LC, W2 W3 ,2. : IE 23>! r If rwk ,v : _ -4: - , 3 ’,7~~\ ,. ~«<\—~; ,’5.;‘_z Q‘ ' - ‘ ' - , -. , .4 - \ .4 T ;. , 1.»..- . . . V. "‘ ‘ " ‘ ’ " ' 1 ‘ a: ti’ J’. "' '. ‘ ‘ ‘ - -7 ~.. .. g. .. - - - ‘ , ', . I ‘ \\":,P ‘I ‘ >- . . .1 N J’ «J zmlfl’ 3939£85 niversit of issou a |IHflIi1lM:|] O10- CHILD WELFARE AND FAMILY PROBLEMS: LEGISLATION AND ISSUES IN THE 97TH CONGRESS ISSUE BRIEF NUMBER IB8lO69 AUTHOR: Fowler, Jan Education and Public welfare Division THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE MAJOR ISSUES SYSTEM DATE ORIGINATED O4/14/81 DATE UPDATED 12/10/81‘ FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CALL 287-5700 l2l4 CRS= l IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/IO/81 ISSUE DEFINITION Over the years numerous Federal programs have been established to meet the various needs of families and children, including income maintenance, health, and education. A fourth category of program has also arisen: social services. Federal social service programs range from the new, broadly targeted social services State block grant to narrower initiatives focused on family problems such as child abuse or teenage pregnancy. During the budget reconciliation process last summer, Congress rejected an Administration proposal to consolidate a number of these categorical social programs into a State block grant and voted instead to consolidate only the services and training programs under title XX of the Social Security Act. The new social services block grant and most other child- and family-related social services programs are now being funded under a continuing appropriations resolution effective through Dec. 15, l98l. The House of Representatives and the Senate Appropriations Committee have approved FY82 appropriations legislation. In the meantime, however, the Administration revised its original FY82 budget to further cut social spending} and recently the President vetoed a continuing resolution that was judged to contain inadequate funding cuts. BACKGROUND AND POLICY ANALYSIS This issue brief contains a discussion of (1) the evolution of existing child- and family-related social services programs; (2) the Administration's block grant proposals as they related to child and family programs, and congressional action on these proposals during the budget reconciliation process; (3) FY82 appropriations action on these programs; and (4) additional child- and family-related legislation in the 97th Congress that appears to be the subject of congressional and public interest and controversy. BRIEF HISTORY OF FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT IN SOCIAL SERVICES Major Federal involvement in the provision of social services began in l956, when the Federal Government started to reimburse States for the provision of social services to welfare recipients. This program evolved into the social services program authorized under title XX of the Social Security Act, which, until Sept. 30, 1981, provided matching funds to States for the provision of social services primarily to low-income individuals and families. Some of this title XX funding was earmarked ifor child day care services. A separate title XX component funded States for training social services personnel. T T Several major Federal child welfare programs are authorized by title IV of the Social Security Act. Title IV-B, the child welfare services program, provides matching funds to the States for child welfare services. It also includes separate training, and research and demonstration components. Title TV-E, the foster care and adoption assistance program, authorizes matching nds to the states for foster care and adoption subsidy payments. These Social Security Act programs operate by providing Federal funds to the States and allowing the States some discretion in how the money is spent. CRS- 2 IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/lO/Bl This system reflects the reluctance of Congress, until fairly recently, to become directly involved in family matters, which many have felt, and continue to feel, should be under State and local jurisdiction. However, with the advent of the war on Poverty in the late l960s, the role of the Federal Government in meeting social needs became at once larger and more specific. Solving the problems of the poor, the elderly, children, and other vulnerable groups began to be perceived as a national responsibility, which the States, by themselves, were viewed as either not committed to or not capable of meeting. Beginning with the _Economic Opportunity Act of l964, and continuing through the l970s, a number of specifically focused social service programs have been established to address various problems and needs of children and families. These include programs concerning child development (the Headstart program), child abuse, juvenile delinquency, runaway youth, teenage pregnancy and family planning, and adoption of hard-to-place children. Most of these programs award discretionary service grants to local organizations, and some also have research, demonstration, or training components. In recent years, public opinion has again changed, and categorical programs such as these have come under increasing attack as examples’ of unwelcome Federal intrusion into family affairs. Progams that award discretionary social service grants to local groups have come to be seen by. some as imposing a Federal agenda on the identification and solution of sensitive family problems. If the individual family cannot deal with these problems, the argument goes, they ought to be considered and addressed at the State or local level. Even the Social Security Act programs, which provide matching funds to the States with relatively few strings attached, have come to be unacceptable to some, who feel that States should have more discretion in defining and addressing local needs. Another criticismq is that the proliferation of Federal social service programs has resulted in duplication of both services and administrative structures, and in rising costs overall, as more and more groups come to expect Federal help in meeting their particular needs. OVERVIEW OF ACTION DURING THE 97TH CONGRESS, lST SESSION Growing concerns about the inappropriateness and expense of direct Federal participation in alleviating family problems were addressed in the Reagan Administration's March 1981 social services block grant proposal, which would have consolidated 12 programs, including most of the programs mentioned above and several other categorical social services programs. In this proposal, 75% of the total FY81 budget authority of these l2 programs -- $3.8 billion -— would have been available in FY82 in the form of grants to» states for social services. Specifically, of the programs discussed in this brief, the title XX general social services, title XX day care, title XX training, child welfare services, child welfare training, foster care, adoption assistance, child abuse (State grant component), and runaway youth programs were included in this proposal. In addition, the adolescent pregnancy and family planning programs were slated to be included in the proposed preventive health block grant. Four additional programs discussed above -— juvenile delinquency, child welfare research and demonstration, child abuse research and demonstration, and adoption opportunities for hard-to—place children -- were not included in the Administration's FY82 budget request and were thus slate. to be phased out altogether. Of all the child- and family-related social services programs mentioned above, only one -- the Headstart program -— would have remained intact under the Administration's March proposal. CRS- 3 IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/lO/8l The Senate and House responded to these proposals by including differing zersions of various block grants in their reconciliation bills. However, during conference negotiations on reconciliation, most child- and family-related social services programs, instead of being included in block grants, were reauthorized as categorical programs. Specifically, only the title XX programs —- services, day care, and training —- were consolidated into a social services block grant to the States. The existing adolescent pregnancy program was consolidated, along with 6 other programs, into a maternal and child health block grant. In addition, a new categorical adolescent pregnancy program, entitled the adolescent family life program, was enacted. All the other child- and family-related programs discussed above were retained as is, by either reauthorizing, through reconciliation, those that were due to expire in FY81, or by not mentioning them in reconciliation at all, thus leaving them intact. Table l shows the FY81 appropriation levels and the final reconciliation conference agreements regarding the disposition and FY82 authorization levels of child- and family-related programs. On Sept. 30, 1981, Congress approved a continuing appropriations resolution for FY82 (P.L. 97-51) which was in effect through Nov. 20, l98l. On Nov. 23, l98l, this continuing resolution was extended through Dec. l5, l98l (P.L. 97-85). Most programs, including the programs discussed here, will be funded during this period at the lower of their FY81 level or the level approved by the House Appropriations committee. On Oct. 6, l98l, the full House of Representatives passed the Labor-Health nd Human Services—Education appropriations bill. This bill, which is almost identical to the committee-approved bill, would fund most child- and family-related social services programs at their FY81 level or higher. On Nov. 9, l98l, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported FY82 Labor—HHS-Education legislation which for some child and family programs is identical to the House version but is higher or lower than the House bill in other cases. The Administration, however, submitted a revised FY82 budget to Congress on Sept. 30, l98l, which contains cuts of 12% or more from the funding levels requested for most programs in the March budget. This renewed drive to cut social spending culminated in a veto of the second continuing resolution which was thought by the Administration to contain insufficient spending cuts. After the veto, Congress approved the simple 3-week extension mentioned above and during this time will try again either to pass appropriations legislation or craft yet another continuing resolution that will be acceptable to the Administration. Table 2 shows the funding levels of child- and family-related programs under the current continuing resolution, the House-passed appropriations ~bill, the Senate committee-approved appropriations bill, and the Administration's September budget request. Following the tables are a more specific account of congressional action and more detailed descriptions of each program, now it was affected by reconciliation, and how it would be funded under various appropriations and budget proposals. (For additional information on Administration proposals, and the congressional response, concerning various child and family programs, see the ,llowing issue briefs and mini briefs: "Social Service Programs: Proposed Grant Consolidation," IB8llO2; "Budget Cuts in AFDC," IB8lO5l; "School Lunch and Related Child Nutrition ‘Programs; Proposed Reductions in Funding," IB8l045; "Education and the 97th Congress: Overview," IB8ll08; "Social cRs- 4 IB8lO69 UPDATE-12/lo/81 Security: Reagan Budget and Financing Proposals," IB8lO36; and "Medicaid: Administration Budget Proposal," MB8l23l.) CRS- 5 IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/10/81 TABLE l Disposition of child- and family-related social services programs under the budget reconciliation conference agreement; FY81 appropriation levels; FY82 authorization levels FY81 Budget FY82 appropriation reconciliation authorization level conference level Program (millions) agreement (millions) 1/ Title XX services* 2,716 ssbg Title XX day care* 200 ssbg Total of 2,400 Title XX training* 75 ssbg Child welfare services (Title IV—B)* 163 ret 266 Child welfare training (Title IV—B)* 5 ret open-ended Child welfare research and demonstration (Title IV—B)* ll ret open-ended Foster care (Title IV-E)* 349 A ret open-ended Adoption assistance 6 (Title IV-E)* 5 ret open-ended Child abuse State grant component** 7 ret 1 Child abuse research and demonstration and administration** 16 ret _lQ Adoption opportunities** 5 ret 2 Headstart** 820 ret ggg Adolescent mchbg, mchbg— total of 373 pregnancy** lo adol adol- fig Family planning** 166 ' ret 127 Juvenile delinquency*** 100 ret 11 Runaway yOuth*xx ll ret 25 * permanently authorized 1/ Underlined ** reauthorized by figures are thos reconciliation bill set by reconcili *** reauthorized in 1980 ation; others ha been set by existing law. ssbg - social services block grant ret - retained as is mchbg - maternal and child health block grant adol - new adolescent family life program phbg - preventive health block grant rep - repealed CRS- 6 IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/10/31 TABLE 2 FY82 funding levels of child- and family-related social services programs under current continuing resolution (P.L. 97-85), House-passed appropriations bill (H.R. 4560), Senate committee-approved appropriations bill (H.R. 4560), and Administration's revised September budget (in millions) Senate _ committee- Continuing House=passed approved September Program resolution 1/ appropriations appropriations budget Title xx (social services block grant) 2,400 2,400 2,400 1,974 Child welfare services 163 163 220 108 Child welfare . training A 5 5 4 4 Child welfare research and demonstration . ll 11 3 / 3 / Foster care 171 171 3 / 225 264 Adoption assistance 5 5 5 5 Child abuse State grants . 7 7 7 5 Child abuse research and demonstration 2 and administration 10 l0 l0 2 / Adoption opportunities 2 2 2 2 / Headstart 820 950 950 831 5 Maternal and child health block grant 331 331 351 291 Adolescent family life 0 0 0 0 Family planning 130 130 130 98 Juvenile delinquency 70 70 6 / 70 6 / 0 Runaway youth 11 16 ll 7 1/ P.L. 97-85, third FY82 continuing appropriations resolution, specifies the lesser of the FY81 amount or the House 2/ 3/ .4/ 5/ 5/ CRS- 7 IB8l069 UPDATE-12/10/81 committee-approved amount. Effective through Dec. 15, 1981. The Administration's September budget consolidates these and other discretionary research and demonstration programs into a general research and demonstration category. The total requested for this category is $30.8 million. The Senate committee-approved bill consolidates certain discretionary research and demonstration programs, including the child welfare research and demonstration program, into a social services discretionary account and appropriates a total of $17,300,000 for these activities. The Senate version of this discretionary research account is different from the Administration's proposal in that it consolidates fewer programs and budgets a lower amount. Unlike the Administration's proposal, the Senate Appropriations Committee continues to appropriate separat amounts for the child abuse research and demonstration and adoption opportunities programs, thus keeping them categorical. The House-passed appropriations bill, which is also the basis for the continuing resolution, requests $171 million for foster care. However, the bill report (H.Rept. 97-251) states that "additional funds probably will be required in 1982 when more information becomes available about State activity." (p. 86.) The September budget cut the Headstart request by 12% from the March request of $950 million, resulting in a revised figure of $836 million. This amount was later reduced to $831 million in order to add $5 million to the revised request for salaries and. expenses. This $831 million figure represents a 1.3% increase from the FY81 appropriation of $820 million. The juvenile delinquency program appropriation is included in the Commerce-Justice-State-Judiciary appropriation bill, H.R. 4169, which passed the House on Sept. 9, 1981, and was reported from the Senate Appropriations Committee on Oct. 30, 1981. CRS- 8 IB8lO69 UPDATE-12/lo/31 ACTION IN THE 97TH CONGRESS, lST SESSION Reconciliation During the reconciliation process, both the House and the Senate developed block grant alternatives different from the original Administration proposals. The Senate reconciliation bill, S. l377, as passed by the Senate on June 25, would have: 1) put the title XX, title IV-B (except for research and demonstration), and title IV-E programs into a social services block grant; 2) put the adolescent pregnancy and family planning programs into a preventive health block grant; 3) reauthorized and extended the Headstart program; and 4) retained the juvenile delinquency program at a reduced funding level. In addition, the child abuse State grant component would have been reauthorized as is (i.e., not included in a block grant), as would the Headstart program (S. lO85). (There were two Senate bills that would have reauthorized Headstart —- language included in the reconciliation bill, and S. lO85, a free-standing bill.) By virtue of not being included in any proposed block grant or reconciliation cuts, the runaway youth program would also have been retained as is (it is currently authorized through FY84). The child abuse research and demonstration component, the child welfare research and demonstration component, and the adoption opportunities programs would have been repealed. Finally, the Senate also proposed another adolescent _pregnancy bill, S. lO90, which was subsequently enacted as part of reconciliation. Entitled the Adolescent Family Life Program, this bill establishes a new categorical grant program for projects to prevent adolescent pregnancy and provide services to adolescents. This program is similar to the existing adolescent pregnancy program in many respects. some differences between the existing program and ‘the new proposal are that the new proposal: l) places tight restrictions on the offering of family planning services and abortion counseling and referral services; 2) requires grantees to obtain parental permission before providing most services to minors; and 3) places more emphasis on discouraging teenage sexual activity and on adoption as a possible resolution of teenage pregnancy. In the House of Representatives, the reconciliation bill, H.R. 3982, passed on June 26, would have: l) put the title XX, child abuse (State grant and research), adoption opportunities, and runaway youth programs (along with the Community Services Administration) into a social services block grant; 2) included adolescent pregnancy in a maternal and child health block grant; 3) reauthorized the family planning program at a reduced funding level; and 4) retained the juvenile delinquency program atya reduced funding level. (A separate bill, H.R. 2318, would have reauthorized the entire child abuse program and the adoption opportunities program.) The title IV-B and IV-E programs would have been retained as is (these programs are permanently authorized), although the language of the proposed social services block grant would also have allowed the States to use their block grant funds for child welfare-related activities and assistance for foster care maintenance payments and adoption subsidies. The Headstart program would also have been reauthorized and retained as is (H.R. 3045). As described above, the outcome of reconciliation conference negotiations was that most child- and family-related programs were not put into block grants but were left as categorical programs. See Program Descriptions, below, for descriptions of each program in its FY81 form, and an account of cRs- 9 IB8lO69 UPDATE-12/10/81 how it was affected by reconciliation. FY82 Appropriations On Sept. 30, 1981, Congress approved a continuing appropriations resolution for FY82 (P.L. 97-51), which was effective through Nov. 20, 1981. Also on Sept. 30, the Administration submitted a revised FY82 budget to Congress, which contained cuts in most social programs of 12% below the amount requested in March. The continuing resolution in many cases contained amounts well above the levels in the revised budget, and the Administration began to pressure Congress to bring FY82 spending down, either through FY82 appropriations bills, if they were enacted in time, or in a second continuing resolution, if it proved to be necessary. Most programs were still without appropriations legislation on Nov. 20, so enactment of a second continuing resolution was necessary. Despite the urging of the Administration, Congress passed a second continuing resolution that was judged to contain insufficient spending cuts, so the President vetoed it. Then, on Nov. 23, 1981, Congress passed a third continuing resolution (P.L. 97-85) that continues the spending levels of the first continuing resolution through Dec. 15, 1981. All of the programs discussed in this brief will be funded through Dec. 15, 1981 at the FY81 level or the House Appropriations Committee-approved level, whichever is lower. Six programs 4- child welfare services, training, and research and demonstration; adoption assistance; Headstart; and runaway youth -- will be funded at their FY81 levels while the continuing resolution is in effect. The child abuse State grant component will also be funded at its FY81 level. with the exception of the adolescent pregnancy program, all ther programs discussed here -- title XX, foster care, child abuse research and demonstration, adoption opportunities, family planning, and juvenile .delinquency -- will be funded during the continuing resolution period at levels lower than their FY81 levels. The former adolescent pregnancy program, as mentioned above, was folded into a maternal and ‘child health DlOC.k grant, WhiCh was funded under the continuing resolution at a level slightly below that authorized during reconciliation. The new adolescent family life program did not receive any funding under the continuing resolution, although provision is made for continuing to operate the Office of Adolescent Pregnancy Programs, which will administer the adolescent family life program if and when it receives an appropriation. On Oct. 6, the House of Representatives passed their version of the FY82 Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill (H.R. 4560). This bill is almost identical to the committee-approved bill. It would provide for funding for most of the programs under discussion here at their FY81 level, and would iprovide for increased funding for two programs —- Headstart and runaway youth. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported its version of the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill on Nov. 9, 1981. This bill would provide for increased funding over FY81 for Headstart and child welfare services, no change in funding from FY81 for adoption assistance, child abuse State grants, and runaway youth, and reduced spending for the remainder of the programs under discussion. See Program Descriptions, below, for descriptions of the funding levels for each program under the continuing resolution, the House-passed appropriations bill, the Senate committee-approved appropriations bill, and the new September 1981 budget. CRS=lO' ' IB8lO69 UPDATE=l2/l0/Bl PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS Programs Included in Social Services Block Grant Title XX Social Services and Child Day Care. Title XX of the Social Security Act authorized, through FY81, Federal reimbursement for a wide variety of social services such as child day care, counseling, information and referral, legal services, protective services for children and adults, homemaker and other in-home services. Welfare recipients were categorically eligible for assistance. other eligibility criteria were determined by States within a maximum income limit of ll5% of median income. Funds were distributed to States according to their relative population size. The Federal matching share for most services was 75%. Family planning was matched at a 90% Federal rate and certain child day care services were 100% federally funded. Title XX State and Local Training. Under this program, the Federal Government reimbursed States for various forms of training, both short term and long term, in-service and in classrooms, for personnel employed in title XX agencies and certain volunteers. Prior to FY80, title XX training was an open=ended entitlement to States. However, as a result of P.L. 96-272, State training allotments in fiscal years 1980 and 1981 were limited to either 4% Of the State's regular title XX allotment 150!" that year Or thé amount Of. Federal funds received for training for FY79, whichever was higher. The Federal matching rate for training under title XX was 75%. In accordance with the social services block grant approved during the reconciliation process, the services, day care, and training components of the title XX program have been consolidated into one block grant, with funds distributed to the States on the basis of population. The State matching requirement and income eligibility criteria have been eliminated. The States will be able to spend funds on any combination of services or training that they wish. Total funding authorized for the block grant was $2.4 billion, a 25% decrease from total FY81 funding. The continuing resolution funds the social services block grant at this $2.4 billion level, as would the House-passed appropriations bill and the Senate committee-approved bill. The September budget requests $1.974 billion for this program. Child— and Family-Related Social Services Programs Left Intact E; Reconciliation Child Welfare Services (Title IV-B). The child welfare services program provides child protection, adoption, and foster care services to children under 18, without regard to income. Funds are distributed to the States, on the basis of the under-l8 population and per capita income, and are administered by the State child welfare agency. The Federal share is 75%. Child welfare Training (Title IV-B). The child welfare training program funds traineeships for students and teaching grants for curriculum CRS-ll IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/lO/81 development through discretionary grants to institutions of higher learning. is program is lOO% federally funded. Child Welfare Research and Demonstration (Title IV-B). This program awards discretionary grants for research and demonstration projects in the areas of child welfare, day care, youth development, and child and family development. Projects include studies of child abuse diagnosis, adolescent suicide, and family stress. These projects are lOO% federally funded. The IV-B programs were not affected by reconciliation. They are permanently authorized, and appropriation levels for the training and research and demonstration components are open~ended. For the services component, the authorization is $266 million, although appropriations have never exceeded $163 million. Both the continuing resolution and the House-passed appropriations bill fund all three of these programs at their FY81 levels: $163 million for services, $5 million for training, and $11 million for research and demonstration. The Senate committee-approved bill would fund child welfare services at $220 million and child welfare training at $4 million. The Senate bill would consolidate the research and demonstration component into a social services discretionary account, for a total figure of $17.3 million. The September budget requests $lO7 million for services and $4 million for “aining. The research and demonstration component would be consolidated n&tn several other discretionary research programs for a total request of $31 million. (This proposed consolidation includes more programs than the Senate's proposal.) Foster Care (Title IV-E). Funds under this program are paid for the maintenance of AFDC-eligible children who are in foster care, usually due to abuse or neglect. Funds are“ allotted to States on the basis of their under—l8 population and their foster care caseload. The Federal matching rate is the same as the matching rate for the medicaid program, which averages approximately 54% for all the States. ~ Adoption Assistance (Title IV-E). Funds under this program are used to make adoption assistance payments to adoptive parents of special needs children to enable these children to be permanently placed. Special needs children are defined as AFDC- or SSI-eligible children who are members of a sibling or minority group, older children, or children who have mental or physical handicaps. Funds are to be allotted to the States on behalf of any such child, with Federal matching based on the medicaid matching rate. (This program is expected to be fully operational by the end of FY82.) As was the case for the IV-B programs, title IV-E was not directly affected by reconciliation. Both the foster care and adoption. assistance Jgrams are permanently authorized, with open-ended authorization levels. \.he foster care program is currently operating under a temporary ceiling, established for each State.) CRS-l2 IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/10/Bl The continuing resolution and the House—passed appropriations bill -both allocate $171 million for the foster care program, but the Housr appropriations report (H.Rept. 97-251) states that additional funds will probably be required later. The Senate committee-approved bill would provide for $225 million for foster care. The new Administration budget requests a total of $264 million for the foster care program. The adoption iassistance program received $5 million under the continuing resolution, the House-passed appropriations bill, and the Senate committee-approved bill, and this amount was also requested in the September budget. ‘ Child Abuse (State grant component). This program funds services for the prevention and treatment of child abuse and neglect, such as interdisciplinary teams of professionals to assist abusive families, assistance to parental self-help groups, and crisis centers and hotlines. Recipients of services are abused and neglected children and their families, without regard to income. Under the State grant program, funding is provided through block grants based on each eligible State’s under-l8 population. There is no State matching requirement. ‘ Child Abuse Research and Demonstration and Administration. Child abuse research and demonstration grants include grants to study_ issues such as abuse of children in institutions and the role of alcohol in child abuse. Demonstration projects include studies of various treatment approaches in areas such as child sexual abuse, child neglect, and adolescent abuse. The grants are 100% federally funded. This category also includes funds for administration of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in DHHS, which currently administers both the child abuse State grant program and the research and demonstration grant program. Adoption Opportunities Program. The adoption apportunities program gathers information and provides technical assistance to the States to encourage and facilitate the adoptive placement of older, handicapped, and minority children. .One of its specific projects is the development and operation of a national adoption information exchange system. In addition to its Washington office, the program operates 10 adoption resource centers in the 10 DHHS regions, which serve as clearinghouses for information and assistance to the States in their region. This program is 100% federally funded. The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and Adoption Reform Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-266) is the authorizing legislation for both the child abuse and adoption opportunities programs. The State grant component of the child abuse program, which already functions somewhat like a small State block grant program, was funded at its FY81 level, $7 million, through FY83 by reconciliation. ‘ The child abuse research and demonstration component, the administering agency (the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect in DHHS), and the adoption opportunities program were not explicitly extended by reconciliation. However, $12 million was authorized for discretionary activities in the specific areas of child abuse prevention, treatment, and information dissemination, .and for operation of a national adoption information exchange system. If these activities are carried out, the bill requires that the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect continue to CRS-13 IB8lO69 UPDATB4l2/lO/81 operate. The bill also stipulates that, of the discretionary $12 million, $2 gllion be used to carry out activities of the adoption opportunities program. The continuing resolution, the House-passed appropriations, and the Senate committee-approved appropriations bill, all fund these programs at the levels set forth in reconciliation: $7 million for child abuse State grants, and $12 million for discretionary activities relating to child abuse prevention and adoption reform. The Administration's September budget requests $5 million for child abuse State grants. The new budget puts the child abuse research and demonstration and the adoption opportunities programs into a general social services research account, along with several other discretionary programs, and requests a total of $31 million for these consolidated programs. Headstart. This program funds educational, health, nutritional, and other social services for low-income preschool children. Funds are allotted to the States on a formula basis and are distributed to local Headstart agencies. The broad objective of the program is to eliminate the gap in early childhood development that is thought to exist between economically disadvantaged children'and their more advantaged peers. The Headstart program was the one child- and family-related social services program that the Administration (March budget), the House, and the snate all proposed to leave intact, and with increased funding. (In fact, ieauthorization of the Headstart program was omitted in the House version of the reconciliation bill, for reasons that are not apparent, but in the meantime the Education and Labor Committee had reported out a bill that would have reauthorized the Headstart program and funded it in FY82 at the same level -- ,$95O million -— that had originally been requested by the Administration.) The program was extended through FY84 by reconciliation, with an authorization for FY82 of $950 million, a l6% increase over the FY81 level. Because of the wording of the continuing resolution, Headstart will be funded through Dec. l5 at its FY81 level, because this level is lower than the House-passed level of $950 million. The Senate Appropriations Committee also approved a level fif $950 million. The Administration's revised Headstart request was originally $836 million, a l2% cut from the March 1981 request.’ This figure was later reduced to $831 million, a l.3% increase over Headstart's FY81 appropriation. Family Planning (Title X of the Public Health Service Act). Title X authorizes grants to State and local health departments and private nonprofit organizations for (1) family planning services, (2) training of family planning personnel, (3) research in family planning, and (4) development and dissemination of family planning educational materials. Recipients of services are primarily low-income women and adolescents. The program is 100% vderally funded. The family planning program was reauthorized through FY84 by reconciliation, and was left a categorical program. Its FY82 authorization CRS-14 y IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/10/Bl was reduced to $127 million, however, a 23% decrease from the program's FY81 funding level. The continuing resolution and the House-passed appropriatio bill provide for a funding level of $l30 million for the family planning program, as does the Senate committee-approved bill. The new Administration budget requests $98 million. Juvenile Delinquency Prevention. This program provides for both discretionary grants and formula grants to States for projects to prevent juvenile delinquency and improve the juvenile justice system. Projects include programs to deinstitutionalize status offenders, to find alternatives to incarceration of juvenile offenders, and to prevent school violence. The discretionary component of the program is l00% federally funded. The State grant program is 90% federally funded, and funds are distributed to States on the basis of their under—l8 population. Although the Administration had wanted to abolish this program, both the House and Senate wanted to continue to fund it (it needed no reauthorization, as it is currently authorized through FY84). The reconciliation bill provides for an authorization of $77 million for FY82, a 23% decrease from the FY81 appropriation. The continuing resolution and the House-passed appropriations bill (H.R. 4l69, Commerce-Justice-State-Judiciary) fund this program at $70 million, as does H.R. 4169 as reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee. The new Administration budget, like the March budget, requests no funds for the juvenile delinquency program. Runaway Youth. This program funds runaway shelters and associated services, such as counseling and referral for teenage runaways, and their families. The program also supports a national toll—free runaway hotline. Funding is distributed to States according to the State's under-l8 population. These projects are 90% federally funded. The runaway youth program was not mentioned in the final version of the reconciliation bill, so, since it is currently authorized through FY84, it will be continued as is. It is authorized for $25 million for FY82, but the program has never received more than $11 million. The continuing resolution funds the runaway youth program at its FY81 level of $11 million. The House-passed appropriations bill would fund this program in FY82 at $16 million, while the Senate committee-approved bill would fund it at $ll million. The Administration's September budget requests $7 million for this program. Adolescent Pregnancy The former adolescent pregnancy program awarded discretionary service grants to community programs that provide, either directly _or through referrals to other programs, a variety of services to pregnant adolescents and adolescent parents. Services include educational and employment services, health and family planning services, and family counseling. The program was 70% federally funded. Adolescent pregnancy is the only programl that underwent substantive CRS-l5 IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/lO/81 changes as a result of the reconciliation process. The former adolescent gegnancy program, which received an appropriation of $10 million in FY81, was repealed and consolidated, along with six other programs, into a maternal and child health block grant with a total authorization level of $373 million. A new adolescent pregnancy program -- the adolescent family life program (see Reconciliation, above) -- was approved during reconciliation, with an authorization of $30 million for FY82. The former program's 27 grantees, if found to be eligible, would presumably receive funding under the new program, but there is no explicit language in the legislation to this effect. The maternal and child health block grant was funded at a level of $331 million under both the continuing resolution and the House-passed appropriations bill. The Senate committee-approved bill would provide for $351 million. The new Administration budget requests $291 million for the maternal and child health block grant. Neither the continuing resolution, the House-passed appropriations bill, the Senate committee—approved bill, nor the Administration's September budget include any funding for the new adolescent family life program. Provision is made in the continuing resolution for continued operation of the Office of Adolescent Pregnancy Programs, which administered the former adolescent. .pregnancy program and will administer the new adolescent family life program, if and when it receives an appropriation. The Senate committee-approved bill would also fund operation of this office during FY82. THE FAMILY PROTECTEON ACT In addition to child and family issues involved in the reconciliation process and the appropriations process, the 97th Congress will be considering another family-related bill that has attracted much attention: the Family Protection Act. This legislation was originally introduced in the 96th Congress as S. 1808, by Senator Laxalt, and as H.R. 6028, by Representative Symms. A slightly revised bill, H.R. 311, has been introduced in the 97th Congress by Representative G. Hansen. The legislation was later revised further and was introduced in June, 1981, as S. 1378 and H.R. 3955. This bill is supported by those who describe themselves as members of the "pro-family" movement, to counter what they see as the negative direction in which the Federal Government is moving with respect to family issues. Much of the bill concerns education. The bill would (1) give parents, churches, ‘and the States more control OV€I' the content and values presented by thé public schools, and would discourage the teaching of values, behaviors, _and sex roles that contradict what is described as "the American way of life as it has been historically understood;" (2) give the States more control over educational matters such as attendance requirements, teacher certification, and integration of the sexes in sports; and (3) would replace the current system of Federal aid to education with a State block grant system. The bill would also attempt to establish the right of individuals to engage in "oluntary prayer in public schools and other public buildings. In other areas, the bill would (1) prohibit Federal regulation of a number of activities sponsored by religious organizations; and (2) provide for various tax measures designed to encourage family savings accounts, trusts, retirement accounts, and other forms of support for dependent family members. CR8-16 IB8lO69 UPDATE—12/10/81 Finally, in the domestic relations area, the bill would (1) plac limitations on federally funded activities in the area of child abuse; (2) redefine child abuse for the purposes of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, to specifically exclude physical punishment administered by a parent; (3) require parental knowledge before providing minors, under any federally funded program, with contraception or abortion counseling; (4) prohibit federally funded legal services programs from doing divorce work or giving legal assistance in "gay rights" cases; and (5) deny Federal funds to any individual or group for the purpose of advocating homosexuality. For more detailed information on the Family Protection Act and examples of pro and con analyses by various groups, see CRS Infopack IPO149. For a more detailed description of congressional action on the Family Protection Act, see CRS Issue Brief IB81147. LEGISLATION P.L. 97-35, H.R. 3982 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Signed into law, Aug. 13, 1981. 'P.L. 97°51, H.J.Res. 325 Continuing appropriations for FY82. Signed into law, Oct. 2, 1981. P.L. 97=85, H.J.Res. 368 Continuing appropriations for FY82. Signed into law Nov. 23, 1981. pH.R. 311 (G. Hansen) Family Protection Act. Contains a number of- provisions relating to education, taxation, civil rights and domestic relations. Introduced Jan. 5, 1981; referred to Committees on Agriculture; Armed Services; Education and Labor; Judiciary; and Ways and Means. H.R. 2318 (Murphy et a1.) Reauthorizes the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and Adoption .Reform Act‘ (child abuse and adoption opportunities programs) through FY86. Introduced Mar. 4, 1981; reported out of Committee on Education and Labor, Apr. 28, 1981. H.R. 3045 (Andrews) Reauthorizes section 512 of the Economic Opportunity Act (the Head Start program) through FY86. Introduced Apr. 7, 1981; reported out of Education and Labor Committee, May 5, 1981. ' H.R. 3955 (A. Smith)/S. 1378 (Jepsen et al.) Family Protection Act. Contains a number of provisions. relating tr education, taxation, civil rights, and domestic relations. H.R. 3955 introduced June 17, 1981; referred to Committees on Armed Services, Education and Labor, Judiciary, and ways and Means. S. 1378 introduced June 17, 1981; referred to Committee on Finance. CRS-17 _ IB8lO69 UPDATE-l2/lO/81 H.R. 4560 (Natcher) FY82 Labor-Health and Human Services—Education appropriations. Introduced Jan. 15, 1981. Reported from House Appropriations Committee, Sept. 23, 1981 (H.Rept. 97~251). Passed House by voice vote, Oct. 6, 1981. S. 1085 (Denton) Reauthorizes the Headstart program through FY84. Introduced Apr. 30, 1981; referred to Committee on Labor and Human Resources. S. 1090 (Denton) Authorizes categorical grants to local organizations for adolescent family life programs. Introduced Apr. 30, 1981; referred to Committee on Labor and Human Resources. - ._.._..-. mrr vtw La 4.. ,-~23’! WA-i3%—§?:NGTON UNi\.'E':RS~|TY ST. LOUIS - M0. Z:—...