Where did the myth that social workers/agencies get more money for each adoption?

Question

I am a social worker and although i don't work in adoption i know many people who do and did. The Social workers job is to make sure that the adoptive family is appropriate and that the first mom is making the best choice for her. The agency makes the same money no matter if the child goes with the PAP or not. The PAP pays their fees and hope for the best. They know this going in. Many PAP go through at least two first moms before a permant placement is made.

Also as person who works for a non profit we really are not making all this money and giving bounses so it looks like we did not make profit. Where did this idea come from. Is there evidance or is just that you are mad so you come up with this story

Also the agency does not get a bouns if a child is placed

Answer 1

My university degree and early career is in social work, as well.  I worked for the state's Department of Human Services/Children's and Family Services as a social worker.  My job was to oversee families in crisis, which included families whose children were in foster care, hook them up with services to help reunify them and keep them unified, make recommendations to the family court regarding placement of the children.  Our main goal was unification/reunification.  So, I wasn't an actual "adoption social worker" either.

Social workers make horrible salaries.  I don't know that anyone actually thinks social workers are lining their pockets.  However, non-profit or not, the top administrators at agencies do make their money based on placements.  Some types of adoptions do cost more money.  More money does equal more left over for the top admins.  

You and the people who run the day to day activities of the agency aren't going to see money.  But, you can check out the IRS 990 forms for any of these agencies and see what they declare.  

I have worked for non-profit agencies before.  The regular working people made very sad salaries.  The top admins were living in some NICE homes and driving some rather upscale vehicles.  They weren't all married to highly paid spouses, either.

It's not about being mad about one thing so making up stories about the numbers and corruption.  It's about looking at the numbers and corruption and THEN getting mad!

ETA:

If for no other reason, you ought to be mad that people in your position are making lousy salaries while large sums of money are involved in adoptions, and that there are admins you may never see who are making some nice salaries.

Answer 2

Agencies also make money by forcing potential adoptive parents to complete classes they give on adoption.  One person who posts here said she paid $1500 for a one week course.  the topic:  How to finance your adoption.  Anyone else see the irony in that?

And $1500?  For a one week course? Most college courses cost about that much for one unit and those courses last a semester and they are usually taught by people with PHD's!

Come on!  The truth is that infant adoption is a huge business.  Case workers (most of whom are NOT degreed social workers)  probably don't make that much money compared to their bosses.  Many of the people who own and operate the business are raking it in.

Those considering any kind of adoption should do the research they need to make sure the agency they use is practicing fairly and isn't fleecing them for cash.  

Adoption, especially INFANT adoption unfortunately is a supply and demand driven market and there are people out there who can and will pay whatever it takes to get an infant. It is those who want to adopt that can affect the most change in the system.

Answer 3

I know I run a risk here, because last time I responded to a question asking for clairification, I got reported.

Gers: You have a list of CEO salaries for different adoption agencies.  But there's really no basis for comparasion here.  How do those salary figures measure up against the "average" salary for a CEO in those regions?  I mean, in some places with low costs of living, fast food makes minimum wage.  Go someplace with a very high cost of living and they make $15.00/hr.  Same thing with professional salaries; they are VERY dependent on location and cost of living and there can be a huge disparity between a nurse working in the rural midwest and a nurse working ER nights in the biggest hospital in New York City.  

I'm not saying that the CEO's are making too much, or too little.  I just think that listing salaries without providing some kind of basis for comparasion makes it hard to judge.

Answer 4

GO gersh!

Answer 5

Are you trying to deny the adoption incentive program started by BUSH?

google: Adoption Incentive Bonus

here you go, from the "whitehouse"'s very own website:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore...

Explanation: "The purpose of the Adoption Incentives Program is to encourage states to find permanent homes for children in the public foster care system through adoptions. The program provides financial incentives to states that increase the number of adoptions over the baselines in the following categories: 1) adoptions from the public foster care system ($4,000 per child), 2) adoptions of children with special needs under age nine ($2,000 per child), and 3) adoptions of older children, ages nine and older ($4,000 per child). While the number of adoptions in each of the three categories in FY 2002 served as the original baseline, the baseline has adjusted to reflect increases in the number of adoptions over the years."

SOME agencies ARE making millions from adoptions and "granting" other agencies. Agencies are working in organized rings to support one another and create more adoptions. This isn't made up, this is fact, i've seen the 990 forms and organized rings myself.

Do you know that 990 forms are available online? And that every nonprofit has a 990 form in the US? That anyone can read them? The proof is on the ones that are telling the truth. And for those who are lying on their 990 forms, thats obvious too. Not EVERY agency is making millions, but MANY are. Too many. And many are working together in organized rings to bring in larger amounts of money.  I WISH i was making this up.

Answer 6

I cannot speak directly about social workers, however, there have been many news programs about how state agencies are being given "bonuses" for all children they place into a permanent home from foster care.  

Our son's social worker (with NJ DYFS) told us point blank that our son was a "hot commodity because he was a caucasian infant" which appalled me.  Thankfully, a family court judge removed the child from NJ DYFS' authority and allowed us to proceed with a private adoption (which is what the birthfamily wanted).

However, here are links to the adoption "bonuses" that I could find (with what I refer to when I mention this type of thing):

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-80243353...

http://www.massnews.com/past_issues/2000...

http://cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov/articles.cf...

http://www.cwla.org/programs/adoption/as...

Answer 7

Where do you live?  In the US, agencies make money by charging fees for home studies etc.

Agencies are private companies and charge large fees to the adoptive parents.  I think most adoptive parents will agree with me about this.

Great answer, Gershom!

Answer 8

Yes they DO!!

The county has already told me that My agency will get $10,000 per child (we are adopting three little girls) yep $30,000 at finalization.  I am not in it for the money - but GESH - that would be  good start to a college fund, or at least better therapy for these girls.

www.adoptive-parenting.com

Answer 9

Clinton started the Adoption Subsidies and Incentives as part of the ASFA (Adoption and Safe Families Act) of 1996....   Bush has simply continued the program that was started by the former administration.....

Answer 10

i spent a lot of time researching an agency.  here's how the one we choose worked.

no dear birthmother letters, no books about yourself, none of that silly crud.

they spent extensive time talking and observing you.  they did the same with a mother who was wanting to place.  

they educated PAP's on their options, and informed us of the possibility and the right the mother had to decide to parent.

they educated the mother's as much as they could of their options.  encouraged them to explore family assistance if available, etc....

on their experience they matched people together who they thought would be a good match.  

after a match only then did you pay any fee at all.  if the mother should decide to parent your fee, all of it, went toward the next best match possibility.

should you decide not to use their agency or not decide to follow through before placement, 75% of your fee was refunded to you.

so knowing that there are agencies out there like mine, i find it hard to believe or trust that there isn't unneeded monetary benefits being made by the majority of agencies.  how can the one we used refund or roll over most of your fee?  But the other one's don't do this at all?

the social worker and other employees might not see any of this profit, but someone has to be.  if our agency can refund or roll over and still financially operate.  Then where is the  non refunded fees going from agencies that don't do this at all?

as an adoptive parent i find it insulting to my intelligence for someone to state that fees must be paid and not refunded if placement doesn't occur, that many PAP's go through at least 2 mothers before placement does occur, and that PAP's just pay their fees and then hope for the best.   It most certainly does not have to be this way, and it is not how it should be.  It just takes time and self education on the PAP's part.  but that's made more difficult because of people and agencies proclaiming just what you have here.

ETA:  Gershom easily gave you their proof of how they understand and know that agencies are indeed making a huge profit.

can you please show us your proof that they are not doing this?

Answer 11

Um I am speechless from Gersh's post.  OMG, that is awful.  In Canada we do not have this kind of issue.  (don't worry we have other issues) but not this issues.  There are a few non-profit agencies whose directors make well the same as any director such as a shelter worker etc.  But in the hundreds of thousands, well that's just ludicrous.

And adoption incentives?  I see where he was going, but anytime a financial incentive exists, especially in the for profit business then the potential for abuses of the system occur and maybe passing through people not ready to take a child from foster care, especially special needs.  To adopt from foster care here in ON, you are screened even more closely for ability to handle high pressure situations.  As a former foster parent, we had to be able to handle suicide threats/attempts, ODD fits of rage, major destruction of property etc.  Not all foster kids fit these behaviours but you never know who is coming through our house and the anger htey have.  Thus, in adoption they look for skills in dealing with children who will majorly test limits.  If they are not doing this in the states, then people who have no clue will be adopting children who they may not be able to handle.

So yep, Gersh has me shocked, and happy to live in Canada.