Prohibit a child in the custody of the state from placement in facility not approved by Department of Human Services
Summary
HB5042 would add a new section to West Virginia’s child welfare law to restrict where children in state custody may be placed. The bill generally prohibits placing a child in any facility that has not been approved by the Department of Human Services (DHS), while allowing the DHS Secretary to authorize an unapproved placement only in extraordinary circumstances. It also requires DHS to maintain and update at least annually a list of approved out-of-state placement facilities.
The bill further directs DHS to establish standards for out-of-state facilities and to include each facility’s location and specialty on the approved list. In practical terms, the measure is aimed at creating a clearer approval framework for residential or treatment placements used for children under state custody, especially when placements occur outside West Virginia.
Impact
HB5042 would amend West Virginia Code by adding §49-2-125a to the child welfare provisions governing state responsibilities for children. It would impose a statutory placement restriction on the Department of Human Services and its custody decisions, requiring approved-facility placement as the default and creating a narrow exception for extraordinary circumstances. The bill would also require DHS to develop and maintain standards and a public-facing list of approved out-of-state facilities, affecting agency placement practices, provider eligibility, and the options available for children in state care.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the overall sentiment appears to be protective and administrative rather than controversial. The measure is framed as a child-safety and oversight bill, suggesting support for tighter controls on placements of vulnerable children in state custody. Because there is no transcript or voting history provided, there is no evidence of formal opposition or bipartisan division in the available record.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the balance between stricter oversight and flexibility in emergency or specialized placement situations. Supporters would likely favor the requirement that only DHS-approved facilities be used, along with annual updates and standards for out-of-state placements, as a safeguard against unsuitable placements. Critics or concerned stakeholders might focus on whether the approval process could limit placement options, especially for children with specialized treatment needs, and whether the “extraordinary circumstances” exception is sufficiently clear or broad enough to allow timely placements when no approved facility is available.