Can a Texas CPS caseworker also be a foster parent for the same agency?

Texas AG Opinion JM-745: CPS Specialist Serving as a Foster Parent

Plain-English summary

A district attorney asked whether a conflict of interest would exist if a child protective services specialist for the Texas Department of Human Services were a foster parent for the department. The Attorney General declined to give a categorical answer, concluding that whether such a conflict existed was a question of fact the department had to decide, not one the opinion process could resolve.

The opinion worked through the state conflict-of-interest statute, article 6252-9b, which barred a state employee from having an interest or engaging in activity in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of official duties and from accepting outside employment that could reasonably be expected to impair the employee's independent judgment. The opinion reasoned that the practical burdens the request described, such as taking leave to attend service-plan reviews and court hearings, were not conflicts of interest under the statute. If they were, no state employee could be a foster parent or even a parent. Article 6252-9b did not bar employees from activities that might occasionally require using leave or being unavailable for overtime.

The opinion identified the real question differently. If a specialist's role as a foster parent actually impaired the ability to make the decisions and judgments the job required, then a conflict under article 6252-9b would exist. Whether that impairment existed was a factual determination for the department to make, and the opinion left it there.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1987. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Did the opinion say a CPS specialist could be a foster parent?

No. It declined to answer yes or no, concluding that whether a conflict of interest existed was a question of fact for the Department of Human Services, not something the Attorney General could resolve.

Were the time demands of fostering a conflict of interest?

The opinion said no. It reasoned that needing to use leave or being unavailable for overtime was not a conflict under article 6252-9b; if it were, no state employee could be a foster parent or a parent.

When would a conflict actually exist?

The opinion explained that a conflict under article 6252-9b would exist if the specialist's role as a foster parent impaired the ability to make the decisions and judgments the job required. Whether that was so was for the department to determine.

Who decides whether a conflict exists?

The department. The opinion treated the existence of a conflict as a factual determination the Department of Human Services had to make, consistent with earlier opinions holding that conflict-of-interest questions under article 6252-9b are fact questions.

Background and statutory framework

Article 6252-9b was the Texas standards-of-conduct statute for state officers and employees. Section 1 declared the policy that no state officer or employee should have an interest or engage in activity in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of public duties, and section 8(c) provided that an employee should not accept outside employment or compensation that could reasonably be expected to impair independent judgment in official duties.

The Department of Human Services regulated foster family homes and other child-care facilities under the Human Resources Code and had adopted qualifications and standards for foster parents by rule. The opinion noted that if the department determined a potential foster parent could not meet a foster child's needs because of job responsibilities or any other reason, that person would not qualify. Consistent with earlier opinions treating conflict-of-interest determinations under article 6252-9b as fact questions, the opinion assigned the decision here to the department rather than resolving it itself.

Citations and references

Statutory and regulatory authorities:

• Article 6252-9b, sections 1 and 8(c), V.T.C.S. (standards of conduct for state officers and employees)
• Human Resources Code section 42.001 et seq. (regulation of child-care facilities), sections 41.021 and 42.021
• 40 Texas Administrative Code sections 583.231 through 583.248 (foster parent qualifications and standards), including section 583.234

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/jim-mattox/jm-0745
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1987/jm0745.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF TEXAS

July 13, 1987

Honorable Steve W. Simmons
District Attorney
303 City-County Building
El Paso, Texas 79901

Opinion No. JM-745

Re: Whether a child protective services specialist for the Department of Human Services may be a foster parent for that agency

Dear Mr. Simmons:

You ask whether a conflict of interest would exist if a child protective services specialist of the Texas Department of Human Services were a foster parent for the department.

Article 6252-9b, section 1, V.T.C.S., provides:

It is the policy of the State of Texas that no state officer or state employee shall have any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, or engage in any business transaction or professional activity or incur any obligation of any nature which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his duties in the public interest. To implement this policy and to strengthen the faith and confidence of the people of Texas in their state government, there are provided standards of conduct and disclosure requirements to be observed by persons owing a responsibility to the people of Texas and the government of the State of Texas in the performance of their official duties. It is the intent of the legislature that this Act shall serve not only as a guide for official conduct of these covered persons but also as a basis for discipline of those who refuse to abide by its terms.

Article 6252-9b, section 8(c) provides:

No state officer or state employee should accept other employment or compensation which could reasonably be expected to impair his independence of judgment in the performance of his official duties.

The Department of Human Services is responsible for regulating foster family homes as well as other child-care facilities. Hum. Res. Code §42.001 et seq. To fulfill that responsibility, the department has promulgated qualifications and standards for foster parents. 40 T.A.C. §§583.231 through 583.248. See also Hum. Res. Code §41.021 (department may pay the cost of foster care in some circumstances). Although you indicate that a child protective services specialist is assigned to every foster child, you do not describe the specific responsibilities of a child protective services specialist. You make clear, however, that you are not asking whether a child protective services specialist may be assigned to his own foster child. See generally Hum. Res. Code §42.021 (department shall employ sufficient personnel to fulfill its responsibility to protect children in child-care facilities).

In the brief you submitted with your request, you suggest several potential conflicts of interest. You state, for example:

Being a foster parent entails certain obligations and responsibilities, such as attending service plan reviews, court hearings, and other foster parent-related activities. A child protective services specialist's job is a full-time job that many times requires the specialist to work more than the usual 40-hour week. Problems will arise in that, as a foster parent, the child protective services specialist would have to be taking time off from his employment to be at meetings and other activities required of foster parents, thereby leading to interruptions of said employee's job time.

If the department determined that a potential foster parent would not be able to meet the needs of a foster child because of job responsibilities or for any other reason, that person would not be qualified to be a foster parent. See generally 40 T.A.C. §583.234. If the "conflicts" you describe, however, were conflicts of interest for purposes of article 6252-9b, then no state employee could be a foster parent or, for that matter, a parent. Article 6252-9b does not prohibit state employees from engaging in activities or hobbies that might occasionally require them to use their leave or to be unavailable for overtime work. Cf. Letter Advisory No. 62 (1973) (the fact that an individual might not have sufficient time to devote to two public positions does not create legal incompatibility).

You also suggest that the interests a child protective services specialist would have as a foster parent might affect the decisions he would have to make as a child protective services specialist. If a child protective services specialist's role as a foster parent impaired his ability to make decisions and judgments required for his job, then a conflict of interest for purposes of article 6252-9b would exist. The determination of whether such a conflict does exist is a question of fact and should be determined by the department. See Attorney General Opinions H-1223 (1978) (determination of whether a conflict of interest exists for purposes of article 6252-9b is a fact question that cannot be resolved in the opinion process); H-688 (1975) (determination of whether a conflict of interest exists for purposes of article 6252-9b must be made by body of which legislator in question is a member); see also Attorney General Opinion H-1317 (1978) (to the extent that rule of Department of Human Resources precludes employee's possession of a real estate license where no conflict of interest exists and where employee's performance is in no way impaired, rule is invalid).

SUMMARY

The question of whether a Department of Human Services child protective services specialist may serve as a foster parent is a question of fact that cannot be resolved in the opinion process.

Very truly yours,

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY
Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Sarah Woelk
Assistant Attorney General