Subsidized Guardianship: Policy Framework and Tensions (WITHDRAWN)

Background and purpose: In 2008, Congress established the Title IV-E Guardianship Assistance Program (GAP) that allows federal funds to be used as subsidies to relative guardians. This program was intended to spur permanency for children where neither reunification nor adoption was an appropriate plan. While federal law provides a general outline for GAP, states have discretion to uniquely shape their programs. For example, they may modify some eligibility criteria, provide additional supports to families (beyond a monthly subsidy), and require specific terms in agreements between guardians and states. Our research sheds light on this somewhat ambiguous national policy framework. While previous studies have examined outcomes of kin placement (Koh & Testa, 2011; Koh, 2010; Testa, 2002), ours is unique in two ways: (1) it identifies how states have customized their guardianship programs, and (2) it reveals possible policy tension between support for guardianship and preservation of parent’s rights.

Methods: We completed a three-stage content analysis of statutes and administrative codes pertaining to subsidized guardianship in all states and DC. First, state materials were assembled and searched for terms and provisions that appear in federal law. This initial search focused on eligibility criteria. During this stage, various terms and provisions emerged that were not in federal law. Consequently, the second stage of analysis centered on recording emergent terms and provisions and subsequently searching the materials for them. An iterative process of identifying and coding key terms and provisions continued until no additional items were identified. Ultimately, 13 major policy terms and provisions were located in the state materials. During the third stage, the major terms and provisions were defined, their frequency across states was determined, and illustrative excerpts were identified. 

Results: By analyzing state statutes and codes, we sought to understand the national policy framework for subsidized guardianship. Our analysis shows that, at a policy level, 39 states have embraced GAP and developed policies that expand beyond federal law. Overall, we identified four major categories of state policies: (1) guardianship eligibility criteria; (2) state supports to families; (3) management of post-guardianship relationship; and, (4) management of parental rights.  Specifically, we determined that states allow fictive kin to become guardians (n=41), they provide additional services to families beyond monthly subsidies (n=28), and many support children until age 21 (n=26). Yet, while state policies clearly support the permanence of relative guardianships, they also reinforce existing parental rights and responsibilities by imposing child support obligations (n=31), allowing visitation (n=28), and explicitly permitting parents to bring actions that end guardianships (n=20). 

Conclusion and implications: Our research documents the swift uptake of GAP across the states, it reveals how state policies expand on federal law, and it describes how these policies vary. More importantly, we found evidence of a potential policy tension between fostering permanence with guardians and preserving parent’s rights to their children. Consequently, front-line social workers – and other policy implementers – may be required to resolve this tension when recruiting relatives as guardians, explaining guardianship to parents, and resolving complex cases through guardianship.