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 Padilla
LAST UPDATED 3/14/2025
ORIGINAL DATE 3/11/2025
SHORT TITLE
Court Intervention After CYFD
Determination
BILL
NUMBER Senate Bill 362
ANALYST Garcia/Greenham
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
CYFD
No fiscal
impact
At least $100 At least $100 At least $200 Recurring General Fund
OFRA
No fiscal
impact
At least $125 At least $125 At least $250 Recurring General Fund
Total
No fiscal
impact
At least $225 At least $225 At least $450 Recurring General Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Conflicts with House Bill 382
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Office of Family Representation and Advocacy (OFRA) Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) New Mexico Attorney General (NMAG) Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Senate Bill 362
Senate Bill 362 (SB362) amends the Family in Need of Court-Ordered Services Act (FINCOS
Act) under Section 32A-3B-2 NMSA 1978. The bill expands the definition of a “family in need
of court-ordered services” to include cases where allegations of child abuse or neglect have been
substantiated by the Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD), but CYFD has
determined that filing an abuse or neglect petition is not in the child’s best interest. Specifically,
the bill allows CYFD to petition for court intervention to provide services to the family when:
The family or child has refused family services or failed to follow through with family
services recommended by CYFD, or
CYFD has exhausted appropriate and available voluntary services, and court intervention
is necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of the child or to facilitate access to
services for the family.
Senate Bill 362 – Page 2
The bill aims to provide CYFD with an additional tool to engage families who are not complying
with voluntary services without needing to file an abuse or neglect petition.
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
No appropriation is included within the bill.
CYFD reports no fiscal impact for the bill. However, the bill would likely result in agency
involvement with more families, which would come at a cost, including the potential need for
additional FTE for FINCOS case filings. LFC estimates the cost for at least one additional FTE
(roughly $100 thousand). This FTE would not likely be eligible for federal reimbursement. At
the same time, the bill could result in a decrease in filings of abuse and neglect petitions.
However, it is difficult to predict what this reduction might be.
The Office of Family Representation and Advocacy (OFRA) reports the bill would increase
OFRA’s service population, requiring additional attorneys to provide legal services to children
and families. OFRA did not provide a cost estimate. LFC assumes the need for at least 1 attorney
FTE at a cost of at least $125 thousand.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
New Mexico’s Family in Need of Court-Ordered Services within the Children’s Code generally
addresses situations where families require court intervention for issues like truancy, running
away, or situations where a child and parent cannot share a residence. SB362 expands the
definition of a “family in need of court-ordered services” to include families which have not
followed through with voluntary services.
Currently, the law narrowly defines families who may be subject to the FINCOS Act as a family
1) whose child is chronically absent from school; 2) where a child is absent from their residence
for more than 12 days without the consent of their parent or guardian; 3) where a child refuses to
return home or there is good cause to believe the child will run away if forced to return home; 4)
where a parent or guardian refuses to allow a child to return home; and 5) where a child is
alleged to be engaged in an act which, if committed by an adult, would be designated prostitution
or is the victim of human trafficking.
CYFD supports the bill’s potential to improve child safety and well-being by ensuring that
families with substantiated abuse or neglect cases receive necessary interventions through court-
ordered services. According to CYFD, “this could result in a shift from filing fewer abuse and
neglect cases, which can be a more supportive way of working with families.” CYFD also
indicates that the bill could reduce the number of children entering the foster care system by
providing an alternative intervention mechanism that does not require custody removal.
However, CYFD notes that the bill could increase the agency’s caseload and the number of court
proceedings, which may require additional resources and staffing to handle the increased
demand.
Senate Bill 362 – Page 3
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) indicates SB362 would increase CYFD’s ability
to work with families who refuse or do not follow through with voluntary services by asking the
court to order services. However, AOC cautions that “the expansion of the definition of a ‘family
in need of court-ordered services’ may also over broaden the ability of CYFD to involve families
in legal proceedings.” This could lead to an increase in the number of families subjected to legal
action even when less invasive methods might suffice. AOC reports the FINCOS Act is rarely
used in New Mexico, with only a “handful” of cases filed each year.
The Office of the Attorney General (NMAG) raises concerns about how the bill would interact
with existing law under the Abuse and Neglect Act, specifically regarding procedural due
process. According to NMAG, it is unclear “whether procedural due process would attach under
this new definition” since CYFD would not need to prove abuse or neglect by clear and
convincing evidence but only that the family “is in need of court-ordered services.” NMAG also
highlights that the bill contains contradictory language. On the one hand, the bill defines a family
in need of court-ordered services as one with substantiated allegations of abuse or neglect
requiring court intervention; on the other hand, it states that filing an abuse or neglect petition is
not in the child’s best interest. NMAG argues that this creates a scenario where CYFD could
seek court intervention without the procedural requirements typically tied to filing a petition.
OFRA notes that SB362 increases the flexibility of the child welfare system by allowing a level
of intervention above voluntary services but below a petition for custody when abuse or neglect
has been substantiated. According to OFRA, “the bill acknowledges that not all abuse and
neglect occurrences require the separation of children from the family unit.” OFRA also points
out that the bill could disproportionately impact families in underserved communities where
barriers to accessing services may exist.
OFRA states that the term “failed to follow through with family services” is not clearly defined
and raises the question of whether this means the family never engaged with services after an
initial referral or if it means the family determined that the services were not beneficial or created
an additional financial or logistical burden. OFRA recommends clarifying how a family’s
engagement with voluntary services is to be monitored and assessed.
PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS
AOC indicates SB362 could lead to an increase in the number of FINCOS cases filed, which
would place additional pressure on the courts and increase the need for more hearings and
administrative support from the courts.
OFRA also anticipates an increase in its service population, requiring additional attorneys to
provide legal representation to children and families involved in FINCOS cases. According to
OFRA, “there will also be an increased number of hearings requiring court oversight,” which
would contribute to a heavier workload for CYFD, OFRA, and the court system. OFRA further
notes that no existing performance measures specifically track FINCOS cases, so new
performance metrics may need to be developed to assess the impact of the expanded definition
and ensure consistent implementation.
CYFD reports that SB362 “could result in a shift from filing fewer abuse and neglect cases,”
which may reduce the number of foster care placements but increase the need for case
management and court intervention at an earlier stage. Senate Bill 362 – Page 4
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
AOC indicates that expanding the eligibility for FINCOS cases could lead to an increase in court
filings and hearings, which would place additional administrative pressure on the courts. This
would require greater judicial resources, scheduling adjustments, and administrative staff support
to manage the higher caseload.
OFRA also anticipates an increased demand for legal representation for children and families
involved in FINCOS cases, which would require additional staffing and administrative support.
According to OFRA, “an increase in FINCOS filings would also increase OFRA’s service
population, requiring additional attorneys to provide legal services to children and families.”
Additionally, OFRA raises concerns that the bill does not define how a family’s engagement
with voluntary services would be tracked or monitored, creating an administrative gap that would
need to be addressed through the development of new monitoring and compliance systems.
CYFD acknowledges SB362 could shift some cases away from abuse and neglect petitions
toward FINCOS petitions, which would require modifications to case management processes and
increased coordination with the courts and service providers.
CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP
SB362 conflicts with House Bill 382 (HB382), which proposes a different standard for
intervention based on “credible evidence” rather than “substantiated” cases of abuse or neglect.
NMAG explains that this creates a fundamental difference in the threshold for action, with
SB362 requiring substantiated findings and HB382 requiring only credible evidence. This
conflict could create inconsistencies in how cases are handled under the FINCOS Act.
ALTERNATIVES
OFRA recommends specific amendments to SB362:
Clarify who determines the necessity of court intervention – OFRA states that Section 1,
Line 22–24 of the bill should be amended to replace the phrase “it has been determined”
with “the department has determined” to specify that CYFD holds the authority to decide
whether court intervention is necessary.
Define “failure to follow through with family services” – OFRA highlights that the term
is not clearly defined and raises the question of whether this means the family never
engaged with services after an initial referral or if it means that the family determined the
services were not beneficial or imposed an additional financial or logistical burden.
OFRA recommends clarifying this term to avoid inconsistent interpretation.
Establish a process for monitoring family engagement with services – OFRA notes that
the bill does not describe how a family’s engagement with voluntary services is to be
monitored or assessed and suggests that a system for tracking compliance and
engagement may need to be developed.
NMAG indicates contradictions and procedural ambiguity could be addressed by clarifying
language:
Resolve contradictory language about abuse and neglect findings – NMAG points out Senate Bill 362 – Page 5
that the bill defines a FINCOS as a family with substantiated abuse or neglect requiring
court intervention, while simultaneously stating that filing an abuse or neglect petition is
not in the child’s best interest. This contradiction could be resolved by clarifying the
circumstances under which court intervention without a formal petition is appropriate.
Clarify procedural due process – NMAG questions whether procedural due process
would apply under the new FINCOS definition and suggests that the bill should clarify
the procedural standards CYFD would need to meet when seeking court intervention
without a formal abuse or neglect petition.
RMG/MG/hj/SL2