GUIDE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SENATE BILL 236

GUIDE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SENATE BILL 236 Prepared by the SB 236 Workgroup, a Project of the Georgia Model Courts Committee, a Joint Project of the CJCJ Permanency Planning Committee and the Child Placement Project Presented by R. Michael Key, Troup County Juvenile Court and Melissa Dorris, Georgia Supreme Court Child Placement Project 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Composition of the Workgroup n n n n Office of the Georgia Child Advocate Staff of the Council of Juvenile Court Judges Private Child Advocates DFCS Representatives – State and Local Level CASAs – Georgia CASA and Local Programs Court Personnel Staff of the Child Placement Project Juvenile Court Judges Staff from the Barton Clinic Private Attorneys Care Providers Office of Adoptions Special Assistant Attorneys General Citizens Review Panel Coordinators Georgia Attorney General’s Office (By Review Only) 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Who are you? 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

PART A. NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD UNDER REVISED O. C. G. A. SECTION 15 -11 -58 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

SB 236 Effective July 1, 2003 n Sponsor / Legislative Intent – To clarify the rights of foster parents to receive notice of hearings and to be provided an opportunity to be heard in hearings concerning the child(ren) in their care – To expand options for permanent placement for children in foster care – To codify best practice for relative (and other person) search – And … to ensure all changes are compliant with ASFA. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Elements of SB 236 Notice & Opportunity to be Heard Relative (and Other Person) Search Extended Temporary Custody Permanent Custody Post -TPR 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Notice & Opportunity to Be Heard Originated with ASFA (1997) § 104 provides that each state’s foster care review system must be designed to ensure that: “(T)he foster parents (if any) of a child any preadoptive parent or relative providing care for the child are provided with notice of, and an opportunity to be heard in, any review or hearing to be held with respect to the child. . . ” n O. C. G. A. § 15 -11 -58(k) (1998) n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Practice Snapshot (Barton Clinic 2002) Court Perspective n Foster Parent View (Majority) DFCS provides notice in jxn n – Primarily for periodic reviews, permanency hearings – Usually by mail/phone 40% notice is court’s responsibility n Lack of knowledge as to how much notice given n Foster parents informed of rights “always” (25%) or “most of the time” (23%) n 62% received notice of panel reviews, periodic reviews – From judges (36. 2%) – From DFCS (52. 6%), typically by mail, within 7 -14 days 22. 4% received notice of permanency hearings n 18% received notice “rarely or never” n 60% not given information about right to be heard n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

O. C. G. A. § 15 -11 -58(p) “In advance of each review or hearing to be held with respect to a child pursuant to this Code section, the court shall provide written notice or shall direct that a party shall provide written notice of such review or hearing, including their right to be heard at such review or hearing, to the custodian of the child, to the foster parents of the child, and to any preadoptive parents or relatives providing care for the child, consistent with the form and timing of notice to parties …” 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Application n WHO? Current caregivers: Custodian, foster parents, preadoptive parents or relatives – “providing care” – Expanded definition of “custodian” to include eligible agencies/organizations n Other changes: – Caregiver is entitled to a copy of the portions of the court approved case plan/ panel report/ revised plan that involve the permanency goal and services to be provided to the child. Subsections (d) & (k). 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Application n WHICH HEARINGS/REVIEWS AFFECTED? – Statutory language limits to those reviews/hearings held pursuant to Code section 15 -11 -58 § Periodic reviews held by the court or panel; § Appeals from, or hearings arising out of, reviews by panels; § Hearings triggered by revocation of license of agency to which permanent custody has been granted pursuant to O. C. G. A. § 15 -11 -58(i); § Permanency hearings; § Motions to extend – ASFA requirement: permanency hearings and 6 -mo reviews 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Best Practices Recommendation Former language of § 15 -11 -58(k) required notice and opportunity to be heard “in any review or hearing to be held with respect to the child. ” n Expansive interpretation (sponsor intent) – n Notice and opportunity to be heard provided to custodian, foster parents, preadoptive parents, and relative caretakers at any review or hearing where the case plan or permanency is an issue. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Notice Requirements n Written notice n Provided by the court or by a party, as directed by the court (presumably DFCS) – Where the court provides notice, it may issue a standing order requiring DFCS to provide timely notice to the court, the CASA, and attorney GAL of the name and address of a new caregiver when a change in placement has occurred. – Where DFCS gives notice, local practice must ensure that new caregivers are timely and properly noticed 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Notice Requirements n “Consistent with the form and timing of notice to parties” – Not identical form and manner of service to parties (summons, personal service) – Content and timing consistent with that provided to parties § § Same information Given in advance of hearing Service in person or by mail Minimum time limits provided by law – 5 days notice of permanency hearing (O. C. G. A. § 15 -1158(o)(4)) 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Opportunity to Be Heard n Burden on the court – Order must include findings of fact Informal and non-threatening n In person or in writing n – ASFA: Right to provide input but no right to appear in person – “Oral and written testimony” § Writings reviewed by all parties, subject to cross § Local court preference n Information presented directly to the court 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Possible Issues for Legislative Correction Amend the custodian definition to provide for notice to houseparents in group home placements n Clarify mechanics of notice requirement n Substitute “information” for “testimony” and reference § 15 -11 -56(a) for treatment of information n Others? n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Questions? Concerns? Comments? 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

PART B. THE RELATIVE (AND OTHER PERSON) SEARCH PURSUANT TO REVISED O. C. G. A. SECTION 15 -11 -55(a)(2) 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

What drove this provision? 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Terminology. For ease of reference, throughout this presentation, the terms “relative search” and “relative” are used to refer to all persons for whom the search must be conducted. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

What is the Effective Date of the Relative Search Provision, and how does that impact O. C. G. A. Section 1511 -103? The effective date of SB 236 is July 1, 2003. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Within What Time Frame Must the Relative Search be Completed in Cases Arising on or after July 1, 2003? The required search shall be completed within 90 days from the date on which the child was removed from the home. n The phrase “removed from the home” means the date that the child is physically removed from the home, but also includes the date on which the child is constructively removed from the home, such as when a child is taken into protective custody while the child is hospitalized n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Within What Time Frames Must the Relative Search be Completed in Cases pending on July 1, 2003? n Termination of parental rights cases where there has been no finding under the revised Section 15 -11 -55 as to the relative search. n Deprivation cases pending on July 1, 2003, in which there has been no dispositional hearing. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Within What Time Frames Must the Relative Search be Completed in Cases pending on July 1, 2003? Deprivation cases pending on July 1, 2003, in which there has been a dispositional hearing and transfer of legal custody pursuant to O. C. G. A. § 15 -11 -55(a)(2). n Deprivation cases pending on July 1, 2003, in which there has been a dispositional hearing and reunification, or finalization of an alternate permanency plan other than termination and adoption, is likely to occur within three months. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

By Whom Must the Search be Conducted? n By the court; and n By the Department of Human Resources”. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

For Whom Must the Court and DFCS Search? A parent of the child. n A relative of the child. -- Grandparents -- Great-Grandparents -- Aunts and Uncles -- Great Aunts and Uncles -- Adult Siblings n Other persons who have demonstrated an ongoing commitment to the child. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

What is a “Reasonably Diligent Search”? n n Interviews with the parents during the course of an investigation, while child protective services are provided, and while the child is in care and is supervised by the placement unit. Interviews with the child throughout the case. Interviews with relatives throughout the case. Interviews with school teachers, counselors, day care providers, preachers, and others who may know of relatives not yet disclosed and of other persons who have demonstrated an ongoing commitment to the child. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

What is a “Reasonably Diligent Search”? n n n The use of data bases, including DFCS’s own files and the Parent Locator Service. The First Placement/Best Placement provider, which already provides a great deal of this information. The attorney guardian ad litem and the CASA. Appropriate inquiry during the course of the hearings in the case. Any other reasonable means that are likely to identify relatives or other persons who have demonstrated a significant relationship with the child. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

How and When Should the Results of the Search be Documented and Filed with the Court? n The search has to be documented in writing. n The results of the search have to be “filed”. n The Relative Search Provision states that the results must be filed “at the time of the first review”. n What are some problems? n What are some best practices? 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

How do the Courts Manage the Two Temporary Custody Provisions under Section 15 -11 -55? The relevant part of the Relative Search Provision states that, “before transferring temporary legal custody in an order of disposition under this paragraph”, the search must be conducted, documented in writing, and filed with the court, but in the meantime, the “child may be placed in the temporary legal custody of” DFCS or any other appropriate person or entity. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

How do the Courts Manage the Two Temporary Custody Provisions under Section 15 -11 -55? Drawing from that procedure, following is the recommended procedure for implementing this portion of the Relative Search Provision: All reasonable efforts should be made to conduct the relative search prior to the initial dispositional hearing. n Where the relative search cannot be completed, documented, filed with the court, and approved by the court prior to the initial dispositional hearing, the court, after hearing all of the evidence in the case, should enter a provisional order of disposition. n Where the court enters a provisional order of disposition, the court should review the results of the relative search when they are filed with the court, and make a determination as to whethere is any reason not to make the provisional order a final order of the court. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

How do the Courts Manage the Two Temporary Custody Provisions under Section 15 -11 -55? From a procedural standpoint, there at least two options. -- The simple way; or -- The complex way similar to O. C. G. A. 1511 -39. 2. n Is the 90 -day period a drop-dead date for continuation of temporary custody? n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Is the Relative Search Provision Limited to Foster Care Cases, or Does it Apply to “Granny Petitions”? Except in cases involving delinquent or unruly children, the Relative Search Provision applies in every order transferring legal custody pursuant to O. C. G. A. § 15 -1155(a)(2). 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

PART C. EXTENDED TEMPORARY CUSTODY UNDER O. C. G. A. SECTION 15 -11 -58(i) 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Terminology n A. K. A. “permanent relative custody” pre. SB 236… n But: – Not really permanent – No longer limited to relatives – Term of orders extended beyond normal 1 -2 year limitation on duration of orders n Nature of custody not changed 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Shifting Standards n From “best interests of the child” (pre-SB 236) n To “detrimental to the child” – The court must find that “reasonable efforts to reunify a child with his or her family would be detrimental to the child …” § Actual detriment – And that “referral for TPR and adoption is not in the child’s best interest. ” 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Persons Eligible to Receive Extended Temporary Custody n n Pre-SB 236, only relatives Now: – Relative; – Nonrelative individual found to be qualified to receive and care for the child; – Suitable individual custodian in another state; – “An agency or organization licensed or otherwise authorized by law to receive and provide care for the child which is operated in a manner that provides such care, guidance, and control as would be provided in a family home as defined in the court’s order. ” 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Temporary Custody to an Eligible Agency n Points to Consider: – Individual optimal permanency in a placement – Custody can be granted to an eligible agency only if the court has made a finding that all other placement options are not in the child’s best interests – “family home” qualifier § § Physical environment Stability and longevity of commitment Placement intended to be permanent Capacity to meet the ongoing lifelong needs of the child – Agency self-reporting triggers judicial review of placement – Loss of state and federal financial assistance 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Timelines for Reviews An order granting extended custody to a relative must be reviewed every 36 months. n Other orders of extended custody must be examined annually. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

PART D. CHANGES TO THE TERMINATION STATUTE UNDER SB 236 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Two Basic Changes One significant change to the termination statute is the removal of the “thorough search for a suitable family member” provision from the termination statute, and the replacement thereof with the relative (and other caregiver) search provisions discussed in Part B of this report. n One other change was the addition of language requiring a “study by the probation officer or other person or agency designated by the court” for a person who is willing and “qualified to receive and care for the child”. No such study was previously required, although no judge would have given permanent custody under the prior law without first obtaining a home evaluation by the agency. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

What Classes of Persons or Agencies were Added to the List of Persons or Agencies Eligible for Permanent Custody? n n A. suitable individual on the condition that the person becomes the guardian of the child pursuant to the juvenile court’s authority under O. C. G. A. Section 15 -11 -30. 1. A licensed child-placing agency willing to accept custody of the child for the purpose of placing the child in a foster home. An agency or organization authorized by law to receive and care for children which is operated in a manner that provides such care, guidance, and control as would be provided in a family home as defined in the court’s order. If no placement of the child is effected under any of the foregoing provisions, then the court may take other suitable measures for the care and welfare of the child. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Must the Dispositional Alternatives be Considered in the Listed Order of Preference? Unlike the extended temporary custody provision, the termination statute provides a very clear hierarchy of permanency options. n Each option must be considered by the court and found to be inappropriate before the court can move to the next option. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order Pursuant to O. C. G. A. § 15 -11 -103(a), permanent custody of [CHILD] is hereby ORDERED as follows: ( ) Pursuant to paragraph (1) of this code subsection, Permanent Custody of [CHILD] is HEREBY AWARDED to [RELATIVE] for the purpose of adoption. The Court finds this individual qualified to receive and care for the child. The Court determines that such placement is the most appropriate for and in the best interest of the child because __________________________________ 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order ( ) Pursuant to paragraph (1) of this code subsection, Permanent Custody of [CHILD] is HEREBY AWARDED to [RELATIVE]. The Court finds this individual qualified to receive and care for the child. The Court determines that such placement is the most appropriate for and in the best interest of the child because _______________________ 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order ( ) The Court finds that placement under paragraph (1) of this code subsection is not appropriate because _______________________________________________________ Therefore, pursuant to paragraph (2) of this code subsection, Permanent Custody of [CHILD] is HEREBY AWARDED to the Georgia Department of Human Resources through the ________ County Department of Family and Children Services / [a licensed child-placing agency willing to accept custody] to be placed for adoption. The Court determines that such placement is the most appropriate for and in the best interest of the child because _______________________________________________________ 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order ( ) The Court finds that placement under paragraph (1) and (2) of this code subsection is not appropriate because _______________________________________________________ Therefore, pursuant to paragraph (3) of this code subsection, Permanent Custody of [CHILD] is HEREBY AWARDED to [Name of Individual] conditioned upon this individual becoming the guardian of the person of the child pursuant to this Court’s authority under O. C. G. A. § 15 -11 -30. 1. The Court determines that such placement is the most appropriate for and in the best interest of the child because _______________________________________________________ 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order ( ) The Court finds that placement under paragraph (1), (2), and (3) of this code subsection is not appropriate because _____________________________________________________________ Therefore, pursuant to paragraph (4) of this code subsection, Permanent Custody of [CHILD] is HEREBY AWARDED to the Georgia Department of Human Resources through the ________ County Department of Family and Children Services / [a licensed child-placing agency willing to accept custody] for the purpose of placing the child in a foster home. The Court determines that such placement is the most appropriate for and in the best interest of the child because _____________________________________________________________ 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order ( ) The Court finds that placement under paragraph (1), (2), (3), and (4) of this code subsection is not appropriate because _____________________________________________________________ Therefore, pursuant to paragraph (5) of this code subsection, Permanent Custody of [CHILD] is HEREBY AWARDED to [an agency or organization authorized by law to receive and provide card for children…] This placement will provide a family home because of the following characteristics: _____________________________________________________________ The Court determines that such placement is the most appropriate for and in the best interest of the child because _____________________________________________________________ 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order ( ) The Court finds that placement under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) of this code subsection is not appropriate because ______________________________________________ Therefore, pursuant to paragraph (6) of this code subsection, the Court does HEREBY ORDER as follows: ______________________________________________ 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Dispositional Order (X) The Court hereby finds that the placement made herein is in the best interest of the child. This case is hereby set for REVIEW on ___________ at ____, ____. m. to determine what efforts have been made to assure the adoption or other permanent placement of the child. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

To Whom Must the Court Provide a Copy of the Order Terminating the Parental Rights? Although this is not a new requirement, the statute was changed to correctly state the name of the agency to whom the report is to be sent, which is the Office of Adoptions of the Department of Human Resources; and n This provisions is included herein as a reminder of the court’s obligation to send a copy of the termination order within 15 days following the filing of the order. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Were the Post-Termination Review Requirements Changed by SB 236? Not as to the previously existing options; but n In those cases where the child was placed with a guardian of the child pursuant to Paragraph (3) of Subsection (a), the guardian shall report to the court in the same manner and at the same frequency as is required for guardians of the person of minors appointed by the judge of the probate court; and n In those cases where the child was placed with an agency or organization authorized by law to receive and care for children, the court shall, at least yearly, review the circumstances of the child to determine that the placement continues to be in the child’s best interest. n 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Are the New Classes of Individuals and Agencies that Have Been Made Eligible for Permanent Placement Under SB 236 Appropriate Permanency Options Under ASFA? 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference

Questions, Answers and Comments. 11/13/2003 Child Placement Conference