State child advocate warns lawmakers about oversight as DCF contracts with Abraxas for youth facility

Matthew Bernstein, Vermont’s Child Youth and Family Advocate, testified before the House Human Services committee that proposed budget cuts to prevention programs are misplaced and raised specific questions about oversight of contracted youth facilities.

Bernstein urged lawmakers to prioritize prevention funding over expanding costly locked or staff-secure placements and presented data showing Vermont spends a small share of its child-welfare budget on prevention while spending heavily on out-of-home placements. "Crisis is not policy," he told the committee, arguing that cutting prevention increases downstream costs and harms.

Bernstein also flagged a Department for Children and Families (DCF) contract with Abraxas to operate West River Haven that, he said, was signed 12/16/2025. He told the committee that Pennsylvania regulators revoked an Abraxas license after finding failures that included a staff member allegedly putting hands on a youth and the facility’s failure to report the incident; he said the Pennsylvania action included a failure-to-report finding and subsequent license revocation and referenced a separate lawsuit alleging systemic abuse at the facility.

"How is DCF responding to this? Who provides accountability? How do these allegations impact budget decisions?" Bernstein asked, pressing for clarity on how the state will ensure child safety if the contractor has such regulatory findings in another state.

Committee members asked Bernstein about reporting and investigation routes for youth who allege mistreatment. Bernstein said complaint routes include his office, a youth’s attorney or guardian ad litem, Disability Rights Vermont, and internal AHS contacts that typically loop back to DCF; he stressed that his two-person office lacks regulatory authority and that independent oversight capacity is limited.

Bernstein recommended strengthening independent oversight and increasing the Advocate’s capacity to visit facilities and monitor conditions. He also asked the committee to require clearer information from DCF about the cost, scope and accountability structures for proposed locked or staff-secure placements.

The committee did not provide DCF responses in this hearing excerpt; members acknowledged these questions and indicated they will continue to seek information as budget deliberations proceed.