PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Human Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 2017
Family First Prevention Services Act of 2017
This bill amends part E (Foster Care and Adoption Assistance) of title IV of the Social Security Act (SSAct) regarding, among other matters: (1) mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services and in-home parenting skill-based programs, (2) foster care maintenance payments for children with parents in a licensed residential family-based treatment facility for substance abuse, and (3) payments for evidence-based kinship navigator programs.
Part B of title IV (Child and Family Services) of the SSAct is amended regarding, among other matters: (1) time limits for family reunification services for children in foster care or returning home, (2) grants for the development of an electronic interstate case-processing system to expedite the interstate placement of children in foster care or guardianship or for adoption, and (3) targeted grants to increase the well-being of children affected by substance abuse.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill appropriates certain funding to Department of Health and Human Services for FY2018 for competitive grants to states, Indian tribes, or tribal consortia to support the recruitment and retention of high-quality foster families.
The bill amends part B of title IV of the SSAct to reauthorize through FY2021: (1) the Stephanie Tubbs Jones Child Welfare Services Program, (2) promotion of safe and stable families program, (3) funding reservations for monthly caseworker visits and regional partnership grants, and (4) funding for state courts.
Part E of title IV of the SSAct is amended to: (1) revise the John H. Chaffee Foster Care Independence Program and related provisions, and (2) reauthorize adoption and legal guardianship incentive programs through FY2021.
The Government Accountability Office shall study the extent to which states comply with certain SSAct requirements relating to the effects of phasing out the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program income eligibility requirements for adoption assistance payments.
People & committees
Rep. Buchanan, Vern [R-FL-16] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Human Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.253 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.253 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.253 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.253 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.