Summary#

HB 26-1376, Federal Adoption Money Cash Fund Updates, amends Colorado Revised Statutes section 26-1-111; it does not set up a new fund. Signed into law, it requires that fund money used from fiscal year 2026–27 onward comply with a federal Title IV-E provision. Its stated goal is to update the fund’s permissible uses.

• The General Assembly may continue to appropriate money from the fund for county allocations, including help with the costs of obtaining federal reimbursements and for specified child care, assistance, social services, and child welfare services.
• From fiscal year 2026–27 onward, use of the fund’s money must follow section 473(a)(8) of the federal Social Security Act.
• The bill expressly includes post-permanency services as a permissible use. These services are intended to support lasting outcomes for a child or youth who might otherwise enter or reenter foster care.
• The existing text says unspent, uncommitted money stays in the fund, and investment income is credited to it.

What it means for you#

• Counties and state agencies: The fund remains subject to annual appropriation. The state department handles allocations to counties under the existing provisions; the Department of Early Childhood is named for child care assistance allocations. The bill does not guarantee that money will be appropriated or that a county will receive a particular amount.
• Children, youth, and families: Post-permanency services may be funded if money is appropriated and allocated for that purpose. The bill does not create an individual right to services or a process for applying for them.
• Taxpayers: The bill does not change taxes, fees, or fines.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

• The bill does not give an appropriation amount or estimate the cost of the new permissible use.
• Fund spending remains subject to annual appropriation by the General Assembly.
• The existing text keeps unspent, uncommitted money in the fund and credits investment income to it.

What is unclear#

• The bill does not explain which specific services qualify as “post-permanency services.” It points to a federal law provision, but that provision’s details are not included in the supplied material.
• It is unclear how the new federal-use requirement interacts with the existing list of county funding purposes, including help with reimbursement costs, child care assistance, assistance, social services, and child welfare services.
• The bill does not set allocation amounts, county eligibility rules, application steps, timelines, or reporting requirements for the new use.
• The supplied excerpt shows parts of the existing law, but the parent statute was not supplied, so the full current-law context could not be checked against it.

Case for#

• The bill expressly allows fund money to support services for children and youth after a permanent placement, where those services may help sustain that placement.
• Requiring fund use to follow the cited federal provision may help keep spending within federal rules.
• The fund already supports several child- and family-related purposes; adding post-permanency services could give the state another permitted way to use it.

Case against#

• The bill does not define post-permanency services or explain how the state will decide which services to fund.
• The fund is not unlimited, and annual appropriations are not guaranteed. Money used for a new purpose may compete with other authorized uses.
• The bill does not specify how counties or families would access these services, or how the state would measure whether they support lasting outcomes.