Despite an Alabama Supreme Court ruling this week, a Madison nonprofit organization that hosts foster children still has further to go before its dispute with the Department of Human Resources is settled.

Kids to Love has been denied foster care referrals from DHR since June after the state agency suspended placements due to “serious violations” of standards to be met by child placement agencies.

DHR soon after tried to remove children from the organization’s homes. Kids to Love was granted a temporary restraining order against DHR in September to stop the state agency from removing children without evidence of harm or unsafe conditions.

On Wednesday, the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the restraining order following a DHR appeal. All new placements to Kids to Love, however, remain suspended.

According to Kids to Love founder Lee Marshall, DHR has not been forthcoming about alleged violations and has not provided the organization with information necessary to redress any issues.

“I asked [DHR Commissioner Nancy Buckner] if she would clarify and there was no response. I followed up asking again, asking for a meeting. No response. We’ve had multiple lawmakers go to Montgomery on our behalf. We have followed every chain of command that we know to avoid getting to the point of filing a lawsuit. That was what we felt was our absolute last resort,” Marshall said.

“We’ve asked over and over, what can we do? We don’t know of any deficit and if you can tell us what that is, we are ready to rectify it. But let us serve these kids,” Marshall said.

Kids to Love, founded in 2004 by Marshall, a former Huntsville television news anchor, operates foster care facilities and acts as a private child placement agency, according to its website. It also provides an array of other services for foster children, such as clothing and other items if needed. Every child it works with receives a Bible. In 2023, the organization said it surpassed $1 million in awarded scholarships to foster children for certification training, trade schools and college.

According to Marshall, DHR told her only that Kids to Love had violated confidentiality by posting protected information about a child in their “Meet our Kids” posts.

“That child was not in our child placing agency; he was never placed with one of our foster families. That child was only involved in our Meet our Kids segment,” said Marshall. “And so, we removed that child from the website as soon as we received notification of it. So then our attorneys, you know, follow back up. OK, that has been removed. Now, can you open our homes?”

Marshall said DHR still would not lift the suspension after they removed the post, which she said contained information that was important for families to know if they were interested in adoption.

The information in the post was sent by DHR, who had asked Marshall for help in publicizing that the child was available for adoption.

“They said that we were breaking confidentiality, even though everything that we were given they gave to us. What they sent was what we’ve printed or posted on our website verbatim,” Marshall said.

In a September hearing, a lawyer for Kids to Love said DHR’s actions were “arbitrary and capricious” and did not have the best interest of children in mind.

“Ultimately, our allegations are that DHR has been acting in a manner of retribution towards the Kids to Love organization. And for a state agency to act in that manner towards a private charitable organization is atrocious and we’d like that to end.”

While litigation continues, Marshall said she worries for the kids who don’t have placements.

“We know of one situation where a young man slept on the floor at a county office for 21 days since our referrals were suspended and our homes were frozen,” said Marshall. “I don’t know all of his situation. And I don’t know if I would have had a family to meet that child’s needs. But I can promise you this. Had that director or worker called and said hey, here’s my situation, we would have done everything we could to try to support but our hands were tied.”

“We just want to be part of [a child’s] success story. We can’t do it without DHR, but DHR does not want to work with us.”

In a statement to AL.com about the court’s ruling, DHR said, “There is ongoing litigation and another side of the story to tell.”