by Athena Wong, MPH & Fátima Khayar-Cámara, PhD
Who Are Unaccompanied Immigrant Children?
Unaccompanied children are legally defined as individuals who have no lawful immigration status in the United States (U.S.), are under 18 years old, and have no parent or legal guardian in the U.S., or no parent or legal guardian in the U.S. available to provide care and physical custody. Recognizing the vulnerability of unaccompanied children, Congress passed the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) in 2000 to establish special care and legal protections for this group. See “Supporting the Well-Being of Immigrant and Refugee Youth” on page 24 of this issue for more context on the psychological, social and physical vulnerability of unaccompanied children. Given the distinct avenues for immigration relief available to them and social services needs exacerbated by their separation from family, unaccompanied children benefit from specialized support from child welfare practitioners and allied professionals.
Between federal fiscal years 2021 and 2025, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security referred more than 491,000 unaccompanied children to the care and custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR; ORR, 2026a). Approximately 96 percent of these children, more than 472,000 were released to sponsors, whom ORR describes as adults capable of ensuring a child’s physical and mental well-being without posing a safety risk to the child. Nearly 10.5 percent of all releases (more than 49,000 children) occurred in California, the second highest total of any state (ORR, 2026b). The ORR cautions that federal fiscal year 2025 data remain unreconciled and subject to revision.
The Children’s Holistic Immigration Representation Project (CHIRP)
To address the unmet need of unaccompanied children’s access to legal representation as well as gaps in current service models, the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) launched services under the Children’s Holistic Immigration Representation Project (CHIRP) in September 2022. CHIRP provides integrated legal and social services to unaccompanied children across California, recognizing that social service needs often intersect with the substance of the immigration case, impact the ability of youth to engage with their case, and at times, are more pressing than their legal case.
CHIRP teams may include attorneys, legal representatives, social workers, and case managers as well as supervisors and administrative/support staff who have defined roles and work in collaboration toward a shared advocacy plan in support of the client’s legal case and overall well-being. Social service providers take on needs assessments; referrals and accompaniments (e.g., school, medical, benefits, and court); advocacy in external systems; psychoeducation; and crisis/safety planning. Legal service providers deliver full-scope representation (e.g., removal defense, asylum, SIJS, T and U Visas, etc.), in state and federal forums, governed by culturally humble and trauma-informed practices. Furthermore, CHIRP operates through a universal representation intake model: cases are accepted on a first-come, first-served basis regardless of perceived “merits.”
The ideal holistic representation model for CHIRP features a dedicated dyad, pairing one legal service provider with one social service provider in a 1:1 ratio. This structure theoretically enables unified assessment, planning, and advocacy, and supports program fidelity, workforce planning, and outcome measurement. However, in response to practical constraints within the current immigration landscape, the program has revised this standard to address provider capacity and case complexity, while protecting continuity of care. CHIRP now recommends a staffing ratio of up to three social service providers for each legal service provider (3:1). This formalized flexibility accommodates real-world variability without compromising the model’s objective of consistent, integrated support.
To preserve quality of services alongside this staffing ratio flexibility, the program has set caseload guardrails of 30 to 35 clients per legal service provider on the holistic team and emphasizes access to social services across the full lifecycle of the immigration case, given backlogs and extended adjudication timelines. Moreover, the program offers technical assistance for CHIRP staff including access to external clinical supervision and monthly processing groups on vicarious trauma. These resources have been identified by organizations as important facilitators of program implementation and sustainability, as well as for staff retention and well-being. Since its launch, the CHIRP network has included 19 non-profit organizations providing free legal services to unaccompanied children for their immigration cases, with16 organizations active in the network during the California State Fiscal Year 2025–2026. As of the end of 2025, CHIRP has served over 1,000 youth across more than 20 California counties.
Challenges and Opportunities for Holistic Representation in Immigration Settings - Lessons Learned from CHIRP
Organizations in the field of immigration representation have not yet widely adopted holistic services. In fact, among organizations that have participated in CHIRP, 47.4% did not offer any in-house social services prior to joining the network. With limited blueprints to replicate from the immigration field, CHIRP forged an innovative approach to working with unaccompanied children. Along the way, teams overcame challenges and identified opportunities for effective ways to implement holistic representation for youth.
In general, social service professionals are mandated reporters, meaning they are legally required to escalate concerns to appropriate government authorities if they suspect a child has been harmed or is at risk of harm with specific requirements governing mandated reporting varying by state. Legal professionals, by contrast, are bound by attorney-client privilege, which limits the extent to which attorneys may disclose information shared by clients without the client’s express waiver of that privilege. When integrating these disciplines, CHIRP teams are given the option to include social service professionals in the legal retainer to be covered under attorney-client privilege, or to have separate agreements that allow them to retain their status as mandated reporters. For teams that select the former approach, the significant change from being a mandated reporter to a non-mandated reporter can be a tricky adjustment for social service staff who remain dedicated to ensuring the safety of clients. Under CHIRP, social service staff who are not mandated reporters have adopted collaborative and innovative practices by proactively developing safety plans, empowering clients to seek and create safety on their own, educating clients on effective coping mechanisms, and consulting with legal staff during crisis situations.
Additionally, effective interprofessional collaboration requires deliberate efforts, including cross-training and restructuring of workflows and supervision structures. Although these measures demand substantial initial investment of staff time and, at times, organization financial resources, CHIRP legal and social service staff report that interprofessional collaboration fosters professional fulfillment and reduces burnout. Integrating legal and social services within a unified framework allows providers to address the comprehensive range of client needs: legal, economic, physical, emotional, social, educational, and political.
Conclusion
Integrating legal and social services to support unaccompanied children undergoing immigration proceedings has been transformative for clients like “A” as well as for staff working on these interdisciplinary teams. Please see “Supporting the Well-Being of Immigrant and Refugee Youth” on page 27 of this issue to learn more about “A”’s story.
Implementing holistic representation in immigration settings presents certain challenges; however, it offers greater opportunities to enhance access to justice, support unaccompanied children’s healthy development, help staff find professional fulfillment, and strengthen the field of immigration representation.
Athena Wong, MPH, is the Research and Evaluation Associate for the Children’s Holistic Immigration Representation Project (CHIRP) at the Acacia Center for Justice.
Fátima Khayar-Cámara, PhD, is a Principal Research and Evaluation Manager at Acacia Center for Justice. She oversees research and evaluation activities for the Children’s Holistic Immigration Representation Project (CHIRP).