An abuse finding disqualifies Maryland foster parents — unless they’re kin

Gov. Wes Moore and Maryland’s Department of Human Services (DHS) are celebrating what they describe as a historic milestone: Half of children aged 10 and under in the state’s foster care system are currently placed in “kinship care,” up from 34% just two years ago.

How did they accomplish this?

Until recently, Maryland had a single set of licensing requirements for foster parents – kin and non-kin – with uniform rules about what was disqualifying and how exceptions could be made.

But in 2024, Maryland passed a law seeking to increase kin placements through two strategies.

First, the law expands the definition of kin. A third cousin who has never met the child qualifies as kin. As does a “person identified by the child’s parent”; no blood, legal, or relational bond to the child is required. There are often good reasons to consider, or give preference to, individuals who do not meet strict definitions of relative (such as a godparent or coach).

But the second change Maryland made was to systematically remove safeguards for this broad group of individuals now designated as kin. The law directed DHS to create a separate licensing track because, as Angelique Salizan, chief of staff for the state’s Social Services Administration, explained, licensure was previously a “big barrier for kin.”

Maryland has now removed a long list of standard licensure requirements, under the premise they constitute unreasonable barriers for kin. These include disqualification on the basis of confirmed child abuse, medical and mental health screenings, training, a complete home study and requirements that caregivers be able to meet their own material needs without taking the child’s foster care stipend for themselves.

On the traditional licensing track, a foster home is disqualified if either the foster parent or another adult household member “has been indicated for child abuse or neglect.” Exceptions can be made, in writing, by local directors.

Kin-specific licensing regulations only require the agency to “review” child protection records. A history of known child abuse is not itself disqualifying. And the agency must affirmatively demonstrate that any concerns – including a prospective kinship caregiver’s prior abuse and neglect, criminal history, or drug use – compromise the child’s safety before licensure can be denied.

That means a grandmother known to have abused her own daughter can now be approved, and paid over $1,000 per month to care for her granddaughter. So can a man the child’s mother identifies as a friend, even if he has never met the child and has a known substance use problem.

If the agency wants to deny placement with the grandmother, it must go through a secondary review process to prove to the state that she is likely to commit abuse again, rather than requiring the grandmother to prove that she is able to provide a safe home today. To deny the mother’s friend, the agency must provide “facts substantiated by objective evidence” that he cannot provide for the child because of  “substance or alcohol misuse.”

On the traditional licensing track an applicant is denied a license if their substance use “creates reasonable doubt” as to their capacity. But for kin caregivers, the agency is prohibited from relying on any general knowledge or common sense about how historical behavior predicts future behavior or the role of substance use in child harm – both of which are considered “stereotypes” and “generalizations.”

The safety shortcuts run through just about every licensing requirement. The agency is not only lowering the approval standards for kin, they are no longer collecting information that would inform whether the placement is appropriate.

Prospective kinship caregivers receive no home study – just a single visit. Agencies are not checking for concerns about other children already residing with the kinship caregiver, assessing financial stability, or verifying basic health status via medical examination. There is also no limit on the number of children placed in kin-licensed homes.

And, although the state purports to provide “trauma-informed environments” for children who have often experienced severe or chronic abuse or neglect, kinship caregivers – again, including people who have never met the child – will undergo no required training.

If Maryland believes that its traditional licensing requirements are unnecessary, why hasn’t it simply dropped them for all foster parents?

Maryland hasn’t and won’t, because it knows we are not talking about bureaucratic red tape – this is a blanket waiver of safety standards. Half of Maryland’s youngest children are now placed in foster homes approved under these lower standards. That is a milestone. But is it one that should be celebrated?