Archives

§1987. Prosecution of violation of certain laws

The United States attorneys, marshals, and deputy marshals, the United States magistrate judges appointed by the district and territorial courts, with power to arrest, imprison, or bail offenders, and every other officer who is especially empowered by the President, are authorized and required, at the expense of the United States, to institute prosecutions against all persons violating any of the provisions of section 1990 of this title or of sections 5506 to 5516 and 5518 to 5532 of the Revised Statutes, and to cause such persons to be arrested, and imprisoned or bailed, for trial before the court of the United States or the territorial court having cognizance of the offense.

(R.S. §1982; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167; June 25, 1948, ch. 646, §1, 62 Stat. 909; Pub. L. 90–578, title IV, §402(b)(2), Oct. 17, 1968, 82 Stat. 1118; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, §321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)

References in Text

Sections 5506 to 5510, 5516 to 5519 and 5524 to 5535 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in text, were repealed by act Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §341, 35 Stat. 1153; section 5506, 5511 to 5515, and 5520 to 5523, also referred to in text, were repealed by act Feb. 8, 1894, ch. 25, §1, 28 Stat. 37. The provisions of sections 5508, 5510, 5516, 5518 and 5524 to 5532 of the Revised Statutes were reenacted by act Mar. 4, 1909, and classified to sections 51, 52, 54 to 59, 246, 428 and 443 to 445 of former Title 18, Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure. Those sections were repealed and reenacted as sections 241, 242, 372, 592, 593, 752, 1071, 1581, 1583 and 1588 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, in the general revision of Title 18 by act June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 683.

Codification

R.S. §1982 derived from acts Apr. 9, 1866, ch. 31, §4, 14 Stat. 28; May 31, 1870, Ch. 114, §9, 16 Stat. 142.

Section was formerly classified to section 49 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

Change of Name

Act June 25, 1948, eff. Sept. 1, 1948, substituted “United States attorneys” for “district attorneys”. See section 541 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, and Historical and Revision Notes thereunder.

“United States magistrate judges” substituted in text for “magistrates” pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of Title 28. Previously, “magistrates” substituted for “commissioners” pursuant to Pub. L. 90–578. See chapter 43 (§631 et seq.) of Title 28.

Reference to the district courts substituted for reference to the circuit courts on authority of section 291 of act Mar. 3, 1911.

§1988. Proceedings in vindication of civil rights

(a) Applicability of statutory and common law

The jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters conferred on the district courts by the provisions of titles 13, 24, and 70 of the Revised Statutes for the protection of all persons in the United States in their civil rights, and for their vindication, shall be exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United States, so far as such laws are suitable to carry the same into effect; but in all cases where they are not adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable remedies and punish offenses against law, the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of such civil or criminal cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of the cause, and, if it is of a criminal nature, in the infliction of punishment on the party found guilty.

(b) Attorney’s fees

In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law 92–318 [20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.], the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 [42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.], the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 [42 U.S.C. 2000cc et seq.], title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.], or section 13981 of this title, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity such officer shall not be held liable for any costs, including attorney’s fees, unless such action was clearly in excess of such officer’s jurisdiction.

(c) Expert fees

In awarding an attorney’s fee under subsection (b) of this section in any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of section 1981 or 1981a of this title, the court, in its discretion, may include expert fees as part of the attorney’s fee.

(R.S. §722; Pub. L. 94–559, §2, Oct. 19, 1976, 90 Stat. 2641; Pub. L. 96–481, title II, §205(c), Oct. 21, 1980, 94 Stat. 2330; Pub. L. 102–166, title I, §§103, 113(a), Nov. 21, 1991, 105 Stat. 1074, 1079; Pub. L. 103–141, §4(a), Nov. 16, 1993, 107 Stat. 1489; Pub. L. 103–322, title IV, §40303, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1942; Pub. L. 104–317, title III, §309(b), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3853; Pub. L. 106–274, §4(d), Sept. 22, 2000, 114 Stat. 804.)

References in Text

Title 13 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original “this Title” meaning title 13 of the Revised Statutes, consisting of R.S. §§530 to 1093. For complete classification of R.S. §§530 to 1093 to the Code, see Tables.

Title 24 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original “Title ‘Civil Rights,’ ” meaning title 24 of the Revised Statutes, consisting of R.S. §§1977 to 1991, which are classified to sections 1981 to 1983, 1985 to 1987, and 1989 to 1994 of this title. For complete classification of R.S. §§1977 to 1991 to the Code, see Tables.

Title 70 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original “Title ‘Crimes,’ ” meaning title 70 of the Revised Statutes, consisting of R.S. §§5323 to 5550. For complete classification of R.S. §§5323 to 5550, see Tables.

Title IX of Public Law 92–318, referred to in subsec. (b), is title IX of Pub. L. 92–318, June 23, 1972, 86 Stat. 373, as amended, known as the Patsy Takemoto Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act, which is classified principally to chapter 38 (§1681 et seq.) of Title 20, Education. For complete classification of title IX to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1681 of Title 20 and Tables.

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 103–141, Nov. 16, 1993, 107 Stat. 1488, which is classified principally to chapter 21B (§2000bb et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2000bb of this title and Tables.

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 106–274, Sept. 22, 2000, 114 Stat. 803, which is classified principally to chapter 21C (§2000cc et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2000cc of this title and Tables.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 88–352, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 241, as amended. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is classified generally to subchapter V (§2000d et seq.) of this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2000a of this title and Tables.

Civil Rights 0

These are the Federal Rules of Evidence, as amended to December 1, 2020. Click on any rule to read it.

  1. ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS
    1. Rule 101. Scope; Definitions
    2. Rule 102. Purpose
    3. Rule 103. Rulings on Evidence
    4. Rule 104. Preliminary Questions
    5. Rule 105. Limiting Evidence That Is Not Admissible Against Other Parties or for Other Purposes
    6. Rule 106. Remainder of or Related Writings or Recorded Statements
  2. ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE
    1. Rule 201. Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
  3. ARTICLE III. PRESUMPTIONS IN CIVIL CASES
    1. Rule 301. Presumptions in Civil Cases Generally
    2. Rule 302. Applying State Law to Presumptions in Civil Cases
  4. ARTICLE IV. RELEVANCE AND ITS LIMITS
    1. Rule 401. Test for Relevant Evidence
    2. Rule 402. General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence
    3. Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons
    4. Rule 404. Character Evidence; Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts
    5. Rule 405. Methods of Proving Character
    6. Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
    7. Rule 407. Subsequent Remedial Measures
    8. Rule 408. Compromise Offers and Negotiations
    9. Rule 409. Offers to Pay Medical and Similar Expenses
    10. Rule 410. Pleas, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements
    11. Rule 411. Liability Insurance
    12. Rule 412. Sex-Offense Cases: The Victim’s Sexual Behavior or Predisposition
    13. Rule 413. Similar Crimes in Sexual-Assault Cases
    14. Rule 414. Similar Crimes in Child Molestation Cases
    15. Rule 415. Similar Acts in Civil Cases Involving Sexual Assault or Child Molestation
  5. ARTICLE V. PRIVILEGES
    1. Rule 501. Privilege in General
    2. Rule 502. Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product; Limitations on Waiver
  6. ARTICLE VI. WITNESSES
    1. Rule 601. Competency to Testify in General
    2. Rule 602. Need for Personal Knowledge
    3. Rule 603. Oath or Affirmation to Testify Truthfully
    4. Rule 604. Interpreter
    5. Rule 605. Judge’s Competency as a Witness
    6. Rule 606. Juror’s Competency as a Witness
    7. Rule 607. Who May Impeach a Witness
    8. Rule 608. A Witness’s Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness
    9. Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of a Criminal Conviction
    10. Rule 610. Religious Beliefs or Opinions
    11. Rule 611. Mode and Order of Examining Witnesses and Presenting Evidence
    12. Rule 612. Writing Used to Refresh a Witness’s Memory
    13. Rule 613. Witness’s Prior Statement
    14. Rule 614. Court’s Calling or Examining a Witness
    15. Rule 615. Excluding Witnesses
  7. ARTICLE VII. OPINIONS AND EXPERT TESTIMONY
    1. Rule 701. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses
    2. Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses
    3. Rule 703. Bases of an Expert’s Opinion Testimony
    4. Rule 704. Opinion on an Ultimate Issue
    5. Rule 705. Disclosing the Facts or Data Underlying an Expert’s Opinion
    6. Rule 706. Court-Appointed Expert Witnesses
  8. ARTICLE VIII. HEARSAY
    1. Rule 801. Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay
    2. Rule 802. The Rule Against Hearsay
    3. Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay — Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness
    4. Rule 804. Hearsay Exceptions; Declarant Unavailable
    5. Rule 805. Hearsay Within Hearsay
    6. Rule 806. Attacking and Supporting the Declarant’s Credibility
    7. Rule 807. Residual Exception
  9. ARTICLE IX. AUTHENTICATION AND IDENTIFICATION
    1. Rule 901. Authenticating or Identifying Evidence
    2. Rule 902. Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating
    3. Rule 903. Subscribing Witness’s Testimony
  10. ARTICLE X. CONTENTS OF WRITINGS, RECORDINGS, AND PHOTOGRAPHS
    1. Rule 1001. Definitions That Apply to This Article
    2. Rule 1002. Requirement of the Original
    3. Rule 1003. Admissibility of Duplicates
    4. Rule 1004. Admissibility of Other Evidence of Content
    5. Rule 1005. Copies of Public Records to Prove Content
    6. Rule 1006. Summaries to Prove Content
    7. Rule 1007. Testimony or Statement of a Party to Prove Content
    8. Rule 1008. Functions of the Court and Jury
  11. ARTICLE XI. MISCELLANEOUS RULES
    1. Rule 1101. Applicability of the Rules
    2. Rule 1102. Amendments
    3. Rule 1103. Title
Civil Rights 0
CPS Appeals, Dependency 0
CPS Appeals, Dependency, Video 0
  1. Fill one out for social worker and one for supervisor.
  2. This is what the clerk will mail back to you with the official seal.
  3. After you get this document in the mail you can now serve the attorney general of your state.
Civil Rights, Forms 0
  1. Follow the “Rules of Evidence” when submitting evidence to them.
  2. Tort law  in nationwide so all 50 states have to file a tort first, if you want money, this will need to be sent to your states “attorney general”
  3. Some states have online tort filing options google it!
  4. Put in the amount you want to be compensated, higher than $75,000.00.
  5. As long as you wait 60 days after filing then you will not have to have the actual letter to file your lawsuit just state under jurisdiction that you filed a tort 60 days ago.
Civil Rights, Forms 0
  1. Even if your case with CPS is closed leave the kids name out. Refer to them as “child” if needed.
  2. Mark number 440 “Other civil rights complaint”
  3. On this form you do not have to make a separate one for each defendant you can use the same one for all. Mark Federal Question.
  4. Write Section 1983 civil rights violation somewhere in either of the boxes that is the core you want to always document on all forms.
  5. Put cover sheet, summons, complaint, and fee waiver in one envelope, mail it via ups so you can get a signature that the federal court clerk received it, with your $400 money order.
  6. Wait for the clerk to mail the summons back to you before you serve them
Case Law, Forms 0

What better way to hold the accountable?

Than the law from the state they are from and are required to follow, you can and should find all law violations possible and list each and every one in your lawsuit of course.

Revised Code of Washington (RCW)

The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) is the compilation of all permanent laws now in force. It is a collection of Session Laws (enacted by the Legislature, and signed by the Governor, or enacted via the initiative process), arranged by topic, with amendments added and repealed laws removed. It does not include temporary laws such as appropriations acts. The official version of the RCW is published by the Statute Law Committee and the Code Reviser.

The online version of the RCW is updated twice a year, once in the early fall following the legislative session, and again at the end of the year if a ballot measure that changes the law passed at the general election. Copies of the RCW as they existed each year since 1973 are available in the RCW Archive.

The Selected Titles version of the Revised Code of Washington is located here.

Civil Rights 0

You can sue anyone for anything! Do not let the naysayers tell you that you can’t this is their failed attempt to stop you from getting rich. there is a first time for everything state your case if you feel like you have one who cares what anyone says sue the person you believe violated your rights don’t follow the rules. Do what you think and know is the right thing to do. Rich and famous people did not get to where they are by following the rules they took a risk.

  1. Never name the state it embarrassing to them
  2. Only name the people in their individual capacity and that they work for the state.
  3. Judge (individual capacity)
  4. Commissioner (individual capacity)
  5. Bailiff (individual capacity)
  6. School District (official capacity)
  7. Attorney General (individual capacity)
  8. Police Department (official capacity)
  9. City of ___________ (city is considered a “person”)
  10. County of  __________(official capacity)
  11. Do not name Child Protective Services
  12. Drug and Alcohol Counselor (individual capacity)
  13. CPS Supervisors (individual capacity)
  14. Teacher (individual capacity)
  15. Nurse (individual capacity)
  16. Doctor (individual capacity)
  17. Hospital (official capacity)
  18. Daycare worker (individual capacity)
  19. Court clerk (individual capacity)
  20. Social workers (individual capacity)
  21. CPS Area Administrators (individual capacity)
  22. CASA (individual capacity)
  23. Your Attorney (individual capacity)
  24. Foster Parents (individual capacity)
  25. Police Officer (individual capacity)
  26. Police Detective (individual capacity)
  27. Prosecuting Attorney (individual capacity)
  28. Division of Child Support (official capacity)
  29. College or School (official capacity)
Civil Rights 0

In December, Frontier Airlines filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that it failed to present sufficient facts that a law was violated or that Swinney and her daughter are entitled to judicial remedy. Such motions are a common initial response to civil lawsuits.

U.S. District Judge Loretta C. Biggs granted Frontier’s motion in part.

Breaking news & more

Sign up for one of our many newsletters to be the first to know when big news breaks

SIGN UP

Biggs allowed slander, libel and negligence claims to move forward.

She dismissed claims for abuse of process, gross negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress and defamation.

One of Swinney’s attorneys, Sharika Robinson, who is based in Charlotte, described the judge’s ruling as good news.

“The major claim survived,” Robinson said about the negligence claim.

Las Vegas to RDU

Swinney and her daughter were flying from Las Vegas back to the Raleigh-Durham International Airport when they found vomit on one of the seatback trays, inside the seat pocket and on the ground, the lawsuit states.

Swinney summoned the flight attendant, who returned with Clorox wipes and rubber gloves.

Swinney asked her daughter to move to the aisle so that the attendant could clean the seat, but the female attendant told Swinney “it was not her job,” the lawsuit states.

Another passenger asked the flight attendant whose job it was, and she “shrugged her shoulders” and walked to the front of the plane, the lawsuit states.

After waiting 10 minutes, Swinney walked to the front of the plane and asked for someone to address the vomit issues. Swinney also asked the flight attendant for her name and asked to speak to her supervisor, the lawsuit states.

The flight attended responded not to worry about her name, the lawsuit states, because Swinney wouldn’t be on the flight “no matter what.”

Swinney decided to move to two empty seats, when a Frontier employee directed her off the plane. Swinney refused. Frontier officials called law enforcement, who eventually cleared the plane of all passengers.

The passengers were told “because of one rude passenger we are asking everyone to deplane,” the lawsuit states.

When Swinney did leave the plane, she was arrested for trespassing in the gate area.

A friend offered to take Swinney’s daughter, but officials refused, Swinney’s attorneys said.

Swinney’s daughter was placed in Nevada’s Child Protective Custody for 12 hours, the lawsuit states.

A few days later Frontier released a statement indicating that Swinney and her daughter were told they would be given new seats, but Swinney didn’t like the result and became “disruptive.”

Source: NC Woman’s $55 Million Vomit-on-the-Plane Lawsuit Against Frontier Advances | Aviation Pros

Civil Rights 0

A § 1983 lawsuit is a legal remedy available to individuals
pursuant to a federal statute that waives the government’s immunity
from suit for civil rights violations. Congress permits individuals to
file suit against the government under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to seek
redress for violations of constitutional rights committed by
government officials.96 Section 1983 of Title 42 provides:
Every person who, under color of . . . State or Territory . . . subjects
. . . any citizen of the United States . . . to the deprivation of any
rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and
laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law . . . .97
Before filing suit against CPS, attorneys representing families should
identify whether the parent or child’s constitutional rights have been
violated, whether the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment protections
were violated, and which CPS conduct violated the individual’s
rights. Even where there are constitutional violations, families may
be barred from recovery if the court accepts the defense that the state
actors qualify for qualified immunity. Therefore, attorneys should
plead that CPS violated family members’ constitutional violations in a
manner that gives family members the best opportunity to recover
compensation in light of anticipated qualified immunity

Qualified immunity is an affirmative defense to a civil action that
may be asserted against public officials engaging in a discretionary

function of their employment.98 Public official defendants are
immune from § 1983 lawsuits “[u]nless the plaintiff’s allegations
state a claim of violation of clearly established law.”99 Qualified
immunity balances two important competing interests: “the need to
hold public officials accountable when they exercise power
irresponsibly and the need to shield officials from harassment,
distraction, and liability when they perform their duties
reasonably.”100 The Supreme Court has established a two-pronged
test for determining whether public official defendants are immune
from suit for wrongful conduct: (1) whether the plaintiff alleges a
violation of a constitutional right and (2) whether the plaintiff’s right
was clearly established at the time.101 A “clearly established” right is
one that is “sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would
understand that what he is doing violates that right.

Although qualified immunity is technically an affirmative defense,
in the Ninth Circuit, the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating
that the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of
the incident.103 If the court determines that government officials are
entitled to qualified immunity, the damages claims against the
officials can be dismissed without a court ever deciding the merits of
the suit.104 In such an instance, the case would be dismissed before a
family is able to tell their story to a jury. The Court’s two-pronged
test is intended to avoid a practical problem of qualified immunity:
that the legal standards will be unclear governing whether official
conduct violated a clearly established right

Case Law, Civil Rights, Forms 0

Sec474. [42 U.S.C. 674] (a) For each quarter beginning after September 30, 1980, each State which has a plan approved under this part shall be entitled to a payment equal to the sum of—

(1) subject to subsections (j) and (k) of section 472,[323][324] an amount equal to the Federal medical assistance percentage (which shall be as defined in section 1905(b), in the case of a State other than the District of Columbia, or 70 percent, in the case of the District of Columbia) of the total amount expended during such quarter as foster care maintenance payments under section 472 for children in foster family homes or child-care institutions (or, with respect to such payments made during such quarter under a cooperative agreement or contract entered into by the State and an Indian tribe, tribal organization, or tribal consortium for the administration or payment of funds under this part, an amount equal to the Federal medical assistance percentage that would apply under section 479B(d) (in this paragraph referred to as the “tribal FMAP”) if such Indian tribe, tribal organization, or tribal consortium made such payments under a program operated under that section, unless the tribal FMAP is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage that applies to the State); plus

(2) an amount equal to the Federal medical assistance percentage (which shall be as defined in section 1905(b), in the case of a State other than the District of Columbia, or 70 percent, in the case of the District of Columbia) of the total amount expended during such quarter as adoption assistance payments under section 473 pursuant to adoption assistance agreements (or, with respect to such payments made during such quarter under a cooperative agreement or contract entered into by the State and an Indian tribe, tribal organization, or tribal consortium for the administration or payment of funds under this part, an amount equal to the Federal medical assistance percentage that would apply under section 479B(d) (in this paragraph referred to as the “tribal FMAP”) if such Indian tribe, tribal organization, or tribal consortium made such payments under a program operated under that section, unless the tribal FMAP is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage that applies to the State); plus

(3) subject to section 472(i) an amount equal to the sum of the following proportions of the total amounts expended during such quarter as found necessary by the Secretary for the provision of child placement services and for the proper and efficient administration of the State plan—

(A) 75 per centum of so much of such expenditures as are for the training (including both short-and long-term training at educational institutions through grants to such institutions or by direct financial assistance to students enrolled in such institutions) of personnel employed or preparing for employment by the State agency or by the local agency administering the plan in the political subdivision,

(B) 75 percent of so much of such expenditures (including travel and per diem expenses) as are for the short-term training of current or prospective parents or relative guardians, the members of the staff of State-licensed or State-approved child care institutions providing care, or State-licensed or State-approved child welfare agencies providing services, to foster or adoptive children receiving assistance under this part, and members of the staff of abuse and neglect courts, agency attorneys, attorneys representing children or parents, guardians ad litem, or other court-appointed special advocates representing children in proceedings of such courts, in ways that increase the ability of such current or prospective parents, guardians, staff members, institutions, attorneys and advocates to provide support and assistance to foster and adopted children, and children living with relative guardians whether incurred directly by the State or by contract,

(C) 50 percent of so much of such expenditures as are for the planning, design, development, or installation of statewide mechanized data collection and information retrieval systems (including 50 percent of the full amount of expenditures for hardware components for such systems) but only to the extent that such systems—

(i) meet the requirements imposed by regulations promulgated pursuant to section 479(b)(2);

(ii) to the extent practicable, are capable of interfacing with the State data collection system that collects information relating to child abuse and neglect;

(iii) to the extent practicable, have the capability of interfacing with, and retrieving information from, the State data collection system that collects information relating to the eligibility of individuals under part A (for the purposes of facilitating verification of eligibility of foster children); and

(iv) are determined by the Secretary to be likely to provide more efficient, economical, and effective administration of the programs carried out under a State plan approved under part B or this part; and

(D) 50 percent of so much of such expenditures as are for the operation of the statewide mechanized data collection and information retrieval systems referred to in subparagraph (C); and

(E) one-half of the remainder of such expenditures; plus

(4) an amount equal to the amount (if any) by which—

(A) the lesser of—

(i) 80 percent of the amount expended by the State during the fiscal year in which the quarter occurs to carry out programs in accordance with the State application approved under section 477(b) for the period in which the quarter occurs (including any amendment that meets the requirements of section 477(b)(5)); or

(ii) the amount allotted to the State under section 477(c)(1) for the fiscal year in which the quarter occurs, reduced by the total of the amounts payable to the State under this paragraph for all prior quarters in the fiscal year; exceeds

(B) the total amount of any penalties assessed against the State under section 477(e) during the fiscal year in which the quarter occurs; plus

(5) an amount equal to the percentage by which the expenditures referred to in paragraph (2) of this subsection are reimbursed of the total amount expended during such quarter as kinship guardianship assistance payments under section 473(d) pursuant to kinship guardianship assistance agreements; plus[325]

(6)[326] subject to section 471(e)—

(A)[327] for each quarter—

(i) subject to clause (ii)—

(I) beginning after September 30, 2019, and before October 1, 2026, an amount equal to 50 percent of the total amount expended during the quarter for the provision of services or programs specified in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 471(e)(1)that are provided in accordance with promising, supported, or well-supported practices that meet the applicable criteria specified for the practices in section 471(e)(4)(C); and

(II) beginning after September 30, 2026, an amount equal to the Federal medical assistance percentage (which shall be as defined in section 1905(b), in the case of a State other than the District of Columbia, or 70 percent, in the case of the District of Columbia) of the total amount expended during the quarter for the provision of services or programs specified in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 471(e)(1)that are provided in accordance with promising, supported, or well-supported practices that meet the applicable criteria specified for the practices in section 471(e)(4)(C) (or, with respect to the payments made during the quarter under a cooperative agreement or contract entered into by the State and an Indian tribe, tribal organization, or tribal consortium for the administration or payment of funds under this part, an amount equal to the Federal medical assistance percentage that would apply under section 479B(d) (in this paragraph referred to as the “tribal FMAP”) if the Indian tribe, tribal organization, or tribal consortium made the payments under a program operated under that section, unless the tribal FMAP is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage that applies to the State); except that

(ii)[328] not less than 50 percent of the total amount expended by a State under clause (i) for a fiscal year shall be for the provision of services or programs specified in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 471(e)(1) that are provided in accordance with well-supported practices; plus

(B) for each quarter specified in subparagraph (A), an amount equal to the sum of the following proportions of the total amount expended during the quarter—

(i) 50 percent of so much of the expenditures as are found necessary by the Secretary for the proper and efficient administration of the State plan for the provision of services or programs specified in section 471(e)(1), including expenditures for activities approved by the Secretary that promote the development of necessary processes and procedures to establish and implement the provision of the services and programs for individuals who are eligible for the services and programs and expenditures attributable to data collection and reporting; and

(ii) 50 percent of so much of the expenditures with respect to the provision of services and programs specified in section 471(e)(1) as are for training of personnel employed or preparing for employment by the State agency or by the local agency administering the plan in the political subdivision and of the members of the staff of State-licensed or State-approved child welfare agencies providing services to children described in section 471(e)(2) and their parents or kin caregivers, including on how to determine who are individuals eligible for the services or programs, how to identify and provide appropriate services and programs, and how to oversee and evaluate the ongoing appropriateness of the services and programs; plus

(7)[329] an amount equal to 50 percent of the amounts expended by the State during the quarter as the Secretary determines are for kinship navigator programs that meet the requirements described in section 427(a)(1)and that the Secretary determines are operated in accordance with promising, supported, or well-supported practices that meet the applicable criteria specified for the practices in section 471(e)(4)(C), without regard to whether the expenditures are incurred on behalf of children who are, or are potentially, eligible for foster care maintenance payments under this part.

(b)(1) The Secretary shall, prior to the beginning of each quarter, estimate the amount to which a State will be entitled under subsection (a) for such quarter, such estimates to be based on (A) a report filed by the State containing its estimate of the total sum to be expended in such quarter in accordance with subsection (a), and stating the amount appropriated or made available by the State and its political subdivisions for such expenditures in such quarter, and if such amount is less than the State’s proportionate share of the total sum of such estimated expenditures, the source or sources from which the difference is expected to be derived, (B) records showing the number of children in the State receiving assistance under this part, and (C) such other investigation as the Secretary may find necessary.

(2) The Secretary shall then pay to the State, in such installments as he may determine, the amounts so estimated, reduced or increased to the extent of any overpayment or underpayment which the Secretary determines was made under this section to such State for any prior quarter and with respect to which adjustment has not already been made under this subsection.

(3) The pro rata share to which the United States is equitably entitled, as determined by the Secretary, of the net amount recovered during any quarter by the State or any political subdivision thereof with respect to foster care and adoption assistance furnished under the State plan shall be considered an overpayment to be adjusted under this subsection.

(4)(A) Within 60 days after receipt of a State claim for expenditures pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary shall allow, disallow, or defer such claim.

(B) Within 15 days after a decision to defer such a State claim, the Secretary shall notify the State of the reasons for the deferral and of the additional information necessary to determine the allowability of the claim.

(C) Within 90 days after receiving such necessary information (in readily reviewable form), the Secretary shall—

(i) disallow the claim, if able to complete the review and determine that the claim is not allowable, or

(ii) in any other case, allow the claim, subject to disallowance (as necessary)—

(I) upon completion of the review, if it is determined that the claim is not allowable; or

(II) on the basis of findings of an audit or financial management review.

(c) Automated Data Collection Expenditures.—The Secretary shall treat as necessary for the proper and efficient administration of the State plan all expenditures of a State necessary in order for the State to plan, design, develop, install, and operate data collection and information retrieval systems described in subsection (a)(3)(C), without regard to whether the systems may be used with respect to foster or adoptive children other than those on behalf of whom foster care maintenance payments or adoption assistance payments may be made under this part.

(d)(1) If, during any quarter of a fiscal year, a State’s program operated under this part is found, as a result of a review conducted under section 1123A, or otherwise, to have violated paragraph (18) or (23) of section 471(a) with respect to a person or to have failed to implement a corrective action plan within a period of time not to exceed 6 months with respect to such violation, then, notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section and any regulations promulgated under section 1123A(b)(3), the Secretary shall reduce the amount otherwise payable to the State under this part, for that fiscal year quarter and for any subsequent quarter of such fiscal year, until the State program is found, as a result of a subsequent review under section 1123A, to have implemented a corrective action plan with respect to such violation, by—

(A) 2 percent of such otherwise payable amount, in the case of the 1st such finding for the fiscal year with respect to the State;

(B) 3 percent of such otherwise payable amount, in the case of the 2nd such finding for the fiscal year with respect to the State; or

(C) 5 percent of such otherwise payable amount, in the case of the 3rd or subsequent such finding for the fiscal year with respect to the State.

In imposing the penalties described in this paragraph, the Secretary shall not reduce any fiscal year payment to a State by more than 5 percent

(2) Any other entity which is in a State that receives funds under this part and which violates paragraph (18) or (23) of section 471(a) during a fiscal year quarter with respect to any person shall remit to the Secretary all funds that were paid by the State to the entity during the quarter from such funds.

(3)(A) Any individual who is aggrieved by a violation of section 471(a)(18) by a State or other entity may bring an action seeking relief from the State or other entity in any United States district court.

(B) An action under this paragraph may not be brought more than 2 years after the date the alleged violation occurred.

(4) This subsection shall not be construed to affect the application of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978[330].

(e) Discretionary Grants for Educational and Training Vouchers for Youths Aging out of Foster Care.—From amounts appropriated pursuant to section 477(h)(2), the Secretary may make a grant to a State with a plan approved under this part, for a calendar quarter, in an amount equal to the lesser of—

(1) 80 percent of the amounts expended by the State during the quarter to carry out programs for the purposes described in section 477(a)(6); or

(2) the amount, if any, allotted to the State under section 477(c)(3) for the fiscal year in which the quarter occurs, reduced by the total of the amounts payable to the State under this subsection for such purposes for all prior quarters in the fiscal year.

(f)(1) If the Secretary finds that a State has failed to submit to the Secretary data, as required by regulation, for the data collection system implemented under section 479, the Secretary shall, within 30 days after the date by which the data was due to be so submitted, notify the State of the failure and that payments to the State under this part will be reduced if the State fails to submit the data, as so required, within 6 months after the date the data was originally due to be so submitted.

(2) If the Secretary finds that the State has failed to submit the data, as so required, by the end of the 6-month period referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection, then, notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section and any regulations promulgated under section 1123A(b)(3), the Secretary shall reduce the amounts otherwise payable to the State under this part, for each quarter ending in the 6-month period (and each quarter ending in each subsequent consecutively occurring 6-month period until the Secretary finds that the State has submitted the data, as so required), by—

(A) 1/6 of 1 percent of the total amount expended by the State for administration of foster care activities under the State plan approved under this part in the quarter so ending, in the case of the 1st 6-month period during which the failure continues; or

(B) 1/4 of 1 percent of the total amount so expended, in the case of the 2nd or any subsequent such 6-month period.

(g) For purposes of this part, after the termination of a demonstration project relating to guardianship conducted by a State under section 1130, the expenditures of the State for the provision, to children who, as of September 30, 2008, were receiving assistance or services under the project, of the same assistance and services under the same terms and conditions that applied during the conduct of the project, are deemed to be expenditures under the State plan approved under this part.


[322]  See Vol. II, P.L. 99-177, §256, with respect to treatment of foster care and adoption assistance programs.

[323]  P.L. 115–123 §50712(b) inserted “subject to section 472(j),” before “an amount equal to the Federal”. Effective February 9, 2018.

[324]  P.L. 115–123 §50741(a)(2) struck “section 472(j)” and inserted “subsections (j) and (k) of section 472”. Effective February 9, 2018.

[325]  P.L. 115–123 §50711(c)(1) struck the period and inserted “; plus”. Effective February 9, 2018.

[326]  P.L. 115–123 §50711(c)(2) inserted new paragraph (6). Effective February 9, 2018.

[327]  P.L. 116–94, Div. N, §602, suspended application of clause (ii) for quarters in fiscal years 2020 and 2021. Effective as if enacted as part of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (P.L. 115–123), February 9, 2018.

[328]  P.L. 116–94, Div. N, §602(b)(2), provided that practices that meet the criteria specified for supported practices in section 471(e)(4)(C) shall be considered well-supported practices for purposes of this clause in quarters in fiscal years 2022 and 2023. Effective as if enacted as part of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (P.L. 115–123), February 9, 2018.

[329]  P.L. 115–123, §50713(2), added paragraph (7). Effective February 9, 2018.

[330]  P.L. 95-608; 92 Stat. 3069.

Civil Rights 0

Sec471. [42 U.S.C. 671] (a) In order for a State to be eligible for payments under this part, it shall have a plan approved by the Secretary which—

(1) provides for foster care maintenance payments in accordance with section 472, adoption assistance in accordance with section 473, and, at the option of the State, services or programs specified in subsection (e)(1) of this section for children who are candidates for foster care or who are pregnant or parenting foster youth and the parents or kin caregivers of the children, in accordance with the requirements of that subsection;[273]

(2) provides that the State agency responsible for administering the program authorized by subpart 1 of part B of this title shall administer, or supervise the administration of, the program authorized by this part;

(3) provides that the plan shall be in effect in all political subdivisions of the State, and, if administered by them, be mandatory upon them;

(4) provides that the State shall assure that the programs at the local level assisted under this part will be coordinated with the programs at the State or local level assisted under parts A and B of this title, under subtitle I of title XX of this Act, and under any other appropriate provision of Federal law;

(5) provides that the State will, in the administration of its programs under this part, use such methods relating to the establishment and maintenance of personnel standards on a merit basis as are found by the Secretary to be necessary for the proper and efficient operation of the programs, except that the Secretary shall exercise no authority with respect to the selection, tenure of office, or compensation of any individual employed in accordance with such methods;

(6) provides that the State agency referred to in paragraph (2) (hereinafter in this part referred to as the “State agency”) will make such reports, in such form and containing such information as the Secretary may from time to time require, and comply with such provisions as the Secretary may from time to time find necessary to assure the correctness and verification of such reports;

(7) provides that the State agency will monitor and conduct periodic evaluations of activities carried out under this part;

(8) subject to subsection (c), provides safeguards which restrict the use of or disclosure of information concerning individuals assisted under the State plan to purposes directly connected with (A) the administration of the plan of the State approved under this part, the plan or program of the State under part A, B, or D of this title or under title I, V, X, XIV, XVI (as in effect in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands), XIX, or XX, the program established by title II,[274] or the supplemental security income program established by title XVI, (B) any investigation, prosecution, or criminal or civil proceeding, conducted in connection with the administration of any such plan or program, (C) the administration of any other Federal or federally assisted program which provides assistance, in cash or in kind, or services, directly to individuals on the basis of need, (D) any audit or similar activity conducted in connection with the administration of any such plan or program by any governmental agency which is authorized by law to conduct such audit or activity, and (E) reporting and providing information pursuant to paragraph (9) to appropriate authorities with respect to known or suspected child abuse or neglect; and the safeguards so provided shall prohibit disclosure, to any committee or legislative body (other than an agency referred to in clause (D) with respect to an activity referred to in such clause), of any information which identifies by name or address any such applicant or recipient; except that nothing contained herein shall preclude a State from providing standards which restrict disclosures to purposes more limited than those specified herein, or which, in the case of adoptions, prevent disclosure entirely;

(9) provides that the State agency will—

(A) report to an appropriate agency or official, known or suspected instances of physical or mental injury, sexual abuse or exploitation, or negligent treatment or maltreatment of a child receiving aid under part B or this part under circumstances which indicate that the child’s health or welfare is threatened thereby;

(B) provide such information with respect to a situation described in subparagraph (A) as the State agency may have; and

(C) not later than—

(i) 1 year after the date of enactment of this subparagraph, demonstrate to the Secretary that the State agency has developed, in consultation with State and local law enforcement, juvenile justice systems, health care providers, education agencies, and organizations with experience in dealing with at-risk children and youth, policies and procedures (including relevant training for caseworkers) for identifying, documenting in agency records, and determining appropriate services with respect to—

(I) any child or youth over whom the State agency has responsibility for placement, care, or supervision and who the State has reasonable cause to believe is, or is at risk of being, a sex trafficking victim (including children for whom a State child welfare agency has an open case file but who have not been removed from the home, children who have run away from foster care and who have not attained 18 years of age or such older age as the State has elected under section 475(8) of this Act, and youth who are not in foster care but are receiving services under section 477 of this Act); and

(II) at the option of the State, any individual who has not attained 26 years of age, without regard to whether the individual is or was in foster care under the responsibility of the State; and

(ii) 2 years after such date of enactment, demonstrate to the Secretary that the State agency is implementing the policies and procedures referred to in clause (i).[275]

(10) provides–

(A) for the establishment or designation of a State authority or authorities that shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining standards for foster family homes and child care institutions which are reasonably in accord with recommended standards of national organizations concerned with standards for the institutions or homes, including standards related to admission policies, safety, sanitation, and protection of civil rights, and which shall permit use of the reasonable and prudent parenting standard;

(B) that the standards established pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be applied by the State to any foster family home or child care institution receiving funds under this part or part B and shall require, as a condition of each contract entered into by a child care institution to provide foster care, the presence on-site of at least 1 official who, with respect to any child placed at the child care institution, is designated to be the caregiver who is authorized to apply the reasonable and prudent parent standard to decisions involving the participation of the child in age or developmentally-appropriate activities, and who is provided with training in how to use and apply the reasonable and prudent parent standard in the same manner as prospective foster parents are provided the training pursuant to paragraph (24);

(C) that the standards established pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall include policies related to the liability of foster parents and private entities under contract by the State involving the application of the reasonable and prudent parent standard, to ensure appropriate liability for caregivers when a child participates in an approved activity and the caregiver approving the activity acts in accordance with the reasonable and prudent parent standard; and

(D) that a waiver of any standards established pursuant to subparagraph (A) may be made only on a case- by-case basis for nonsafety standards (as determined by the State) in relative foster family homes for specific children in care;[276]

(11) provides for periodic review of the standards referred to in the preceding paragraph and amounts paid as foster care maintenance payments and adoption assistance to assure their continuing appropriateness;

(12) provides for granting an opportunity for a fair hearing before the State agency to any individual whose claim for benefits available pursuant to this part is denied or is not acted upon with reasonable promptness;

(13) provides that the State shall arrange for a periodic and independently conducted audit of the programs assisted under this part and part B of this title, which shall be conducted no less frequently than once every three years;

(14) provides (A) specific goals (which shall be established by State law on or before October 1, 1982) for each fiscal year (commencing with the fiscal year which begins on October 1, 1983) as to the maximum number of children (in absolute numbers or as a percentage of all children in foster care with respect to whom assistance under the plan is provided during such year) who, at any time during such year, will remain in foster care after having been in such care for a period in excess of twenty-four months, and (B) a description of the steps which will be taken by the State to achieve such goals;

(15) provides that—

(A) in determining reasonable efforts to be made with respect to a child, as described in this paragraph, and in making such reasonable efforts, the child’s health and safety shall be the paramount concern;

(B) except as provided in subparagraph (D), reasonable efforts shall be made to preserve and reunify families—

(i) prior to the placement of a child in foster care, to prevent or eliminate the need for removing the child from the child’s home; and

(ii) to make it possible for a child to safely return to the child’s home;

(C) if continuation of reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B) is determined to be inconsistent with the permanency plan for the child, reasonable efforts shall be made to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the permanency plan (including, if appropriate, through an interstate placement) and to complete whatever steps are necessary to finalize the permanent placement of the child;

(D) reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B) shall not be required to be made with respect to a parent of a child if a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that—

(i) the parent has subjected the child to aggravated circumstances (as defined in State law, which definition may include but need not be limited to abandonment, torture, chronic abuse, and sexual abuse);

(ii) the parent has—

(I) committed murder (which would have been an offense under section 1111(a) of title 18, United States Code[277], if the offense had occurred in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States) of another child of the parent;

(II) committed voluntary manslaughter (which would have been an offense under section 1112(a) of title 18, United States Code[278], if the offense had occurred in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States) of another child of the parent;

(III) aided or abetted, attempted, conspired, or solicited to commit such a murder or such a voluntary manslaughter; or

(IV) committed a felony assault that results in serious bodily injury to the child or another child of the parent; or

(iii) the parental rights of the parent to a sibling have been terminated involuntarily;

(E) if reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B) are not made with respect to a child as a result of a determination made by a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with subparagraph (D)—

(i) a permanency hearing (as described in section 475(5)(C)), which considers in-State and out-of-State permanent placement options for the child, shall be held for the child within 30 days after the determination; and

(ii) reasonable efforts shall be made to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the permanency plan, and to complete whatever steps are necessary to finalize the permanent placement of the child; and

(F) reasonable efforts to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian, including identifying appropriate in-State and out-of-State placements may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts of the type described in subparagraph (B);

(16) provides for the development of a case plan (as defined in section 475(1) and in accordance with the requirements of section 475A for each child receiving foster care maintenance payments under the State plan and provides for a case review system which meets the requirements described in sections 475(5) and 475A with respect to each such child;

(17) provides that, where appropriate, all steps will be taken, including cooperative efforts with the State agencies administering the program funded under part A and plan approved under part D, to secure an assignment to the State of any rights to support on behalf of each child receiving foster care maintenance payments under this part;

(18) not later than January 1, 1997, provides that neither the State nor any other entity in the State that receives funds from the Federal Government and is involved in adoption or foster care placements may—

(A) deny to any person the opportunity to become an adoptive or a foster parent, on the basis of the race, color, or national origin of the person, or of the child, involved; or

(B) delay or deny the placement of a child for adoption or into foster care, on the basis of the race, color, or national origin of the adoptive or foster parent, or the child, involved;

(19) provides that the State shall consider giving preference to an adult relative over a non-related caregiver when determining a placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards;

(20)(A) provides procedures for criminal records checks, including fingerprint-based checks of national crime information databases (as defined in section 534(f)(3)(A) of title 28, United States Code[279]), for any prospective foster or adoptive parent before the foster or adoptive parent may be finally approved for placement of a child regardless of whether foster care maintenance payments or adoption assistance payments are to be made on behalf of the child under the State plan under this part, including procedures requiring that—[280]

(i) in any case involving a child on whose behalf such payments are to be made in which a record check reveals a felony conviction for child abuse or neglect, for spousal abuse, for a crime against children (including child pornography), or for a crime involving violence, including rape, sexual assault, or homicide, but not including other physical assault or battery, if a State finds that a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that the felony was committed at any time, such final approval shall not be granted; and

(ii) in any case involving a child on whose behalf such payments are to be made in which a record check reveals a felony conviction for physical assault, battery, or a drug-related offense, if a State finds that a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that the felony was committed within the past 5 years, such final approval shall not be granted;[281]

(B) provides that the State shall—

(i) check any child abuse and neglect registry maintained by the State for information on any prospective foster or adoptive parent and on any other adult living in the home of such a prospective parent, and request any other State in which any such prospective parent or other adult has resided in the preceding 5 years, to enable the State to check any child abuse and neglect registry maintained by such other State for such information, before the prospective foster or adoptive parent may be finally approved for placement of a child, regardless of whether foster care maintenance payments or adoption assistance payments are to be made on behalf of the child under the State plan under this part;

(ii) comply with any request described in clause (i) that is received from another State; and

(iii) have in place safeguards to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of information in any child abuse and neglect registry maintained by the State, and to prevent any such information obtained pursuant to this subparagraph from being used for a purpose other than the conducting of background checks in foster or adoptive placement cases; [282]

(C) provides procedures for criminal records checks, including fingerprint-based checks of national crime information databases (as defined in section 534(f)(3)(A) of title 28, United States Code), on any relative guardian, and for checks described in subparagraph (C) of this paragraph on any relative guardian and any other adult living in the home of any relative guardian, before the relative guardian may receive kinship guardianship assistance payments on behalf of the child under the State plan under this part; and[283]

(D)[284] provides procedures for any child-care institution, including a group home, residential treatment center, shelter, or other congregate care setting, to conduct criminal records checks, including fingerprint-based checks of national crime information databases (as defined in section 534(f)(3)(A) of title 28, United States Code), and checks described in subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, on any adult working in a child-care institution, including a group home, residential treatment center, shelter, or other congregate care setting, unless the State reports to the Secretary the alternative criminal records checks and child abuse registry checks the State conducts on any adult working in a child-care institution, including a group home, residential treatment center, shelter, or other congregate care setting, and why the checks specified in this subparagraph are not appropriate for the State;

(21) provides for health insurance coverage (including, at State option, through the program under the State plan approved under title XIX) for any child who has been determined to be a child with special needs, for whom there is in effect an adoption assistance agreement (other than an agreement under this part) between the State and an adoptive parent or parents, and who the State has determined cannot be placed with an adoptive parent or parents without medical assistance because such child has special needs for medical, mental health, or rehabilitative care, and that with respect to the provision of such health insurance coverage—

(A) such coverage may be provided through 1 or more State medical assistance programs;

(B) the State, in providing such coverage, shall ensure that the medical benefits, including mental health benefits, provided are of the same type and kind as those that would be provided for children by the State under title XIX;

(C) in the event that the State provides such coverage through a State medical assistance program other than the program under title XIX, and the State exceeds its funding for services under such other program, any such child shall be deemed to be receiving aid or assistance under the State plan under this part for purposes of section 1902(a)(10)(A)(i)(I); and

(D) in determining cost–sharing requirements, the State shall take into consideration the circumstances of the adopting parent or parents and the needs of the child being adopted consistent, to the extent coverage is provided through a State medical assistance program, with the rules under such program;

(22) provides that, not later than January 1, 1999, the State shall develop and implement standards to ensure that children in foster care placements in public or private agencies are provided quality services that protect the safety and health of the children;

(23) provides that the State shall not—

(A) deny or delay the placement of a child for adoption when an approved family is available outside of the jurisdiction with responsibility for handling the case of the child; or

(B) fail to grant an opportunity for a fair hearing, as described in paragraph (12), to an individual whose allegation of a violation of subparagraph (A) of this paragraph is denied by the State or not acted upon by the State with reasonable promptness,

(24) includes a certification that, before a child in foster care under the responsibility of the State is placed with prospective foster parents, the prospective foster parents will be prepared adequately with the appropriate knowledge and skills to provide for the needs of the child and that the preparation will be continued, as necessary, after the placement of the child, and that the preparation shall include knowledge and skills relating to the reasonable and prudent parent standard for the participation of the child in age or developmentally-appropriate activities, including knowledge and skills relating to the developmental stages of the cognitive, emotional, physical, and behavioral capacities of a child, and knowledge and skills relating to applying the standard to decisions such as whether to allow the child to engage in social, extracurricular, enrichment, cultural, and social activities, including sports, field trips, and overnight activities lasting 1 or more days, and to decisions involving the signing of permission slips and arranging of transportation for the child to and from extracurricular, enrichment, and social activities;[285]

(25) provides that the State shall have in effect procedures for the orderly and timely interstate placement of children, which, in the case of a State other than the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, or American Samoa, not later than October 1, 2027, shall include the use of an electronic interstate case-processing system;[286] and procedures implemented in accordance with an interstate compact, if incorporating with the procedures prescribed by paragraph (26), shall be considered to satisfy the requirement of this paragraph;

(26) provides that—

(A)(i) within 60 days after the State receives from another State a request to conduct a study of a home environment for purposes of assessing the safety and suitability of placing a child in the home, the State shall, directly or by contract—

(I) conduct and complete the study; and

(II) return to the other State a report on the results of the study, which shall address the extent to which placement in the home would meet the needs of the child; and

(ii) in the case of a home study begun on or before September 30, 2008, if the State fails to comply with clause (i) within the 60-day period as a result of circumstances beyond the control of the State (such as a failure by a Federal agency to provide the results of a background check, or the failure by any entity to provide completed medical forms, requested by the State at least 45 days before the end of the 60-day period), the State shall have 75 days to comply with clause (i) if the State documents the circumstances involved and certifies that completing the home study is in the best interests of the child; except that

(iii) this subparagraph shall not be construed to require the State to have completed, within the applicable period, the parts of the home study involving the education and training of the prospective foster or adoptive parents;

(B) the State shall treat any report described in subparagraph (A) that is received from another State or an Indian tribe (or from a private agency under contract with another State) as meeting any requirements imposed by the State for the completion of a home study before placing a child in the home, unless, within 14 days after receipt of the report, the State determines, based on grounds that are specific to the content of the report, that making a decision in reliance on the report would be contrary to the welfare of the child; and

(C) the State shall not impose any restriction on the ability of a State agency administering, or supervising the administration of, a State program operated under a State plan approved under this part to contract with a private agency for the conduct of a home study described in subparagraph (A);

(27) provides that, with respect to any child in foster care under the responsibility of the State under this part or part B and without regard to whether foster care maintenance payments are made under section 472 on behalf of the child, the State has in effect procedures for verifying the citizenship or immigration status of the child;

(28) at the option of the State, provides for the State to enter into kinship guardianship assistance agreements to provide kinship guardianship assistance payments on behalf of children to grandparents and other relatives who have assumed legal guardianship of the children for whom they have cared as foster parents and for whom they have committed to care on a permanent basis, as provided in section 473(d);

(29) provides that, within 30 days after the removal of a child from the custody of the parent or parents of the child, the State shall exercise due diligence to identify and provide notice to the following relatives: all adult grandparents, all parents of a sibling of the child, where such parent has legal custody of such sibling[287], and other adult relatives of the child (including any other adult relatives suggested by the parents), subject to exceptions due to family or domestic violence, that—

(A) specifies that the child has been or is being removed from the custody of the parent or parents of the child;

(B) explains the options the relative has under Federal, State, and local law to participate in the care and placement of the child, including any options that may be lost by failing to respond to the notice;

(C) describes the requirements under paragraph (10) of this subsection to become a foster family home and the additional services and supports that are available for children placed in such a home; and

(D) if the State has elected the option to make kinship guardianship assistance payments under paragraph (28) of this subsection, describes how the relative guardian of the child may subsequently enter into an agreement with the State under section 473(d)to receive the payments;

(30) provides assurances that each child who has attained the minimum age for compulsory school attendance under State law and with respect to whom there is eligibility for a payment under the State plan is a full-time elementary or secondary school student or has completed secondary school, and for purposes of this paragraph, the term “elementary or secondary school student” means, with respect to a child, that the child is—

(A) enrolled (or in the process of enrolling) in an institution which provides elementary or secondary education, as determined under the law of the State or other jurisdiction in which the institution is located;

(B) instructed in elementary or secondary education at home in accordance with a home school law of the State or other jurisdiction in which the home is located;

(C) in an independent study elementary or secondary education program in accordance with the law of the State or other jurisdiction in which the program is located, which is administered by the local school or school district; or

(D) incapable of attending school on a full-time basis due to the medical condition of the child, which incapability is supported by regularly updated information in the case plan of the child;

(31) provides that reasonable efforts shall be made—

(A) to place siblings removed from their home in the same foster care, kinship guardianship, or adoptive placement, unless the State documents that such a joint placement would be contrary to the safety or well-being of any of the siblings; and

(B) in the case of siblings removed from their home who are not so jointly placed, to provide for frequent visitation or other ongoing interaction between the siblings, unless that State documents that frequent visitation or other ongoing interaction would be contrary to the safety or well-being of any of the siblings;

(32)[288] provides that the State will negotiate in good faith with any Indian tribe, tribal organization or tribal consortium in the State that requests to develop an agreement with the State to administer all or part of the program under this part on behalf of Indian children who are under the authority of the tribe, organization, or consortium, including foster care maintenance payments on behalf of children who are placed in State or tribally licensed foster family homes, adoption assistance payments, and, if the State has elected to provide such payments, kinship guardianship assistance payments under section 473(d), and tribal access to resources for administration, training, and data collection under this part;

(33) provides that the State will inform any individual who is adopting, or whom the State is made aware is considering adopting, a child who is in foster care under the responsibility of the State of the potential eligibility of the individual for a Federal tax credit under section 23 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;

(34) provides that, for each child or youth described in paragraph (9)(C)(i)(I), the State agency shall–

(A) not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, report immediately, and in no case later than 24 hours after receiving information on children or youth who have been identified as being a sex trafficking victim, to the law enforcement authorities; and

(B) not later than 3 years after such date of enactment and annually thereafter, report to the Secretary the total number of children and youth who are sex trafficking victims;[289]

(35) provides that—

(A) not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this paragraph, the State shall develop and implement specific protocols for—

(i) expeditiously locating any child missing from foster care;

(ii) determining the primary factors that contributed to the child’s running away or otherwise being absent from care, and to the extent possible and appropriate, responding to those factors in current and subsequent placements;

(iii) determining the child’s experiences while absent from care, including screening the child to determine if the child is a possible sex trafficking victim (as defined in section 475(9)(A)); and

(iv) reporting such related information as required by the Secretary; and

(B) not later than 2 years after such date of enactment, for each child and youth described in paragraph (9)(C)(i)(I) of this subsection, the State agency shall report immediately, and in no case later than 24 hours after receiving, information on missing or abducted children or youth to the law enforcement authorities for entry into the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, established pursuant to section 534 of title 28, United States Code, and to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children;[290]

(36)[291] provides that, not later than April 1, 2019, the State shall submit to the Secretary information addressing—

(A) whether the State licensing standards are in accord with model standards identified by the Secretary, and if not, the reason for the specific deviation and a description as to why having a standard that is reasonably in accord with the corresponding national model standards is not appropriate for the State;

(B) whether the State has elected to waive standards established in 471(a)(10)(A) for relative foster family homes (pursuant to waiver authority provided by 471(a)(10)(D)), a description of which standards the State most commonly waives, and if the State has not elected to waive the standards, the reason for not waiving these standards;

(C) if the State has elected to waive standards specified in subparagraph (B), how caseworkers are trained to use the waiver authority and whether the State has developed a process or provided tools to assist caseworkers in waiving nonsafety standards per the authority provided in 471(a)(10)(D) to quickly place children with relatives; and

(D) a description of the steps the State is taking to improve caseworker training or the process, if any; and

(37)[292] includes a certification that, in response to the limitation imposed under section 472(k) with respect to foster care maintenance payments made on behalf of any child who is placed in a setting that is not a foster family home, the State will not enact or advance policies or practices that would result in a significant increase in the population of youth in the State’s juvenile justice system.

(b) The Secretary shall approve any plan which complies with the provisions of subsection (a) of this section.

(c) Use of Child Welfare Records in State Court Proceedings.—Subsection (a)(8) shall not be construed to limit the flexibility of a State in determining State policies relating to public access to court proceedings to determine child abuse and neglect or other court hearings held pursuant to part B of this part, except that such policies shall, at a minimum, ensure the safety and well-being of the child, parents, and family.

(d) Annual Reports by the Secretary on Number of Children and Youth Reported by States To Be Sex Trafficking Victims.— Not later than 4 years after the date of the enactment of this subsection and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Congress and make available to the public on the Internet website of the Department of Health and Human Services the number of children and youth reported in accordance with subsection (a)(34)(B) of this section to be sex trafficking victims (as defined in section 475(9)(A)).

(e)[293]Prevention and Family Services and Programs.—

(1) In general.—Subject to the succeeding provisions of this subsection, the Secretary may make a payment to a State for providing the following services or programs for a child described in paragraph (2) and the parents or kin caregivers of the child when the need of the child, such a parent, or such a caregiver for the services or programs are directly related to the safety, permanence, or well-being of the child or to preventing the child from entering foster care:

(A) Mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services.—Mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services provided by a qualified clinician for not more than a 12-month period that begins on any date described in paragraph (3) with respect to the child.

(B) In-home parent skill-based programs.— In-home parent skill-based programs for not more than a 12-month period that begins on any date described in paragraph (3) with respect to the child and that include parenting skills training, parent education, and individual and family counseling.

(2) Child described.—For purposes of paragraph (1), a child described in this paragraph is the following:

(A) A child who is a candidate for foster care (as defined in section 475(13)) but can remain safely at home or in a kinship placement with receipt of services or programs specified in paragraph (1).

(B) A child in foster care who is a pregnant or parenting foster youth.

(3) Date described.—For purposes of paragraph (1), the dates described in this paragraph are the following:

(A) The date on which a child is identified in a prevention plan maintained under paragraph (4) as a child who is a candidate for foster care (as defined in section 475(13)).

(B) The date on which a child is identified in a prevention plan maintained under paragraph (4) as a pregnant or parenting foster youth in need of services or programs specified in paragraph (1).

(4) Requirements related to providing services and programs.—Services and programs specified in paragraph (1) may be provided under this subsection only if specified in advance in the child’s prevention plan described in subparagraph (A) and the requirements in subparagraphs (B) through (E) are met:

(A) Prevention plan.—The State maintains a written prevention plan for the child that meets the following requirements (as applicable):

(i) Candidates.—In the case of a child who is a candidate for foster care described in paragraph (2)(A), the prevention plan shall—

(I) identify the foster care prevention strategy for the child so that the child may remain safely at home, live temporarily with a kin caregiver until reunification can be safely achieved, or live permanently with a kin caregiver;

(II) list the services or programs to be provided to or on behalf of the child to ensure the success of that prevention strategy; and

(III) comply with such other requirements as the Secretary shall establish.

(ii) Pregnant or parenting foster youth.—In the case of a child who is a pregnant or parenting foster youth described in paragraph (2)(B), the prevention plan shall—

(I) be included in the child’s case plan required under section 475(1);

(II) list the services or programs to be provided to or on behalf of the youth to ensure that the youth is prepared (in the case of a pregnant foster youth) or able (in the case of a parenting foster youth) to be a parent;

(III) describe the foster care prevention strategy for any child born to the youth; and

(IV) comply with such other requirements as the Secretary shall establish.

(B) Trauma-informed.—The services or programs to be provided to or on behalf of a child are provided under an organizational structure and treatment framework that involves understanding, recognizing, and responding to the effects of all types of trauma and in accordance with recognized principles of a trauma-informed approach and trauma-specific interventions to address trauma’s consequences and facilitate healing.

(C)[294]Only services and programs provided in accordance with promising, supported, or well-supported practices permitted.—

(i) IN GENERAL.—Only State expenditures for services or programs specified in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) that are provided in accordance with practices that meet the requirements specified in clause (ii) of this subparagraph and that meet the requirements specified in clause (iii), (iv), or (v), respectively, for being a promising, supported, or well-supported practice, shall be eligible for a Federal matching payment under section 474(a)(6)(A).

(ii) General practice requirements.—The general practice requirements specified in this clause are the following:

(I) The practice has a book, manual, or other available writings that specify the components of the practice protocol and describe how to administer the practice.

(II) There is no empirical basis suggesting that, compared to its likely benefits, the practice constitutes a risk of harm to those receiving it.

(III) If multiple outcome studies have been conducted, the overall weight of evidence supports the benefits of the practice.

(IV) Outcome measures are reliable and valid, and are administrated consistently and accurately across all those receiving the practice.

(V) There is no case data suggesting a risk of harm that was probably caused by the treatment and that was severe or frequent.

(iii) Promising practice.—A practice shall be considered to be a “promising practice” if the practice is superior to an appropriate comparison practice using conventional standards of statistical significance (in terms of demonstrated meaningful improvements in validated measures of important child and parent outcomes, such as mental health, substance abuse, and child safety and well-being), as established by the results or outcomes of at least one study that—

(I) was rated by an independent systematic review for the quality of the study design and execution and determined to be well-designed and well-executed; and

(II) utilized some form of control (such as an untreated group, a placebo group, or a wait list study).

(iv) Supported practice.—A practice shall be considered to be a “supported practice” if—

(I) the practice is superior to an appropriate comparison practice using conventional standards of statistical significance (in terms of demonstrated meaningful improvements in validated measures of important child and parent outcomes, such as mental health, substance abuse, and child safety and well-being), as established by the results or outcomes of at least one study that—

(aa) was rated by an independent systematic review for the quality of the study design and execution and determined to be well-designed and well-executed;

(bb) was a rigorous random-controlled trial (or, if not available, a study using a rigorous quasi-experimental research design); and

(cc) was carried out in a usual care or practice setting; and

(II) the study described in subclause (I) established that the practice has a sustained effect (when compared to a control group) for at least 6 months beyond the end of the treatment.

(v) Well-supported practice.—A practice shall be considered to be a “well-supported practice” if—

(I) the practice is superior to an appropriate comparison practice using conventional standards of statistical significance (in terms of demonstrated meaningful improvements in validated measures of important child and parent outcomes, such as mental health, substance abuse, and child safety and well-being), as established by the results or outcomes of at least two studies that—

(aa) were rated by an independent systematic review for the quality of the study design and execution and determined to be well-designed and well-executed;

(bb) were rigorous random-controlled trials (or, if not available, studies using a rigorous quasi-experimental research design); and

(cc) were carried out in a usual care or practice setting; and

(II) at least one of the studies described in subclause (I) established that the practice has a sustained effect (when compared to a control group) for at least 1 year beyond the end of treatment.

(D)Guidance on practices criteria and preapproved services and programs.—

(i) In general.—Not later than October 1, 2018, the Secretary shall issue guidance to States regarding the practices criteria required for services or programs to satisfy the requirements of subparagraph (C). The guidance shall include a pre-approved list of services and programs that satisfy the requirements.

(ii) Updates.—The Secretary shall issue updates to the guidance required by clause (i) as often as the Secretary determines necessary.

(E) Outcome assessment and reporting.—The State shall collect and report to the Secretary the following information with respect to each child for whom, or on whose behalf mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services or in-home parent skill-based programs are provided during a 12-month period beginning on the date the child is determined by the State to be a child described in paragraph (2):

(i) The specific services or programs provided and the total expenditures for each of the services or programs.

(ii) The duration of the services or programs provided.

(iii) In the case of a child described in paragraph (2)(A), the child’s placement status at the beginning, and at the end, of the 1-year period, respectively, and whether the child entered foster care within 2 years after being determined a candidate for foster care.

(5)State plan component.—

(A) Iin general.—A State electing to provide services or programs specified in paragraph (1) shall submit as part of the State plan required by subsection (a) a prevention services and programs plan component that meets the requirements of subparagraph (B).

(B) Prevention services and programs plan component.— In order to meet the requirements of this subparagraph, a prevention services and programs plan component, with respect to each 5-year period for which the plan component is in operation in the State, shall include the following:

(i) How providing services and programs specified in paragraph (1) is expected to improve specific outcomes for children and families.

(ii) How the State will monitor and oversee the safety of children who receive services and programs specified in paragraph (1), including through periodic risk assessments throughout the period in which the services and programs are provided on behalf of a child and reexamination of the prevention plan maintained for the child under paragraph (4) for the provision of the services or programs if the State determines the risk of the child entering foster care remains high despite the provision of the services or programs.

(iii) With respect to the services and programs specified in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1), information on the specific promising, supported, or well-supported practices the State plans to use to provide the services or programs, including a description of—

(I) the services or programs and whether the practices used are promising, supported, or well-supported;

(II) how the State plans to implement the services or programs, including how implementation of the services or programs will be continuously monitored to ensure fidelity to the practice model and to determine outcomes achieved and how information learned from the monitoring will be used to refine and improve practices;

(III) how the State selected the services or programs;

(IV) the target population for the services or programs; and

(V) how each service or program provided will be evaluated through a well-designed and rigorous process, which may consist of an ongoing, cross-site evaluation approved by the Secretary.

(iv) A description of the consultation that the State agencies responsible for administering the State plans under this part and part B engage in with other State agencies responsible for administering health programs, including mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services, and with other public and private agencies with experience in administering child and family services, including community-based organizations, in order to foster a continuum of care for children described in paragraph (2) and their parents or kin caregivers.

(v) A description of how the State shall assess children and their parents or kin caregivers to determine eligibility for services or programs specified in paragraph (1).

(vi) A description of how the services or programs specified in paragraph (1) that are provided for or on behalf of a child and the parents or kin caregivers of the child will be coordinated with other child and family services provided to the child and the parents or kin caregivers of the child under the State plans in effect under subparts 1 and 2 of part B.

(vii) Descriptions of steps the State is taking to support and enhance a competent, skilled, and professional child welfare workforce to deliver trauma-informed and evidence-based services, including—

(I) ensuring that staff is qualified to provide services or programs that are consistent with the promising, supported, or well-supported practice models selected; and

(II) developing appropriate prevention plans, and conducting the risk assessments required under clause (iii).

(viii) A description of how the State will provide training and support for caseworkers in assessing what children and their families need, connecting to the families served, knowing how to access and deliver the needed trauma-informed and evidence-based services, and overseeing and evaluating the continuing appropriateness of the services.

(ix) A description of how caseload size and type for prevention caseworkers will be determined, managed, and overseen.

(x) An assurance that the State will report to the Secretary such information and data as the Secretary may require with respect to the provision of services and programs specified in paragraph (1), including information and data necessary to determine the performance measures for the State under paragraph (6) and compliance with paragraph (7).

(C)Reimbursement for services under the prevention plan component.—

(i) Limitation.—Except as provided in subclause (ii), a State may not receive a Federal payment under this part for a given promising, supported, or well-supported practice unless (in accordance with subparagraph (B)(iii)(V)) the plan includes a well-designed and rigorous evaluation strategy for that practice.

(ii) Waiver of limitation.—The Secretary may waive the requirement for a well-designed and rigorous evaluation of any well-supported practice if the Secretary deems the evidence of the effectiveness of the practice to be compelling and the State meets the continuous quality improvement requirements included in subparagraph (B)(iii)(II) with regard to the practice.

(6)Prevention services measures.—

(A) Establishment; annual updates.—Beginning with fiscal year 2021, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall establish the following prevention services measures based on information and data reported by States that elect to provide services and programs specified in paragraph (1):

(i) Percentage of candidates for foster care who do not enter foster care.—The percentage of candidates for foster care for whom, or on whose behalf, the services or programs are provided who do not enter foster care, including those placed with a kin caregiver outside of foster care, during the 12-month period in which the services or programs are provided and through the end of the succeeding 12-month period.

(ii) Per-child spending.—The total amount of expenditures made for mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services or in-home parent skill-based programs, respectively, for, or on behalf of, each child described in paragraph (2).

(B) Data.—The Secretary shall establish and annually update the prevention services measures—

(i) based on the median State values of the information reported under each clause of subparagraph (A) for the 3 then most recent years; and

(ii) taking into account State differences in the price levels of consumption goods and services using the most recent regional price parities published by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the Department of Commerce or such other data as the Secretary determines appropriate.

(C) Publication of state prevention services measures.—The Secretary shall annually make available to the public the prevention services measures of each State.

(7)Maintenance of effort for state foster care prevention expenditures.—

(A) In general.—If a State elects to provide services and programs specified in paragraph (1) for a fiscal year, the State foster care prevention expenditures for the fiscal year shall not be less than the amount of the expenditures for fiscal year 2014 (or, at the option of a State described in subparagraph (E), fiscal year 2015 or fiscal year 2016 (whichever the State elects)).

(B) State foster care prevention expenditures.—The term “State foster care prevention expenditures” means the following:

(i) TANF; iv–b; ssbg.— State expenditures for foster care prevention services and activities under the State program funded under part A (including from amounts made available by the Federal Government), under the State plan developed under part B (including any such amounts), or under the Social Services Block Grant Programs under subtitle A of title XX (including any such amounts).

(ii) Other state programs.—State expenditures for foster care prevention services and activities under any State program that is not described in clause (i) (other than any State expenditures for foster care prevention services and activities under the State program under this part (including under a waiver of the program)).

(C) State expenditures.—The term “State expenditures” means all State or local funds that are expended by the State or a local agency including State or local funds that are matched or reimbursed by the Federal Government and State or local funds that are not matched or reimbursed by the Federal Government.

(D) Determination of prevention services and activities.—The Secretary shall require each State that elects to provide services and programs specified in paragraph (1) to report the expenditures specified in subparagraph (B) for fiscal year 2014 and for such fiscal years thereafter as are necessary to determine whether the State is complying with the maintenance of effort requirement in subparagraph (A). The Secretary shall specify the specific services and activities under each program referred to in subparagraph (B) that are ‘prevention services and activities’ for purposes of the reports.

(E) State described.—For purposes of subparagraph (A), a State is described in this subparagraph if the population of children in the State in 2014 was less than 200,000 (as determined by the United States Census Bureau).

(8) Prohibition against use of state foster care prevention expenditures and federal iv–e prevention funds for matching or expenditure requirement.—A State that elects to provide services and programs specified in paragraph (1) shall not use any State foster care prevention expenditures for a fiscal year for the State share of expenditures under section 474(a)(6)for a fiscal year.

(9) Administrative costs.—Expenditures described in section 474(a)(6)(B)—

(A) shall not be eligible for payment under subparagraph (A), (B), or (E) of section 474(a)(3); and

(B) shall be eligible for payment under section 474(a)(6)(B) without regard to whether the expenditures are incurred on behalf of a child who is, or is potentially, eligible for foster care maintenance payments under this part.

(10)Application.—

(A) In general.—The provision of services or programs under this subsection to or on behalf of a child described in paragraph (2) shall not be considered to be receipt of aid or assistance under the State plan under this part for purposes of eligibility for any other program established under this Act, nor shall the provision of such services or programs be construed to permit the State to reduce medical or other assistance available to a recipient of such services or programs.[295]

(B) Candidates in kinship care.—A child described in paragraph (2) for whom such services or programs under this subsection are provided for more than 6 months while in the home of a kin caregiver, and who would satisfy the AFDC eligibility requirement of section 472(a)(3)(A)(ii)(II)but for residing in the home of the caregiver for more than 6 months, is deemed to satisfy that requirement for purposes of determining whether the child is eligible for foster care maintenance payments under section 472.

(C)[296] Payer of last resort.—In carrying out its responsibilities to ensure access to services or programs under this subsection, the State agency shall not be considered to be a legally liable third party for purposes of satisfying a financial commitment for the cost of providing such services or programs with respect to any individual for whom such cost would have been paid for from another public or private source but for the enactment of this subsection (except that whenever considered necessary to prevent a delay in the receipt of appropriate early intervention services by a child or family in a timely fashion, funds provided under section 474(a)(6) may be used to pay the provider of services or programs pending reimbursement from the public or private source that has ultimate responsibility for the payment).


[272]  See Vol. II, P.L. 110-351, §503, with respect to prohibition of Federal funding to unlawfully present individuals.

[273]  P.L. 115–123 §50711(a)(1) struck “and” and all that followed through the semicolon and inserted “, adoption assistance in accordance with section 473, and, at the option of the State, services or programs specified in subsection (e)(1) of this section for children who are candidates for foster care or who are pregnant or parenting foster youth and the parents or kin caregivers of the children, in accordance with the requirements of that subsection;”. Effective February 9, 2018.

[274]  P.L. 115–165, §103(a)(2), inserted “the program established by Title II.” as a conforming amendment following insertion of 205(j)(11).

[275]  P.L. 113-183, §101, amended to add subparagraph (C) effective September 29, 2014.

[276]  P.L. 113-183, §101, amended to replace subparagraph (10). effective September 29, 2014

[277]  See Vol. II, 18 U.S.C. 1111(a).

[278]  See Vol. II, 18 U.S.C. 1112(a).

[279]  See Vol. II, 28 U.S.C. 534 (e)(3)(A).

[280]  P.L. 115–123 §50745(b) struck “section 534(e)(3)(A)” and inserted “section 534 (f)(3)(A)”. Effective October 1, 2018.

[281]  P.L. 115–123, §50745(a)(1), struck “and” after the semicolon. Effective October 1, 2018.

[282]  P.L. 115–123, §50745(a)(2), struck “and” after the semicolon. Effective October 1, 2018.

[283]  P.L. 115–123, §50745(a)(3), inserted “and” after the semicolon. Effective October 1, 2018.

P.L. 115–123, §50745(b), struck “section 534(e)(3)(A)” and inserted “section 534 (f)(3)(A)”. Effective October 1, 2018.

[284]  P.L. 115–123, §50745(a)(3), inserted subparagraph (D). Effective October 1, 2018.

[285]  P.L. 113-183, §111, added subparagraph (24), effective September 29, 2014. See Vol. II, P.L. 113–183, §111(a)(3), with respect to requirement for HHS to provide technical assistance to the states.

[286]  P.L. 115–123 §50722(a-b) struck “provide” and inserted “provides” and inserted “, which, in the case of a State other than the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, or American Samoa, not later than October 1, 2027, shall include the use of an electronic interstate case-processing system” before the first semicolon. Effective February 9, 2018.

[287]  P.L. 113–183 §209; replaced “all adult grandparents” with “ the following relatives: all adult grandparents, all parents of a sibling of the child, where such parent has legal custody of such sibling”. Effective September 29, 2014.

[288]  See Vol. II, P.L. 110-351, §301(d), with respect to rules of construction and §301(e), with respect to regulations.

[289]  P.L 115–123 §50731(b)(1) struck “and” after the semicolon. Effective February 9, 2018.

[290]  P.L 115–123 §50731(b)(2) struck the period and inserted a semicolon. Effective October 1, 2018.

[291]  P.L 115–123, §50731(b)(3), added paragraph (36). Effective October 1, 2018.

[292]  P.L. 115–123, §50741(d), added paragraph (37). Effective February 9, 2018.

[293]  P.L. 115–123, §50711(a)(2), added subsection (e). Effective February 9, 2018.

[294]  See Vol. II., P.L. 115–271, §8083, for support available for services and programs specified under this subparagraph.

[295]  P.L. 115–271, §8082(b), inserted “, nor shall the provision of such services or programs be construed to permit the State to reduce medical or other assistance available to a recipient of such services or programs” after “under this Act”. Effective February 9, 2018.

[296]  P.L. 115–271, §8082(b)(2), added new subparagraph (C). Effective February 9, 2018.

Civil Rights 0

(a)Requisite features of State planIn order for a State to be eligible for payments under this part, it shall have a plan approved by the Secretary which—
(1)provides for foster care maintenance payments in accordance with section 672 of this title, adoption assistance in accordance with section 673 of this title, and, at the option of the State, services or programs specified in subsection (e)(1) of this section for children who are candidates for foster care or who are pregnant or parenting foster youth and the parents or kin caregivers of the children, in accordance with the requirements of that subsection;
(2)provides that the State agency responsible for administering the program authorized by subpart 1 of part B of this subchapter shall administer, or supervise the administration of, the program authorized by this part;
(3)provides that the plan shall be in effect in all political subdivisions of the State, and, if administered by them, be mandatory upon them;
(4)provides that the State shall assure that the programs at the local level assisted under this part will be coordinated with the programs at the State or local level assisted under parts A and B of this subchapter, under division A [1] of subchapter XX of this chapter, and under any other appropriate provision of Federal law;
(5)provides that the State will, in the administration of its programs under this part, use such methods relating to the establishment and maintenance of personnel standards on a merit basis as are found by the Secretary to be necessary for the proper and efficient operation of the programs, except that the Secretary shall exercise no authority with respect to the selection, tenure of office, or compensation of any individual employed in accordance with such methods;
(6)provides that the State agency referred to in paragraph (2) (hereinafter in this part referred to as the “State agency”) will make such reports, in such form and containing such information as the Secretary may from time to time require, and comply with such provisions as the Secretary may from time to time find necessary to assure the correctness and verification of such reports;
(7)provides that the State agency will monitor and conduct periodic evaluations of activities carried out under this part;
(8)subject to subsection (c), provides safeguards which restrict the use of or disclosure of information concerning individuals assisted under the State plan to purposes directly connected with (A) the administration of the plan of the State approved under this part, the plan or program of the State under part A, B, or D of this subchapter or under subchapter I, V, X, XIV, XVI (as in effect in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands), XIX, or XX, the program established by subchapter II, or the supplemental security income program established by subchapter XVI, (B) any investigation, prosecution, or criminal or civil proceeding, conducted in connection with the administration of any such plan or program, (C) the administration of any other Federal or federally assisted program which provides assistance, in cash or in kind, or services, directly to individuals on the basis of need, (D) any audit or similar activity conducted in connection with the administration of any such plan or program by any governmental agency which is authorized by law to conduct such audit or activity, and (E) reporting and providing information pursuant to paragraph (9) to appropriate authorities with respect to known or suspected child abuse or neglect; and the safeguards so provided shall prohibit disclosure, to any committee or legislative body (other than an agency referred to in clause (D) with respect to an activity referred to in such clause), of any information which identifies by name or address any such applicant or recipient; except that nothing contained herein shall preclude a State from providing standards which restrict disclosures to purposes more limited than those specified herein, or which, in the case of adoptions, prevent disclosure entirely;

Source: 42 U.S. Code § 671 – State plan for foster care and adoption assistance | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Copy this link to have this document printed and mailed to you!

The document.execCommand() method is not supported in IE8 and earlier.

Case Law, Forms 0

In the early 1970s, however, many scholars accepted that “life, liberty or property” was directly affected by state action, and wanted these concepts to be broadly interpreted. Two Supreme Court cases involved teachers at state colleges whose contracts of employment had not been renewed as they expected, because of some political positions they had taken. Were they entitled to a hearing before they could be treated in this way? Previously, a state job was a “privilege” and the answer to this question was an emphatic “No!” Now, the Court decided that whether either of the two teachers had “property” would depend in each instance on whether persons in their position, under state law, held some form of tenure. One teacher had just been on a short term contract; because he served “at will” — without any state law claim or expectation to continuation — he had no “entitlement” once his contract expired. The other teacher worked under a longer-term arrangement that school officials seemed to have encouraged him to regard as a continuing one. This could create an “entitlement,” the Court said; the expectation need not be based on a statute, and an established custom of treating instructors who had taught for X years as having tenure could be shown. While, thus, some law-based relationship or expectation of continuation had to be shown before a federal court would say that process was “due,” constitutional “property” was no longer just what the common law called “property”; it now included any legal relationship with the state that state law regarded as in some sense an “entitlement” of the citizen. Licenses, government jobs protected by civil service, or places on the welfare rolls were all defined by state laws as relations the citizen was entitled to keep until there was some reason to take them away, and therefore process was due before they could be taken away. This restated the formal “right/privilege” idea, but did so in a way that recognized the new dependency of citizens on relations with government, the “new property” as one scholar influentially called it.

When process is due
In its early decisions, the Supreme Court seemed to indicate that when only property rights were at stake (and particularly if there was some demonstrable urgency for public action) necessary hearings could be postponed to follow provisional, even irreversible, government action. This presumption changed in 1970 with the decision in Goldberg v. Kelly, a case arising out of a state-administered welfare program. The Court found that before a state terminates a welfare recipient’s benefits, the state must provide a full hearing before a hearing officer, finding that the Due Process Clause required such a hearing.

What procedures are due
Just as cases have interpreted when to apply due process, others have determined the sorts of procedures which are constitutionally due. This is a question that has to be answered for criminal trials (where the Bill of Rights provides many explicit answers), for civil trials (where the long history of English practice provides some landmarks), and for administrative proceedings, which did not appear on the legal landscape until a century or so after the Due Process Clause was first adopted. Because there are the fewest landmarks, the administrative cases present the hardest issues, and these are the ones we will discuss.

The Goldberg Court answered this question by holding that the state must provide a hearing before an impartial judicial officer, the right to an attorney’s help, the right to present evidence and argument orally, the chance to examine all materials that would be relied on or to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, or a decision limited to the record thus made and explained in an opinion. The Court’s basis for this elaborate holding seems to have some roots in the incorporation doctrine.

Many argued that the Goldberg standards were too broad, and in subsequent years, the Supreme Court adopted a more discriminating approach. Process was “due” to the student suspended for ten days, as to the doctor deprived of his license to practice medicine or the person accused of being a security risk; yet the difference in seriousness of the outcomes, of the charges, and of the institutions involved made it clear there could be no list of procedures that were always “due.” What the Constitution required would inevitably be dependent on the situation. What process is “due” is a question to which there cannot be a single answer.

A successor case to Goldberg, Mathews v. Eldridge, tried instead to define a method by which due process questions could be successfully presented by lawyers and answered by courts. The approach it defined has remained the Court’s preferred method for resolving questions over what process is due. Mathews attempted to define how judges should ask about constitutionally required procedures. The Court said three factors had to be analyzed:

First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.
Using these factors, the Court first found the private interest here less significant than in Goldberg. A person who is arguably disabled but provisionally denied disability benefits, it said, is more likely to be able to find other “potential sources of temporary income” than a person who is arguably impoverished but provisionally denied welfare assistance. Respecting the second, it found the risk of error in using written procedures for the initial judgment to be low, and unlikely to be significantly reduced by adding oral or confrontational procedures of the Goldberg variety. It reasoned that disputes over eligibility for disability insurance typically concern one’s medical condition, which could be decided, at least provisionally, on the basis of documentary submissions; it was impressed that Eldridge had full access to the agency’s files, and the opportunity to submit in writing any further material he wished. Finally, the Court now attached more importance than the Goldberg Court had to the government’s claims for efficiency. In particular, the Court assumed (as the Goldberg Court had not) that “resources available for any particular program of social welfare are not unlimited.” Thus additional administrative costs for suspension hearings and payments while those hearings were awaiting resolution to persons ultimately found undeserving of benefits would subtract from the amounts available to pay benefits for those undoubtedly eligible to participate in the program. The Court also gave some weight to the “good-faith judgments” of the plan administrators what appropriate consideration of the claims of applicants would entail.

Civil Rights 0

This form is required to be completed prior to suing CPS, in most states you must wait 60 days before filing your lawsuit  after filing this with your states attorney general Office of Risk Management.

Civil Rights 0

Child Fatality Review #05-29
Region 1
Spokane Office
Case Overview
This six-year-old Caucasian male died in the Spokane area on December 7, 2005 from a gunshot
wound to his head.
On the evening of December 6, 2005, at approximately 5:00 p.m., an eleven-year-old reportedly
shot his younger brother, age six. They were at their home alone when the eleven-year-old shot
the six-year-old in the head with his father’s gun. The six-year-old was airlifted to the hospital
where he died the next morning.
The parents did not adequately provide supervision for their children. This was a recurring theme
in several previous referrals. Child Protective Services (CPS) had received a total of 12 referrals
regarding this family.
The parents were offered substance abuse evaluations and marital counseling following the first
referral received by CPS in May 2001. The parents refused to participate in these services. In
January 2002, substance abuse evaluations were offered again following a new investigation by
CPS. The father complied and was diagnosed as alcohol dependent with recommendations for
intensive outpatient treatment and community support groups. The mother also completed an
evaluation and was diagnosed as alcohol and cannabis dependent. She was recommended to
participate with intensive outpatient treatment and sexual assault counseling. Neither of the
parents followed through with the treatment recommendations.
The siblings were also referred to individual counseling because of reports that they were
engaged in sexualized behavior. There was not an opening available when the referral was made.
The counseling center only had one counselor available in the parents’ community. Due to a
possible conflict of interest, at least one of the children would need to participate in counseling in
Spokane. The parents stated this posed a hardship due to their hours of employment and
transportation issues.
In March 2002, a referral was received for Sexually Aggressive Youth (SAY) treatment for the
older boy. The Spokane County Prosecutor made the request for services. The parents did not
respond to the services offered for their oldest son.
In February 2003, following a protective placement by Law Enforcement, the assigned social
worker attempted to engage the parent’s in intensive outpatient treatment, counseling, and
counseling for their children. For five months the parents failed to follow through with any
services.
In February of 2003, the older brother was placed in a behavioral intervention classroom and the
decedent was accepted in a pre-school through the school district. The school provided the
14
transportation for pre-school. The school counselor contacted the parents to offer school based
mental health services to the children. The parents refused to allow the children to participate.
Several referrals were received in 2005 that required CPS investigation. The father had agreed to
a voluntary service plan that included Family Preservation services (FPS), counseling for the
older children, as well as appropriate childcare whenever the father was not home. The father
quit participating after three contacts by the FPS provider. The FPS provider reports that she
addressed gun safety at a meeting with the family on July 9, 2005. The father said that all of his
guns were locked up and he wouldn’t allow his oldest son to have a gun because he hadn’t
completed a gun safety course. The FPS provider also identified childcare resources for the
father. He never arranged for the children’s counseling and did not have adequate supervision for
the children on the day the shooting occurred.
On September 29, 2005, a Child Protection Team (CPT) recommended that the children remain
in the home. The team expressed concerns for the children’s safety and suggested that the
Department staff the case with an Assistant Attorney General (AAG) and the father should get a
substance abuse evaluation. According to the Social Worker, the AAG said that there was not
sufficient information to pursue a dependency petition.
On November 1, 2005, the school reported to CPS that the oldest boy smelled of alcohol at
school. They had reports that the children use alcohol and drugs at home and that the daughter
had pulled knives and pellet guns on the boys. CPS investigated these allegations, which were
founded for negligent treatment. The school helped develop a safety plan for the children to be
supervised by a friend’s parents after school.
On November 2, 2005 CPS received an informational report that the daughter had snorted
oxycontin.
On December 7, 2005, CPS received information that the youngest boy had been shot by his
older brother and died.
A safety plan was implemented in the father’s home immediately after the child’s death.
However, both siblings were informally placed shortly thereafter. The older daughter was placed
with a relative and her brother was placed with a friend of the father’s. A dependency on the two
children was granted in March, 2006. The brother is currently in a BRS placement and the
daughter is in a foster home.

Civil Rights 0

Child Fatality Review #05-19
Region 4
Office of African-American Children’s Services
Case Overview
This two-month-old African American female died on August 15, 2005 due to Sudden Infant
Death Syndrome (SIDS).
Children’s Administration received a call from the King County Medical Examiner reporting the
death of a child, age two months. The family has Child Protective Services (CPS) history and an
active case. Other children remained in the home at the time. It was stated that the twins slept
with the mother in her bed. The mother woke to feed the babies at 4:30 a.m., and they all went
back to sleep. At 9:30 a.m., the mother was awakened by the cries of the other twin. At that
time, she found the decedent face down lying next to her and unresponsive. She called out for
help, and an aunt came in and began cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Medics responded
and did not attempt resuscitation as the decedent was found to be “down too long.” The decedent
had no signs of external trauma. The mother appeared appropriate and did not seem to be under
the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The cause of death is SIDS per the King County Medical Examiner, confirmed December 21,
2005.
A safety plan was developed to ensure the safety of the other twin. The plan was an agreement
between the Division of Children and Family Services (DCFS) and the mother. The goal of the
agreement was to ensure the safety and well being of other twin. The safety plan included: 1)
The other twin was taken to the doctor. The mother was to follow up with all recommended
medical treatment. 2) The mother was to attend the August 31, 2005 intake at Therapeutic
Health Services (THS). 3) The maternal grandmother was to be the primary caretaker of the
twin until the cause of death is determined.

The mother had given birth to four children by two different fathers. The father of the two oldest
children, born December 18, 1993 and July 7, 1999, was the same. The twins, born on June 3,
2005, had a different father than the older children. There is no father named on their birth
certificates.
On December 3, 2002, CPS received a referral that was accepted for investigation for negligent
treatment/maltreatment and physical abuse. At that time, the three-year-old reported his father
punched him in the neck. Interviews with both of the children, the mother and father, and the
maternal grandmother occurred. At that time the mother was a client at THS. The investigation
was unfounded and explained as play wrestling between the father and son.
On May 6, 2003, CPS received an information only referral. The oldest child told an employee
at her school about an incident in a grocery store in which the mother was apparently intoxicated.
On August 18, 2003, CPS received a referral that was accepted for investigation for negligent
treatment/maltreatment. The oldest child called 911, and the mother was transported to
CFR #05-19 (AIRS 1303)
Region 4 – Office of African American Children’s Services
46
Harborview. The mother was partly conscious. She tested positive for “amphetamines, opiates,
benzos and methadone.” This investigation was founded. The third report in 2003 came on
October 10th and was accepted for investigation of physical abuse. The second oldest child said
his father hurt his ear. This was unfounded. There was one report in 2004 that was information
only dated July 8, 2004. During 2004, the family received two authorizations for Intensive
Family Preservation Services (IFPS). There were multiple instances in which the mother’s
behavior appeared to be drug-seeking.
The twins were born June 5, 2005. Swedish Hospital made a report to CPS on June 6th. This
report of negligent treatment/maltreatment was accepted for investigation. The mother tested
positive for methadone and opiates. Both babies also were drug positive, according to the
Service Episode Record (SER). The mother told the assigned CPS worker that the maternal
grandmother was taking care of the second oldest child at her home in Redmond, Oregon and
would soon have the oldest child there when school ended for the summer. The mother’s initial
plans were to live with the twins at a friend’s home, then move to public housing.
The mother left the hospital with the babies to live at an address in Seattle. The service plan with
CPS included at least one urinalysis and a referral to Child Haven for the twins. Soon after, the
mother and the twins left for a visit with the maternal grandmother and the other siblings in
Oregon. On August 15, 2005, the King County Medical Examiner contacted CPS to report the
death of this twin.
The surviving twin was subsequently hospitalized for medical testing. He was placed in foster
care on a Voluntary Placement Agreement (VPA), and then placed with a relative with a
dependency petition filed.
Court records document several incidents of domestic violence between the mother and the
father of the older children. There is a current No Contact Order that is in effect until August 20,
2006. There are no records concerning domestic violence between the mother and the father of
the twins.
Issues and Recommendations
I. Practice Issues
A. Issue: The importance of case history in helping to determine the case plan. It
appears that the assigned worker may not have carefully reviewed the case file before
deciding on a course of action. A review would have provided ample information
when the twins were born that the mother was continuing a several-year pattern of
abuse of pain killers while marginally participating in a Methadone maintenance
program. With that information in hand, it may have been clearer that legal action
would be warranted.
Recommendation: Read the case file and if it is not physically in the office, read it
on-line.
CFR #05-19 (AIRS 1303)
Region 4 – Office of African American Children’s Services
47
B. Issue: Using Voluntary Services Plans when parents have known substance abuse
issues. Workers want to provide reasonable efforts and services to prevent placement
and legal intervention. On the other hand, voluntary plans may not be effective with
substance-abusing clients who are in denial.
Recommendation: Voluntary plans, if used at all, need to be for very short time
frames, such as thirty days. Compliance should be very closely monitored.

C. Issue: Using Family Preservation Services (FPS) or IFPS when a parent is not clean
and sober. This family actually received two authorizations for IFPS. The substance
abuse issues continued throughout both episodes.
Recommendation: Preservation services should not be employed when a parent is
using. The goals cannot be met and the safety of the children will not be enhanced.

D. Issue: Making referrals to the Public Health Nursing (PHN) Early Intervention
Program (EIP). In this case the hospital made a “regular” PHN referral, but the CPS
worker did not subsequently request an EIP PHN. Doing so means the PHN will
obtain consent for release of information and will provide the worker with written
progress reports.
Recommendation: Where available, request an EIP PHN for families with infants
and children under age three, or with any child that has medical issues

Civil Rights 0

Child Fatality Review #05-34
Region 3
Bellingham DCFS Office
This three-year-old Native American male was killed in October 8, 2005, when a car accidentally
rolled over him in a private driveway at the home of a third party.
Case Overview
The child’s family was homeless and the parents went to look at a fifth wheel trailer that was for
sale. When they arrived at the home, the parents turned off the motor, exited the car and left their
three sons (ages 8, 5, and 3) sleeping inside the car. The parents met with the owner of the fifth
wheel and were looking at it but were within sight of their children in the parked car
approximately 75 feet away. The parents heard the sound of crunching and responded
immediately. They attempted to lift the car tire off the child, called 911, moved the car and then
administered CPR. The child apparently got out of his car seat, out of the car and was run over in
the driveway after one of his siblings knocked the car out of gear. The investigating law
enforcement agency reported to CPS that they viewed this as an accident.
The family had prior history with Children’s Administration. The child’s mother was possibly a
victim of child abuse in her family when she was about sixteen. There is no prior CPS history on
the father.
The first referral concerning the family was received in 1997. An emergency room (ER)
physician made a CPS referral about the parents’ first born son who was then six months old.
The mother brought him to the ER with bruises and contusions on his face and head. The mother,
supported by her sister and her sister’s child, stated that the injuries occurred when the mother’s
three-year old niece climbed into the child’s crib and beat him with his bottle. This occurred
when the mother and her sister stepped out onto the porch for a few minutes. The child’s injuries
healed with no permanent effects. The case was closed after investigation with a finding of
Unfounded and with referrals for services for the three-year old niece.
The next time CPS became aware of this family was in 2000. The mother was pregnant with
their second son. While at the doctor’s office with her oldest child, the mother had been
admonished by the doctor for being impatient with him and “yanking” on his arm. There was no
injury. The mother was working with a public health nurse, who had never seen anything of
concern. The referral was taken as Information Only.
Two months later, the mother was in the hospital delivering her second son. Hospital staff called
CPS to report that the father had physically abused the oldest child as they were leaving the
hospital. They observed the child crying for his mother and the father yanked him, screamed at
him and threw him to the ground while going to the car. The referent also reported the mother
claimed she had been physically assaulted by the father six months earlier. The father was
attending anger management classes because she reported the incident to police. The mother also
told the referent hat she used marijuana weekly during her recent pregnancy.
15
16
The newborn did not test positive for drugs and he was allowed to go home with his parents. The
investigator learned that the father had been assessed and diagnosed with severe alcohol and
marijuana dependence, and methamphetamine dependence in remission. He was required to
attend chemical dependency treatment as a part of his domestic violence case and a Driving
under the Influence charge. He did not comply with treatment and was ordered to 15 days of inhome detention. The treatment facility report indicated that his prognosis for recovery was poor.
During the CPS investigation, a new CPS referral was made about the family. An anonymous
caller stated that the father was heard yelling, slamming doors, and “screaming obscenities,”
particularly at the oldest child. The investigator asked the mother to submit to a urinalysis for
drug use, but she refused. The parents refused to attend parenting classes, but the father did
complete 26 weeks of domestic violence counseling. After four months of working with the
family and offering services, the case was closed. Although the family’s engagement in services
was minimal, the department believed there was not sufficient basis to file a dependency petition.
The findings of the investigation were Unfounded.
The department heard nothing about the family until the spring of 2005. By that time the family
had three sons. The youngest son was born in 2001. The daycare provider expressed concern to
CPS about the oldest boy. He was reported to have been seen “slapping himself” and stated that
his parents “slapped him all the time.” He told the teacher that his parents “hate me and they hit
me.” The center had never seen evidence of physical abuse. The referral was screened as
Information Only.
The next referral was in October of 2005, when the department learned of the fatality.
Issues and Recommendations
Exceptional Social Work Practice
Most of the work on this case prior to the fatality was performed by the Bremerton DCFS
office in 2000. In a very comprehensive investigation that included many collateral
contacts, the social worker identified the risk factors the family presented and began the
process of establishing the children’s tribal identity once their Native American ancestry
was revealed. It turned out to be a lengthy process, not reaching completion until well
after the case was closed. Despite extensive efforts to engage the family, the social
worker was only partially successful in connecting the reluctant parents with services,
and the case was closed per policy. The active efforts made on this case, however, were
commendable.

Civil Rights 0

Child Fatality Review #05-25
Region 1
Spokane Office
Case Overview
This seven-year-old Caucasian male died in the home of his adoptive mother on January 13,
2005 due to “severe dehydration” as reported by the medical examiner. He weighed 28 pounds,
significantly below the fifth percentile for children his age at the time of his death.
The decedent was born on January 13, 1998. He was placed in foster care on April 5, 1998 due
to concerns of neglect by his biological mother. His biological father is a registered sex
offender. Although the department had concerns about the decedent’s biological mother’s drug
use, the decedent’s birth records indicate that he did not have drugs in his system at birth. He
was placed in his adoptive mother’s home on May 29, 1998, after a brief stay in another foster
home.
The decedent’s medical records indicate that he weighed 16 pounds on July 7, 1998, in the 50th
percentile for children his age. His biological mother relinquished her parental rights on
December 3, 1998. She agreed to an open adoption with his adoptive mother. He was adopted
on April 10, 2000.
Children’s Administration Division of Licensed Resources Child Abuse and Neglect Section
(DLR/CPS) investigated the circumstances surrounding the decedent’s death in conjunction with
Stevens County Sheriff’s office.
In the eleven months since the decedent’s death, there have been six new referrals alleging
physical abuse, negligent or maltreatment of other children who were placed in the adoptive
home prior to the decedent’s death. Several of the decedent’s adopted and foster siblings have
reported that the adoptive mother and her daughter physically abused them and withheld food
and water from them. These referrals were generated both by Department of Social and Health
Services (DSHS) staff and providers upon learning of new allegations of abuse and neglect in the
course of the investigation following the decedent’s death.
For a copy of the full report and case history please review the fatality report at:
http://www1.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/MR/DELEON-ECFR-Feb-2006.pdf

Foster Care 0

Here’s more proof that some CPS social workers don’t care at all about the children they pretend to protect. According to the lawsuit: Three girls were placed with a man known to CPS social workers as a cocaine addict. He was allowed to adopt one of the three girls. For ten years there were complaints […]

Source: Washington: Children Sue CPS For Allowing Them To Be Abused By Foster “Parent” – FightCPS: Child Protective Services-CPS-False Accusations

Civil Rights 0

Physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, and exploitation – in a foster home! We’re not surprised. Three children in Washington state were granted 7.3 million dollars in a lawsuit settlement by the Washington Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS). CPS social workers in Washington placed the children in the home of Enrique Fabregas, a foster […]

Source: Washington: Three foster children sued CPS and won 7.3 million dollars – FightCPS: Child Protective Services-CPS-False Accusations

Civil Rights 0

A mother accused of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy sued and won 1.4 million taxpayer dollars because of incompetence and a rush to judgement by doctors and Kern County social services workers. Rather than checking a child’s medical records, the doctors decided that the mother of a girl with cystic fibrosis was over-medicating her. They removed […]

Source: California: 1.4 Million Settlement for Mom Accused of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy – FightCPS: Child Protective Services-CPS-False Accusations

Civil Rights 0

Washington state where my chances are very slim I am seeking a civil rights attorney I will pay by the hour if you can simply guide me and I will even sign a consent so the state will not know you are helping me? I am a 36 year old single mother and they violated my civil rights when they picked up my infant daughter, this happened in December 2019 I have only had video visits since our separation this has been so hard on me and depression has taken over. Please help.

Civil Rights 0

They are offering foster children to adopt for a fee directly from your US Government. This must be stopped! Why? Because when 80% of removals are for neglect then you can bet that those parents were violated of their basic fundamental rights in an attempt for government profit.

 

Case Law, Civil Rights 0

I am also looking to try and hire an attorney, all the help would be blessings. I am also a single mother of 27 yo they are trying to terminate my rights and it had only been a year but I was just released from jail a few months ago. I am in an inpatient treatment facility. You can message me and I will send you court documents to prove my situation, my husband does not get released for another 4 and a half years.

Thanks for the help!

Civil Rights 0