Connect with us

New Hampshire

NH Child Advocate urges increased supervision of children in state placement

Published

on


This story was originally produced by the New Hampshire Bulletin, an independent local newsroom that allows NHPR and other outlets to republish its reporting.

Details of what the Office of the Child Advocate called “horrifying” abuse and neglect of two New Hampshire boys placed by the state in a Tennessee youth facility are behind legislation that would require the state to substantially increase its supervision of the children it places and limit those placements to New England as of January 2025.

The state Department of Health and Human Services has estimated it would need 30 new positions, 18 of them case workers, to meet the requirements in House Bill 1573 at a cost of about $5 million a year. The bill would also increase court hearings, a measure the state judicial branch has estimated would require nine new positions at a cost of about $1.5 million a year.

Children in abuse and neglect cases are placed in residential treatment facilities when their needs cannot be met by family, legal guardians, or other relatives.

Advertisement

The bill was heard Tuesday before the House Children and Family Law Committee.

Meanwhile, the state is defending itself against a federal lawsuit filed in 2021 against Gov. Chris Sununu and Department of Health and Human Services officials by New Hampshire Legal Assistance, Disability Rights Center-NH, ACLU New Hampshire, and the national advocacy group Children’s Rights. They allege the state is systematically and unnecessarily institutionalizing older foster youth rather than placing them in homelike settings within or close to their communities. The case is pending the outcome of mediation.

Currently four children of nearly 350 in out-of-state placements are in facilities outside New England, Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Kathleen Remillard said Tuesday. Those sites are in Missouri, Arkansas, and Florida.

Of the remaining children, 264 are in New Hampshire and 81 are in New England, she said.

Child Advocate Cassandra Sanchez said the four children outside of New England is a drop from the approximately 20 children receiving services out of state when she reported the Bledsoe Youth Academy to Tennessee child protection officials and demanded the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services return them to the state.

Advertisement

Sanchez’s allegations against Bledsoe Youth Academy in Gallatin, Tennessee, included staff offering children incentives to assault other children; cameras in bedrooms that left little privacy to change; and kids with rug burns from being restrained face-down on a carpet. The two New Hampshire boys said they were threatened with retaliation for reporting the incidents to Sanchez and her team.

When officials at Bledsoe, a facility for boys 12 to 18, learned of the allegations, they told the boys they were being sent elsewhere, to a facility where gang members would harm them and kill their families, Sanchez told the committee.

In a September report recounting her findings, Sanchez said that while the Division for Children, Youth, and Families had been checking in with the two children at Bledsoe, it had not visited in person for a facilities evaluation before awarding it certification in 2021 or recertifying it in 2023.

Sanchez’s office and the department agree on “99%” of the proposed legislation, she said. Their disagreement is isolated to the nature of the state’s legal relationship with residential placement facilities.

Sanchez wants the state to contract with each facility, something it currently does with most but not all out-of-state sites. She told committee members a contract was the only way the state could hold a facility accountable.

Advertisement

Morissa Henn, deputy commissioner for the Department of Health and Human Services, said the state wants to maintain the contracts in place but be allowed to require certification for those sites when a child’s needs require a level of care an existing site cannot provide. She also told lawmakers contracting is a lengthy process that could interfere with providing a child timely care.

Each have requested amendments to the bill, which its sponsor, Rep. Mark Pearson, a Hampstead
Republican, introduced Tuesday for the committee to weigh. Aside from the disagreement over how to partner with sites, their amendments are virtually identical.

Under the bill, caseworkers would be required to visit the children in and out of state monthly, during which they would have to tour the children’s living area, talk with the children, and meet with the site’s leaders and staff.

Sanchez said she learned of the conditions in the Tennessee facility by taking those steps. She said seven different case workers visited the boys, all unfamiliar to the boys, and spent too little time to uncover the abuse and neglect. She said the state’s visits to children last 15 minutes.

Henn disputed that Tuesday.

Advertisement

“Just to correct the record, these are not 15-minute visits, where you pick up some pamphlets, as you just heard,” she said. “These are in-depth visits. We take them extremely seriously. We check on the youth under our care, we interview them. We have critical responsibilities serving often in the role of parents and in our obligations as a department. It gives me goosebumps to imagine the notion that we would do anything but the most robust protections.”

The department would also have to visit in-state and out-of-state facilities quarterly; at least one of those visits each year would have to be unannounced.

The bill would put new requirements on the judicial branch as well.

Courts would also have to review placements more frequently, from every 90 days as is now required to every 60 days. If the child or the child’s representative does not support the qualified residential treatment program level of care, those court reviews would be required every 30 days.

Prior to those hearings, the department would have to submit evidence to the court showing the residential placement continues to meet the child’s needs and provides the most appropriate level of care; placement with family or a legal guardian could not meet those needs; and that the placement is consistent with the short- and long-term goals for the child.

Advertisement

Before approving a placement, the court would have to determine whether the child’s needs could be met through placement with a parent, legal guardian, legal custodian, kin caregiver, or in a foster care home. Before approving a residential treatment placement, the court would have to review the specific needs of the child, the length of stay, and input from the child and the family.

New Hampshire Bulletin is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Hampshire Bulletin maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Dana Wormald for questions: info@newhampshirebulletin.com. Follow New Hampshire Bulletin on Facebook and Twitter.





Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

New Hampshire

NH dog facility owner charged with animal cruelty after video surfaces online

Published

on

NH dog facility owner charged with animal cruelty after video surfaces online


A 26-year-old woman, who owns a dog training and kennel facility in Brentwood, New Hampshire, has been arrested after a video surfaced online showing apparent animal cruelty in Methuen, Massachusetts.

Brentwood police notified the Methuen Police Department about the video on Jan. 2. A preliminary investigation then identified the woman in the video as Maddison Eastman.

Police obtained an arrest warrant for Eastman on two counts of animal cruelty, and she turned herself into Lawrence District Court last Wednesday.

Eastman was arraigned Friday. Information from her court appearance wasn’t immediately available, and officials haven’t released further details about what Eastman allegedly did.

Advertisement

Methuen police said they’ll have no further comment at this time and referred all inquiries to the Essex County District Attorney’s Office.



Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

David M. Parr

Published

on

David M. Parr


Screenshot

David M. Parr, 63, of Merrimack NH passed away on Wednesday, January 7th, 2026 at the Community Hospice House in Merrimack after a long battle with cancer.

He was born in Nashua, NH on September 26th, 1962, one of six children to the late Albert and Pauline (Fish) Parr. He was raised in Nashua and was a graduate of Nashua High School, Class of 1981.

Advertisement

David spent his entire career working in sales for several building products companies. In his free time, he enjoyed working around his house perfecting his lawn and yard, fly fishing, camping with a great campfire and stories, hiking, backpacking, watching the Bruins and Patriots, and following politics. Most of all he loved raising and spending time with his children with his wife and constantly sharing his dad jokes to make them laugh. He was so proud of both Brendan and Shannon and the amazing adults they became.

Along with his parents, he was pre-deceased by an infant brother, Michael Parr and a brother-in-law, Robert LeBrun.

He will be forever loved and remembered by his wife of 31 years, Lorraine (Plante) Parr; two children, Brendan Parr and his fiancée Anna Conte, and Shannon Parr; five siblings, Susan Cole-Kelly, Debra Murphy, Bonnie and her husband Patrick Mihealsick, Lauren LeBrun and Dan Parr and his wife Darcey along with numerous nieces and nephews.

Visitation hours will be held at the Rivet Funeral Home, 425 Daniel Webster Highway, Merrimack NH on Friday, January 16th, 2026 from 5 – 7 PM. A Memorial Mass of Christian Burial will be celebrated at Our Lady of Mercy Church, 16 Baboosic Lake Road, Merrimack on Saturday, January 17th at 9 AM. Burial will follow at Last Rest Cemetery.

Kindly visit rivetfuneralhome.com to leave an online condolence for the family.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

High number of NH households lack emergency savings – Valley News

Published

on

High number of NH households lack emergency savings – Valley News


A broken furnace, medical bill, or car repair could quickly become a financial crisis if it were to happen in any one of over 120,000 New Hampshire households with very little savings. An analysis recently published by the Urban Institute found that nearly one in four New Hampshire households lacked at least $2,000 in non-retirement savings in 2022, representing a basic financial cushion for weathering emergencies. According to the analysis, about 23% of New Hampshire households did not have non-retirement savings, such as money in a checking or savings account, totaling more than $2,000 in 2022. That figure rose to 30% for Granite Staters in rural northern and western New Hampshire, 32% for Manchester residents, and 31% for Granite Staters of color statewide.

The Urban Institute published this analysis in November 2025 using the latest consistently available data for each type of financial well-being measured. A previous version of the analysis, published in 2022, found about 26 percent of New Hampshire households lacked $2,000 in emergency savings in 2019, although the $2,000 threshold was not adjusted for inflation between those two years. The researchers also measured overall wealth, income relative to key expenses, and certain other metrics.

Unpaid debt

Researchers at the Urban Institute also found that about 16% of Granite Staters had some form of debt that was at least 60 days past due in 2023. Two percent of all residents specifically had delinquent student loan debts.

Advertisement

Housing expenses

About 87% of all households with less than $50,000 in annual income, which was about one in four New Hampshire households in 2023, paid more than 30% of their incomes for their housing costs, such as rent or mortgage payments, utilities, property taxes, and insurance costs. For Granite Staters of color, about 96% of households with these lower incomes were cost-burdened, or paying at least 30% of income, by housing costs.

This percentage varied for different areas within the state as well. While about 78% of all residents with lower incomes in Coos, Grafton and Sullivan counties combined were cost-burdened by housing, about 95% of Manchester residents and 91% of Strafford County and northern Rockingham County residents were cost-burdened in this manner.

Utility costs

About one in five New Hampshire households paid more than 10% of household income solely on utility costs, including electricity, water, gas, and heating fuels. While the lowest percentage of households facing these utility costs were near Nashua and a few other relatively urban parts of the state, about 46% of households in Coos, Grafton, and Sullivan counties, and 41% in eastern central New Hampshire encompassing Carroll and Belknap counties, paid more than 10% in utility costs.

Access to emergency savings varies throughout New Hampshire

Savings can be difficult to accumulate for a variety of reasons, and the primary factors include income and expenses. Both lower incomes and higher expenses make saving more difficult, while their opposites enable more opportunities to set money aside for a time of need. Some of the variations in savings across New Hampshire could be rooted in both factors.

The approximately 23% of Granite State households without at least $2,000 in savings during 2022 represents about 129,600 households of the estimated 557,200 in New Hampshire that year. In Coos, Grafton, and Sullivan Counties, which include the two counties (Coos and Sullivan) with the highest poverty rates in the state, about 30% of households lacked that level of savings. Coos County also had a median household income that was only slightly more than half of Rockingham County in southeastern New Hampshire. The cost of buying a house has also increased fastest in rural parts of New Hampshire, although the overall cost is still lower than in southeastern New Hampshire.

Advertisement

In Manchester, where 32% of households did not have at least $2,000 in emergency savings (the highest rate of the measured areas in the state) in 2022, the cost of renting the median two-bedroom apartment increased 31% from 2020 to 2024 to $1,838 per month. Median household income, at about $77,000, was below the statewide median of about $95,600 during the 2019 to 2023 period. Increasing costs, particularly regional housing costs, likely made saving very difficult for households in Manchester and elsewhere, particularly the families that are more likely to see incomes fall short of expenses than ten years ago.

Wealth is a critical factor and difficult to measure

Most common measures of financial well-being are based on income. Income is often measured through surveys and tax returns, and income from employment is also reported by businesses and other employers. As a result, income is more commonly measured than wealth. Income measures the money coming into a household in a given time period, while wealth measures the assets owned by the members of a household.

Wealth provides a form of economic security that promotes resilience, including the ability to weather a job loss or an unexpected expense, such as a car repair or medical costs from an illness. Even a higher income does not provide the security of having a substantial amount of money in a bank account, as that income could change, or new costs could appear, relatively quickly. Wealth provides a financial cushion that can be critical for individuals and families in times of need.

Local data difficult to access

While national measures provide insights into wealth and wealth inequality, which has risen substantially over the last six decades, local data are much harder to collect than data about the income of residents in states and counties. Researchers at the Urban Institute used publicly-available data and collaborated with a major credit bureau, employing anonymized data, to get a sample of about 10 million people nationwide. They also utilized models to understand the likely conditions facing people in less-populated areas and in smaller population groups when the sample sizes themselves were too small to create reliable estimates.

These data and methods allowed the Urban Institute researchers to estimate the percentage of households that had less than $2,000 in their bank accounts, stocks, mutual funds, and other non-retirement assets. However, the data were not granular enough to allow for consistent town- or county-level analyses in New Hampshire. The data were organized by regions of the state (and country) with a total of 100,000 people or more. While data for Manchester can be separated from the rest of the state with this strategy, every other city or town is combined with at least one other community in these data.

Advertisement

Different than other surveys

This methodology is notably different from a commonly-cited national-level survey conducted by the U.S. Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking, which asks U.S. residents nationwide a series of questions. These questions include asking about the methods the individual would use to pay for an unexpected $400 expense.

The latest survey indicates that 37% of U.S. adults would not have paid for an unexpected $400 expense with cash, savings, or a credit card to be paid off by the end of the month. While that indicates more than one in three U.S. adults do not have the savings to easily cover this expense, 13% said they would be unable to pay it by any means; others indicated they would carry a balance on a credit card, borrow money from a friend, family member, bank, or payday lender, or sell something to help pay for the expense. That suggests many adults would not spend their bank account down to zero, perhaps to preserve some wealth cushion for other unexpected expenses or to avoid fees.

While these survey data offer key insights and annual updates allowing for helpful comparisons over time, the Urban Institute’s methods seek to measure the actual balances in household accounts. The Urban Institute’s data also provide insights into the financial resilience of New Hampshire residents specifically.

Financial situations fragile for many Granite State families

Without $2,000 in savings, a Granite Stater could quickly spend their liquid assets to pay for an unexpected car repair, needed fixes for a house or an appliance, the deductible on their health insurance after an injury or illness but before coverage begins, losing a job, or other factors that could effectively require immediate, unforeseen costs. That would potentially lead to debt that could be difficult to pay off, unpaid bills, or forgone health or housing needs.

Housing, utility, health care, and child care costs have increased across New Hampshire. These rising costs have made building emergency savings increasingly difficult. With nearly one in four New Hampshire households in this fragile situation, small changes in physical or financial well-being, expenses facing families, public policy, or the economy overall could have big impacts on many Granite Staters.

Advertisement

The New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute is sharing these articles with the partners in The Granite State News Collaborative. NHFPI is an independent nonprofit organization that explores, develops and promotes public policies that foster economic opportunity and prosperity for all New Hampshire residents. For more information visit nhfpi.org. These articles are being shared by partners in The Granite State News Collaborative. For more information visit collaborativenh.org.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending