Why is it taking so long to move down the road?: Creating a regional border agreement in the DMV as an alternative for the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children

The Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) is an agreement between all 50 states and the District of Columbia governing the process of placing a foster child out of state. Notorious for its long wait times and system backlog, the ICPC presents a host of problems for children attempting to move mere minutes across state lines to be with a relative or kin placement instead of state foster care. In an effort to make this process smoother, 18 different “border agreements” have been adopted by several neighboring states across the U.S. Such border agreements give temporary placement licenses to relatives and kin while the ICPC process is ongoing. While this is a good start towards a solution, the ICPC could be further streamlined if border agreements were used more widely, especially in regional contexts. This article considers the possibility of such a regional agreement between the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Northern Virginia (known as the “DMV”). By comparing and contrasting two existing border agreements in these three jurisdictions, a regional DMV border agreement can be created implementing the best terms of both agreements.     

Returning to the child welfare system: Understanding the wellbeing,health, education,and placement of children who return

Using longitudinal archival Child Welfare System (CWS) data, this study describes child health and wellbeing at their initial entrance into the CWS and subsequent returns. Associations between child wellbeing, health, placement stability, and frequency of returning to the system were also investigated. Results indicated most children were healthy and developmentally on target. In addition, emotional distress, behavioral concerns, and number of placements in the CWS were significantly correlated with placement stability. Future work should utilize the use of developmental assessments to systematically and reliably document the concerns for children in the system, and investigate factors contributing to stable placements.     

Why are the highly educated more sympathetic towards welfare recipients?

Stigmatising stereotypes about welfare recipients play a crucial role in building public support for welfare retrenchment. Existing literature finds that the highly educated are more sympathetic towards welfare recipients. This is surprising given the economic advantage associated with educational attainment. Furthermore, educational attainment has increased even as sympathy for welfare recipients has declined. I address these puzzles using three decades of British survey data and find that it is the socially liberal attitudes rather than the economic advantage associated with higher education that explains why this group is sympathetic towards welfare recipients. These findings reveal an educational cleavage in stereotypes about welfare recipients, which is based on non-economic concerns, and has implications for support for welfare retrenchment and policies such as increased conditionality. This cleavage is weaker in more highly educated regions, implying that there are diminishing returns from increasing educational attainment in terms of sympathetic attitudes towards welfare recipients.