News / Articles

The Good: Progress on Healthcare & Education Access, Public Safety Measures, and Support for Children and Caregivers in the Foster System 

While we didn’t see the Legislature pass every positive policy it could have for Texas children and families, there are several key victories to celebrate.  The League, through its advocacy efforts, helped secure the passage of several important bills, including SB 1946, HB 451, HB 4655, and HB 1211! Here are some high points of this session when it comes to issues impacting children across the state. 

Several bills, like SB 207 and HB 3940, were passed to address youth access to health coverage and care, including mental health care. SB 207, which was signed by the Governor on Thursday, May 30th and is effective immediately, ensures that public school students are granted excused absences to attend mental health care appointments. This aligns with one of the League’s children’s issues priorities this session. HB 3940 is a bi-partisan bill that addresses a critical gap in access to health coverage and care impacting newborns. Since nearly 1 of 5 newborns eligible for Medicaid are not auto-enrolled as they should be, HB 3940 seeks to ensure coverage during this critical time for infant medical check-ups and screenings. It requires the Health and Human Services Commission to annually notify providers and Managed Care Organizations that, when treating these newborns who have not yet been assigned a Medicaid ID number, they may use the mother’s number for reimbursement up to 1 year after birth. 

Regarding the safety of children and families, the Legislature also demonstrated bi-partisan support for several measures aimed at addressing issues like family violence and the commercial sexual exploitation of children. First, SB 1946 was sent to the Governor for approval on Monday, June 2nd. The bill establishes a two-year task force comprised of experts and survivors to perform a variety of functions that will help address the preventable and alarmingly frequent tragedy of family violence homicide in Texas. League members were instrumental in expressing widespread support for this bill, with over 1,500 messages urging legislators to vote yes sent in response to our Action Alert! Next, HB 451 has been approved by the Governor and will be effective September 1st of this year. The bill, which received overwhelming support from League members, will require screening for children entering foster care and children under the jurisdiction of a juvenile probation department for risk of commercial sexual exploitation — a problem disproportionately impacting at-risk youth populations. 

Strides were also made in improving services for foster youth, especially those transitioning to independent living, as the Legislature also demonstrated bi-partisan support for a few crucial bills, like HB 4655 and HB 1211. First, HB 4655, which was sent to the Governor May 23rd, enhances and expands the information included in both the widely utilized Preparation for Adult Living Program and the plans required for foster youth transitioning to independent living. Next, HB 1211, which was sent to the Governor June 1st, will directly address one of the League’s key priorities for the session — expanding access to continuing education benefits for current and former foster youth transitioning to adulthood. The League’s action alert on HB 1211 received an overwhelming response from League members in the final days of the session and it paid off!  HB 1211 will extend the deadline for utilization of the Tuition and Fee Waiver available to all foster youth when pursuing higher education at state public institutions from age 25 to 27. While DFPS, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, and organizations, like Texas CASA, advocated for the complete removal of the time constraint on eligibility, this extension still expands access to a important benefit.

The Legislature also took some steps to affirm the rights of relative caregivers involved in the foster care system with HB 2350, which was sent to the Governor May 23rd. This bill will expand and affirm the standing of a child’s relative caregivers to intervene legally on the child’s behalf, while also ensuring that only those with a legitimate, direct interest in the child’s wellbeing are able to initiate legal action. 

We thank the Legislature for their attention and action to improve conditions for Texas children and families, but, as always, alongside the steps forward, there are some reversals.

The Bad: A Lack of Action on Key Bills Impacting Healthcare, Housing, Education and Foster Placements and Regression on Protecting LGBTQ+ Children and Maternal Health

At the end of this session, the Senate neglected to act on several bills that would have implemented some essential solutions to critical issues, including the following bills.

HB 321 would have created an express lane option for enrollment in Children’s Medicaid or CHIP for families applying for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) whose children are identified as eligible. This bill would have helped address the high rate of uninsured children in Texas by offering more efficient and innovative opportunities for the enrollment of already eligible children who are slipping through the cracks. HB 475 would have required Medicaid coverage and reimbursement for multisystemic therapy services, thereby expanding the availability of critical mental health services under Medicaid. This type of therapy prioritizes early intervention measures that would prevent youth mental health crises and mitigate foster care entries resulting from youth mental health problems. HB 215, which would have appropriately assigned support rights and benefits to relative caregivers involved in foster care, remained in the Senate Health and Human Services Committee for over a month without action. For the over 200,000 Texas children living in various kinship placement arrangements, neglecting to pass this bill means that they and their caregivers will continue to be unsupported in creating safe and stable environments. HB 1784, which would have implemented measures to assist homeless and current or former foster students at public institutions of higher education, also received no consideration from the Senate. This important and comprehensive bill included requirements making liaison officers responsible for sharing information with key services, such as financial aid, and prioritized access to academic housing and temporary housing between academic terms. It would have met students’ basic needs while they pursued stability and success through higher education. 

In the House, SB 2041 — a bill requiring that the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) consider whether a placement can meet the long-term needs of a child — never received a vote after being placed on the General State Calendar for May 27th. The simple but important requirements of SB 2041 would have prioritized the long-term stability of children in foster care and helped mitigate disruptions. 

Two problematic bills that did pass must also be noted. First, HB 1106, an anti-LGBTQ+ bill, was sent to the Governor May 30th. This bill will codify the state’s prohibition on including a person’s refusal to affirm a child’s gender identify (even when legal changes to names and pronouns have been made) or sexual orientation in the definition of child abuse or neglect. Now LGBTQ+ children can be sure that the state will not intervene when they experience bigotry and discrimination at home. Next, at the intersection of women’s health and child welfare, SB 1388, which was sent to the Governor May 23rd, seeks to provide “family support services” that would, in reality, continue to suppress access to information about reproductive choice and abortion. This bill will extend the definition of an “abortion services provider” beyond medical practitioners to include those engaged in information sharing about reproductive choice and abortion services, while also denying funding to any organizations “collaborating” with “entities that promote abortion.” This bill resembles a homegrown “global gag rule,” making funding for women’s health conditional on a refusal to promote or even associate with organizations that promote or provide information on abortion services. The effects of this bill will be harmful for women’s health, worsening already restrictive and devastating conditions. Moreover, children’s health will also be put at risk as this bill further restricts certain maternal health services relevant to the health of the child, attempting only to ensure birth while the state is doing very little to support mothers and children after birth. 

This may be difficult and disheartening to read, but in knowing more about legislation, we are able to continue to fight, mitigate negative effects, and share support for the communities and populations most impacted. The League will celebrate the victories of this session, while also continuing to voice our opposition to both regression and the lack of necessary progress.

The Uncertain: A Push for Prioritizing Parental Rights

Finally, there are a few bills (and Constitutional Amendments on the ballot this November) whose impact will be uncertain. Notably, HB 116, authored by Representatives Dutton and Joland Jones, was signed by the Governor and will be effective on September 1st of this year. HB 116 removes grounds for the involuntary termination of the parent-child relationship — specifically, the “O” grounds. The “O” grounds allow for DFPS to justify termination when a parent has failed to fully comply with the provisions of a court-ordered service plan. These often require the completion of services, like drug rehabilitation or domestic violence and parenting courses, that address the risks for removal. The “O” grounds have been criticized as being overly broad or ambiguous, allowing DFPS to terminate in cases where parents have been actively engaged, but not to a standard of compliance DFPS considers necessary. Most terminations include some or at least partial justification under “O”. Organizations, like Texas CASA, who have supported the state’s efforts to ensure family preservation, support the removal of the “O” grounds. However, this change also seems in line with the Legislature’s mandate to prioritize parental rights across all settings, including public education, health care, and child welfare — which has proven to be a slippery slope with regards to the impacts on children themselves. It is uncertain whether the removal of the “O” grounds will have the intended effect of preserving families who are actively and properly pursuing reunification and attempting to address risks for removal, or if the change will open the door for parents to neglect addressing the risks for removal, even when it is the most appropriate goal and in the best interest of the child.