Finding Permanent Homes for Adoptable Children - Pepperdine ...

Funding is another advantage that accompanies federalization. Similar to other child welfare programs,
federal mandate is expected to include federal funding. The current ICPC system operates with standard
allocation of funds; this carries with it the burden on states to pull funds from their own budgets to
support the interstate placement endeavor. This budgetary responsibility creates further strains on
existing state deficits, and federal dollars would help ease that burden. Such funds also answer many of
the challenges posed by public agencies operating on finite figures and continuous requests for aid. The
expectation that comes with federal funding is that these requests not only be met, but also met in a more
timely and responsible fashion. Funding to secure the manpower and technology to manage placement
cases are two of the largest obstacles now facing the ICPC, and option one speaks to these concerns.
In addition to the challenges federal funding overcomes, there is also a level of accountability provided by
federalization not present in the current ICPC process. The issues discussed at length throughout this
report concerning judicial inconsistency, varying standards between states and counties, and the different
degrees of tracking sophistication are each addressed with federalization and eased with federal dollars.
For instance, there is less room for state interpretation with regard to home studies and finalization
approval, there is a federal standard for judges to refer to and comply with in their own jurisdictions, and
placements made outside the ICPC are subject to enforceability not yet seen in the current process.
Federalization provides an entirely new level of oversight not now enjoyed by the ICPC. While reporting
is now voluntary, a federal mandate eliminates that aspect and demands constant assessment by each state
involved. Tracking methodology receives ample attention in this discussion as well, and if the ASFA
mandate is used as an indicator, resources as well as expectations for consistent assessments will follow.
Disadvantages of Federalizing the Interstate Placement Process
Though this approach achieves many of the report’s goals, it also imposes major costs. This approach
places a large bureaucratic burden on public agencies. Therefore, it is unlikely to be a more “adoption
friendly” option, as many federal initiatives are perpetually lost within the bureaucracy. Part of the
advantage of the current system is that states are allowed to establish the equivalent of “community
standards” in assuring the appropriate placement of children. In a federalized approach, this freedom is
replaced with one rule for all communities. The collaborative, local control long held by the ICPC then
becomes virtually obsolete. With federalization comes federal direction, a conversation that dictates
rather than discusses, and in the long run it is more difficult to instigate change when it is required.
One other substantial disadvantage is the viability of extending federal consideration to interstate
placements under the current administration. Taking into account the current priorities and
preoccupations of the nation, both at home and abroad, there may be hesitation by the Bush
22