I oppose the regulatory rate stucture 22 VAC 40-221

This proposal overlooks many consideration factors before catorgarizing a child stable and decreasing their rate structure. A child with a history of sexual abuse, sexually acting out, or agressive destructive behavior can achieve stability, however this doesn't mean the level of care and supervision should not contiune. To ensure the safety of others, especially children, high supervision should always be in place for children with such behaviors issues, whether past or present.

TFP's experience, knowledge,  skills and commitments plays a very important role in the success of a child's progress, including stability. The TFP that is less committed, lacking skills will impact a child's progress, However under the proposed action plan, these parents will receive more compensation for their efforts and performance.

Conflict of interest amongest TFP,, Agency and Social Services on the special needs of  the child. Personally, I've experienced this conflict many times in regards to DSS denying children additional funding for their special needs, ignoring the childs therapeutic history, their G.A.L. and therapist/counslors recommendation.

A childs progress and stability will have inconsistency, there will be set backs. What support and resources will be provided for a child on limited funding.

Teenagers that are required to participated in independent living, requires much attention and time involvement for the parents to accomplish such goals. Provisions in the rate structure need to be made to accommodate for this requirement whether child is stable or unstable.

It takes much time, energy and supervision along with family and personnel sacrifices to do what we do. This new proposed rate structure not only impacts the parents but also the children. By not providing the additional funding, in the end means less for the children.