Addressing the placement of foster children and creating a central reception center and emergency resource homes.
HB3382 would require the West Virginia Department of Human Services to contract with at least two central reception centers to provide short-term, temporary care for children who are awaiting foster placement. These centers would operate 24/7, offer supervised shelter, behavioral assessment and stabilization services, coordinate case planning, and provide educational, medical, or therapeutic support as needed. The bill limits a child’s stay at a central reception center to no more than 72 hours before the child must be placed in an emergency resource home or another suitable foster home.
The bill also directs the department, working with child placing agencies, to expand recruitment of emergency resource homes across the state. These homes would be specialized foster placements for emergency overnight care, with training in trauma-informed care and crisis intervention, financial incentives, and access to 24/7 crisis response support. The department must prioritize recruitment in high-need areas and for adolescents, justice-involved youth, and children with special needs. The bill further requires an annual report to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Health and Human Resources on children served, placement outcomes, stabilization effectiveness, and recruitment progress.
HB3382 would add a new article to the West Virginia Code governing foster placement infrastructure and emergency child welfare response. It would create a statutory framework for central reception centers and emergency resource homes, impose operational and licensing requirements on those facilities, and expand the Department of Human Services’ responsibilities for placement coordination, recruitment, and reporting. The bill is intended to reduce or eliminate the practice of placing foster children in hotels when no foster placement is immediately available.
The available context suggests the bill is generally supportive and problem-solving in tone, with the stated purpose of improving foster care placement options and avoiding hotel placements for children. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no direct evidence of opposition or debate in the supplied materials. The bill’s structure indicates a focus on child welfare system capacity, emergency response, and placement stability.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided record, but the bill’s likely pressure points are the cost and logistics of operating 24-hour reception centers, licensing them as residential treatment facilities, and recruiting enough emergency resource homes statewide. Potential concerns could also include whether the 72-hour limit is workable in practice, how behavioral stabilization services would be delivered, and whether the department can meet staffing, training, and reporting obligations. Any debate would likely center on implementation capacity, funding, and the balance between emergency shelter and family-based foster placement.