Financing Options

The proportion of funds from federal sources is decreasing.  In SFY 2006, federal funds accounted for 48 percent of total child welfare spending - a decrease from over 50 percent earlier in the decade[1].  Policymakers are advised to pool federal funds whenever possible to maximize the use of non-state funding sources. Integrated funding streams work best when the programs themselves have been bundled.  Many policy strategies create these likely scenarios.  The more multilayered a program, the more opportunities policymakers have to merge multiple funding sources and apply them to uniform program efforts.

How Can Policymakers Invest in Reducing Child Abuse and Neglect?

• Maximize federal funds.  Virginia’s governor in 2005 outlined ways in which the state should go about obtaining the maximum amount of federal funding for child care welfare services.  The recommendations outlined ways to not only maximize TANF and CCDF claiming, but to, at the same time, increase the number of child care placements same time.

• Blend and braid funding.  Illinois established a unique birth-to-five funding stream that pulled together the existing education-funded programs.

• Supplement federal funds.  Ohio’s Kinship Permanency Incentive Program matches federal funds with state general funds to carry out a critical indicator to well-being, permanency, and safety.

• Create Dedicated Revenue Streams.    Kansas’ Children’s Cabinet created an appropriation category for at-risk infants and toddlers so that any new investments in preschool would automatically include set-aside investments in high-quality programs for this at-risk population. Connecticut established a  tax credit program for businesses that offer needed community services.

• Leverage private funding .   Michigan capitalized on private funding from the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Family to Family child welfare system to build a community-specific range of services where child welfare referral rates are high.