By ERIN HARMEYER

Foster parents in Missouri are all too familiar with the reality that they receive just one-third of the recommended adequate amount of money for raising children. “I’ll admit, it’s hard to take child after child after child into your home and not be reimbursed somewhat decently for it,” said foster parent John Anderson, 54. He and his wife, Karen, 52, have cared for about 150 children over the past 28 years at their home in Ashland. “It costs money to run children back and forth to [their biological] parents, it costs money for gas and for food and it all adds up and it hurts, it just hurts,” he says.

Karen Jones, 49, a foster parent who has cared for about 15 children during the past five years in her home in Columbia, says the rates were a big factor in her decision to cease taking in children after a home has been found for her current foster daughter. “The very idea that you can raise even a traditional child on this rate is crazy,” Jones says. “I mean we get, what, 20 bucks, a day? Well, woo-hoo!” she sarcastically exclaims, throwing her arms in the air in mock victory.

Foster parents in Missouri are eligible for extras outside of the base rates, including a clothing allowance, mileage reimbursement and respite care, a chance for parents to take a few days off from their duties each year. Parents who have completed professional parenting training can earn an extra $100 per month for each child.

An infant allowance of $50 each month is also given to parents of newborns through their second birthday to defray the cost of infant needs, such as diapers and formula. But foster parents attest that while these extras help some, they do not nearly serve their intended purposes. Some parents go so far as to describe these minimal benefits as a “slap in the face.”

The clothing allowance provides parents of newborns up to age 5 with $150 per year, parents of children ages 6 to 12 with $200 per year and parents of teenagers with $250 per year. The amount is divided and given to the parents in two lump sums; so for example, parents of teenagers are given $125 in the fall to buy winter clothes, and $125 in the spring for warm weather attire.

"The clothing allowance – that’s $75 twice each year for me,” Jones says, who was caring for a 3-year-old in the late fall of last year. “That doesn’t cover shoes. You might be able to buy a coat, if you catch them on sale. Things like pajamas,that comes out-of-pocket. Socks, underwear, that comes out-of-pocket. My children go to church with me every Sunday, so all of their nice church outfits, that comes out-of-pocket.”

According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the amount parents actually spend on children varies based on family income, but the lowest figure is $631 per month on newborn children through age two for those in the lowest income bracket, or families earning less than $44,500 each year. Families earning more than $74,500 will spend at least $1,414 per month on children ages 15 through 17. Across all ages and income brackets, these estimated costs of raising a child surpass those recommended by the MARC study, and grossly exceed the amount of reimbursement provided in Missouri to foster parents.

The USDA says that the cost of clothing a child far exceeds the clothing allowance given to foster parents in Missouri. For example, even in the lowest income bracket, parents of children ages 12 to 14 will spend $700 per year on clothing. In the highest income bracket, the figure jumps to $1,020. The clothing allowance for foster children in this age group is $200-$250, falling well below expected costs.

Sara Anderson, spokesperson for the Missouri Department of Social Services, says the state must work with legislators to determine reimbursement rates. “Just as with any pay raise, the legislature tries to keep up with things like cost of living if possible,” Anderson says. “We’re always hopeful that there will be more increases in rates in the future. But looking at the base rate of Missouri can be deceiving, because there are additions we give to the reimbursement rates here that other states do not.”