During 2005 and 2006, the 109 th Congress made a number of changes to federal child welfare policy, which have recently been implemented or are set to be implemented in the near future. Most of these changes were made to the child welfare programs authorized under Title IV-E and Title IV-B of the Social Security Act. These programs primarily provide funding to state child welfare agencies to support services to families and children in their own homes (e.g. to provide services intended to keep children safely living with their parents), to provide foster care for eligible children who can no longer safely remain in their homes, and to provide adoption assistance for eligible children who are adopted out of foster care. These programs are administered by the Children's Bureau, within the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the legislation amending them was primarily reported by the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee. Amendments to the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program, which is authorized under Subtitle B of the Victims of Child Abuse Act, are also discussed. This program supports provision of advocates for abused or neglected children who are the subject of court proceedings. It is administered within the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) at the Department of Justice (DOJ), and legislation amending it was reported by the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. The changes enacted affect a broad spectrum of child welfare policies, which range from who is an eligible child and what are eligible costs for which states may claim reimbursement under the Title IV-E Foster Care and Adoption Assistance program to the provision of new support for services to children affected by a parent/caretaker's abuse of methamphetamine or other substances and to required collaboration between welfare agencies and courts. The recently enacted laws also added a number of specific new requirements for state child welfare agencies. With regard to children in foster care, each state must have in place new or revised policies or procedures related to (1) the quality and quantity of caseworker visits; (2) consultation with medical professionals on health treatment; (3) placement of children across state lines; (4) verification of citizenship or immigration status; and (5) background checks of prospective foster and adoptive parents. Further, states are required to have in place policies or procedures enabling them to continue providing necessary child welfare services during a disaster. These changes were enacted in seven bills, each of which is briefly discussed below in order of their enactment. The Fair Access to Foster Care Act of 2005 ( P.L. 109-113 ) permits states to claim reimbursement under Title IV-E of the Social Security Act on behalf of otherwise eligible foster children whose maintenance payments are provided to foster parents or institutional foster care providers via a for-profit foster care placement agency. Prior law stipulated that if a state sought to claim federal Title IV-E support on behalf of an otherwise eligible foster child, the child's maintenance payments could only be made by a public or non-profit agency. Noting that the use of for-profit foster care placement agencies is limited, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated this change would have an "insignificant" effect on federal foster care spending. The change was effective with the date of the law's enactment (November 22, 2005). The Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act ( P.L. 109-162 ) reauthorized funding for the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program, permitted additional funding for training and technical assistance related to improving the criminal prosecution of child abuse, and authorized a new competitive grant program intended to improve services to children and youth exposed to violence. Section 112 of P.L. 109-162 amended Subtitle B of the Victims of Child Abuse Act and reauthorized funding for the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program for each of FY2007-FY2011 at the prior law annual level of $12 million. In FY2007, CASA, which is administered within the Department of Justice, received $12 million in funding ( P.L. 110-5 ). In addition to extending the program's funding authority, P.L. 109-162 clarified that CASA funding may be used to "initiate, sustain, and expand" CASA programs. (Prior law generally limited the purpose of these funds to initiating or expanding programs.) It further authorizes state and local CASA programs to request criminal background checks for prospective volunteers from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and stipulates that any CASA program that makes such a request is required to pay the "reasonable costs" associated with the check. Finally, with regard to CASA, P.L. 109-162 prohibits use of federal funds provided under the CASA program for lobbying and requires the Inspector General of the Department of Justice to prepare a report that looks at the types of activities funded by the National CASA Association since 1993 and compares outcomes in cases where a CASA volunteer is appointed to assist a child to those where no CASA volunteer is appointed. Section 1193 of P.L. 109-162 added a new authorization of $7.5 million for each of FY2007-FY2011 for grants to the American Prosecutors Research Institute (APRI) to improve prosecution of child abuse cases. More specifically, APRI is expected to use these funds to provide technical assistance and training to attorneys and other individuals who prosecute child abuse cases in state or federal courts. Although P.L. 109-162 references program authority previously provided in statute for this kind of training and technical assistance (Section 214A of the Victims of Child Abuse Act), it did not amend that prior law, which expired with FY2005 (and had authorized annual funding of $5 million with no mention of APRI) . However, Congress has continued to provide funding for this purpose under that expired funding authority, and these funds are administered by the Department of Justice. In FY2007, just over $2 million was appropriated. Section 303 of P.L. 109-162 amended the Violence Against Women Act to add authority for four competitive grant programs related broadly to services, education, protection, and justice for young victims of violence. Just one of these grant programs is discussed in this report because it specifically requires child welfare agency involvement in administering any grant funding. Under this grant program, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS, specifically the Family and Youth Services Bureau, FYSB) is authorized to make competitive grants to eligible entities for training and other activities intended to improve the collaborative community response to families in which both child maltreatment and domestic violence are present. To be eligible to receive this grant, an entity must be a collaborative partnership that includes a child welfare agency, an agency serving victims of domestic violence (or dating violence), and a law enforcement agency (it may also include courts and other relevant social service providers). Funding for this single grant program was authorized at $5 million for each of FY2007-FY2011. However, no specific funding was provided for this grant program in FY2007. An omnibus budget reconciliation measure, the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA, P.L. 109-171 , Title VII, Subtitle D) made legislative changes intended to clarify which children are eligible for federal foster care and adoption assistance support (under Title IV-E of the Social Security Act). It also placed certain limitations on the ability of states to make claims for federal reimbursement of the costs of administering their Title IV-E foster care programs, including limits on the length of time a child may be considered a "candidate" for foster care and new rules or restrictions on administrative claims related to foster children placed in unlicensed relative homes or other settings that are "ineligible" under the federal foster care program. Separately, the legislation raised the mandatory funding authorization for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families program (Title IV-B, Subpart 2 of the Social Security Act). It further amended both the Child Welfare Services (Title IV-B, Subpart 1) and the Court Improvement (Section 438 of the Social Security Act) programs to require both "ongoing" and "meaningful" collaboration between courts and child welfare agencies. Further, it amended the Court Improvement Program to authorize two new grants (related to data collection and training), which are intended to improve court handling of child welfare proceedings. The law appropriated $100 million ($20 million in each of FY2006-FY2010) for those grants. Finally, the DRA amended the Foster Care and Adoption Assistance plan requirements (under Title IV-E, of the Social Security Act) to assert that the program's confidentiality provisions are not intended to limit a state's flexibility in determining public access to child abuse and neglect proceedings, provided that, at a minimum, a state's policy on this issue ensured the safety and well-being of the child, parents, and family. For more detailed information on the child welfare provisions of the Deficit Reduction Act (which are included in Title VII, Subtitle D of that act), see CRS Report RL33155, Child Welfare: Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Provisions in Budget Reconciliation and CRS Report RL33350, Child Welfare: The Court Improvement Program , both by [author name scrubbed]. P.L. 109-239 amended Title IV-B and Title IV-E of the Social Security Act to encourage the expedited placement of foster children into safe and permanent homes across state lines and made several additional changes to child welfare policy under those parts of the law. The law establishes a federal 60-day deadline for completing an interstate home study (necessary to determine the suitability and safety of the home) and a 14-day deadline for a state that requests this interstate home study to act on the information in the study.