Justice Framework & Reform Landscape
Reform is not enough unless it ends in justice.
Texas's child welfare system spent over $2 billion in SFY 2022. This is not a system lacking resources. It needs better direction, coordination, and courageous realignment. When we fund fragmented responses, we maintain fragmented outcomes. The six justice pillars below define where we are going. The four reform strands below them describe the pressures currently moving the system — measured against whether they advance that vision. And because foster youth experience disability at far higher rates than their peers — too often unidentified, misdiagnosed, or managed through overmedication — disability-forward justice is woven through every pillar below.
Disproportionality & Intersectional Harm
The system does not harm everyone equally.
Any honest justice framework must name who is harmed most. Disability, race, sexuality, and gender identity do not operate separately — they compound. The patterns below are not edge cases; they are the center of where Texas foster care fails.
≈ 1 in 3
of youth in foster care may be LGBTQ+
LGBTQ+ youth enter foster care at far higher rates than their peers — often after family rejection, harassment, or identity-based mistreatment. Once in care, they face higher rates of placement disruption, hostile environments, and instability, and rarely find stable permanence — producing poor outcomes across nearly every social determinant of health in adulthood.
Wilson, B. D. M., Cooper, K., Kastanis, A., & Necco, S. (2014). Sexual and Gender Minority Youth in Foster Care: The Los Angeles Foster Youth Survey. Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law.
Overrepresented
across every decision point
Black children are overrepresented in Texas foster care relative to their share of the state's child population — a pattern documented from report and investigation through removal and permanency. Disproportionality is not an accident or a byproduct; it is produced by how the system screens, separates, and surveils families, and it compounds at every subsequent decision.
Texas DFPS — Statewide Disproportionality reports; U.S. Children's Bureau, AFCARS Report.
A framework for naming it
Kimberlé Crenshaw's theory of intersectionality and Derrick Bell's interest-convergence analysis — foundational texts of Critical Race Theory — explain how race is structurally embedded in institutional outcomes, not merely a matter of individual bias. The Disability Justice framework (2005) extends this same intersectional lens to ableism. The Fostered draws on these established frameworks rather than reinventing them.
- Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex. University of Chicago Legal Forum.
- Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6).
- Bell, D. (1980). Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma. Harvard Law Review, 93(3).
- Sins Invalid (2015). Skin, Tooth, and Bone: A Disability Justice Primer.
The Fostered's Justice Framework
Six pillars define what a just end state looks like.
Drawn from The Fostered's Better Futures for Foster Youth Policy Toolkit, these pillars are the organizing vision of this work — not a description of what the system is doing, but of what we are demanding it become. Each reform is evaluated against them.
"Every young person in Texas's foster care system will have equitable access to high-quality education, individualized supports, and pathways to postsecondary success — eliminating the systemic barriers that currently depress academic achievement for youth in care."
"Every young person who has experienced foster care will have equitable access to holistic, trauma-informed healthcare — mental, physical, and developmental — so that wellness becomes the norm, not the exception."
"Foster youth will have consistent, high-quality legal advocacy across every system that shapes their lives — ensuring rights are protected, voices are heard, and justice is defined by healing rather than punishment."
"No youth will age out of foster care into homelessness. Every young person will leave care with safe, stable, and affordable housing as the foundation for independence and belonging."
"All youth transitioning from foster care will have the resources, skills, and opportunities to achieve lasting financial stability — moving from survival to economic empowerment and thriving adulthood."
"Immigrant foster youth will leave care with secure legal status, documentation, and full access to education, housing, and employment — free to build their futures without fear or exclusion."
How the current reforms connect to the vision
Federal litigation proved the system failed children and created enforceable obligations. Community-Based Care reorganized who is accountable, locally. T3C replaced a 40-year-old behavior-rating payment system with needs-based service packages. The treatment-and-reimbursement evolution is the logic that ties them together. But every one of these reforms is a means, not an end — measured against whether a young person leaves care with education, health, legal standing, housing, economic security, and belonging.
Disability Justice
No body or mind left behind.
The Fostered's work is guided by the Disability Justice framework — an intersectional movement created in 2005 by disabled queer and trans people of color. It expands on traditional disability rights by recognizing that ableism is inherently intertwined with racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and capitalism, and is defined by 10 guiding principles. We did not create this framework — we apply it. Foster youth experience disability at far higher rates than their peers, too often unidentified, misdiagnosed, or managed through overmedication rather than support. We center Disability Justice as a foundational lens on every pillar of this work.
Created in 2005 by disabled queer and trans people of color — including Patty Berne, Mia Mingus, Stacey Milbern, and Leroy F. Moore, Jr. — through the work of Sins Invalid. The Fostered applies this framework; we did not create it.
Intersectionality
Acknowledging that ableism, racism, sexism, homophobia, and classism operate together — and that foster youth live at their intersections.
Leadership of Those Most Impacted
Ensuring movements and design are led by those experiencing compounded oppressions, including disabled foster youth.
Anti-Capitalist Politic
Rejecting a system that measures human worth by economic productivity — a youth's value is never their output.
Commitment to Cross-Movement Organizing
Building coalitions across disability, racial, economic, and youth justice struggles.
Recognizing Wholeness
Valuing individuals for who they are, apart from capitalist definitions of utility or compliance.
Sustainability
Pacing the work and recognizing the physical and emotional limitations of those doing it — youth and adults alike.
Commitment to Cross-Disability Solidarity
Respecting all types of physical, sensory, cognitive, intellectual, and developmental disabilities.
Interdependence
Recognizing that all living systems are interconnected — and that the myth of independence harms communities.
Collective Access
Moving beyond basic legal compliance to creatively build environments and tools that welcome everyone.
Collective Liberation
Committing to a future where no body or mind is left behind.
Federal Litigation — M.D. v. Abbott
What justice looks like here
Litigation proved that when political and administrative accountability fail, courts can compel structural change. But legal victory is not the end state — it is the floor. The justice goal is a system where youth never need a lawsuit to access safety, legal representation, and trauma-informed care in the first place.
The documented failure this responds to
In 2015, a federal court found that Texas's foster care system was so unsafe it violated children's constitutional rights. The record documented caseworkers carrying double the recognized caseload limits, children placed far from home counties, siblings separated, over-restrictive group placements, repeated moves, and youth aging out without permanency or legal support.
Practices being used to reform it
- Remedial orders targeting caseworker caseloads, placement capacity, sibling separation, and unverified kinship placements
- Independent court monitors issuing periodic public reports against specific remedial benchmarks
- Heightened monitoring and civil contempt findings when the state fails ordered remedies
- Class-wide protection for children in Permanent Managing Conservatorship (PMC)
Is this enough?
Litigation is a forcing function, not a permanent scaffold. Its long-term value is the evidentiary baseline — a documented record of system failure that future reform can be measured against. The reforms must outlive the court order: embed monitoring into statute, sustain data transparency, and build civic infrastructure (like SaySo) that surfaces failures before they require another lawsuit.
Community-Based Care (CBC)
What justice looks like here
Decentralization is only justice if the community gains a genuine voice in how care operates locally. The vision is not a new contractor — it is a system where local accountability means children stay connected to their schools, families, and communities, and where placement decisions are driven by a young person's needs, not available beds.
The documented failure this responds to
Under the legacy model, the state directly managed placement and services across a vast geography, producing inconsistent capacity, weak local accountability, and children placed far from their home communities — disrupting relationships, schooling, and continuity of care.
Practices being used to reform it
- Single Source Continuum Contractors (SSCCs) per catchment area, responsible for prevention, kinship, foster, and permanency services
- Two-stage expansion: Stage I builds provider networks; Stage II adds full responsibility including kinship and permanency
- Performance-based contracting with outcome accountability replacing pure compliance monitoring
- Catchment-level planning so children are served closer to home and community
Is this enough?
Decentralization shifts risk but does not eliminate it. Accountability must travel with responsibility: clear outcome metrics, transparent public reporting, independent oversight of SSCC performance, and real community voice in how the continuum operates locally.
T3C — Texas Child-Centered Care
What justice looks like here
Needs-based assessment is justice only if the needs being assessed reflect the whole child — their trauma history, their relationships, their culture, their strengths — and if the resulting service package is actually available and delivered by a trained, trauma-informed workforce. The end state is not a better invoice — it is a young person whose care reflects who they actually are.
The documented failure this responds to
For roughly four decades, Texas reimbursed foster care through a behavioral rating system where a child's retrospective risk score determined both the services they were presumed to need and the money the provider received. A 2020 independent study found rates did not align with the cost of care, the system created fiscal instability, and there were no financial incentives tied to outcomes.
Practices being used to reform it
- Universal CANS 3.0 assessment replacing the legacy service-level determination
- Twenty-four Service Packages plus three Add-On Services, each clearly defined and separately funded
- A rate methodology that funds the package, not a label — stabilizing provider revenue
- Provider credentialing so the workforce is prepared for the new continuum
- Enhanced Title IV-E federal claiming through FFPSA-aligned service packages
Is this enough?
T3C succeeds only if the new methodology is continuously corrected against real costs and outcomes, and if treatment capacity grows to match the new architecture. Without a trauma-informed, credentialed workforce underneath the new packages, the reform changes the invoice without changing the care.
Treatment & Reimbursement Evolution
What justice looks like here
The deepest injustice in the old reimbursement system was that a child's trauma history became a billing category. The vision is a system where what a young person needs shapes what providers are equipped and funded to deliver — not the reverse. Provider financial stability and child well-being are not competing interests; a just system aligns them.
The documented failure this responds to
The older system conflated treatment need with reimbursement tier. A child's behavioral risk score determined both the services they were presumed to need and the provider's income. Because the score lagged the child's actual condition, children were over-served or under-served relative to their real needs, and providers faced fiscal uncertainty as ratings fluctuated.
Practices being used to reform it
- Needs-based assessment (CANS 3.0) as the single entry point for placement and service determination
- Service packages tailored to psychosocial and medical need, with add-ons for complex mental health and medical acuity
- Aftercare services that continue support across placement changes, returns home, or moves to permanency
- Rate methodology that funds the package, not the behavior — aligning cost with service
Is this enough?
This strand is the connective tissue: T3C operationalizes it, CBC carries it into local networks, and litigation supplies the accountability pressure. It is sustainable when the assessment stays valid, rates stay current, and the workforce exists to deliver the packages. The deepest risk is reforming payment faster than treatment capacity.
What this means for SaySo
The platform is designed to live inside these reforms — and hold them accountable to the justice vision.
Rights grounded in the litigation record
M.D. v. Abbott documented specific, court-tested failures. SaySo's rights mapping draws on that record — so when a youth reports a caseload, placement, or supervision concern, the app maps it to rights a federal court has already recognized.
Responsibility mapping that knows about SSCCs
Under CBC, the accountable party is often the local SSCC, not a generic state office. SaySo's referral pathways route concerns to the right local contractor, not an outdated agency directory.
Need-based, not rating-based, framing
T3C moves care from behavior tiers to needs-based packages. SaySo's healthcare, mental health, and placement domains reflect service packages and biopsychosocial need — not legacy level-of-care labels.
A closed-loop feedback channel
Each reform strand depends on evidence of implementation failure. SaySo's documented incidents become real-time signals that reform is working — or not — feeding the same monitoring logic the courts and legislature rely on.
A call to action
"When we invest in integrated, equity-driven, and youth-informed reform — based on both evidence and lived experience — we build a future where every youth who has experienced foster care has the power, resources, and support to thrive."
— Better Futures for Foster Youth Policy Toolkit, The Fostered
We invite stakeholders, decision-makers, and especially young people to help shape the systems that influence their lives. The toolkit above is both a guide and a call to action.
Public sources & references
This landscape is drawn from publicly available case records, statutes, agency publications, rate methodology reports, and The Fostered's own policy toolkit. Reform is ongoing; the documents below are the current public record.