Concurrent Planning Defined M-V

Montana

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Reasonable efforts to place a child permanently for adoption or to make an alternative out-of-home permanent placement may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts to return a child to the child’s home. Concurrent planning, including identifying in-State and out-of-State placements, may be used.

 

 

‘Concurrent planning’ means to work toward reunification of the child with the family while at the same time developing and implementing an alternative permanent plan.

 

(Back to Top)

Nebraska

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Reasonable efforts to place a juvenile for adoption or with a guardian may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family, but priority shall be given to preserving and reunifying the family as provided in this section.

 

(Back to Top)

Nevada

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

The agency that provides child welfare services may make reasonable efforts to place the child for adoption or with a legal guardian concurrently with making the reasonable efforts required to preserve and reunify the family of a child.

 

(Back to Top)

New Hampshire

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

When a minor is in an out-of-home placement, the court shall adopt a concurrent plan other than reunification for the minor. The other options for a permanency plan include termination of parental rights or parental surrender when an adoption is contemplated, guardianship with a fit and willing relative or another appropriate party, or another planned permanent living arrangement.

 

 

‘Concurrent plan’ means an alternate permanency plan for use in the event that a child cannot be safely reunified with his or her parents.

 

(Back to Top)

New Jersey

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Reasonable efforts to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian or in an alternative permanent placement may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the child’s family.

 

 

The Division of Child Protection and Permanency shall prepare, and revise as necessary, a placement plan for each child placed outside his or her home. This shall be done in consultation with the child’s parents or legal guardian and the child, when appropriate. The placement plan shall include a statement of the services to be provided to the parent or legal guardian or an exception to the requirement to provide reasonable efforts toward family reunification, in accordance § 30:4C-11.3. Services to facilitate adoption or an alternative permanent placement may be provided concurrently with services to reunify the child with the parent or guardian.

 

(Back to Top)

New Mexico

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Foster home adoptions: The Protective Services Department (PSD) shall attempt to place foster children with concurrent plans of adoption in foster homes which have been identified as concurrent families. PSD completes the preplacement home study for foster parents and treatment foster parents who have been selected as adoptive parents for children in PSD custody.

 

 

As part of the case planning process, the following plans shall be incorporated into the case plan as appropriate:

  • Permanency plan: The permanency plan reflects the permanency goals to be achieved. Every child’s case plan shall have a permanency plan, which may change throughout the life of the case.
  • Concurrent plan: A concurrent plan is a second permanency plan of adoption or guardianship in addition to the primary permanency plan of reunification.

 

 

‘Concurrent plan’ means a second permanency plan of adoption or guardianship in addition to the primary permanency plan of reunification.

 

(Back to Top)

New York

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

A case consultation must be held for each child in preparation for each permanency hearing, including in those cases where the permanency hearing will constitute the service plan review. The purpose of such case consultation is to assist with the development of the permanency hearing report. The issues addressed in the report shall include the following:

  • Review the progress and the status of the child who had been removed from his or her home, including the child’s health and education
  • Review the safety of the child in his or her current environment
  • Review the appropriateness of the current placement, including whether the placement is the least restrictive environment that can meet the child’s needs
  • Assess whether it would be safe to return the child to his or her home and assess the level of risk of the likelihood of abuse or maltreatment a return would entail
  • Review the progress made by each parent toward successful implementation of the service plan and the child’s permanency planning goal, unless the parent has had his or her parental rights to the child terminated
  • Review the reasonable efforts made to assist with the achievement of the child’s permanency planning goal
  • Assess the need for modification or continuation of the current permanency planning goal
  • Review the current service plan and any barriers to service delivery and assess the need to make modifications to support the safety, permanency, and well-being of the child
  • Review the current visiting plan and assess the need to make modifications to support family relationships
  • For a child who is not free for adoption, review the status of the concurrent permanency plan for the child, in the event the child is unlikely to be able to safely return home

 

 

When the family assessment determines that the child cannot be returned home safely and concurrent planning is warranted, the family assessment and service plan must include a description of the alternate plan to achieve permanency for the child.

 

(Back to Top)

North Carolina

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Concurrent planning shall continue until a permanent plan has been achieved.

At any permanency planning hearing, the court shall adopt concurrent permanent plans and shall identify the primary plan and secondary plan. Reunification shall remain a primary or secondary plan unless the court made findings under § 7B-901(c) (that aggravated circumstances make reasonable efforts for reunification unnecessary) or makes written findings that reunification efforts clearly would be unsuccessful or would be inconsistent with the juvenile’s health or safety. The court shall order the county Department of Social Services to make efforts toward finalizing the primary and secondary permanent plans and may specify efforts that are reasonable to achieve timely permanence for the juvenile.

 

(Back to Top)

North Dakota

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Efforts to place a child for adoption, with a fit and willing relative or other appropriate individual as a legal guardian, or in another planned permanent living arrangement, may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family.

 

(Back to Top)

Northern Mariana Islands

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

This issue is not addressed in the statutes reviewed.

 

(Back to Top)

Ohio

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

The public children’s services agency may develop a supplemental plan for locating a permanent family placement for a child concurrently with reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify families. The supplemental plan shall not be considered a part of the case plan and does not require agreement or approval by the parties to the case plan. Any supplemental plan shall be discussed and reviewed with the parent, guardian, or custodian.

 

 

A case plan for a child and family receiving services may include, as a supplement, a plan for locating a permanent family placement. The supplement shall not be considered part of the case plan.

 

(Back to Top)

Oklahoma

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

If the child is removed from the custody of the child’s parent, the court or the Department of Human Services, as applicable, shall immediately consider concurrent permanency planning, and, when appropriate, develop a concurrent plan so that permanency may occur at the earliest opportunity. Consideration should be given so that if reunification fails or is delayed, the placement made is the best available placement to provide permanency for the child.

The court shall further establish an initial permanency plan for the child, determine if aggravated circumstances exist pursuant to title 10A, § 1-4-809 and determine whether reunification services are appropriate for the child and the child’s family.

When reunification with a parent or legal guardian is the permanency plan and concurrent planning is indicated, the court shall determine if efforts are being made to place the child in accordance with the concurrent permanency plan, including whether appropriate in-State and out-of-State permanency options have been identified and pursued.

Every effort shall be made to place the child with a suitable relative of the child.

 

(Back to Top)

Oregon

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

In making the findings under this section, the court shall consider the efforts made to develop the concurrent case plan, including, but not limited to, identification of appropriate permanent placement options for the child or ward both inside and outside this State and, if adoption is the concurrent case plan, identification and selection of a suitable adoptive placement for the child or ward.

In addition to the findings of fact required by this section, the court may order the Department of Human Services to consider additional information in developing the case plan or concurrent case plan.

 

 

Except in cases when the plan is something other than to reunify the family, the Department of Human Services shall include in the case plan:

  • Appropriate services to allow the parent the opportunity to adjust the parent’s circumstances, conduct, or conditions to make it possible for the ward to return home safely within a reasonable time
  • A concurrent permanent plan to be implemented if the parent is unable or unwilling to adjust the parent’s circumstances, conduct, or conditions in such a way as to make it possible for the ward to return home safely within a reasonable time

 

(Back to Top)

Pennsylvania

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

This issue is not addressed in the statutes reviewed.

 

(Back to Top)

Puerto Rico

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

This issue is not addressed in the statutes reviewed.

 

(Back to Top)

Rhode Island

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Reasonable efforts to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts to reunite the family.

 

(Back to Top)

South Carolina

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

The Department of Social Services may proceed with efforts to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian concurrently with making efforts to prevent removal or to make it possible for the child to return safely to the home.

 

(Back to Top)

South Dakota

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

This issue is not addressed in the statutes reviewed.

 

(Back to Top)

Tennessee

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Reasonable efforts to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family.

 

(Back to Top)

Texas

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

Regardless of whether the goal stated in a child’s service plan is to return the child to the child’s parents or to terminate parental rights and place the child for adoption, the Department of Family and Protective Services shall concurrently provide to the child and to the child’s family as applicable:

  • Time-limited family reunification services, as defined by 42 U.S.C § 629a, for a period not to exceed the period within which the court must render a final order in or dismiss the suit affecting the parent-child relationship with respect to the child
  • Adoption promotion and support services, as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 629a

 

 

At each permanency hearing before a final order is rendered, the court shall review the permanency progress report to determine the appropriateness of the primary and alternative permanency goals for the child developed in accordance with department rule and whether the department has made reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan, including the concurrent permanency goals, in effect for the child.

 

 

In accordance with department rules, a child’s permanency plan must include concurrent permanency goals consisting of a primary permanency goal and at least one alternate permanency goal.

 

(Back to Top)

Utah

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

In addition to the primary permanency plan, the court shall establish a concurrent permanency plan that shall include:

  • A representative list of the conditions under which the primary permanency plan will be abandoned in favor of the concurrent permanency plan
  • An explanation of the effect of abandoning or modifying the primary permanency plan

In determining the primary permanency plan and concurrent permanency plan, the court shall consider:

  • The preference for kinship placement over nonkinship placement
  • The potential for a guardianship placement if the parent-child relationship is legally terminated and no appropriate adoption placement is available
  • The use of an individualized permanency plan, only as a last resort

The court may amend a minor’s primary permanency plan before the establishment of a final permanency plan under § 78A-6-314. The court is not limited to the terms of the concurrent permanency plan in the event that the primary permanency plan is abandoned.

If, at any time, the court determines that reunification is no longer a minor’s primary permanency plan, the court shall conduct a permanency hearing in accordance with § 78A-6-314 on or before the earlier of:

  • Thirty days after the day on which the court makes the determination described in this subsection
  • The day on which the provision of reunification services ends

 

(Back to Top)

Vermont

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

The long-term goal for a child found to be in need of care and supervision is a safe and permanent home. A disposition case plan shall include a permanency goal and an estimated date for achieving the permanency goal. The plan shall specify whether permanency will be achieved through reunification with a custodial parent, guardian, or custodian; adoption; permanent guardianship; or other permanent placement. In addition to a primary permanency goal, the plan may identify a concurrent permanency goal.

 

(Back to Top)

Virgin Islands

Concurrent Planning for Permanency for Children

To better understand this issue and to view it across States, download the PDF (781 KB) of this publication.

Current Through November 2016

 

This issue is not addressed in the statutes reviewed.

 

(Back to Top)

0


Leave a Reply

  • showme on February 9, 2021 @ 21:53:47

This post was created by support on January 1, 2021.