HB780 would appropriate $5 million in nonrecurring General Fund money for fiscal year 2025-2026 to expand fatherhood-related programming in North Carolina. The bill directs $2 million to a grant for Family First, Inc. to expand the All Pro Dad program in the state, including adding school chapters, hosting father-child engagement events, and distributing parenting resources. It also creates a new statutory program, the Responsible Fatherhood NC program, within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to support fathers through statewide outreach, resources, and grants.
Under the new program, DHHS would contract with a nonprofit program manager that has experience in responsible fatherhood work and the capacity to run a statewide initiative. The program manager would be responsible for a media campaign, educational resources, and promotion of related fatherhood programs across public instruction, community college, and UNC systems. The remaining $3 million would fund competitive grants to nonprofit community-based organizations serving fathers, including services such as employment assistance, child support navigation, reentry support, health care access, child development education, and parenting skills training. The bill requires DHHS to implement the program within six months and makes the act effective July 1, 2025.
HB780 would amend Chapter 108A of the General Statutes by adding a new Part 12, creating the Responsible Fatherhood NC Act and establishing new DHHS duties to contract for and oversee fatherhood programming. It would also create a new grant framework for nonprofit organizations serving fathers, including eligibility criteria, priority factors, reporting requirements, and a three-year maximum grant term. In addition, it would appropriate state funds to a Florida-based nonprofit, Family First, Inc., conditioned on its registration to do business in North Carolina and use of the funds for in-state expansion of All Pro Dad chapters and related activities. The bill would affect DHHS, nonprofit service providers, fathers and father figures, and schools and community organizations involved in family engagement.
The bill’s stated purpose and findings reflect strong support for father involvement, family stability, and child well-being, and the available context shows no recorded committee debate or votes yet. Overall, the measure appears framed as a pro-family, pro-child initiative with a focus on prevention, education, and support services rather than enforcement. Because the bill had only been referred to committee, there is no documented floor-level sentiment or recorded vote history in the provided materials.
The most likely points of contention are the use of public funds for a private nonprofit, including a $2 million directed grant to an out-of-state organization, and whether the bill’s approach is the best use of state resources. Another possible issue is the bill’s reliance on DHHS contracting and grant administration, which may raise questions about oversight, program effectiveness, and whether funds should instead support existing state or local fatherhood services. The bill also prioritizes applicants based on community need and organizational capacity, which could prompt discussion about how grants are distributed and which organizations are best positioned to receive them.