CDF1.eps
18


CDF2.eps
19


NCSC1.eps
20


NCSC2.eps
21


FCIK.eps
22


LSA.eps
23


Mentor.eps
24


NCAI.eps
25


NICWA.eps