CHARLESTON WV December 9th 2025
Our article presents a factual account of the recent federal audit of West Virginia’s child welfare system and the steps that state officials state they are taking in response. The information that follows is grounded in the primary findings released by the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, also known as HHS OIG, and in official legislative records confirming the appointment of the state’s current human services leadership. Secondary reporting is clearly identified as such and presented only where attributed statements appear.
The Office of Inspector General issued a report titled West Virginia Did Not Comply With Intake Screening Assessment and Investigation Requirements for Responding to Reports of Child Abuse and Neglect. The audit examined one hundred screened in reports from the state’s Bureau for Social Services. According to the inspectors, an estimated ninety one percent of those screened in reports failed to comply with one or more federal or state requirements for intake, screening, assessment, or investigation. The audit presents these findings in detail with separate sections describing the areas in which the state did not meet required standards.
The inspectors stated that mandatory notification letters were not sent in many of the cases reviewed. The report also states that initial assessments were not completed in the time frame required by federal and state law. The audit further records that required interviews with children or adults involved in the reports were not always completed and that mandated reporters who made referrals were not always notified as required. The inspectors also documented that safety plans were not consistently completed and that risk assessments that identify impending safety threats were often incomplete. These findings form the basis of the federal recommendation that the state revise its procedures, improve supervisory oversight, and take the steps necessary to ensure that these fundamental requirements are met. The audit includes four formal recommendations directed to the Bureau for Social Services that relate to training, documentation, system changes, and monitoring processes.
The confirmation of state leadership responsible for responding to these findings is recorded in official legislative documents. The WEST VIRGINIA SENATE journal for April twelfth two thousand twenty five lists Alex Mayer of Kanawha County as the confirmed Secretary of the West Virginia Department of Human Services. His confirmation places him in the position responsible for overseeing statewide reforms to the system that was evaluated in the federal audit.
Much of the recent discussion about the state’s response comes from reporting by regional journalists who attended legislative briefings and who state that the department is undertaking reforms across several areas. According to those accounts, the department is working to improve adoption procedures and foster and kinship care, reduce reliance on out of state residential placements, and strengthen the way the state develops and monitors safety plans. Reporters have also attributed to the department plans to improve the intake and assessment process through updated practice models and to expand partnerships with faith based and community groups that support foster families and kinship caregivers. These descriptions appear in secondary reporting and represent the information that journalists state was presented to lawmakers during a recent briefing.
Some of these reported reforms relate to systems already documented in first hand state materials. The West Virginia PATH system, known formally as the state’s child welfare information system, is publicly described by the state as the platform used to document intake, case management, and payments. The Office of Inspector General’s findings indicate that many of the required steps in the PATH record were incomplete or missing, and the state has acknowledged in other public documents that the system is the primary tool for documenting compliance. The existence and function of this system are therefore confirmed by multiple first hand records, including state descriptions and federal audit references.
It is important to note that some of the reasons given by various officials and commentators for the noncompliance, including explanations that reference staffing shortages or high caseloads, do not appear as formal conclusions in the federal audit. Those explanations come from secondary reports and public statements and therefore must be presented as attributed context rather than as findings of the inspectors. The federal report itself confines its conclusions to whether required steps were completed in the cases reviewed and does not assign broader causation beyond the procedural deficiencies it documented.
Throughout the discussions that followed the audit, state officials have emphasized their intention to stabilize the system, improve transparency, and ensure greater accountability. Those statements, reported by journalists who attended legislative hearings, reflect the administration’s stated goals but do not yet appear in published written testimony or agency releases. Until such material is made available in official form, these remarks remain secondary sources attributed to those who reported them.
The federal audit stands as the primary document describing the system’s performance during the review period. The findings of widespread incompleteness in notifications, assessments, interviews, safety plans, and risk evaluations remain the central factual record confirmed by the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL. The state’s leadership, as confirmed by official legislative action, is now responsible for implementing the specific recommendations directed to the Bureau for Social Services. Our article presents only the information that is presently documented in first hand governmental materials and clearly identified secondary attribution, without interpretation or speculation.
The Appalachian Post is an independent West Virginia news outlet dedicated to clean, verified, first-hand reporting. We do not publish rumors. We do not run speculation. Every fact we present must be supported by original documentation, official statements, or direct evidence. When secondary sources are used, we clearly identify them and never treat them as first-hand confirmation. We avoid loaded language, emotional framing, or accusatory wording, and we do not attack individuals, organizations, or other news outlets. Our role is to report only what can be verified through first-hand sources and allow readers to form their own interpretations. If we cannot confirm a claim using original evidence, we state clearly that we reviewed first-hand sources and could not find documentation confirming it. Our commitment is simple: honest reporting, transparent sourcing, and zero speculation.
Sources
Primary First Hand Sources
• UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL report titled West Virginia Did Not Comply With Intake Screening Assessment and Investigation Requirements for Responding to Reports of Child Abuse and Neglect
• WEST VIRGINIA SENATE confirmation record for Alex Mayer as Secretary of the Department of Human Services
Secondary Attribution Based Sources
• WV News reporting on legislative briefings where agency officials outlined ongoing reform efforts
Appalachian Post 
Leave a comment