ACF is responsible for the administration and oversight of federal funding to states for child welfare services under Titles IV-B and IV-E. HHS headquarters staff are responsible for developing appropriate policies and procedures for states to follow in terms of obtaining and using federal child welfare funds, while staff in HHS’s 10 regional offices and 10 national resource centers provide guidance and technical assistance to improve child welfare services nationwide. HHS compiles state-reported child welfare data in two databases: the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) and the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS). HHS relies on the information available in its databases to analyze and track children’s experiences in the child welfare system, to determine states’ performance on federal child welfare outcome measures, and to report to Congress on children’s well being and child welfare experiences. However, the monitoring of children served by state child welfare agencies is the responsibility of the state agencies that provide the services to these children and their families. Child welfare caseworkers at the county or local level are the key personnel responsible for documenting the wide range of services offered to children and families, such as investigations of abuse and neglect; treatment services offered to families to keep them intact and prevent the need for foster care; and arrangements made for permanent or adoptive placements when children must be removed from their homes. Most states and counties provide some child welfare services directly and provide others through contracts with private agencies. National survey data confirm that both state and private child welfare agencies are experiencing similar challenges recruiting and retaining qualified caseworkers. For instance, turnover of child welfare staff has been estimated at between 30 percent and 40 percent annually nationwide, with the average tenure for child welfare workers being less than 2 years. In 2000, HHS established a new federal review system to monitor state compliance with federal child welfare laws. One component of this system is the CFSR, which assesses state performance in achieving safety and permanency for children, along with well-being for children and families. The CFSR process includes a self-assessment by the state, an analysis of state performance in meeting national standards established by HHS, and an on-site review by a joint team of federal and state officials. Based on the results of this process, HHS determines whether a state achieved substantial conformity with (1) outcomes related to safety, permanency, and well-being, such as keeping children protected from abuse and neglect and achieving permanent and stable living situations for children and (2) key systemic factors, such as having an adequate case review system and an adequate array of services. States are required to develop program improvement plans to address all areas of nonconformity. Two titles of the Social Security Act provide federal funding targeted specifically to foster care and related child welfare services. Title IV-E provides an open-ended individual entitlement for foster care maintenance payments to cover a portion of the food, housing, and incidental expenses for all foster children whose parents meet certain federal eligibility criteria. Title IV-E also provides payments to adoptive parents of eligible foster children with special needs. To qualify for federal IV-E funding for SACWIS, states must prepare and submit an advance planning document (APD) to ACF’s Children’s Bureau, in which they describe the state’s plan for managing the design, development, implementation, and operation of a SACWIS that meets federal requirements and state needs in an efficient, comprehensive, and cost-effective manner. Since the administration and structure of state child welfare agencies vary across the nation, states can design their SACWIS to meet their state needs, as long as states meet certain federal requirements. Title IV-B of the Social Security Act, established in 1935, authorizes funds to states to provide a wide array of services to prevent the occurrence of abuse, neglect, and foster care placements. In 1993, the Congress created a new program as subpart 2 of Title IV-B (now known as Promoting Safe and Stable Families), which funds similar types of services but is more prescriptive in how states can spend the funds. No federal eligibility criteria apply to the children and families receiving services funded by Title IV-B. Title IV-B subpart 1 provides grants to states for child welfare services, which are broadly defined. Subpart 1 funds are intended for services that are directed toward the accomplishment of the following purposes: (1) protect and promote the welfare of all children; (2) prevent or remedy problems that may result in the abuse or neglect of children; (3) prevent the unnecessary separation of children from their families by helping families address problems that can lead to out-of-home placements; (4) reunite children with their families; (5) place children in appropriate adoptive homes when reunification is not possible; and (6) ensure adequate care to children away from their homes in cases in which the child cannot be returned home or cannot be placed for adoption. In 1980, the Congress enacted legislation that limited the total subpart 1 funds states could use for three categories of services: foster care maintenance payments, adoption assistance payments, and child care related to a parent’s employment or training. The total of subpart 1 funds used for these purposes cannot exceed a state’s total 1979 subpart 1 expenditures for all types of services. The intent of this restriction, according to a congressional document, was to encourage states to devote increases in subpart 1 funding as much as possible to supportive services that could prevent the need for out-of-home placements. However, this restriction applies only to the federal portion of subpart 1 expenditures, as the law notes that states may use any or all of their state matching funds for foster care maintenance payments. Subpart 2 authorizes grants to states to provide four categories of services, which are defined below: Family preservation services: Services designed to help families at risk or in crisis, including services to (1) help reunify children with their families when safe and appropriate; (2) place children in permanent homes through adoption, guardianship, or some other permanent living arrangement; (3) help children at risk of foster care placement remain safely with their families; (4) provide follow-up assistance to families when a child has been returned after a foster care placement; (5) provide temporary respite care; and (6) improve parenting skills. Family support services: Community-based services to promote the safety and well-being of children and families designed to increase the strength and stability of families, to increase parental competence, to provide children a safe and supportive family environment, to strengthen parental relationships, and to enhance child development. Examples of such services include parenting skills training and home visiting programs for first time parents of newborns. Time-limited family reunification services: Services provided to a child placed in foster care and to the parents of the child in order to facilitate the safe reunification of the child within 15 months of placement. These services include: counseling, substance abuse treatment services, mental health services, and assistance to address domestic violence. Adoption promotion and support services: Services designed to encourage more adoptions of children in foster care when adoption is in the best interest of the child, including services to expedite the adoption process and support adoptive families. In our September 2003 report on Title IV-B, we found that states use these funds to provide a wide variety of services to prevent the occurrence of abuse, neglect, and foster care placements, as well as services to help children in foster care and their parents; however, relatively few subpart 1 dollars are used to provide family support and family preservation services, while the majority of subpart 2 funds are used for these purposes. According to our survey data for fiscal year 2002, states spent subpart 1 funds most frequently on the salaries of child welfare agency staff, administration and management expenses, CPS services, and foster care maintenance payments. In comparison, states spent half of their subpart 2 funds on family support or prevention programs and another 12 percent on family preservation services. CFSR results for the past 2 years, however, indicate that states have not performed strongly in terms of assessing the services families need and providing those services. Relatively few subpart 1 dollars were used for family support or family preservation services; instead, they were most frequently used to fund staff salaries, with almost half of these funds designated for the salaries of CPS social workers. Another 20 percent of these funds were used for the salaries of other social workers. During a site visit to the state of Washington for the Title IV-B report, child welfare officials told us that they used over 50 percent of the state’s subpart 1 funds for salaries of staff providing direct services, including CPS social workers, other types of social workers, social work supervisors, and clerical support staff. Administration and management comprised the second largest category of service, accounting for almost 17 percent of subpart 1 dollars. This category included rent and utilities for office space, travel expenses for agency staff, and staff training. CPS represents the third largest category of services that states funded with subpart 1. States used about 16 percent of their subpart 1 funds to provide a variety of CPS services, such as telephone hotlines for the public to report instances of child abuse and neglect, emergency shelters for children who needed to be removed from their homes, and investigative services. During our site visit to California, for example, officials reported using about 40 percent of their subpart 1 dollars to fund staff salaries and operating expenses associated with a variety of shelter care services provided by counties, such as emergency shelters and foster homes. A child is placed in one of these shelters when no other placement option is immediately available—for example, when an investigation in the middle of the night determines that the child is at immediate risk of harm.