Faith-based organizations have played a vital role in the child welfare system for many years, with numerous modern agencies having roots stretching back over a century. While government involvement in the care and well-being of vulnerable children has grown significantly in recent decades, states still depend considerably on faith-based agencies (FBAs). It is a common practice for states to contract with private child welfare agencies, including FBAs, for crucial services such as foster care and adoption. These partnerships also extend to leveraging faith networks to aid in the recruitment of foster and adoptive families. Understanding the scope of religious foster care programs is essential for a comprehensive view of child welfare in the US.
This article delves into the role of faith communities and FBAs within the child welfare system, exploring key aspects such as:
- An evaluation of states that actively engage with faith communities and FBAs, and those that do not, particularly considering states grappling with the opioid crisis.
- An examination of the potential consequences for states when regulations clash with the operational principles of some FBAs, potentially leading to the cessation of their foster and foster-to-adopt programs.
It’s important to acknowledge that comprehensive data on child welfare agencies, including both private and faith-based entities, is generally limited. While some organizations excel at data collection and analysis, accessibility can vary widely. Factors influencing data availability include county, state, and federal requirements, the size and resources of the organization, internal practices and agency culture, and the specific data systems utilized. Despite these limitations, the existing research and information on FBAs offer valuable insights into their critical contribution to the child welfare system. As data collection methods become more advanced across states and agencies, a clearer picture of the operations and outcomes of FBAs will emerge.
Currently, it’s evident that many communities are significantly supported by the contributions of FBAs. However, some FBAs have been compelled to discontinue their foster and adoption services due to regulations that conflict with their deeply held religious beliefs. A notable example is Illinois, which mandated that all child welfare agencies, including FBAs like Catholic Charities, must be willing to place children with same-sex couples. Although many child welfare agencies in Illinois already worked with same-sex couples, Catholic Charities organizations faced a direct conflict with their religious tenets. Consequently, in 2011, after decades of dedicated service, Catholic Charities terminated their foster and adoption contracts with the state, leading to the displacement of thousands of children. Similar situations have forced FBAs in Boston, San Francisco, and Washington, DC, to make comparable decisions.
In response, several state legislatures, including Michigan, Texas, Virginia, South Dakota, North Dakota, Mississippi, Alabama, and more recently, Oklahoma and Kansas, have enacted laws to protect FBAs. These laws exempt FBAs from requirements that would force them to choose between serving vulnerable children and families and adhering to their faith. These protections aim to ensure a diverse range of agencies to serve a diverse population and maximize the availability of foster and adoptive families. This is particularly crucial as the number of children in foster care nationwide is increasing sharply, partly due to the opioid crisis, which has been declared a national emergency. From 2012 to 2016 alone, there was a 10 percent increase in the number of children in care.
To ensure high-quality foster care, states should recognize and utilize the valuable contributions of faith communities and organizations. Collaboration to enhance services for children and families is more beneficial than policies that might inadvertently exclude them from the child welfare system.
The Role of Faith-Based Agencies and Networks in Child Welfare
Why States Partner with Private and Faith-Based Agencies. The provision of child welfare services, including foster care and child protection, initially began in the private sector. In fact, some states’ reliance on private and faith-based organizations dates back to the early 1800s. While the government provided some funding to these early privately run programs, its role became more prominent in the early to mid-1900s, leading to the creation of a public child welfare system. However, starting in the 1990s, many states shifted towards increased reliance on private providers again. This shift was partly motivated by the desire to improve both the cost-effectiveness and quality of services, and many states began implementing performance-based contracts. States like Florida, Kansas, and Illinois have notably privatized significant portions of their child welfare services. While the relationships between public and private providers are diverse across local child welfare systems in the U.S., states ultimately retain authority over cases.
Private and faith-based agencies and networks offer distinct advantages in their partnerships with state child welfare agencies. One key benefit is their ability to tap into faith communities and attract new segments of the population to become foster and adoptive parents. In some cases, private providers enhance state funding for foster care through supplemental resources. Randy Daniels, Vice President of International Resource and Program Development at Buckner International, a child welfare service provider in Texas, explains that private donations allow them to add “about 35 percent on top of what the state pays us to care for a child, to ensure the kids get better care.” This additional funding addresses needs that state funds may not cover. “We pass more money on to the foster family for a child’s school events, clothing, athletics, etc. We also do additional training, such as trauma-informed training.”
Furthermore, some FBAs demonstrate particular success in placing children who may face greater difficulty in finding adoptive homes. This includes older children, sibling groups, and children with special needs. For example, in 2016, 45 percent of adoptions facilitated by Catholic Charities involved children with special needs, according to the organization. St. Vincent Catholic Charities in Michigan, currently involved in a lawsuit with the ACLU regarding its religious beliefs, is particularly adept at finding homes for large sibling groups and teenagers. These partnerships with FBAs capable of securing permanent homes for more challenging cases are invaluable to states. They help prevent children from remaining in care for extended periods or aging out of the system without achieving family permanency.
Several large networks of FBAs exist, including Lutheran Services, Catholic Charities, and Bethany Christian Services. However, many FBAs operate independently, not affiliated with these larger networks, which can complicate efforts to aggregate performance data and compare them to other agencies.
While FBAs do not dominate the child welfare landscape, they constitute a significant and active part of it, as noted by Stephen Monsoma. Catholic Charities alone provided adoption services to over 82,000 children between 2006 and 2016. In 2016, Catholic Charities agencies across the country served approximately 10,500 children through foster care and adoption services. If the contributions of other faith-based networks and providers like Bethany Christian Services, Lutheran Services, and numerous other agencies are included, the total number of children served by FBAs becomes remarkably significant. Quantifying exactly How Many Foster Care Programs Are Religious is challenging due to data limitations, but the impact is clearly substantial.
State Interactions with Faith-Based Agencies and Faith Communities. The following examples illustrate the varying approaches states take in engaging with FBAs and faith communities. These examples also include background data on child welfare and substance abuse issues within each state. It is important to note that the figures for caretaker substance abuse as a factor in child removal, presented in the tables, are likely underreported. This underreporting can occur because caseworkers may record only the most critical reason for removal, or substance abuse issues may not be immediately apparent.
Recent research from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty has established a correlation between the rise in substance abuse, particularly linked to the opioid crisis, and the increasing number of children in foster care. Furthermore, HHS reports that “caseworkers and judges in areas hardest hit by the epidemic described the difficulty of finding relatives to care for children because in many cases multiple members are misusing opioids. They described this as a substantial shift from recent years, when they would commonly rely on family members.” This situation intensifies the need for non-relative foster homes. While prescription opioid rates have begun to decline, opioid overdose deaths continue to rise nationwide, largely due to illicit drugs like fentanyl. Nationally, in FY 2016, approximately 92,000 children entered foster care due to parental drug abuse.
States More Supportive of Faith Communities and Faith-Based Agencies. As substance abuse issues worsen and the number of children in foster care increases, FBAs and faith communities become even more valuable partners for states. While many states already collaborate with faith communities, the following six examples highlight states that actively leverage and protect FBAs and faith networks.
Table showing data for states more open to faith communities and FBAs
While Arkansas and Kentucky have not yet enacted legislation specifically protecting FBAs, unlike states such as Michigan, Texas, and Oklahoma, they still deeply respect and rely on their faith communities. In Arkansas, The CALL, a Christian organization founded in 2007, has been instrumental in recruiting nearly half of the state’s foster families, working in partnership with hundreds of churches. While The CALL operates without state funding and primarily works with Christian couples—referring families not meeting their criteria directly to the state’s Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS)—DCFS relies significantly on The CALL’s support in finding foster homes as the number of children in care continues to grow.
Professor Michael Howell-Moroney noted that “The CALL required the cooperation of the state to function.” He also highlighted that 36 percent of families recruited by The CALL stated they would not have become foster or adoptive parents without the organization’s outreach, and 40 percent were unsure. This clearly demonstrates the significant role faith communities can play in expanding the pool of foster families by reaching new populations of potential foster and adoptive parents.
Kentucky has adopted a different collaborative approach with its faith communities. In 2016, Governor Matt Bevin launched the “Open Hearts/Open Home” initiative, aimed at finding permanent placements, ideally through adoption, for children in foster care by engaging churches and nonprofit groups across the state to recruit nurturing families within their local communities. Georgia has also increased its engagement with faith communities in recent years as its foster care numbers have risen. For example, Georgia’s Division of Family and Children Services partnered with Promise 686, which initiated “Live the Promise” in 2013 to recruit foster families from churches across the state. Promise 686’s website lists partnerships with approximately 150 churches from various denominations.
Michigan and Texas have taken further steps by passing legislation in recent years to proactively protect FBAs, ensuring they can continue their partnerships with the state without being forced to compromise their religious beliefs. In May 2018, Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed similar legislation to shield FBAs. Georgia also attempted to pass such a bill, which passed the state senate but its future is uncertain.
However, a lawsuit in Michigan has introduced uncertainty regarding the future of legislation protecting FBAs. The new law in Oklahoma is also likely to face similar legal challenges. If this protective legislation is overturned, these states could potentially lose the services of numerous FBAs.
States Less Receptive to Faith Communities and Faith-Based Agencies. Not all states embrace FBAs and faith communities in their child welfare efforts to the same extent as states like Arkansas and Michigan. Here are four examples of states that, despite facing significant drug-related issues and increasing numbers of children needing adoption, have reduced their involvement with FBAs or indicated a potential move towards decreased collaboration in the near future.
Illinois stands out as a prominent example where FBAs have been compelled to cease their child welfare services. In 2011, Illinois mandated that all child welfare providers must be willing to place children with same-sex couples, regardless of any religious beliefs that might prohibit such placements. Catholic Charities, a major network of FBAs impacted by this policy, was forced to terminate its contract with the state. This decision resulted in the displacement of an estimated 2,000–3,000 children from FBAs, who were then transferred to other agencies.
Steve Roach, Executive Director of Catholic Charities of Springfield—one of the Catholic Charities organizations that ceased contracting with Illinois—discussed the policy change and how his organization previously addressed sexual orientation in potential foster parents and relatives. “Our preference for non-relative foster placements was with married couples to give children the opportunity for a mother and a father figure in their lives. We would work with single parents as long as they were not cohabitating with another adult. We never inquired about sexual orientation.”
Roach also emphasized the agency’s commitment to maintaining connections between children in care and their families. “If there’s a suitable relative, that’s always preferable [to a non-relative foster home], presuming they met the same foster parent standards, and we didn’t ask about sexual orientation. Family is always prioritized, and if the state deems them suitable then that’s where the children will go. If they have to be ripped from their homes, it is better they be placed at least with family.” When asked about Catholic Charities’ performance compared to other child welfare agencies in Illinois, Roach, a long-time employee, stated that Catholic Charities FBAs consistently ranked near the top in the state’s performance-based evaluation system. Nevertheless, they were compelled to end their contracts due to regulations requiring placements with same-sex couples.
Ohio, significantly affected by the opioid crisis, has also signaled a potential future reduction in contracts with some FBAs through the recently introduced Ohio Fairness Act. This action aligns with precedents set by major cities that have already terminated contracts with several FBAs.
In 2010, Washington, DC, ended its partnership with Catholic Charities. Similarly, after a century of service, Catholic Charities in Boston and San Francisco were forced to cease providing foster and adoptive services in 2006 due to the same issue. In Boston, Catholic Charities had found homes for tens of thousands of children over the years, “more than any other agency in the state,” according to the Boston Globe. From 2011 to 2015, opioid overdose deaths in Boston surged by 130 percent due to fentanyl. Massachusetts overall has seen nearly a 30 percent increase in the number of children in care in the past five years and is facing such a shortage of foster homes that it granted 50 percent more overcapacity waivers to families in a single 12-month period to accommodate more children.
Most recently, in March 2018, Philadelphia announced the suspension of placements with Catholic Social Services and Bethany Christian Services pending an investigation into whether these organizations violated the city’s Fair Practices Ordinance. In 2017, Bethany placed 170 and Catholic Social Services placed 226 of the city’s children in foster homes.
Philadelphia’s decision to suspend services came shortly after an urgent appeal for 300 new foster families. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, “In Philadelphia about 700 children are in group home placements. Of those, [Department of Human Services Commissioner Cynthia] Figueroa said, about 250 could be living with families, while 450 more need to stay in a staffed facility due to physical or emotional needs.” This recruitment effort is the largest in a decade for the city. In 2016, Philadelphia ranked second among the nation’s most populous counties in drug overdose death rates. In a period where states are struggling with the opioid crisis and rapidly increasing numbers of children in foster care, leveraging quality resources is crucial for protecting children and serving communities.
In states that have terminated or may terminate contracts with some FBAs, issues of capacity and service disruption are also important considerations. Even in states where the number of children in care is decreasing or the number of foster homes is increasing, continuous recruitment and training of foster parents remain vital. Many foster parents discontinue fostering after just one year, making ongoing recruitment and training essential to maintain an adequate number of foster homes. Without sufficient foster homes, children may be placed in group homes as an alternative. While group homes are necessary for some children requiring specialized interventions, they are sometimes used as overflow placements when foster homes are lacking. Furthermore, some foster families are only willing to take children of a specific age range, sex, or with certain behavioral profiles. Therefore, even a numerical balance between foster homes and children does not guarantee a suitable match for every child.
Children in foster care sometimes experience multiple placement disruptions due to mismatches with families. A family might find themselves unable to provide the necessary level of care for a child’s needs, or they may struggle with certain behaviors. Each placement disruption is emotionally damaging for a child, and this instability can contribute to attachment and behavioral issues. Having a large pool of qualified foster families improves the likelihood of compatible placements. Faith networks and FBAs, as exemplified by The CALL, play a significant role in recruiting and training thousands of families annually and are invaluable assets for states in meeting this critical need.
The Negative Consequences of Losing Faith-Based Agencies and Prioritizing Children’s Interests. A critical question is what states risk losing by ceasing to work with many of their FBAs due to religious regulations. Illinois serves as a prime example, and as mentioned earlier, Michigan and Texas are currently facing lawsuits concerning their partnerships with FBAs, potentially leading to similar outcomes. Such lawsuits are either ongoing or threatened in several states that have enacted or are considering legislation to protect the religious freedom of their FBAs.
If legislation protecting FBAs is overturned, FBAs in these states would face a difficult choice: either compromise their religious beliefs to continue serving foster children or cease their child welfare services. Randy Daniels from Buckner estimates that approximately 15 percent of child welfare agencies contracted by Texas would seriously consider withdrawing if forced to act against their beliefs. Texas has the second-highest number of children in foster care nationwide, with around 30,000 children in care.
In Michigan, the state contracts with numerous FBAs. Bethany Christian Services and Catholic Charities have a substantial presence, each with multiple organizations providing foster and adoption services across the state. Many FBAs would be compelled to discontinue foster care and foster-to-adopt services if the ACLU succeeds in its lawsuit against Michigan’s laws protecting religious freedom for FBAs. Losing these agencies would be a significant blow to the state’s child welfare system. A brief filed in defense of the law notes that Bethany Christian Services and Catholic Charities agencies facilitate approximately 25 to 30 percent of Michigan’s foster care adoptions. This figure does not account for other FBAs in the state. Bethany Christian Services alone had over 730 licensed foster homes in Michigan in 2016.
Research indicates that practicing Christians are more than twice as likely to adopt compared to the general population, with Catholics being three times as likely and evangelicals five times as likely. Practicing Christians are also 50 percent more likely to become foster parents and almost twice as likely to consider becoming foster parents. As previously discussed, FBAs and faith networks are uniquely effective at recruiting these demographics and increasing the number of foster homes in their service areas.
Some argue that partnering with FBAs comes at a cost, suggesting that because some FBAs do not serve LGBT individuals, states may lose potential LGBT foster parents (who may be unable to be licensed by certain FBAs and therefore do not foster), thus reducing the overall number of available homes for children. However, the presence of FBAs does not preclude LGBT couples and individuals from fostering. Numerous public and private agencies in every state readily welcome qualified LGBT foster parents.
Given the numerous existing options for LGBT couples and individuals who wish to foster and adopt, compelling FBAs to place children with same-sex couples is unlikely to increase the number of LGBT foster homes, as some argue. Instead, it would reduce or eliminate options for individuals who value working with an FBA that aligns with their beliefs. Rather than increasing the number of homes available for children in care, forcing FBAs to cease their child welfare services actually decreases both the number and diversity of a state’s partners in recruiting and supporting foster and adoptive homes.
Currently, FBAs and faith communities play a crucial role in recruiting and training foster families and managing the caseloads of thousands of children, especially considering the rising national trend of foster care growth, partly driven by increased caretaker substance abuse. Research has shown that substance-involved cases are often more complex and take longer to resolve, leading to longer stays for children in foster care.
Given these increasing pressures on the child welfare system, states should not diminish the number of quality providers dedicated to improving the lives of children and families. The Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, introduced in Congress, proposes an approach to ensure FBAs can continue providing foster and adoptive services in accordance with their sincerely held religious beliefs.
Conclusion
Preventing FBAs, many of which have served their communities for decades and even over a century, from providing foster care and adoption services due to their sincerely held religious beliefs is counterproductive. It only increases the burden on other agencies, especially in regions where FBAs constitute a significant portion of service providers or where provider options are already limited. The ultimate consequence of such policies is borne by children in foster care. As Chuck Johnson, President of the National Council for Adoption, stated, “Whether public agencies, secular private agencies, or faith-based agencies, all are providing a very valuable contribution to the arena of services. The need for children to have more resources is growing not decreasing…. There’s a diverse community of families and children out there, and we need a diverse set of agencies.”
Forcing out FBAs undermines communities rather than strengthening them. States aiming to maximize the number of loving homes for vulnerable children in need of foster care and adoption should embrace FBAs and faith networks as valuable partners in child welfare work—and ensure they remain free to serve in ways consistent with their sincerely held religious convictions.
—Natalie Goodnow is a Research Fellow at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.
