A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Vermont Network urges funding for statewide supervised visitation system

February 19, 2026 | Human Services, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Vermont Network urges funding for statewide supervised visitation system
Charlie Lisserman, policy director at the Vermont Network Against Domestic and ****** Violence, urged the Appropriations Committee to fund a statewide supervised‑visitation system that would shore up existing programs and create capacity in counties without services.

Lisserman said the Network revised its budget request for fiscal 2027 and described the proposal as funding community‑based supervised visitation services plus a small allocation for statewide coordination. "Ultimately, the very specific details about what program budgets look like and usage of funds, would likely be determined by the programs themselves and DCF as a funder," Lisserman said during his testimony.

Under the Network’s plan, the state would support eight supervised‑visitation programs statewide — up from six currently — and hire a 0.4 full‑time‑equivalent coordinator housed at the Vermont Network. The coordinator would consult with DCF to support startup of two new programs, provide training and help set program standards and allocations so smaller providers can sustain operations.

Lisserman also asked the committee to consider transferring a bit over $100,000 in general funds currently routed to the Center for Crime Victim Services to DCF to consolidate grant administration and reduce providers’ administrative burden.

Committee members asked how the two new sites would be chosen and whether the money would simply follow willing providers rather than be allocated by need. Lisserman said selection criteria would focus on counties without current services and where needs‑assessment data and interested providers indicate viable options; staff work with Representative Donahue and Legislative Counsel was described as drafting language to make that explicit.

Members signaled support for stabilizing existing programs and asked staff to include a cost analysis and implementation details in committee materials. The committee did not take a formal vote; staff were asked to incorporate the request into the budget recommendations and return with precise line‑item language and calculations.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee