Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Armstrong
/Dow
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 2/4/2025
SHORT TITLE
CYFD Investigation for Plan of Care
Failure
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 173
ANALYST Garcia
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
CYFD
Indeterminate
but minimal
$760.0 to
$1,800.0
$760.0 to
$1,800.0
$1,520.0 to
$3,600.0
Recurring General Fund
OFRA Indeterminate At least $125.0 At least $125.0 At least $250.0 Recurring General Fund
Total
Indeterminate
but minimal
$885.0 to
$1,925.0
$885.0 to
$1,925.0
$1,770.0 to
$3,850.0
Recurring General Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Conflicts with House Bill 205
Relates to an appropriation in the General Appropriation Act, which will provide $1.8 million to
the Health Care Authority to implement plans of safe care and $10 million to CYFD to address
Protective Services caseloads.
Sources of Information
LFC Files
National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare
Federal Administration for Children and Families
Agency Analysis Received From
Department of Health (DOH) Health Care Authority (HCA) Office of Family Representation and Advocacy (OFRA) Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) Agency Analysis was Solicited but Not Received From
Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) New Mexico Attorney General (NMAG) Because of the short timeframe between the introduction of this bill and its first hearing, LFC has yet to receive analysis from state, education, or judicial agencies. This analysis could be updated
if that analysis is received.
House Bill 173 – Page 2
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 173
House Bill 173 (HB173) would amend Section 32A-3A-14 NMSA 1978, which relates to the
notification the Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) receives when a plan of safe
care is not followed.
The bill would require CYFD be notified in all cases and would require CYFD to conduct a
family assessment. Based on the results of the assessment, the bill would amend statute to
require CYFD to refer families to services.
“Family assessment” is defined in existing statute and includes an assessment of the likelihood
of:
1) Imminent danger to a child’s well-being,
2) The child becoming an abused child or neglected child, and
3) The strengths and needs of the child’s family members and care givers
The bill then amends existing statute to require CYFD to conduct an investigation if the family
declines the services or programs recommended by the family assessment.
This bill does not contain an effective date and, as a result, would go into effect 90 days after the
Legislature adjourns if enacted, or June 20, 2025.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The bill would require CYFD to implement a family assessment in instances of noncompliance
with plans of safe care. The 2023 LFC program evaluation on CARA found the state established
plans of safe care for 3,770 infants between 2020 and 2022. Of these, 40 percent of families with
a safe care plan were ultimately referred to CYFD, 27 percent of referrals were ultimately
screened into the investigation process, and 18 percent of accepted reports ultimately resulted in
cases of substantiated abuse or neglect.
CYFD could implement family assessments and a subsequent differential or multilevel response
in alignment with evidence-based practices and existing statute. LFC analysis and national
research suggests differential response or multilevel response may result in returns on investment
of up to $15 per $1 invested. Projected costs from an alternative response range between $98 and
$286 per family, according to previous LFC reports and the Washington State Institute for Public
Policy. If half of all plans of care created were ultimately referred to CYFD, the cost to
implement differential response in all those cases could range between $50 thousand and $100
thousand annually. During the 2024 legislative session, CYFD received $4.2 million over three
years through the government results and opportunity (GRO) fund to pilot and implement
multilevel or differential response statewide, in accordance with statute. CYFD may, thus, be
able to absorb additional costs associated with family assessments. In addition, if CYFD were to
implement multilevel response with fidelity to evidence-based models, the state could ultimately
experience cost-savings.
LFC analysis estimates a child welfare investigation costs New Mexico roughly $1,000/, and House Bill 173 – Page 3
LFC reports have estimated a single year of foster care, including foster care maintenance
payments and administrative costs, are roughly $21 thousand per child. Given the number of
CARA cases the LFC report found were subsequently referred to CYFD and ultimately
substantiated, CYFD may already be absorbing investigation costs with existing resources. As an
estimate, this analysis assumes CYFD could experience an increase of 150 cases that ultimately
require investigation, the agency could experience a cost of roughly $150 thousand. As an
estimate, this analysis assumes 75 additional children experience a year in foster care, the state
could experience a cost of roughly $1.5 million, with an estimated $815 thousand covered by
federal Title IV-E (foster care) reimbursement and an estimated $760 thousand impact to the
general fund.
CYFD reports the bill would require the agency to hire 10 additional FTE, including 6 FTE
related to investigations and 4 FTE related to family preservation services, who conduct family
assessments. CYFD did not provide an estimated cost, though LFC analysis projects up to $1
million. LFC analysis of CYFD’s FY25 budget suggests Protective Services has the ability to
fill roughly 10 positions within their FY25 budget, and the LFC recommendation for the General
Appropriation Act includes sufficient funding to fill an additional 101 caseworker positions
within the government results and opportunity fund, which may also allow the agency to absorb
additional caseworker costs.
Taken together, LFC estimates the potential additional cost to the general fund for Protective
Services ranges between $810 thousand and $1.8 million.
Office of Family Representation and Advocacy (OFRA) notes mandated investigations could
result in increased filing of abuse/neglect petitions, creating a higher need for attorneys
appointed by OFRA. The agency estimates the potential need for at least one more staff member
to absorb additional cases. LFC estimates this cost at $125 thousand annually.
The Health Care Authority (HCA) and Department of Health (DOH) reported no fiscal impact
related to the bill.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
According to LFC analysis, New Mexico has a higher rate of newborns who have been exposed
to substances than the national average. The federal Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act
(CARA) amended the federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) to require
states develop plans and monitor the implementation of plans of safe care. Under CAPTA, a plan
of safe care is a collaborative plan designed to ensure the safety and well-being of infants
affected by prenatal substance exposure, by addressing the health and substance use treatment
needs of the infant and their caregivers and aiming to prevent child safety risks.
States which receive CAPTA grants must report the following to the federal government:
The number of infants born and identified as being substance-exposed,
The number of such infants for whom a Plan of Safe Care was developed,
The number of infants for whom referrals were made for services.
States can place CARA responsibilities within child welfare or public health agencies. According
to the National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare, state child welfare agencies House Bill 173 – Page 4
oversee plans of safe care for families with open child welfare cases in most states. However, 18
states employ strategies for monitoring plans of safe care that do not have an open child welfare
case.
In 2019, New Mexico passed legislation requiring staff in hospitals and birthing centers develop
plans of care for substance-exposed newborns, which refer families to voluntary support and
treatment services. New Mexico’s CARA law changed reporting requirements to the Children,
Youth and Families Department (CYFD) such that a finding that a woman is using or abusing
drugs would not alone be a sufficient basis to report child abuse or neglect. However, the CARA
law spread the responsibility for developing and monitoring voluntary plans of care across
multiple state agencies and healthcare organizations, including the Health Care Authority, the
Department of Health, birthing hospitals, Medicaid managed care organizations, and CYFD.
According to the 2023 LFC program evaluation Implementation of the Comprehensive Addiction
and Recovery Act (CARA), 1,200 plans of safe care were created annually for New Mexico
newborns between 2020 and 2022, accounting for roughly 6 percent of all births during that
period. According to HCA data, more than 70 percent of all births in New Mexico are funded by
Medicaid, while the 2023 LFC program evaluation estimated 90 percent of newborns with plans
of safe care are Medicaid eligible.
The 2023 LFC program evaluation found New Mexico’s implementation of CARA has
substantive gaps, specifically noting most CARA families were not being referred or receiving
support services or substance use treatment, and the state needed to improve CARA-related case
management, screening, and identification. Specifically, the report highlighted roughly 1-in-7
CARA families were ultimately receiving substance use treatment, and families who accept
services often were not participating in these services.
In 2023, the Legislature made appropriations to CYFD from opioid settlement revenue, including
$1 million to implement plans of safe care for substance-exposed newborns and $1 million to
establish SafeCare Home Visiting, an intensive home visiting program eligible for federal
reimbursement and shown through research to reduce child maltreatment. CYFD has reported
continuing to explore SafeCare Home Visiting as a potential prevention program but reports
workforce concerns and has not established the program to date. Both appropriations went
unused and reverted. For FY25, the Legislature appropriated nearly $2 million to implement
plans of safe care to HCA, based on a recommendation from the 2023 LFC program evaluation.
The 2023 LFC report also found that a family with a plan of safe care subsequently had a higher
maltreatment substantiation rate for abuse or neglect, compared to families of infants without a
plan of care. At the time of the LFC report, CYFD noted this measure could indicate whether the
CARA program is appropriately identifying children at-risk. The LFC program evaluation made
a variety of recommendations to improve the CARA program and address system gaps. These
recommendations include amending CARA statute to require a family assessment or differential
response when a report involving a family is made to CYFD and amending statute to require
CYFD to conduct a family assessment of families who refuse substance use treatment or do not
comply with their plans of care.
During 2024, CYFD posted 17 CARA-related positions and moved forward with hiring. As of
December 1, 2024, the agency had filled 16 CARA positions; CYFD reported the agency was
using Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funding for the positions. In January
2025, LFC became aware the executive planned to transfer the responsibility for overseeing House Bill 173 – Page 5
plans of safe care to the Department of Health, along with the CARA navigator positions hired
by CYFD, without enabling legislation and potentially in conflict with existing CARA statute.
House Bill 173 would require the completion of a family assessment in all cases of
noncompliance and refer families to appropriate services. In addition, the bill will require CYFD
to conduct an investigation if the family declines the services recommended through the family
assessment.
CYFD notes the bill and existing statute do not clarify the specific mechanism for notifying the
appropriate parties when families and caregivers disengage from plans of safe care. CYFD notes
it remains unclear who is responsible for notifying CYFD about noncompliance. This issue was
also identified in the LFC CARA evaluation because the CARA portal lacked functionality to
track service engagement and participation.
CYFD also reports CARA navigators are currently responsible for completing family
assessments for families with a plan of safe care under current CYFD rules, and the CYFD
CARA navigators support families to access services to which they are referred. If a family
disengages from services, CYFD reports the CARA navigator follows internal procedures to
report to CYFD statewide central intake (SCI), who then determines whether a CYFD
investigation is warranted.
CYFD notes:
CARA navigators are already required to make an abuse of neglect referral to Protective
Services if, at any point during a one-year engagement period, there is concern that the
infant is being abused or neglected. If enacted, this legislation would require CARA
navigators to contact Statewide Central Intake (SCI) if a family declines services. …
CYFD would need to address through rules and regulations that these screened in calls
will mandate an abuse and neglect investigation on matter the level of risk
OFRA reports that requiring a family assessment and requiring an investigation may limit
CYFD’s discretion and be seen as “punitive and contrary to a public-health approach to
voluntarily engage families in plans of safe care.”
The Department of Health (DOH) reports:
Studies have found that policies that mandate referrals to child protective services for
families of substance-exposed newborns deter women from seeking substance use
treatment during pregnancy and may deter them from seeking prenatal care all together.
By mandating a family assessment for these families who decline the plan of safe care,
infants at risk of abuse or neglect could potentially be identified and, in addition, families
would have another opportunity to discuss the available supports and services, and if
family still declined services, the CYFD would be mandated to conduct an investigation.”
DOH also notes the bill does not distinguish between high- and low-risk families, based on the
results of the family assessment and highlights the degree of risk and type of substance exposure
could inform different degrees of navigation, support, and interventions.
DOH reports behavioral health conditions in pregnant women are often associated with negative
health outcomes, including pregnancy-related deaths. HB173 could improve the health of
mothers and infants with a plan of safe care whose families otherwise declined all services and House Bill 173 – Page 6
supports. DOH cites the example of Early Intervention, a program that is proven through
research to improve the developmental trajectory of infants with substance exposure; however,
according to federal guidelines, it is a voluntary program. The mandatory family assessment
could thus provide an opportunity for CYFD staff to explain the benefits of such programs to
families.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
HCA notes, “Through the [family] assessment, if services are identified for parents and/or family
members involved in the care of the child, coordination of those services can be accessed
through HCA’s physical and behavioral health network.”
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
HB173 conflicts with House Bill 205, which would make similar changes to the noncompliance
section of statute relating to plans of safe care, including a required family assessment, but would
require investigations in cases in which refused services result in potential imminent risk to the
child. In addition, House Bill 205 makes more extensive changes to the CARA program and the
Children’s Code.
Relates to an appropriation in the General Appropriation Act, which will provide $1.8 million to
the Health Care Authority to implement plans of safe care and $10 million to CYFD to address
Protective Services caseloads.
OTHER SUBSTANT IVE ISSUES
CYFD notes the bill appears to place the family assessment process before an investigation and
reports:
While assessments are a critical step, there may be instances where an immediate report
and investigation may be necessary prior to a full family assessment. To avoid
misunderstanding, it may be beneficial to clarify that all mandated reporters remain
responsible for fulfilling their statutory duty to report suspected abuse and neglect, and
that compliance with this bill does not exempt them from that obligation.
RMG/hg/rl