Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
24822512
label
Adoption 2002 Report - Final
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
24822512
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Adoption 2002 Report - Final
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Nicole Rabner's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
24822512
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7763278-20121035S-020-007-2015
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
848d90ed7364f7b7
ocrText
ADOPTION 2002
A Response to the Presidential Executive Memorandum
on Adoption
Issued December 14, 1996
HUMAN SERVICES. USA
$
HEALTH
OF
U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services
February 1997
HEALTH
THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
SERVICES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20201
FEB 12 1997
USA
The President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
20500
Dear Mr. President:
On December 14, 1996, you called upon the Department of Health
and Human Services to devise new ways to make adoption easier and
to move more children, more quickly out of foster care into
permanent homes. You challenged us to work with States,
communities, and advocates to create a plan that could reach the
goal of doubling the number of adoptions and permanent placements
for 54,000 children by the year 2002.
The enclosed report, Adoption 2002, is the Department's response
to your call to action. This report -- the culmination of an
intensive 60-day consultation process with over 600 foster and
adoptive parents, professionals, policy experts and advocates at
the national, state and local levels -- outlines a series of
policy and practice-related steps that will help us achieve our
shared goal of giving more children in foster care what every
child needs and deserves: loving parents and a safe and stable
home. We are grateful for the support of the Domestic Policy
Council, the First Lady and her staff, and each person with whom
we consulted.
This report also outlines new steps that will help States set and
meet urgent new adoption targets. It recommends sensible
financial incentives for States to raise adoption rates, as well
as a range of technical assistance to State child welfare
agencies and courts to help achieve our goals. It calls for
grants to States to help them remove the barriers to adoption.
And, it challenges the Congress to pass legislation that will
help move children through the child welfare system more quickly
and protect them when they leave.
As a nation, we have before us an opportunity to make a real
difference in the lives of our most vulnerable children by
strengthening and improving the child welfare system. Our plan
will focus critical attention and much needed resources toward
improving the life chances of thousands of children who have been
abused, neglected, and are languishing in foster care. We, at
the Department of Health and Human Services, look forward to
working with you to implement this critical initiative, and
salute your dedication to helping more children grow up in safe
and caring homes.
Sincerely
Donna DISCL E. Shalala
Enclosure
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Executive Summary
i
I.
Introduction
1
II.
Overview
3
III.
Issues and Challenges in the Child Welfare System
4
IV.
Recommendations for Action
9
V.
Conclusion
24
Appendices
A
Text of Presidential Directive on Adoption
B -
Adoption Correspondents
C
Adoption 2002 Focus Group Questions and Participant List
D
Themes Emerging from the Adoption 2002 Consultation Process
E
State Letters of Support
F
Federal Programs to Support Adoption
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Adoption 2002 responds to President Clinton's Executive Memorandum and takes its name
from one of its central goals -- to double by the year 2002 the number of children adopted or
placed in other permanent homes each year. On December 14, 1996, the President directed
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct wide consultations and report to him
with specific recommendations for strategies to move children more quickly from foster care
to permanent homes and to meet the goal of at least doubling adoptions and other permanent
placement over the next five years.
The Department developed Adoption 2002 as a blueprint for bipartisan Federal leadership in
adoption and other permanency planning for children in the public child welfare system. To
prepare this report, the Department of Health and Human Services consulted with child
welfare professionals, policy experts, advocates, and foster and adoptive parents at the
national, State and local levels. Adoption 2002 first examines the existing barriers to
expediting the placement of children from foster care to permanent homes. Delays in making
timely permanency decisions result from high caseloads for judges and caseworkers; incorrect
beliefs and outdated assumptions about the adoptability of children; the limited pool of
permanent families for children with special needs; and the varied interpretation of the
"reasonable efforts" requirement to reunify a child in foster care with his or her birth family
before another goal, such as adoption, can be pursued for the child.
Adoption 2002 outlines an agenda to help overcome these barriers and to accelerate the path
to permanency for all waiting children in the public child welfare system. First, the report
articulates a guiding set of principles centered on the needs of the child to give direction to
the overall agenda. These principles include that every child deserves a safe, permanent
family; that the child's health and safety should be the paramount considerations in all
placement and permanency planning decisions; and that foster care is a temporary situation --
it is not an appropriate place for children to grow up. Adoption 2002 establishes
unequivocally that the Federal goals for children in the child welfare system are safety,
permanency, and well-being.
The Adoption 2002 agenda is multifaceted to address the range of barriers and challenges that
exist in the child welfare system. The report presents strategies to establish, track, and meet
State-by-State annual, numerical targets for adoptions and other permanent placements --
targets that will bring us to a national doubling of adoptions and permanent placements in the
year 2002. To help States reach their targets, the Department commits to providing expanded
technical assistance, rewarding States for incremental increases in adoption levels with per-
child financial bonuses, and otherwise recognizing successful performance. The bonus system
proposed in Adoption 2002 is an example of common-sense government, as it not only
provides an incentive for increasing the number of adoptions, but also pays for itself, with the
cost of the bonuses offset by savings in foster care costs. Adoption 2002 also includes a
proposal to establish competitive grants available to States for dismantling barriers to
permanency.
i
In addition to providing incentives to States to meet new targets, Adoption 2002 outlines
ways in which the Federal government can assume leadership in breaking down barriers to
permanency for children in foster care. The Department will issue strong guidance on the
implementation of the law signed by President Clinton which established penalties for
denying or delaying the placement of a child based on race, color, or national origin.
Perhaps most important, while working with Congress on its legislative proposals that seek to
define the "reasonable efforts" provision, the Department will issue guidance that clarifies its
meaning. This guidance will make it clear that in determining whether and when to remove a
child from his or her family and whether and when to reunify the family, Federal law requires
that the child's health and safety shall be the paramount concern.
The Department also will issue model guidelines for State legislation to emphasize that the
child's health and safety is the paramount concern in decisions to terminate parental rights.
In addition, the Department commits to exploring alternative permanency options for children
for whom adoption is not possible. Furthermore, the Adoption 2002 report urges that the
Administration seek legislation that shortens the time before a child's first dispositional
hearing -- the hearing in which a permanency decision is first made -- from 18 months to 12
months and changes its name to a "permanency planning hearing."
Information gained by the Department in developing the details of the Adoption 2002 agenda
will form the basis of the public awareness campaign that the President directed the Secretary
of Health and Human Services to undertake, in cooperation with other heads of Federal
Departments or Agencies, as part of his Executive Memorandum. The strategies outlined in
Adoption 2002, coupled with a strong public information campaign and joined by efforts by
State and local officials and by community, business and religious leaders, will ensure that we
live up to President Clinton's call that "no child should be trapped in the limbo of foster care;
no child should be uncertain about what the word 'family' or 'parent' or 'home' means,
particularly when there are open arms waiting to welcome these children into safe and strong
households where they can build good, caring lives." (12/14/96)
ii
I. INTRODUCTION
The President's Executive Memorandum on Adoption
On December 14 1996, President Clinton issued a Executive Memorandum to the Secretaries
of Health and Human Services, Treasury, Labor, and Commerce and the Director of the
Office of Personnel Management to promote efforts to increase the number of children who
are adopted or permanently placed each year, to move children more rapidly from foster care
to permanent homes, to increase awareness about the tens of thousands of children waiting for
families, and to encourage all Americans to consider the rewards and responsibilities of
adoption. (See Appendix A for the text of the Executive Memorandum.) The Executive
Memorandum focuses most specifically on children in foster care who, often because of abuse
or neglect, cannot return home safely. The President's attention to this issue reflects the
urgent need to find safe, permanent, loving homes for our Nation's most vulnerable citizens.
The President directed the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, to
report to him with specific recommendations for strategies that move children more quickly
from foster care to permanent homes and at least double, by the year 2002, the number of
children who are adopted or permanently placed each year. This goal translates into an
increase in adoptions and permanent placements from 27,000 in 1996 to 54,000 in 2002. If
we are successful at implementing these and other strategies at the Federal, State, and local
levels, it may be possible for even more children to secure adoptive homes or other
permanent placements.
The President identified key issues to be examined in meeting the goal, including working
with Congress to make changes in Federal law; working with States to eliminate barriers to
finding children permanent placements; setting annual numerical targets; rewarding successful
performance; and raising public awareness. Recognizing the need to move quickly, the
Executive Memorandum called upon the Department, in consultation with State and civic
leaders, to prepare a report within 60 days. This report recommends actions to be taken to
move children more rapidly from foster care to permanent homes and to meet the goal of
placing 54,000 children from foster care, in the year 2002, in adoptive homes or other
permanent placements.
The Department Responds to the Executive Memorandum
Consistent with the Executive Memorandum, the Department undertook an intensive
consultation process, which included:
Mailing copies of the Executive Memorandum to over 2,000 adoption and
foster care professionals, placement agencies, child welfare advocates, adoptive
and foster parents, and national organizations. Recipients were invited to
submit comments on specific steps that can be taken to implement the
Executive Memorandum. Over 200 thoughtful responses were received via
mail, fax and the internet. (See Appendix B for a list of the respondents.)
1
Conducting consultations with a wide range of organizations and individuals,
including line workers, program managers, administrators from the eight States
with the largest foster care populations, child welfare administrators and staff
from large urban areas, representatives of Tribes and Tribal Organizations, and
representatives from national child welfare and adoption-related organizations,
advocacy groups, intergovernmental organizations, and several foundations.
(The questions that guided the consultations and the list of individuals and
organizations consulted appear in Appendix C.)
Conducting consultations with key congressional staff and reviewing legislative
proposals.
In addition, each of the ten Regional Offices conducted a series of focus groups with key
State and local adoption advocates and child welfare professionals. Over 300 people were
contacted through this regional outreach process.
This broad based consultation with a wide range of professionals, policy experts, advocates,
foster and adoptive parents, and other interested individuals grounded the Department's
examination of strategies and issues in the daily experiences of participants in the child
welfare system. The Department gained many useful ideas and suggestions through this
consultation process. Many of these ideas are reflected in the recommendations outlined in
this report.
The consultations will greatly inform the public awareness campaign that the President also
directed the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to undertake, forming
the foundation of information upon which the campaign can be built. (A more complete
summary of themes and issues raised during the Department's external consultation process
appears in Appendix D.)
2
II. OVERVIEW
Subsequent sections of this report have been organized in the following manner:
III.
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES IN THE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM
A discussion of some of the issues and challenges in doubling the number of
adoptions and in overcoming barriers to permanency.
IV.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION
A restatement of each of the elements in the President's Executive
Memorandum (in italics and preceded by a " - ") and the Department's
recommended action steps. Recommendations include possible legislative or
regulatory changes.
V.
CONCLUSION
Final thoughts on the report and how the process of broad consultation has
helped to energize and mobilize States, communities and private organizations
around the shared goal of helping children find stable, permanent, nurturing
families.
3
III. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES IN THE
CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM
The President's Executive Memorandum focuses attention on a special group of children
waiting to be adopted -- the approximately 100,000 children in the public foster care system
who cannot return safely to their own parents and homes. These children waiting for
adoption have often been in the foster care system for an extended period of time. They are
often "children with special needs," which means that they have characteristics that make
them more difficult to place. "Children with special needs" are older children (not infants),
children of minority heritage¹, children who are part of a sibling group, or children who have
physical, intellectual or emotional disabilities. Effective strategies to move these children to
permanence must be grounded in an understanding of the broader child welfare system and
the barriers that face children, especially children with special needs, waiting for permanent
homes.
A Continuum of Child Welfare Services
The child welfare system is designed to keep children safe and to help them achieve
permanence. The concept of permanence is best defined as a stable, legally-sanctioned
relationship with caring, protective adults. This may be achieved in a child's birth family,
but, for many children in foster care, it may occur through adoption or guardianship.
Children attain permanence in a more timely manner when sound child welfare practices are
deployed from the time the child initially comes to the attention of the child welfare system.
In order to meet the individualized needs of children and families, a range of child welfare
services are required, including:
Community-based prevention programs that support adults in their roles as parents to
help resolve problems before they lead to children being abused or neglected;
Effective child abuse and neglect investigation and risk assessment procedures that
allow for appropriate intervention;
Services for families who are in crisis, but can be safely strengthened and maintained
through the provision of intensive, but time-limited, services;
Foster care services that provide a temporary safe home for children and services to
their families, while parents resolve their crises and agencies and the courts decide in
a prompt and timely manner whether the parents can care for their children safely; and
'Children of minority heritage remain in care longer and are over-represented among the children in care
who are seeking permanency and require special attention; therefore, they are included among children with
special needs.
4
Adoption and guardianship opportunities for children who cannot or should not be
reunified with their parents and/or whose parents' rights to custody have been
terminated.
The ability of child welfare agencies to make timely determinations about permanency is
dependent upon the quality, availability and accessibility of services at any point on this
continuum. The principal goal of the child welfare system is to protect children and provide
a temporary safe haven for them while parents develop the ability to protect and care for their
children themselves. Each year, about sixty percent of the children in foster care will safely
return home, most within one year. However, some children will be unable to return to their
birth families safely. For these children, adoption or guardianship can be the key to a
permanent, loving family and the security necessary for healthy development.
Characteristics of Children Waiting for Adoption
The children waiting for adoption are primarily those whose parents have been unable or
unwilling to resolve the issues that precipitated placement. Of the more than 450,000
children who were in the foster care system in 1994, 100,000 could not return home without
jeopardizing their health, safety, and development. The majority of them had a goal of
adoption, with 27,000 being legally free and immediately available for adoption.
Most foster children awaiting adoption are considered children with "special needs" which
means they have characteristics that make them harder to place. The median age of children
who are legally free and awaiting adoption is almost nine years old. Slightly over half of the
children are of minority heritage. Two-thirds of the children in the special needs category
have medical problems, developmental delays and disabilities, and/or behavioral and
psychological problems. The most recent data, though preliminary, suggest that the
proportion of legally free children who have special needs is increasing. One factor is the
growing number of children orphaned by AIDS.
Barriers to Adoption and Permanence
In addition to the placement challenges posed by the characteristics of children with special
needs, there are a number of barriers to permanence spanning the social service and judicial
systems. Some of the most significant barriers that delay permanence include:
Delays in Child Welfare Agency Practices: Federal statute requires States to
provide "reasonable efforts" to make it possible for a child to return to his or her
horne. These efforts often take the form of actual services offered and/or provided to
the family, such as family counseling, respite care, and substance abuse treatment. If
an agency does not offer or provide these services in a timely fashion, the permanency
plan for a child may be impeded.
Delays also can result from well-intended but misguided practices to preserve families
through prolonged and extensive reunification services without adequate consideration
of the permanency needs of children. In these situations, adoption or an alternate
5
permanency plan is rarely considered until the 18-month dispositional hearing. High
caseloads and rapid staff turnover also causes delays.
Jurisdictional barriers between State child welfare systems may also result in delays in
implementing permanent plans for children. At times, there is an unwillingness to
effectively coordinate services to families and share limited resources across State
agencies.
Delays in Court/Judicial Practices: Delays throughout the judicial process, from the
initial determination of abuse or neglect through the resolution of the dispositional
hearing, often impede permanent placements. The courts' inability to attend to the
permanency planning needs of children result from the backlog of cases on a court's
calendar; strict evidentiary requirements established by State's Attorneys; and the
extensive time and resources required for an agency to prepare cases for termination of
parental rights. In addition, some States' adoption laws include timelines or other
family reunification effort requirements that may preclude an appropriately early
termination of parental rights.
Delays Related to Staff Beliefs and Attitudes: A limited view of which children are
adoptable may contribute to a reluctance to terminate parental rights outside that
range. If no adoptive home has been identified, child welfare workers and judges may
be reluctant to terminate the parental rights of the child's biological family because no
permanent alternatives exist.
Also detrimental is the belief by some that children are not disadvantaged by
remaining in foster care for long periods of time. Despite evidence that children in
foster care frequently move between placements, some believe that foster families will
be just as stable as adoptive homes.
Further, some workers and agencies have delayed or denied adoptive placements
because their priority was to seek families with backgrounds similar to those of the
children needing permanent homes, even though this practice is illegal.
Limited Pool of Permanent Families for Children with Special Needs: Despite
the requirement in title IV-B to recruit potential foster/adoptive families able to meet
the needs of children requiring out-of-home placement, the pool of permanent families
for children of minority heritage, older children, members of sibling groups, and
children with emotional, developmental, or physical challenges remains insufficient.
This report outlines an agenda to help overcome these barriers to adoption and to accelerate
the path to permanency for all waiting children.
6
Guiding Principles for the Adoption Initiative
Based on a firm understanding of the challenges that face children who await permanence in
the child welfare system, the Department will pursue the President's goals in a manner which
focuses on changing the outcomes for those children who are hardest to place; improves
decision-making for children currently entering the system; and reinforces best practices
throughout the system. The Federal goals for children in the child welfare system are safety,
permanency and well-being. Based on the extensive consultation, a set of principles has
emerged to provide a foundation for the important work of the Adoption 2002 Initiative.
Every child deserves a safe, permanent family.
The child's health and safety should be the paramount considerations in all placement
and permanency planning decisions.
Children in foster care deserve prompt, timely decision-making from the adults serving
them. The timeframes for placement and permanency planning decisions must be
respectful of the child's developmental needs and the child's sense of time.
Permanency planning efforts for children should begin as soon as a child enters foster
care and should be expedited by the provision of services to families.
Foster care is a temporary situation -- it is not an appropriate place for children to
grow up.
Permanency cannot be achieved for children without the partnership of child welfare
agencies, the courts and other service-providing agencies (e.g., housing, mental health
care, and substance abuse treatment).
Adoption is one of a number of pathways to permanency which also includes
reunification, guardianship, and permanent placement with relatives.
Adoptive families often require services and supports long after legalization to meet
the ongoing challenges of caring for their children.
Communication and information sharing about effective strategies, innovative
programs, and collaboration opportunities is critical to the success of this initiative.
The diversity and strengths of all communities must be tapped to create permanency
for children.
7
The Department is committed to working with all sectors of the American community to
implement the activities of the Adoption 2002 Initiative in a way that adheres to the
principles of sound child welfare practice. The next section of this report presents a series of
recommendations to help remove the barriers to permanency for children in foster care and
support improvements throughout the child welfare system. The Adoption 2002 Initiative will
be a powerful tool to help the Nation realize the goals of safety, permanency, and well-being
for every child.
8
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION
Today, therefore, I direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in
consultation with State and civic leaders, to report to me within 60 days on
actions to be taken to move children more rapidly from foster care to
permanent homes and at least to double, by the year 2002, the number of
children in foster care who are adopted or permanently placed out of the
public foster care system.
-- President Clinton
December 14, 1996
President Clinton's Executive Memorandum requested recommendations from the Department
in a number of specific areas. Many of the strategies highlighted in the President's Executive
Memorandum focus on activities that the Federal government can undertake. However, the
President also emphasized that placing children in nurturing families is a national priority and
responsibility that requires efforts on the part of State and local governments as well as
community, business, and religious groups. The Federal role in this initiative is largely one
of supporting States and communities by providing financial incentives, technical assistance,
policy and programmatic leadership, and recognition of successful efforts. In this section of
the Department's report, each element of the President's Executive Memorandum is cited and
specific proposed actions are outlined and discussed.
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF ADOPTIONS - To increase the number of
children who are adopted or permanently placed each year, this report should
include, but should not necessarily be limited to, recommendations in the following
areas:
Setting Goals (a) Plans to work with States on setting and reaching State specific
numerical targets,
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To set numerical targets leading to a doubling in the number of children who are adopted or
placed in alternative permanent homes by the year 2002:
By September 30, 1997 the Department, through its Regional Offices and
collaboratively with the States, will establish preliminary numerical targets for
adoption and guardianship. All States will establish both preliminary baseline data for
fiscal year 1997 on the number of adoptions and guardianships and proposed annual
incremental targets for fiscal years 1998-2002, leading to a national doubling in the
annual number of adoptions and guardianships completed by fiscal year 2002.
9
Discussion:
Establishing numerical targets with States, including annual benchmarks to move States to the
goal of doubling the number of adoptions from the foster care system by the year 2002,
provides an outcome-driven framework for the Adoption 2002 Initiative. This approach also
offers a way to link adoption efforts at the Federal, State, and community levels in pursuit of
specific results for children.
In order to establish baselines and targets, the Department will form partnership agreements
with the States, building on the work already underway between the Department and the
States. In December 1995, the Children's Bureau organized a national meeting of State
adoption managers, national advocacy organizations, private non-profit organizations, adoptive
parents and Federal staff. The participants produced an outcome-focused framework for
adoption services for children with special needs. Because of its emphasis on results, this
framework can be the foundation upon which to base results-oriented activities under the
President's Executive Memorandum.
The Regional Offices of the Administration for Children and Families have launched
discussions with the States about the President's Executive Memorandum and more goal-
directed methods to increase the number of children who are permanently placed. Some
States and local jurisdictions have already strongly endorsed the President's initiative with
letters of support. (See Appendix E.)
Technical Assistance (a)
using the technical assistance of the Department of
Health and Human Services National Resource Centers to make information on
best practices available to States and to engage community leaders, parents, and
the business and faith communities;
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To assist States and communities to reach their targets for increased numbers of adoptions
and alternative permanent placements for children in foster care:
The Department will provide the best adoption expertise in the nation to State
agencies, courts and communities to improve the timeliness of permanency decisions
and to increase the number of adoptions and other permanent placements for children
in foster care unable to be reunified with their families.
Technical assistance will support the development of collaboratives that encourage
placements across geographical boundaries; models to improve the recruitment of
families for children with special needs; and the development and dissemination of
model legislation, best practice guidelines, multi-disciplinary training curricula and
implementation guides on the Multiethnic Placement Act (as amended) and the Indian
Child Welfare Act.
10
The President's fiscal year 1998 budget seeks $10 million annually for three years (FY
1998-FY 2000) to support these efforts.
The Department will also review and may revise the title IV-E training regulations to
assure a comprehensive approach to child welfare training with a focus on the
knowledge and skills necessary to achieve timely permanency planning.
Discussion:
The Department's proposed technical assistance strategy recognizes the need to provide the
best information available to agencies, courts, institutions and professionals who make key
decisions daily about children's futures. Respondents in the Department's consultation
frequently cited the need for the Federal government to foster the sharing of information and
best practices across the country.
Some of the specific activities the Department expects to undertake include:
Providing technical assistance to child welfare agencies and to courts to implement an
outcome-focused approach related to the best interests of the child, permanency,
timeliness, and quality of care.
Developing and disseminating materials such as:
-
model guidelines for family assessment;
-
guidelines for State legislation relating to terminating parental rights and
guardianship;
-
legislative options for States developing stand-by guardianships for
children with terminally ill parents;
-
curricula for collaborative training with agencies, attorneys, and judges;
-
effective judicial and agency practices;
-
recruitment and family development models;
-
information for courts and agencies related to the Multiethnic Placement
Act (as amended) and the Indian Child Welfare Act;
-
guidelines for conducting administrative reviews; and
-
information on the adoption tax credit.
Convening Regional forums to encourage peer-to-peer exchanges of information and
successful strategies.
Awarding grants to multi-State and intrastate collaboratives (operated by the States or
other entities) that encourage placements across geographical boundaries; and to local
collaboratives designed to recruit families for children with special needs.
11
Financial Incentives (b) Proposals to provide per child financial incentives to
States for increases in the number of adoptions from the public welfare system.
Options considered should have little to no net costs, as increases in the number of
adoptions from the public system will reduce foster care costs, thereby offsetting
much if not all of the incentive payments;
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To encourage States to meet their adoption goals and to reward them when they do:
The Department proposes a bonus for children adopted from the public foster care
system. For each child adopted over the base number for that year a per child bonus
would be awarded to the State. A higher bonus would be paid to the extent there are
increases among children receiving title IV-E adoption assistance. The bonuses would
be established as an amendment to the title IV-E Adoption Assistance program. States
could use their bonus funds to improve or increase services, including post-legal
adoption services, to children and families in the child welfare system.
Discussion:
The Department is proposing a system that would provide a per-child bonus to each State that
increases its annual number of adoptions from the foster care system. This proposal places an
emphasis on special needs children by providing an extra incentive for their adoption.
The bonuses would be paid beginning in 1999 to the States in the year following the year in
which they were earned. The bonus money would be available for use by the State for any
activity or service which is allowable under title IV-B, of the Social Security Act. These
include a wide range of services to children and families, including post-legal adoption
services.
The President's budget includes $108 million for bonus payments to the States. Based on this
proposal, each State would receive a bonus for every child adopted from the State foster care
system above the baseline or the annual starting point. A supplemental bonus would be paid
to the extent these increases were among children adopted from the State foster care agency
who receive assistance under a title IV-E adoption subsidy agreement (i.e., a special needs
child).
The baseline or starting point for determining each year's incentive funds will be determined
based on data submitted by the States to the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and
Reporting System (AFCARS), the federally-mandated foster care and adoption data collection
system. For the purposes of establishing baseline data in FY 1997 only, a State that has not
yet submitted reliable AFCARS data may produce data from an alternative source, provided
that it can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the alternative data provided
are reliable.
12
The Department's proposal provides a concrete reward to States for good performance,
without increasing the expenditures of Federal dollars. The cost of bonuses paid will be
offset by savings from reduced foster care costs.
Implementing the Multiethnic Placement Act "(c) A proposal to ensure
continued aggressive implementation of the Multiethnic Placement Act, as amended
by the Interethnic Adoption Provision of the Small Business Job Protection Act;..." "
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To continue the Department's aggressive implementation of the Multiethnic Placement Act
(MEPA), as amended by the Interethnic Adoption Provision of the Small Business Job
Protection Act:
The Department will expedite the issuance of guidance regarding the amendments to
MEPA contained in the Interethnic Adoption Provision to supplement information
earlier disseminated to the States. This guidance will focus on the implications of the
deletion of permissible consideration language, the new penalty structures, and the
approach the Department will take to implementing systematic compliance review
protocols.
The Department's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) will expedite the revision and
implementation of compliance reviews. In addition, the Department's Administration
for Children and Families (ACF) will include in its monitoring review process a focus
on MEPA compliance.
The ACF and OCR will provide States with technical assistance over the next several
months regarding compliance with MEPA.
The OCR will continue its expeditious review of individual complaints.
13
Discussion
The Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 (MEPA) was designed to decrease the length of time
that children wait to be adopted, prevent discrimination in the placement of children on the
basis of race, color, or national origin, and facilitate the identification and recruitment of
foster and adoptive families who can meet children's needs. The MEPA, as amended by the
Interethnic Adoption Provision of the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, prohibits
delaying or denying the placement of any child on the basis of race, color or national origin;
requires States to diligently recruit prospective adoptive and foster care families who reflect
the ethnic and racial diversity of children in the State for whom foster and adoptive homes
are needed; and requires the Federal government to impose fiscal penalties for States not in
compliance with the anti-discrimination prohibition.
After the passage of MEPA, the Department worked aggressively to ensure that State laws
and policies conformed to the statute's provisions. The Department issued guidance in April
1995, notified States of their non-compliance, and worked with 27 States and the District of
Columbia to achieve policy compliance. In fiscal year 1997, the OCR will begin reviewing
agencies for practice compliance. Beginning in 1995, Regional Offices reviewed State title
IV-B plans to ensure that child welfare services programs included recruitment plans for
adoptive and foster care parents. The Department will undertake a similar course of action to
ensure compliance with the Interethnic Adoption Provision.
Since the enactment of the Interethnic Adoption Provision, the Department has issued an
Information Memorandum to the States and title IV-E agencies informing them of the changes
to the MEPA. The Department is presently drafting guidance to address how the changes to
the discrimination prohibition (particularly the repeal of the "permissible consideration"
language that accommodated the consideration of cultural, ethnic, or racial background as one
of a number of factors used to determine the best interests of a child) should be implemented.
The Administration for Children and Families also is developing processes for assessing
penalties, implementing corrective action plans, and conducting systematic monitoring of State
practices. The Office for Civil Rights is revising its compliance review instrument that
focuses specifically on transracial adoptive and foster care placements.
Tracking Progress of the States (d) Plans to compile and publish an annual
State-by-State report on success in meeting the numerical targets;
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To publicize the progress made by each State and the Nation as a whole in reaching
numerical targets:
The Department will issue an annual State-by-State report, beginning in the Spring of
1999, on the Nation's progress in meeting the goals of the President's Executive
Memorandum. The annual report will provide State-by-State figures on key measures
14
of success including not only the number of children in foster care who are adopted or
placed in guardianship, but measures that reflect the experience of children in the child
welfare system, such as the length of time in care and the timeliness of permanency
decisions.
The report will be disseminated widely to national and State policymakers, advocates,
State agencies and courts and other interested individuals through targeted mailings
and distribution by the National Adoption Information Clearinghouse. The report will
also be made available electronically through the Department's homepage on the
World Wide Web.
Discussion:
The focus on collecting and using quality data in the area of adoption and permanency will
advance our national efforts to strengthen the collection and availability of reliable child
welfare data. To ensure that the public stays focused on how well the Nation and the
individual States are meeting established goals, the Department is committed to disseminating
timely information as widely as possible.
Recognizing Success (e) Plans to recognize successful States.
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To foster public recognition of successful, innovative practices:
The Department will work in collaboration with foundations and intergovernmental
organizations to establish annual awards to be made each November during the
commemoration of National Adoption Month. Beginning in 1997, these awards will
recognize States, local agencies, courts, private organizations, employers and others
who are making key contributions to national efforts to support adoption and to
promote permanency for children in the child welfare system.
Discussion:
In addition to publishing annual findings on how the States are progressing toward numerical
adoption and guardianship goals, the Department is enthusiastic about the prospect of
recognizing innovations in adoption and permanency planning practices by States, and other
public and private entities. This will be an opportunity to identify and publicly recognize
outstanding practices and will help provide a means to publicize successful actions that can be
replicated in other parts of the country.
15
MOVING CHILDREN WHO CANNOT RETURN HOME MORE QUICKLY
TOWARD PERMANENT HOMES - To move children more rapidly from foster
care to permanent homes, the report shall also recommend changes to Federal law
and regulations and other actions needed to emphasize the importance of planning
for permanency as soon as a child enters the foster care system. The Secretary's
report should include, but should not necessarily be limited to, recommendations in
the following areas:
Removing Barriers to Permanency (a) Plans to provide States with funding to
identify barriers to permanency and to develop targeted strategies to find
permanent homes for children who have been in foster care a particularly long
time;
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To assist State child welfare agencies, courts and nonprofit organizations to identify and
overcome barriers to permanency:
Through its existing annual discretionary grant award process, the Department will
award new and continuing grants under the Adoption Opportunities Act to assist in
overcoming barriers to adoption for special needs children. Grants made under the
Adoption Opportunities Act address a variety of issues such as: improving the
recruitment of minority families; encouraging collaboration to strengthen services to
children with disabilities; developing non-adversarial options for permanency, such as
concurrent planning, voluntary relinquishment of children and family mediation; and
developing training and resource materials to help adoptive parents meet the needs of
adopted children who are of a different race or ethnicity.
For fiscal year 1998, the President's budget requests $10 million in additional funds
for the Adoption Opportunities Act to support a special cluster of barrier reduction
grants to the States. These grants would be awarded competitively to State agencies to
develop model strategies to reform permanency planning and adoption services, both
for children currently in foster care who are unable to return to their families and for
children just entering the foster care system. To be eligible to compete for these
grants, applicant States would need to participate with the Department in the setting of
numerical targets to double the number of adoptions and permanent placements by the
year 2002, develop a goal-oriented plan for meeting their goals, and involve the courts
in developing their applications and strategies. Up to 15 grants would be awarded.
The Department will also continue to work with the States to fully implement the
Court Improvement Program, authorized in conjunction with the Family Preservation
and Support Act. This program provides a grant to the highest court in each
participating State to assist in assessing and addressing barriers to permanency from
the perspective of the courts. The program has helped to bring courts and agencies
16
together to examine barriers to permanency and to develop a plan to address these
issues. States are now completing their assessments, and are ready to move forward in
implementing changes in the court's handling of child welfare cases.
Discussion:
Identifying and addressing barriers is crucial in our national efforts to move children in foster
care more quickly to permanent homes, whether this be through reunification, adoption, or
placement in an alternative permanent home. Many different factors can serve as a barrier to
permanency, ranging from worker decision-making, to the lack of availability of needed
services for families, to court delays, to the supply of adoptive families. Addressing barriers
to permanency, therefore, requires a multifaceted strategy where the Federal government can
make a number of important contributions.
For example, during the Department's consultation, many individuals mentioned that the
Court Improvement Program has been helpful both in focusing the judicial system's attention
on child welfare issues and in bringing courts and child welfare agencies together to identify
and address barriers to permanency. To augment the important work already begun, the
Department is proposing the awarding of competitive grants to up to 15 States that form an
effective collaboration between the State agency and the State court and that involve other
key stakeholders, including Tribes, community representatives, and citizen review boards.
These grants will be used to develop model strategies to reform permanency planning and
adoption services, i.e., concurrent planning, expanding court capacity, partnerships for
recruitment, and modification of State law and policy. The focus will be on children waiting
as well as children newly entering the foster care system, to ensure more timely decision-
making. These decisions will reflect the best interest of the child and provide appropriate
services to support moving children more quickly from foster care to permanent homes.
Addressing Permanency Planning Earlier Through Timely Hearings (b)
Proposals to shorten the period of time between a child's placement in foster care
and his or her initial hearing at which a permanency determination is made; (c) A
proposal to clarify that the purpose of "dispositional hearings" is to plan for
permanency and, as appropriate, to consider referrals for family mediation,
termination of parental rights, adoption, legal guardianship, or other permanent
placements;
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To encourage more timely permanency planning and improved judicial decision-making for
children in foster care:
The Department recommends that the Federal statute requiring an 18-month
dispositional hearing be amended to require that this hearing be held no later than 12
17
months after a child's placement in foster care and will work with Congress toward
that goal.
The Department further recommends amending the Federal statute to change the name
of the "dispositional hearing" to "permanency planning hearing."
The Department will provide guidance to the States to :
-
Clarify the purpose of the dispositional hearing;
-
Clarify the purpose of the 6-month administrative review; and
-
Clarify that States have the flexibility to increase the frequency of the
dispositional hearing as well as the 6-month administrative review.
The Department proposes several additional activities specifically addressing court-
related barriers to permanency:
-
Convening a forum of leaders in the legal profession, judges, attorneys, agency
administrators and advocates to develop strategies for adding to the courts'
focus on improved outcomes for children.
Identifying and disseminating information about innovative reforms and model
practices derived from the assessments of the Court Improvement Programs and
other efforts.
Finally, the Department encourages the President to communicate with State chief
justices and national legal organizations to emphasize the importance of elevating the
status of child welfare proceedings (including child protection, permanency planning,
termination of parental rights and adoption proceedings) within the courts.
Discussion:
The President's Executive Memorandum called on the Department to examine issues around
the timeliness of judicial hearings affecting the duration of a child's stay in foster care and his
or her movement towards permanency. Specifically, the Executive Memorandum instructed
the Department to examine ways to shorten the period of time between a child's placement in
foster care and the initial dispositional hearing at which permanency planning issues are
addressed.
The Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-272) created the framework
for existing Federal child welfare programs and requirements. Among the provisions of the
law are requirements for administrative and court reviews to ensure that children's needs for
permanent homes are addressed. The law requires that, within 18 months of placement, and
every 12 months thereafter, a dispositional hearing must be held to determine the child's
permanent placement and, specifically, whether:
18
-
the child should be returned to the parent;
-
the child should be continued in foster care for a specified period;
-
the child should be placed for adoption; or
-
the child should (because of the child's special needs or circumstances) be continued
in foster care on a permanent or long-term basis.
This hearing was intended to be the time when a definitive permanent plan for the child
would be set by the court. However, these permanent plans are not always set within the 18
month timeframe, sometimes because of the confusion surrounding the purpose of the
dispositional hearing.
The Department's proposals reflect themes heard during the Department's outreach and
consultation process. There was significant agreement that the permanent plan for a child
should be set earlier than 18 months after a child's entry into foster care. We also heard
support for providing guidance that would clarify the purpose of the dispositional hearings.
While the Department believes that the changes outlined above will encourage more timely
decisions regarding permanency planning for children, it must be emphasized that services
must begin as soon as the child enters substitute care.
In addition to addressing the timeliness of hearings, there is widespread support for reviewing
and strengthening court practices to achieve better outcomes for children in the child welfare
system.
Clarifying "Reasonable Efforts" (d) A proposal to clarify the "reasonable
efforts" requirement and other Federal policy as it relates to permanency and
safety;
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To ensure the protection of children by clarifying or proposing changes to legislation
regarding "reasonable efforts," reunification of children with their families, and termination of
parental rights:
The Department will issue administrative guidance within 60 days that clarifies the
"reasonable efforts" provision of title IV-E of the Social Security Act. This
clarification will advance the goal of giving every child in our nation's public child
welfare system a safe and permanent home by making it clear that in determining
whether and when to remove a child from his or her family, whether and when to
reunify the family, and whether and when to seek an alternative permanent plan, the
child's health and safety shall be the paramount concern.
Members of Congress have developed a number of proposals to address this issue and
the Department will work with them to achieve statutory changes reinforcing this
administrative clarification.
19
The Department in particular will work with Congress to more clearly and
appropriately illustrate the circumstances in which "reasonable efforts" to preserve or
reunify a family may not be appropriate or required. The Child Abuse Prevention and
Treatment Act (CAPTA), as amended by the Congress in 1996, already requires that,
as a condition for receiving funds under the Basic State Grant Program:
1)
the State may not mandate the reunification of a surviving child with parents
found to have aided or abetted or committed murder, voluntary manslaughter,
or serious bodily injury to their children; and
2)
conviction of any of the above mentioned felonies constitutes grounds for the
termination of parental rights.
The Department will work towards amending the title IV-E provisions of the Social
Security Act to similarly illustrate to States this list of circumstances in which
reunification may not be appropriate.
The Department will also issue model guidelines for State legislation that will advance
the goal of giving every child in our Nation's public child welfare system a safe and
permanent home by making it clear that in determining whether and when to terminate
parental rights, the child's health and safety should be the paramount concern.
Discussion:
Since 1980, Federal law has required that "reasonable efforts" be made both: (1) to prevent
the unnecessary removal of children from their families; and (2) to reunify children, when
possible, who have been placed in foster care with their families. The goal of this provision
was to reduce the phenomenon of children languishing unnecessarily in foster care and to
avoid the unnecessary disruption of parental rights. The Federal "reasonable efforts"
requirement has been both heralded as being essential to effective child welfare practice and
criticized for being unclear and a barrier to child safety and permanence.
Consultation revealed that there is wide variation in how the current "reasonable efforts" law
is interpreted by caseworkers, agencies, and judges around the country. There was a strong
consensus that some clarification of the reasonable efforts requirements is needed to allow for
better, more timely decision-making in individual cases, although there were divergent
opinions on what degree of specificity would be useful from the Federal government.
The proposals outlined above will send a clear message that Federal law requires that the
health and safety of children shall be the paramount concern in making decisions about
whether and when to remove children from families, whether and when to reunify the
families, and whether and when to seek alternative permanency plans. They also will make
clear to the States the Administration's view that the child's health and safety should be
paramount in determining whether and when to terminate parental rights.
20
Standards for Securing Permanency (e) Plans to ensure that States give
appropriate weight to permanency planning by establishing standards for securing
permanency through adoption or guardianship, once a decision has been made that
a child cannot be returned home;
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To ensure that States give appropriate attention to permanency planning for children in foster
care who are unable to return home to their families:
The Department recommends that title IV-E of the Social Security Act be amended to
require "reasonable efforts" to secure a permanent home for children in foster care
when adoption or another permanent placement is the goal for the child.
The Department will propose regulatory changes to clarify that States may
simultaneously work toward reunification and develop an alternative plan for children
in the event that they are not able to be reunified. The Department will also
disseminate effective models of practice.
The Department will work with States to encourage use of the Federal Parent Locator
Service at the time a child enters foster care to locate absent parents and other
relatives who may be able to provide permanent homes for the child.
Discussion:
As discussed above, there is a Federal standard that requires States to make reasonable efforts
to prevent the removal of children and to reunify families when consistent with child safety.
However, there is currently no comparable standard or requirement to find alternative
permanent homes for children once the decision has been made that they cannot safely be
reunified with their families. Too often, children are made to wait in foster care for long
periods of time, even after the decision has been made that adoption is the most appropriate
permanency option for the child. Passage of legislation to require reasonable efforts to secure
a permanent home for children will help to ensure that States give priority attention to the
issue of permanency.
In addition to setting a standard for permanency in the law, the Department will clarify its
policies to ensure that States understand that they may concurrently work with families to
help them safely resume care of their children and develop an alternative plan for permanency
in the event that the child and family cannot be reunified. This practice of concurrent
planning was frequently endorsed during the Department's consultation as an effective means
to ensure timely decision-making for children. In addition, the Department will share
information and best practices with the States on how to conduct concurrent planning.
21
An additional step the Department proposes to assist States in making timely and informed
decisions about permanency is to work with State child welfare and child support enforcement
agencies to facilitate use of the Federal Parent Locator Service to identify and locate absent
parents or other relatives who may be interested in providing a permanent home for a child in
foster care. (The Federal Parent Locator Service is currently used by State child support
enforcement officials.) Even if an absent parent or other relative is unable to provide a home
for the child, ruling out this alternative early in a child's placement will allow the agency and
court to move expeditiously towards adoption or another permanent alternative.
Alternative Forms of Permanency (f) Plans to examine alternative permanency
arrangements, such as guardianship, when adoption is not possible.
PROPOSED ACTION STEPS
To gain a better understanding of alternative permanency arrangements:
The Department proposes to continue to study and evaluate guardianship as an
alternative form of permanency when adoption is not possible. The Department will
work with the States of Illinois, North Carolina, and Delaware in evaluating the
assisted guardianship efforts being undertaken as part of these States' child welfare
demonstration waivers.
The Department may seek a limited expansion of the child welfare demonstration
waiver authority to test additional approaches to permanency and timely decision-
making if current authority is found to be insufficient.
The Department will also continue to explore relative and/or kinship care as a means
of ensuring permanency for children. Demonstration grants regarding kinship care are
permitted under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, as reauthorized in
1996. The Department intends to fund projects in the future under this authority to
improve our knowledge of the use of kinship care in ensuring children's safety and
permanency. Examples of topics that might be addressed under this demonstration
authority include the development of best practices for the licensing and approval of
relatives' homes and the development of training curricula focused on permanency for
children in relative care.
22
Discussion:
When adoption is not appropriate, children need stable, permanent living arrangements.
Examples include some children placed in long-term kinship care arrangements and some
older children with special needs without realistic adoption prospects. This is also an
important issue for American Indian children under Tribal jurisdiction. Many Tribes consider
kinship care the cultural equivalent of adoption.
Many people with whom the Department consulted recommended that the Federal government
help pay for the cost of subsidized guardianship arrangements, as it does for adoption, under
title IV-E of the Social Security Act. The Department does not recommend this step at this
time. Because guardianships are easily revoked and, therefore, do not offer the legal
protection of adoption, the criteria for the use of guardianship as a form of permanency must
be carefully examined. There is limited understanding of the factors which shape decisions
about adoption and guardianship by relatives. Premature changes in title IV-E
reimbursement policies might result in unintentional incentives to shift children into
guardianship arrangements when an adoption could be achieved.
Several current and proposed activities will expand our knowledge and experience regarding
guardianship and its relationship to relative care. Using demonstration authority, the
Department will work with the States to gain better information on how guardianships are
currently used; the relationship between guardianships, relative care and adoption; and the
important ways in which guardianships differ from adoption. Based on these demonstration
efforts, the Department will consider whether criteria might be developed regarding when and
for which children such alternatives are appropriate. Co-guardianships (which are being used
in several places for children with incarcerated or terminally ill parents) and family mediation
methods which emphasize permanency options for children will also be explored.
Under the child welfare waiver demonstrations, Illinois, North Carolina, and Delaware are
currently exploring alternative permanency options that include support for subsidized
guardianships (similar to adoption assistance agreements) primarily for kinship care providers.
Several other States have applied for similar demonstrations. All waiver demonstrations will
be rigorously evaluated. Because we believe that this approach allows for a careful and
thorough examination of alternative permanency arrangements and other emerging topics in
the field of child welfare, the Department may also seek a limited expansion in the number of
child welfare demonstration waivers that may be granted if the existing authority is
insufficient to fully examine alternative permanency arrangements.
Finally, it should be noted that the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193) included a provision requiring the States to
consider giving preference to relatives as caretakers for children eligible to receive foster care
maintenance subsidies under title IV-E of the Social Security Act. Policy guidance for the
States is currently under development. This is the first Federal legislative preference for
placing children with relatives. We hope that it will lead to an earlier identification and
location of relatives who are willing and able to provide permanent, nurturing homes for
children in the child welfare system.
23
V. CONCLUSION
The Adoption 2002 report to the President presents a number of recommendations for
statutory, regulatory, and administrative actions necessary to double the number of children
placed into permanent homes annually by the year 2002. Presidential attention to the needs
of children who have been abused and neglected and are languishing in foster care has the
potential to change the life experiences of thousands of children.
The Adoption 2002 Initiative builds on the concerns reflected in Congress and by States and
communities in their efforts to increase adoption and permanency outcomes for children.
Congress is considering important legislative changes in this arena. States are moving to
reform their systems by streamlining administrative and judicial procedures to move children
more quickly to permanence as well as by amending their laws governing the termination of
parents' rights. Foundations are working with the States to ensure that the experience of
children in foster care is time limited and results in stability for children. Innovations in the
recruitment of adoptive families continue in both community efforts, such as One Church,
One Child, and the development of internet listing services for waiting children.
As a Nation, we have an important opportunity to focus the energy of Federal, State and local
governments with that of professional organizations, faith communities, and neighborhood
leadership to make a difference for our most vulnerable children.
The time is now. The chance is ours.
24
Appendix A
Text of Presidential Directive on Adoption
WASHINGTON, Dec. 14 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a memorandum from President Clinton to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Commerce
and the director of the Office of Personnel Management:
During this Holiday Season, as we reflect on the importance of family in our own lives, let us remember the
tens of thousands of our Nation's children in the public child welfare system who live without permanent and
caring families. Foster care provides temporary shelter and relief for children who have been abused or neglected.
I am committed to giving the children waiting in our Nation's foster care system what every child in America
deserves --loving parents and a healthy, stable home. The goal for every child in our Nation's public welfare
system is permanency in a safe and stable home, whether it be returning home, adoption, legal guardianship, or
another permanent placement. While the great majority of children in foster care will return home, for about one
in five, returning home is not an option, and they will need another home, one that is caring and safe. These
children wait far too long --
typically over 3 years, but for many children much longer -- to be placed in permanent homes. Each year, State
child welfare agencies secure homes for less than one-third of the children whose goal is
adoption or an alternate permanent placement. I know we can do better.
I believe we should increase the number of children who are adopted or permanently placed from the public
foster care system each year toward the goal of at least doubling that number by the year 2002. Returning home
is not an option for about 100,000 of the over 450,000 children in the Nation's foster care system, yet only
approximately 20,000 were adopted last year and approximately 7,000 were permanently placed in legal
guardianships. While the number of adoptions each year has been constant for many years, I believe that by
working with States to identify and break down barriers to permanent placements, setting annual numerical
targets, rewarding successful performance, and raising public awareness, we can meet the target of at least 54,000
children adopted or permanently placed from the public foster care system by the year 2002.
Today, therefore, I direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with State and civic
leaders, to report to me within 60 days on actions to be taken to move children more rapidly from foster care to
permanent homes and at least to double, by the year 2002, the number of children in foster care who are adopted
or permanently placed out of the public foster care system.
I. To increase the number of children who are adopted or permanently placed each year, this report should
include, but should not necessarily be limited to, recommendations in the following areas:
(a) Plans to work with States on setting and reaching State specific numerical targets, using the technical
assistance of the Department of Health and Human Services National Resource Centers to make information
on best practices available to States and to engage community leaders, parents, and the business and faith
communities;
(b) Proposals to provide per child financial incentives to States for increases in the number of adoptions from
the public welfare system. Options considered should have little to no net costs, as increases in the number of
adoptions from the public system will reduce foster care costs, thereby offsetting much if not all of the
incentive payments;
(c) A proposal to ensure continued aggressive implementation of the Multi-ethnic Placement Act, as amended
by the Inter-ethnic Adoption Provision of the Small Business Job Protection Act;
(d) Plans to compile and publish an annual State-by-State report on success in meeting the numerical targets;
and
(e) Plans to recognize successful States.
II. To move children more rapidly from foster care to permanent homes, the report shall also recommend changes
to Federal law and regulations and other actions needed to emphasize the importance of planning for
permanency as soon as a child enters the foster care system. The Secretary's report should include, but should
not necessarily be limited to, recommendations in the following areas:
(a) Plans to provide States with funding to identify barriers to permanency and to develop targeted strategies
to find permanent homes for children who have been in foster care a particularly long time;
(b) Proposals to shorten the period of time between a child's placement in foster care and his or her initial
hearing at which a permanency determination is made;
(c) A proposal to clarify that the purpose of "dispositional hearings" is to plan for permanency and, as
appropriate, to consider referrals for family mediation, termination of parental rights, adoption, legal
guardianship,or other permanent placements;
(d) A proposal to clarify the "reasonable efforts" requirement and other Federal policy as it relates to
permanency and safety;
(e) Plans to ensure that States give appropriate weight to permanency planning by establishing standards for
securing permanency through adoption or guardianship, once a decision has been made that a child cannot be
returned home; and
(f) Plans to examine alternative permanency arrangements, such as guardianship, when adoption is not
possible.
Last month, I signed a proclamation designating November as National Adoption Month -- a time to increase
awareness about the tens of thousands of children waiting for families and to encourage
all Americans to consider the rewards and responsibilities of adoption. However, adoption must be a national
concern throughout the year. Therefore, I direct:
(a) The Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop and lead a public awareness effort, including use of
public service announcements, print materials, and the Internet;
(b) The Secretaries of Health and Human Services and the Treasury in consultation with State, civic, and private
sector leaders to develop and disseminate information about the new adoption tax credits and other adoption
benefits;
(c) The Secretaries of Labor and Commerce, in consultation with State and civic leaders, to
identify and recognize companies in the private sector with model policies to encourage and ease
adoption among employees; and
(d) The Director of the Office of Personnel Management to direct all Federal agencies to provide information
and support to Federal employees who are prospective adoptive parents.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON
Appendix B
Adoption Correspondents by Category:
January 15, 1997
A. Service Providers:
1. Hope for the Children, Rantoul, IL
2. Northeast Ohio Adoption Services, Warren, OH
3. Tressler Lutheran Services, York, PA
4. Tressler Lutheran Services, Baltimore, MD
5. Lutheran Adoption Service, Southfield, MI
6. Family Builders By Adoption, Oakland, CA
7. Children's Home Society of Florida, Jacksonville, FL
8. Common Sense Adoption Services, Mechanicsburg, PA
9. Maine Adoption Placement Service, Bangor, ME
10. Center for Family Connections, Inc., Cambridge, MA
11. Lutheran Social Service of Kansas and Oklahoma, Wichita, KS
12. Society for Seamen's Children, Staten Island, NY
13. Miami Valley Adoption Coalition, Inc. Dayton, OH
14. Marian Adoption Services, Plymouth Meeting, PA
15. Lutheran Social Services of Indiana, Fort Wayne, IN
16. Adoption by Gentle Care, Columbus, OH
17 Adoption Horizons and the Birth Parent Center, Eureka, CA
18. Catholic Charities, Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Fort Wayne, IN
19. Open Adoption and Family Services, Inc., Portland, OR
20. Boys and Girls Aid Society, Portland, OR
21. Welcome House Social Services of the Pearl S. Buck Foundation, Inc., Perkasie, PA
22. Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany, Albany, NY
23. Children's Adoption Network, Richboro, PA
24. Ennis Center for Children, Inc., Detroit, MI
25. Adopt a Special Kid/Texas, Inc., Hurst, TX
26. Children and Family Institute, Fort Worth, TX
27. Minnesota Adoption Resource Network, Minneapolis, MN
28. Massachusetts Adoption Resource Exchange, Inc., Boston, MA
29. Christian Cradle, Lansing, MI
30. Children's Hope International, Franklin TN
31. Los Ninos Children's International Adoption Center, The Woodlands, TX, (9 different letters)
32. Jewish Family Services, New Haven, CT
33. LDS Social Services, Ogden, UT
34. LDS Social Services, Amherst, NH
35. Community Maternity Services, Albany, NY
36. Lutheran Social Services of Indiana, Griffith IN
37. The Attachment Center, Evergreen, CO
38. Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Nashville, TN
39. Small World Ministries, Inc., Hermitage, TN
40. St. Christopher-Ottilie Services for Children and Families, Long Island, NY
41. Respond, St. Louis, MO
42. Families Are Special, North Little Rock, AR
43. Children Awaiting Parents, Rochester, NY
44. Dependent Care Connection, Westport, CT
45. Respond, St. Louis MO
46. Leake and Watts, Yonkers, NY
47. Spence-Chapin Services to Families and Children, New York, NY
48. Project STAR, The Rehabilitation Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
49. Heritage Adoption Services, Inc., Portland, OR
50. Urban League-Rhode Island, Providence, RI
51. Tarzana Treatment Center, Inc., Tarzana, CA
52. Daniel Memorial Adoption Information Center, Jacksonville, FL
53. Jewish Child Care Association of New York, New York, NY
54. Mentor Clinical Care, Indianapolis, IN
55. The Northwest Adoption Exchange, Seattle, WA
56. Placement Services Agency, Dallas, TX
57. New Beginnings, Adoption and Counseling Agency, Columbus GA
58. United Methodist Family Services, Virginia Beach, VA
59. Adoptions From the Heart
60. University of Chicago School of Social Work
61. Washington State Families for Kids, Seattle, WA
62. Child Development Unit, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS
63. Arlington Diocese Catholic Charities, Burke, VA
B. Government Agencies
1. Program Supervisor, Administrative Office of the Courts, Arizona Supreme Court, Phoenix, AZ
2. Franklin County Children Services
3. County of Los Angeles, Department of Children's Services, Peter Digre, Los Angeles, CA
4. Licking County Department of Human Services, Newark OH
5. Louisiana Department of Social Services, Assistant Secretary, Office of Community Services,
Baton Rouge, LA
6. Minnesota Department of Human Services, St. Paul, MN
7. Missouri Department of Social Services, Director, Division of Family Services, Jefferson City,
MO
8. Massachusetts Department of Social Services, Executive Office of HHS, Director of Public
Relations, Boston, MA
9. Massachusetts Department of Social Services, Adoption Supervisor, Boston MA
10. Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, Director, Division of Family and Children,
Indianapolis, IN
11. Secretary, Kansas Department of Social Services, Topeka, KS
12. Massachusetts HHS, Department of Social Services, Acting Commissioner, Boston, MA
13. Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services, Secretary, Madison, WI
14. North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Director of Social Services, Raleigh, NC
15. Virginia Department of Social Services, FP/FC & Adoption Manager
16. Department of Health and Human Resources, Adoption-Homefinding Unit, Charleston, WV
17. New Jersey Department of Human Services, Director, Division of Youth and Family
18. Services Department of Social Services for Henry County, VA senior social worker, Collinsville,
VA
19. Judge, San Ildefonso Pueblo Tribal Court
20. Administrator, Division of Family and Community Services, Idaho Department of Health and
Welfare
21. Director, Family and Children's Services Division, Minnesota Department of Human Services
22. Commissioner, Social and Rehabilitation Services, Vermont Department of Social and
Rehabilitation Services
23. Director, Division of Family Services, Delaware Department of Service for Children, Youth and
Families, Wilmington, DE
24. Acting Commissioner, Bureau for Children and Families, West Virginia Department of HHR
25. Director, Iowa Department of Human Services
26. Isaac Palmer, Office of Family and Children's Services, Ohio Department of Human Services
27. Assistant Secretary for Children, Washington Department of Social and Health Services, Olympia,
WA
28. Department of Children, Youth and Families, Rhode Island
29. Secretary, Maryland Department of Human Resources, Baltimore, MD
30. San Mateo County Youth and Family Services Agency, Belmont County
31. Director, Child Welfare Services, Colorado Department of Human Services, Denver CO
32. Chair, Adoption Development Outreach Planning Team, Department of Social Services,
Chesterfield-Colonial Heights, Chesterfield. VA
33. Secretary, Florida Department Children and Families Tallahassee, FL
34. Director of Social Services, Alexandria City Department of Human Services, Alexandria, VA
35. Cabinet for Families and Children, Frankfort, KY
36. Chair, Black Adoption and Foster Care Advocacy Board, Louisiana Department of Social
Services, Lafayette, LA
37. Acting Director, Michigan Family Independence Agency Lansing, MI
38. Director, Wyoming Department of Family Services, Cheyenne, WY
39. Director, New Hampshire Division for Children, Youth and Families, Department of Health and
Human Services, Concord, NH
40. Utah, Adoption Council, Utah Division of Child and Family Services, DHS, Salt Lake City, UT
41. Director, Loudoun County Department of Social Services, Leesburg, VA
42. Executive Director, Mississippi Department of Human Services, Jackson, MS
43. Director, Department of Children and Family Services, State of Illinois, Chicago, IL
44. Commissioner, Division of Family and Youth Services, Department of Health and Social Services,
Juneau, AK
45. Chief, Adoptions Branch, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, CA
46. Nebraska Director of Health and Human Resources, Omaha, NE
47. Director, Services to Children and Families, Oregon Department of Human Resources, Salem, OR
48. Project Director, Children Services Board of Summit County, Akron, OH
49. Regional Director, Rhode Island Department of Chidlren, Youth and Families, Providence, RI
50. Deputy State Director, Office of Program Policy and Oversight, South Carolina Department of
Social Services, Columbia, SC
51. Deputy Commissioner, Division of Services and Community Development, New York State
Departmetn of Social Services, Albany, NY
C. Advocacy Groups
1. Coalition for Adoption Reform and Education, San Diego, CA
2. National Court Appointed Special Advocate Association, Seattle, WA
3. The Adoption Institute, New York, NY
4. The Independent Women's Forum, Washington, DC
5. Independent Adoption Center, Pleasant Hill, CA
6. National Council for Single Adoptive Parents, Chevy Chase, MD
7. Children, Remembered, Inc., Northbrook, IL
8. Adoption Exchange Association, Denver, CO
9. National Child Welfare Association, Portland, OR
10. Family Builders Network, Boston, MA
11. Casey Family Program, Seattle, WA
12. National Association of Foster Care Reviewers, Atlanta, GA
13. Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C.
14. National Adoption Center, Philadelphia, PA
15. New York State Citizens' Coalition for Children, Inc., Ithaca, NY
16. Voice for Adoption, Washington, DC
17. National Resource Center for Permanency Planning, New York, NY
18. Child Welfare League of America, Washington, DC
19. Generations United, Washington, DC
20. National Association of Social Workers, Washington, DC
21. Adoption Advocates, Minneapolis, MN
22. National Council for Adoption, Washington DC
23. American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, IL
24. Cooperative Adoption Consulting, San Anselmo, CA
25. Coalition for Family & Children's Services, Des Moines, IA
26. Institute for Children, Cambridge, MA
27. Common Ground Network for Life and Choice, Washington, DC
28. Family Research Council, Washington, DC
29. Child Welfare League of America, Washington DC
30.
Congressional:
1. Howard Metzenbaum, Retired Senator
D. Private Citizens/General Public/Adoptive Parents
1. Kathryn B. Creedy, adoptive parent
2. Betty Charmatz
3. Hector and Susan Badeau Family, adoptive parents
4. Carole Adlard, executive director, Adoption Option, Cincinatti, OH
5. Christopher Unger, Ph.D., psychologist
6. Adoree Blair, Child Advocate
7. Julie Jarrell Bailey, adoptive parent and birth mother
8. Dave Bushnell, adoptive parent
9. Allan Neustadt
10. Jack Marvin
11. David Wazdatskey, adoption supervisor
12, Kathy Casey, adoptive parent
13. Elizabeth Bartholet, adoption advocate
14. Peter Winkler, ACSW
15. David and Susan Distel, foster parents
16. Vicky Payne
17. Jackie Hampton, LMSW
18. Susan Levitzky, MD, FAAP
19. jsqui10177.aol.com
20. Jerri Ann Jenista, MD
21. Marie Dolfi, MSW
Appendix C
ADOPTION 2002 FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONS
ELIMINATING BARRIERS TO PERMANENCY & INCREASING ACCESS TO ADOPTION
Removing Barriers to Permanency
What are the barriers to permanency?
What stands in the way of timely decision-making throughout the system?
Multiethnic Placement Act/Interethnic Placement provision
The directive mandates that the Federal government ensure continued aggressive
implementation of MEPA and the Interethnic Placement provision. In the context of this
mandate, how can the Federal government best promote more rapid compliance with MEPA
and the Interethnic Placement provision?
MOVING CHILDREN MORE PROMPTLY
Reasonable Efforts Requirements
What ought to be the goals of the reasonable efforts requirements?
What are the concerns and issues surrounding the reasonable efforts requirements?
Should there be a reasonable efforts requirement related to permanency?
What principles or factors should the Federal government consider in an attempt to clarify the
relationship between safety and reasonable efforts requirements?
Dispositional Hearings
What should be accomplished with dispositional hearings?
What barriers, if any, stand in the way of accomplishing the goals with regard to dispositional
hearings?
DOUBLING THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN WHO ACHIEVE PERMANENCY
State Numerical Adoption Targets
What supports, other than monetary support, can the Federal government provide to States to
help them reach the goal of doubling the number of children who achieve permanency?
More specifically, what kinds of technical assistance would be most helpful to States as they
pursue the permanency goals?
Financial Incentives to States to Increase Adoptions
Can financial performance incentives help States move toward the permanency goals? If so,
how?
In addition to the per child financial incentive outlined in the directive, what other kinds of
performance incentives could help States reach the targets?
PROMOTING INNOVATION IN THE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM
Alternative Permanency Arrangements
What are effective alternative permanency arrangements for children? What concerns would
you have about them?
Opportunities for Systemic Change
How does the directive fit with efforts to promote systemic change in the child welfare system?
CROSS-CUTTING PRINCIPLES
What principles should guide the Federal planning for this initiative to help achieve the
permanency goals?
ADOPTION 2002 FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANTS
Intergovermental
National Council for Adoption
Maureen Hogan
Januuary 22, 1997
(NCFA)
Adopt A Special Kid
January 27, 1997
226 4th Street, N.E.
Melissa Baker
Washington, D.C. 20002
American Public Welfare Association
Dortha Tilly
202-544-3603
810 First Street, N.E.
Adopt A Special Kid
Suite 500
1060 West Pipeline Road
Washington, D.C. 20002
Suite 106
National Council for Adoption
202-682-0100
Hurst, Texas 76053
(NCFA)
817-595-0497
January 21, 1997
Susan Golonka
National Governors Association
Kent Pulsipher
Elizabeth Bartholet, Harvard Law
444 North Capital Street, N.W.
LDS Social Services
School
Suite 267
9978 Marble Street
Houser Hall
Washington, D.C. 20001
Sandy, Utah 84094
422
202-624-5300
801-572-0452
1575 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
Marilina Sanz
Nathan Samuel
617-495-3128
National Association of Counties
Childplace
440 First Street, N.W.
2420 Highway 62
Carol Coccia
8th Floor
Jeffersonville, IN 47130
National Committee to End
Washington, D.C. 20001
812-282-8248
Racism in America's Child
202-393-6226
Care System, Inc.
Kent Brand
22075 Koths
Sherry Steisel
Hope for Children
Taylor, MI 48180
National Conference of State
1507 Johnson Fairy Road
313-295-0257
Legislatures
Suite 190
444 North Capital Street, N.W.
Merritta, Ga 30062
Phoebe Dawson
Suite 515
770-977-0813
New Beginnings Adoption &
Washington, D.C. 20001
Counseling Agency
202-624-5400
Jim Savely
1316 Wynnton Court
Small World Ministries
Suite A
Joe Dimas
401 Bonnaspring Drive
Columbus, Georgia 31906
Nation League of Cities
Hermitage, TN 37076
404-571-3346
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
615-883-4372
Washington, D.C. 20004
Jane Edwards
202-626-3020
Tommilee Harding
2926 Parkland Drive
Christian World Adoption
Vradenton, Florida 34209
Laura Waxman
270 West Common Blvd
941-795-1802
U.S. Conference of Mayors
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464-3489
1620 Eye Street, N.W.
803-856-0305
Patrick Fagan
Washington, D.C. 20006
Heritage Foundation
202-293-7330
Gary Weir
214 Massachusetts Avenue
Refugee Maternity Home
Washington, D.C. 20002
Gene Flango
499 Walnut Street
202-546-4400
National Center for State Courts
Winfeld, MO 63389
300 Newport Avenue
314-668-8192
Rene Garfinkel, Adoption Studies
P.O. Box 8798
Institute
Williamsburg, Va. 23187-8794
Ruby Lee Piester
2924 M Street, N.W.
804-253-2000
Texas Govenor's Committee on
Suite 101
Adoption
Washington, D.C. 20007
5413 Ledgestone Drive
202-338-1550
Ft. Worth, TX 76132
817-346-8630
Richard Gelles
Sheri A. Brady, Esq.
Paola Maranan
University of Rhode Island
Program Associate
Public Policy Coordinator
Department of Sociology
National Associate of Child
The Children's Alliance
Kingston, RI 02881
Advocates
172 20th Avenue
401-874-4138
1522 K Street, NW, Suite 600
Seattle, WA 98122
Washington, DC 20005
206-354-0340
Beverly Jimmerson
202-289-0777 ext. 215
Governor's Office
Tara T. Marshall
P.O. Box 12428
Eve Brooks, President
Director of Violence Prevention
Austin, Texas 78711
National Association of Child
Services
512-475-2340
Advocates
Agenda for Children
1522 K Street, NW, Suite 600
P.O. Box 51837
Carol Olwert Reese
Washington, DC 20005
New Orleans, LA 70151
Partnership for Adoption Advocacy
202-289-0777 ext. 210
504-586-8509
2 Hudson Drive
New Fairfield, Conneticut 06812-
Gary Brunk, Executive Director
Jim McComb
3801
Kansas Action for Children
Advocates for Children & Youth
715 Southwest 10th
300 Cathedral Street, Suite 500
Mary Beth Style
P.O. Box 463
Baltimore, MD 21201
c/o NCFA
Topeka, KS 66601
410-547-9200
930 17th Street, N.W.
913-232-0550
Washington, D.C. 20009
Kathy Bigsby Moore
703-502-7910
Suzanne Cambria
Executive Director
Soical Work Intern
Voices for Chilren in Nebraska
Woody Turner
D.C. Action for Children
7521 Main Street, Suite 103
Pennsylvania Adoptive Family Rights
1616 P Street, NW, Suite 110
Omaha, NE 68127
Council
Washington, DC 20036
402-597-3100
1500 Oliver Building
202-234-9404
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
John S. Niblock
412-355-6478
Tonia Hunt
President/CEO
Public Policy Assistant
Alliance for South Carolina's
Children First for Oregon
Children
National Association of Child
921 SW Morrison Street, Suite 418
1330 Lady Street
Advocates
Portland, OR 97205
Columbia, SC 29211
January 17, 1997
503-294-1456
803-343-5510
Anne Arnesen
Jann Jackson
Sharon Claytor Peters
Director
Executive Director
President
Wisonsin Council on Children and
Advocates for Children & Youth
Michigan's Children
Families
300 Cathedral Street, Suite 500
428 W. Lenawee
16 N. Carroll Street
Baltimore, MD 21201
Lansing, MI 48933
Madison, WI 53703
410-547-9200
517-485-3500
608-284-0580
Jennifer Keith
Anne Roberts
Diane Benjamin
Legal Director
Executive Director
Director of Minnesota KIDS Count
Arkansas Advocates for Children and
Oklahoma Institute for Child
Children's Defense Fund-Minnesota
Families
Advocacy
550 Rice Street, Suite 205
103 E 7th Street, Suite 931
420 NW 13th Street, Suite 101
St. Paul, MN 55103
Little Rock, AR 72201
Oklahoma City, OK 73103
612-227-6121
501-371-9678
405-236-5437
Jetta Bernier, Executive Director
Gabrielle Kreisler, Esq.
Michael Tierney, Executive Director
Massachusetts Committee for
Citizens' Committee for Children of
Children's Policy Institute of West
Children and Youth
New York
Virginia
14 Beacon Street, Suite 706
105 East 22nd Street
P.O. Box 3839
Boston, MA 02108
New York, NY 10010
Charleston, WV 25338
617-742-8555
212-673-1800
304-344-3970
Linda Tilly
Jody Weigel
Judge William Byars
Executive Director
Human Services
Circuit Family Court Judge
VOICES for Alabama's Children
411 3rd Street, S.E.
Kershaw County Courthouse
P.O. Box 4576
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Camden, SC 29020
Montgomery, Al 36103
319-398-3950
803-425-1500, ext. 390
334-213-2410
JoAnn Harrison
Don Duquette
Jackie Town
Cabinet for Children and Families
Clinical Professor of Law
Director of Case Advocacy
I & I Unit B
University of Michigan Law School
Kentucky Youth Advocates
7 East
Child Advocary Law Clinic
2034 Frankfort Avenue
908 West Broadway
313 Legal Research Building
Louisville, KY 40206
Louisville, KY 40203
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1215
502-895-8167
313-763-5000
Karen Hawkins
Patrick T. Villani, Ph.D
Department of Community Services
Brenda Gadson
Executive Director
City of Louisville
Massachusetts FFK
St. Ann's Home, Inc.
200 South 7th Street
Children's Services of Roxbury
100-A Haverhill Street
Louisville, KY 40202
8th Floor
Methuen, MA 01844
502-574-1369
105 Chauncy Street
508-682-5276
Boston, MA 02111-1726
Diane Seymore
617-542-2366
Elie Ward
Department of Childre and Families
Director of Policy
5920 Arlington Express
Susan Ignelzi
Statewide Youth Advocacy, Inc.
Rm. 232
Families First Council
17 Elk Street-5th Floor
Jacksonville, Fl 32231
Ohio Family & Children First
Albany, NY 12207
904-723-5335
Initiative
518-436-8525
Office of the Governor
Tena Thompson
77 South High Street, 30th Floor
Judiths Watts
Child Service
Columbus, OH 432-15
President/CEO
11 North 7th Street
614-752-4044
Agenda for Children
St. Louis, MO 63101
P.O. Box 51837
314-340-7007
Marie Jamieson, Director
New Orleans, LA 70151
Children's Home Society of
504-586-8509
Marsha Rose Wickliffe
Washington
Annie E. Casey Foundation
PO Box 15190
Ceil Zalkind
701 St. Paul Street
Seattle, WA 98115
Associate Director
Baltimore, MD 21202
206-527-6067
Association for Children of New
410-223-2961
Jersey
Gloria Hochman
35 Halsey Street
National Adoption Center
Newark, NJ 07102
Kellogg Foundation Families
1500 Walnut Street, Suite 701
201-643-3876
for Kids Grantees
Philadelphia, PA 19102
January 16, 1997
215-735-9988
Casey and Clark Foundation
Karen Abmanm
Jacquelyn Kidd
Grantees
Arizona Families for Kids (FFK)
NACAC
January 17, 1997
AZ Children's Home Association
970 Raymond Avenue - Suite 106
2700 South Eigth Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55114-1149
Anne Grunewald
Tucson, AZ 85713
612-644-3036
4 Oaks
520-622-7611
5400 Kurtwood Blvd, SW
Wendy Lewis Jackson, Director
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52404
Sarah Anderson-Mims
Families for Kids Kent County
319-364-0259
North Carolina Families for Kids
c/o The Grand Rapids Foundation
NC Division of Social Services
209-C Waters Building
325 North Salisbury Street
161 Ottawa Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grand Rapids, MI 49503-2703
919-733-2580
616-545-1751
Anotoinette Nelson, Director
Carolyn Johnson
Samuel Totaro, President
Families For Kids Crusade
National Adoption Center
American Academy of Adoption
Administration for Children's Services
1500 Walnut Street
Attorney
- 5th Floor
Suite 701
4 Greenwood Square Suite 100
150 Williams Street
Philidelphia, Pennsylvania 19102
Ben Salem, Pennsylvania 19020
New York, NY 10038
215-735-9988
215-244-1045
212-676-9207
Mary Ford
Renay Sanders, Director
NACAC
National Organization Focus Group
Ohio Families for Kids
970 Raymond Avenue
January 15, 1996
Summit County Children's Services
Suite 106
264 South Arlington Street
St. Paul, MN 55114
Mary Lee Allen
Akron, OH 44306
612-729-1735
Children's Defense Fund
330-996-1028
25 E Street, N.W.
Judith McKenzie
Washington, D.C. 20001
Joan Wagnon, Executive Director
Spaulding for Children
202-628-8787
Kansas Families for Kids
16250 Northland Drive
Suite 206
Suite 120
Mark Harden
603 SW Topeka Avenue
Southfield, MI 48075
American Bar Association
Topeka, Kansas 66603
810-443-7080
740 15th Street, N.W.
913-354-4663
Washington, D.C. 20005
Terry Cross
202-662-1000
Linda West
National Indian Child Welfare
Mississippi Families for Kids
Association
Karabelle Pizzigati,
MS Children's Home Society
3611 Southwest Hood Street
Pam Day and Ann Sullivan
1900 N. West Street, Suite B
Suite 201
Child Welfare League of America
Jackson, MS 39202
Portland, Oregon 97201
440 First Street, N.W.
800-241-5437
503-222-4044
Suite 310
Washington, D.C. 20001-2085
Ying-Ying Yuan
Delois Caldwell
Walter R. McDonald & Assoc., Inc.
Families Independence Agency
Tom Birch
Suite 310
Family Services Administration
National Child Abuse Coalition
12300 Twinbrook Parkway
Suite 1414
733 15th Street, N.W.
Rockville, MD 20852
235 Grand
#938
301-881-2590
P.O. Box 30037
Washington, D.C. 20005
Lansing, MI 48909
202-347-3666
Valora Washington
517-373-4558
W.K. Kellogg Foundation
Bill Pierce and Patrick Purtill, Jr.
One Michigan Avenue East
Robert Ortega
National Council for Adoption
Battle Creek, MI 49017-4058
Unversity of Michigan
1930 17th Street, N.W.
616-968-1611
School of Social Work
Washington, D.C. 20009
4062-Frieze Building
202-328-1200
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1285
National Organizations
313-763-6576
Mary Sullivan
January 16, 1997
National Adoption Information
Shane Salter
Clearinghouse
Peggy Soule
For Love of Children
10530 Rosenhaven Street Suite 400
Children Awaiting Parents
1711-A 14th Street, NW
Fairfax, Va. 22030
700 Exchange Street
Washington, D.C. 20009
703-246-9095
Rochester, NY 14608
202-462-7080
716-232-5110
Brenda Russell Nordlinger
Mark McDermott
Dan Drolet
Zena Oglesby
American Academy of Adoption
National Association of Homes and
Institute for Black Parenting
Attorneys
Services for Children
9920 LaCienega Blvd - Suite 806
1300 19th Street, NW - #400
1701 K Street, N.W., Suite 200
Inglewood, California 90301
Washington, DC 20036
Washington, D.C. 20006
310-348-1400
202-223-3447
Christine Koucher
Richard Hoekstra, Manager
Renee Powers
Washington Metropolitan Council of
Division of Adoption Services
Deputy Director
Governments
Michigan Family Independence
Department of Children and Family
777 North Capitol Street, N.E.
Agency
Services
Suite 300
235 South Grand Avenue
144 P Street
Washington, D.C. 20002-4239
Lansing, MI 48909
Sacremento, Ca 95814
202-962-3200
Joe Loftus
Joan Reeves
Caren Kaplan
Executive Deputy Director
Commissioner
National Association of Social
Illinois Dept. of Children and Family
Department of Human Services
Workers
Services
Willow Oak Bldg #42
750 First Street, N.E.
406 East Monroe Street
Harrisburg, Pa 17105
Suite 700
Springfield, Illinois 62701-1498
Washington, D.C. 20002
Joe Loftus
202-457-0492
Warren Lewis
Executive Deputy Director
Office of Children, Youth and
Illinois Dept. of Children and Family
Judy Leavitt
Families
Services
Generations United
Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare
406 East Monroe Street
C/O CWLA
DPW Bldg. - Complex #2 - Rm 220
Springfield, Illinois 62701-1498
440 First Street, N.W.
Harrisburg, PA 17105
Suite 310
Washington, D.C. 20001-2085
Jim Hine
Tribal Conference Call
Executive Director
January 23, 1997
Texas Dept. of Protective
Conference Call with "Big 8
and Regulatory Services
Pat Serna
States"
Mail Code E-557
Jicarilla Apache Tribe
Tuesday, January 14, 1996
P.O. Box 149030
P.O. Box 100
Austin, Tx. 78714-9030
Jemez Pueblo, NM 87024
Don Smith
Associate Deputy Commissioner
Billye Leitka
Services and Community
Conference Call with Urban
Seminole Nation of Oklahoma
Development Division
Child Welfare Administrators
New York Department of Social
Wednesday, January 15, 1997
Virginia Hill, Co-Chair
Services
National Congress of American
40 North Pearl Street
Sara Webster, Regional Director
Indians
Albany, NY 12243
Texas Department of Protective
2010 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
and Regulatory Services
2nd Floor
Dee Richter, Program Manager
Mail Code E-557
Washington, D.C. 20036
Florida Department of Health and
P.O. Box 149030
202-466-7764
Rehabilititative Services
Austin, Tx 78714-9030
Bldg. E, Rm 227
Marien Skunkcap
1317 Winewood Blvd
Nicholas Scopetta, Commissioner
Fort Hall Reservation
Tallahasse, Fl 32399-0100
New York City Administration for
Children's Services
Albert Long
Isaac Palmer
40 North Pearl Street
Navajo Nation
Deputy Director
Albany, NY 12243
P.O.Box 4590
Ohio Department of Human Services
Window Rock, Arizona 86515
30 East Broad Street
Dr. Imran Ali
Columbus, Ohio 43266-0415
District Program Manager
Polly Sharp
614-466-5214
District 11
Human Service Policy Director
Florida Dept. of Health
Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.
Marjorie Kelly, Deputy Director
and Rehabilitative Services
4205 N. 7th Avenue - Suite 200
Children and Family Services
Bldg. E, Rm 227
Phoenix, AZ 85013
Division
1317 Winewood Blvd
602-248-0071
California Dept. of Social Services
Tallahasse, Fl 32399-0100
744 P Street
Sacremento, California 95814
Region I - January 13-14, 1997
Nancy Powers
Karen Parciak
30 Mystic Street
100 Comstock Road
Michele Benkis
Arlington, MA 02203
Manchester, CT 06073
Director of Clinical Services
617-643-4783
860-646-4744
30 Mystic Street
Arlington, MA 02203
Donald Roy
Patty Marchand
617-643-6205
33 East Merrimack Street
1320 Main Street
Lowell, MA 02203
Willimaritic, CT 06073
Patricia Byrd
508-452-8970
860-450-2018
Department of Social Services
1537 Main Street
Rita Schein
Alice Wisten
Springfield, MA 02203
24 Farnsworth Street
9 Mott Avenue
413-781-0323
Boston, MA 02203
Norwalk, CT 06073
617-727-3171 ext. 559
203-855-8765
Sharon Castellina
141 Main Street
Sharon Silvia
Rosalyn M. Kinno
Brockton, MA 02203
1061 Pleasant Street
72 Tryon Street
505-587-8110
New Bedford, MA 02203
South Glassbury, CT 06073
508-996-8572
860-633-7935
Christy Chamberlin
1537 Main Street
Deborah Wingard
Doris E. Kinder
Springfield, MA 02203
123 Morton Street
P.O. Box 1052
413-781-0323
Jamaica Plain, MA 02203
Mitchfield, CT 06759
617-524-5474
860-567-0285
Donna Eaton-Mahoney
1537 Main St
Maria Magoiers
Patricia Cobb
Brockton, MA 02203
Supreme Judicial Courthouse
682 Prospect Avenue
508-584-0980
1400 New Courthouse
Hartford, CT 06105
Boston, MA 02108
860-236-0001
Lisa Funaro
617-557-1194
Boston Children Services
Pam Schneider
271 Huntington Avenue
Judge Baker
P.O. Box 451
Boston, MA 02203
3 Blackfan Circle
Southport, CT 06149
617-267-3700
Boston, MA 02115
203-255-5520
617-232-8398
Mary Gambon
Vicki Hill
24 Farnsworth Street
Brenda Gadson
Office of Civil Rights
Boston, MA 02203
MA Family for Kids
U.S. Dept. Health & Human Services
617-727-3171 ext. 589
105 Chauncy Street
Room 1875
8th Floor
JFK Federal Building
Eileen Griffin
Boston, MA 02111
Boston, MA 02203
340 Main Street
617-542-2366
617-565-1340
Worchester, MA 02203
508-791-1200
Dean Putnam
Felicia Gray
Office of Civil Rights
5 Old Orchard Road
Dottie Hollis
U.S. Dept. Health & Human Services
Bloomfield, CT 06002
430 N. Canal Street
Room 1875
860-243-8441
Lawrence, MA 02203
JFK Federal Building
508-685-5930
Boston, MA 02203
Elizabeth Johnson-Tyson
617-565-1344
DCF - I Long Warf
Maxine Kreikamp
New Haven, CT 06331
1 Arch Place
Dick Richardson
205-786-0691
Springfield, MA 02203
2400 Washington Street
413-774-5546
Broxbury, MA 02115
Richard Vaillencourt
617-445-6055
103 Kitt Road
Canterbury, CT 06331
860-546-9655
Carolyn Goodridge
Terri Jackson
Ann Vanklpool-Brown
827 Wethersfield Avenue
Federation of Protestant
Miracle Maker
Hartford, CT. 06114
Welfare Agencies
33 Somers Street
281 Park Avenue South, 2nd Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11233
Helen G. Keegan
New York, New York 10010
718-455-1331
P.O. Box 505
212 777-4800
Litchfield, CT 06759
Lynette Brown
860-567-8065
Ms. Cecilia Rivera Healy, CSW
Council of Family & Child
Associate Executive Director
Caring Agencies (COFCCA)
Anne Facts
Saint Joseph Services for
220 E. 23 Street Suite 905
55 Kelly Green
Children and Families
New York, NY 10010
New London, CT 06320
540 Atlantic Avenue
212-929-2626
203-855-8765
Brooklyn, New York 11217-1982
718 797-6090
Janet Jackson
Sheryl Dicker
The Village for Family & Children
Chester Jackson
Executive Director
1680 Albany Avenue
Adoption Action Network
Permanent Judicial Commission
Hartfort, CT 06105
1220 Neptune Avenue
on Justice for Children
860-297-0581
Brooklyn, New York 12224
c/o Pace University School of Law
800-601-1779
78 North Broadway
Joseph Shipley
White Plains, NY 10603
7 Vauchall Street
Ms. Maris Blechner
914-422-4425
New London, CT 06320
Executive Director
860-442-2797 ext. 335
Family Focus Adoption Services
Barbara Salmanson
54-40 Little Neck Parkway
Senior Policy Adviser
Dora Hale
Suite 3
Office of Policy Management
CARE
Little Neck, New York 11362
Comptroller Office for the City of NY
52 Whitehall
718 224-1919
1 Centre Street - rm 517
Meriden, CT 06451
New York, NY 10007-2341
203-238-6640
Juana Miranda-Salzman
212-669-3740
Coalition for Hispanic
Karen Caffrey
Family Services
Martha Raman
17 South Highland Street
315 Wyckoff Avenue, 4th Floor
C-Plan: Child Planning and Advocacy
West Hartford, CT 06119
Brooklyn, New York 11237
Now
860-236-6009
718 497-6090
c/o The Office of the NYC Public
Advocate
Ms. Marlene Halpern, Esq.
1 Centre Street
Region II - New York
Director, Family Law Task Force
New York, NY 10007
January 16-17, 1997
Legal Services of New York
212-669-4955 and 669-4678
350 Broadway
Jane Barowitz
New York, New York 10013
Patricia Warren
Jewish Child Care Association of NY
212 431-7200
Harlem Dowling Westside Center
575 Lexington Avenue
for Children & Family Services
NY, NY 10022
Ms. Halpern
2090 Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. Blvd.
212-303-4613
Children's Defence Fund - New York
New York, New York 10027
200 Church Street
212-749-3656 Ext. 406
Asari Inniss
New York, NY 10013
Committee for Hispanic Children and
212-233-4000
Ms. Betsy Mayberry
Families
Children's Aid Society
104 West Street
Ms. Janice Shindler
105 E. 22nd Street - Suite 517
NY, NY 10011
National Association of
New York, NY 10010
(212) 206-1090
Black Social Workers
212-949-4379
New York Chapter
1969 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10035
212 831-5181
Debbie Martin
Donna Younkin, ARA
Gwen Bridges
The Adoption Institute
Division of Youth and Family
Office of Social Services
6 East 94th Street
Services
WVa. Department of Health and
New York, NY 10128
Placement and Permanency Services
Human Resources
212-369-0300 or 360-0278
CN 717
Capitol Complex
Trenton, NJ 08625
Bldg. 6 - Room 850
Patricia Fearon
609-984-2380
Charleston, West Virginia 25305
WE CARE
304-558-2982
Foster and Adoptive Parent
Marie Pirog
Association
Administrative Office of the Courts
Christine Craig
135-B West 168th Street
Hughes Justice Complex
Planning Office of Social Services
Bronx, New York 10452
Family Division
WVa. Department of Health and
718-538-9328
CN 983
Human Resources
Trenton, NJ 08625
Capitol Complex
Jessica Watson-Crosby
609-984-4228
Bldg. 6 - Room 850
National Association of Former Foster
Charleston, West Virginia 25305
Children
Pam Hasegawa
304-558-7980
P.O. Box 874- Wall Street Station
New Jersey Coalition for
New York, New York 10268-0874
Openness in Adoption
Laura Goodman
212-332-0078
29 Hill Street
Administration
Morristown, NJ 07960
Office of Social Services
Kathy Watson
201-292-2440
WVa. Department of Health and
NYC Administration for Children
Human Resources
Services - Kellog Project
Valerie Kelly, Manager
Capitol Complex
150 William Street - 4th Floor
Division of Youth and Family
Bldg. 6 - Room 850
New York, New York 10038
Services
Charleston, West Virginia 25305
212-676-7397
Adoption Resource Center
304-558-7980
Metro
Donna DelCielo
100 Metroplex Drive
Mae Best, Chief,
NYC Administration for Children
1st Floor, Suite 106
Adoption Unit
Services Kellog Project
Edison, New Jersey 08817
LaShawn General Receiver's Office
150 William Street - 4th Floor
908-819-7272
609 H Street, N.E.
New York, New York 10038
Washington, D.C. 20002
212-676-7423
Joan Wheeler
202-724-8602
Adoptive Parent
Everton Talbott
77 Tuckerton Road
Allicia Walker
NYC Administration for Children
Shamong, NJ 08088
Adoption Unit
Services Kellog Project
609-268-2422
LaShawn General Receiver's Office
150 William Street - 4th Floor
609 H Street, N.E.
New York, New York 10038
Patricia Balasco-Barr
Washington, D.C. 20002
212-676-7382
Director
202-724-8602
Division of Youth and Family
Cathy Amirsar
Services - CN 717
William Johnson
NYC Administration for Children
Trenton, NJ 08625
Adoption Unit
Services
609-292-6920
LaShawn General Receiver's Office
80 Lafayette Street 18th Floor
609 H Street, N.E.
New York, New York 10013
Washington, D.C. 20002
212-266-2579
Region III - January 17 & 22, 1997
202-724-8602
Mariann Kenville
Mary Coogan
Adoption Program Specialist
Judy Hutchenson
Association for Children of New
Delaware Division of Family Services
Adoption Unit
Jersey
1825 Faulkland Road
LaShawn General Receiver's Office
35 Halsey Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19805-1195
609 H Street, N.E.
Newark, NJ 071102
Washington, D.C. 20002
201-643-3876
202-724-8602
Ruth Smith Stewart
Sarah Brownlee
Bridgett Williams
Adoption Unit
Acting Child Welfare Director
Office of Special Assistant
LaShawn General Receiver's Office
Georgia Department of Human
Attorney General
609 H Street, N.E.
Resources
P.O.Box 220
Washington, D.C. 20002
Division of Family and Children
Jackson, Mississippi 39205
202-724-8602
Services
(601) 359-4247
Two Peachtree Street NW
Barbara Nalls
Suite 12-100
Jamie McBride
Adoption Unit
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3180
Administrative Office of Courts
LaShawn General Receiver's Office
(404) 657-3400
P.O.Box 117
609 H Street, N.E.
Jackson, Mississippi 39205
Washington, D.C. 20002
Vale Henson, Director
(601) 354-7397
202-724-8602
Georgia Council of Juvenile Judges
230 Peachtree Street NW
Osborne Shamberger
Sylvester Judge
Suite 1625
Child Placement Services
Adoption Unit
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Division of Social Services
LaShawn General Receiver's Office
(404) 657-5027
325 North Salisbury Street
609 H Street, N.E.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Washington, D.C. 20002
Forrest Burson, Director
(919) 733-7672
202-724-8602
State Office of Adoptions
Georgia Department of Human
Ramona Foley, Director
Stephanie Pettaway
Resources
Family Preservation and Child
Office of Family and Children's
47 Trinity Avenue SW
Welfare Services
Services
Room-522-H
South Carolina Department of Social
Social Services Administration
Atlanta, Georgia 30336-5600
Services - P.O. Box 1520
Department of Human Resources
(404) 657-9920
Columbia, SC 29202-1520
311 West Saratoga Street
(803) 734-5670
Baltimore, MD 21201
Lorraine Adams, President
410-767-7506
Foster Parents Association of Georgia
Gail Yvette Crawford
P.O. Box 155
Foster Care Director
Douglasville, Georgia 30133
Programs Operations
Region IV - January 15, 1997
(770) 942-0219
Department of Children's Services
7th Floor - Cordell Hull Building
Chris Kendall, Director
Brooke Thomas, Bureau Manager
436 Sixth Avenue North
Alabama Department of Human
Department of Social Services
Nashville, Tennessee 37243
Resources
Cabinet for Families and Children
(615) 532-5597
S. Gordon Person Building
275 East Main Street
50 Ripley Street
Frankfort, Kentucky 40621
Montgomery, Alabama 36130-1801
(502) 592-4303
Region V - January 22, 1997
(334) 242-9500
Carey Durrant, Supervisor, Foster
Mary Anne Kren, Chief
Dee Richter
Care
Division of Clinical Services &
Permanency Planning Director
Department of Social Services
Training
Florida Department of Children and
SNAP
IL Depart of Children & Family
Families
908 West Broadway
Services
1317 Winewood Boulevard
Louisville, Kentucky 40203-2015
100 W. Randolph Street, Rm 6-200
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700
(502) 595-4303
Chicago, IL 60601
(904) 487-2383
312-814-6836
Sue Perry, Director
Division of Family and
Cathleen Graham
Children's Services
Bureau of Family
MS Dept of Human Services
Protection/Preservation
P.O. Box 352
Indiana Family and Social Services
Jackson, Mississippi 39205
Administration
(601) 359-4999
402 West Washington, Rm W364
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2739
317-232-4423
Janet Rhodes-Carlson
Henry Hofstra
Susan Bernstein
Division of Families and Children
Division of Adoption Services
DCFS
Bureau of Family
Child and Family Services
310 South Michigan
Protection/Perservation
Family Independence Agency
15th Floor
Indiana Family and Social Services
235 South Grand Avenue
Chicago, IL 60604
Administration
P.O. Box 30037
402 West Washington, Rm W364
Lansing , MI 48909
Lynn Goffinet
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2739
517-335-6159
LSSI
317-232-4622
610 Abington
Christopher Marcel
Peoria, IL 61603
Anne Fuller
Bureau for Chilren, Youth and
Division of Families and Children
Families
Roland Kulla
Bureau of Family
Division of Children & Family
DCFS
Protection/Perservation
Services
100 West Randolph
Indiana Family and Social Services
Department of Health & Family
Chicago, IL 60601
Administration
Services
402 West Washington, Rm W364
P.O. Box 8916
Marilyn Panichi
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2739
Madison, WI 53708-8916
AICI
317-232-4432
608-266-3595
100 West Randolph
Chicago, IL 60601
Dolores Reid, Chief
Region V - January 9, 1997
Bureau of Children and Family
Marilyn Burguveski
Services
Marge Berglind, Director
DCFS
Office of Child Care & Family
Contral Baptist Family Services
406 East Monroe
Services
122 S. Mich. Ave. Suite 1300
Springfield, IL 62710-1498
Ohio Department of Human Services
Chicago, IL 60603
65 East State Street, 5th Floor
Marikay Hampton
Columbus, OH 43215
Larry Drury, Executive Director
1177 South Taylor
614-728-6983
Catholic Charities of Springfield
Oak Park, IL 60304
800 South Fifth
Annette Hall-Murch
Springfield, IL 62703
Carol Lemieux
Planning and Analysis
DCFS
Office of Child Care & Family
Ray Fannings, Executive Director
100 West Randolph
Services
Chicago Child Care Society
Chicago, IL 60601
Ohio Department of Human Services
5467 Unversity Avenue
65 East State Street, 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60615
Judy Pence
Columbus, OH 43215
2426 Austin Drive
614-466-9303
Dan J. Pennell, Executive Director
Springfield, IL 62704
Goldie B. Floberg Center
Suzanne Ignelzy
58 West Rockton Road
Karen Taylor
Families First Council
Rockton, IL 61072
DCFS
Ohio Family & Children First
2125 S. First Street
Initiative
Harriett Sadauskas, Executive
Champaign, IL 61820
Office of the Governor
Director
77 South High Street, 30th Floor
Association House of Chicago
Mary Debose
Columbus, OH 43215
2150 West North Avenue
CHASI
614-752-4044
Chicago, IL 60647
217 N. Jefferson
5th Floor
Judy Labovitz
Bob Longo
Chicago, IL 60660-1111
Office of Children's Services
Illinois Mentor
Child and Family Services
1827 Walden Office Square
Rosemary McElroy
Family Independence Agency
Suite 840
Catholic Charities
235 South Grand Avenue
Schaumburg, IL 60173
541 West Lake
P.O. Box 30037
Chicago, IL 60601
Lansing, MI 48909
517-335-6159
Mary Ann Pullin
Sandra Davis-Ross
Region VI - January 15, 1997
The Baby Fold
Cabrini Green Youth & Family
108 E. Willow Street
Services
June Flye, Manager, Adoption Unit
Normal, IL 61761
900 N. Franklin, Suite 300
Division of Children and Family
Chicago, IL 60610
Services
Sylvia Kagena
Little Rock, AR
CCCS
Uclich Children's Home
501-682-8666
5467 S. University
217 N. Jefferson Street
Chicago, IL 60615
Chicago, IL 60601
Ada White
Adoption Program Specialist
Rosetta Webb
Ed He
Department of Social Services
LSSI
Lawrence Hall Youth Services
Baton Rouge, LA 70821
600 West Jackson
16 N. Wabash
504-342-4086
Chicago, IL 60661
16th Floor
Chicago, IL 60602
Carmen Weisner, Assistant Director
John Schmier
Field Services Division
LSSI
Deborah Harris-Johnson
Baton Rouge, LA 70821
600 West Jackson
HRDI
504-342-4035
Chicago, IL 60661
9204 S. Commercial
#310
Andrea Poole, Senior Associate
Pat Dreibelbis
Chicago, IL 60628
Shaening & Associates
Lutheran Child and Family Svc.
Santa Fe, NM 87501
322 S. Green, 4th Floor
Dr. Karanja
505-474-8500
Chicago, IL 60627
Centers for New Horizons
4150 South King Drive
Robert Klein, Management Analyst
Sylvia Flory
Chicago, IL 60653
Supreme Court of New Mexico
Catholic Charities
Santa Fe, NM 87501
901 West Jackson
Mary Sue Morsch
505-827-4800
Chicago, IL 60607
DCFS
160 North LaSalle, 6th Floor
Lorie Levison, Program Manager
Shaun Lane
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Child-Rite (Private adoption agency)
CHASI
Santa Fe, NM 87501
125 S. Wacker
Alice Castillo
505-758-0343
11th Floor
DCFS
Chicago, IL 60606
100 West Randolph, 6th Floor
Susan Washam, Supervisor of
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Placement
Mike Sakolsky
Children Youth Families Department
Catholic Charities/Springfield
Ken Taylor
Santa Fe, NM 87501
800 South Fifth
DCFS
505-524-6400
Springfield, IL 62703
100 West Randolph, 6th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Diane Garrity, Attorney for Adoption
Heidi Jessmain-Darville
Children Youth Families Department
Catholic Charities
Don Vacca
Santa Fe, NM 87501
651 West Lake Street
DCFS
505-827-8482
Chicago, IL 60661
5415 N. University
Peoria, Illinois 61614
Jan Stanley, Supervisor Central
Kelly Berardelli
Adoptions
Aunt Martha's
Tom Ward
Children Youth Families Department
233 West Joe Orr Road
DCFS
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Chicago Heights, IL 60411
227 South 7th
505-827-7444
Springfield, IL 62701
Melinda Woods
Maryellen Strawniak
Human Services Technologies
Children Youth Families Department
901 W. Jackson, Suite 201
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Chicago, IL 60607
505-823-3991
Patricia Lowry, Post Adjudication
Eileen B. Bisgard
Betsy Holland
Review Board Coordinator
The Family Extension, Inc
Alternative Homes for Youth
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
Executive Director
9201 W. 44th Ave
405-521-4016 (ext. 127)
525 3rd Ave.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
P.O. Box 1458
303-940-5775 ext. 109
Jane Morgan, Adoption Specialist
Longmont, CO 80502
Department of Children and Families,
303-776-1224
Carol Holliday, Director
DHS
Adoption Options
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
Peggy Calloway
2600 S. Parker Road X2-320
405-521-2475
Adoptive and Foster Parent
Aurora, CO 80014
20661 E. Scott Circle
303-695-1610
Region VII - January 8, 1997
Denver, CO 80249
303-371-7986
Phyllis Lce, Adolescent Svcs Supv.
Charlcie Parrish
Mesa County Dept of Social Services
Adoption Program Manager
Irene Cooke
2952 North Avenue
Iowa DHS
Executive Director
P.O. Box 20000-5035
Hoover State Office Building
Denver CASA
Grand Junction, CO 81502-5035
5th Floor
225 16th Ave #640
970-248-2798
Des Moine, Iowa 50319
Denver, CO 80203
515-281-5388
303-832-4592
Forrest Lien, Director Clinical
Services
Patty Dawson
Ray Curtis
The Attachment Center at Evergreen
Adoption Contract Manager
Social Services Director
P.O. Box 2764
Children & Family Services
Forest Heights Lodge
Evergreen, CO 80437-2764
300 Southwest Oakley
P.O. Box 789 Forest Hill
303-674-1910
West Hall
Evergreen, CO 80437-0789
Topeka, KS 66606
303-674-6681
Joyce Jennings, Executive Director
913-296-4645
Colorado Children's Trust Fund
Sue Eilertsen
110 16th Street, Third Floor
Arlend Oney
El Paso County DHS
Denver, CO 80202
Adoption Specialist
105 N. Spruce
303-446-8860
P.O. Box 88
P.O. Box 2692
Department of Family Services
Colorado Springs, CO 80901
Barbara Killmore, Adoption Specialist
Jefferson City, MO 65103
719-444-5979
Department of Human Services
573-751-8942
1575 Sherman Street
Suzette Ellington
Denver, CO 80203-1714
Mary Dyer
Lutheran Family Services
303-866-3209
Adoption Program Manager
363 So. Harlan
P.O. Box 95026
Denver, CO 80226
Ann MacDonald
Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-5026
203-922-3433
The Family Extention
402-471-9331
525 Third Avenue
Elise Flesher
Longmont, CO 80502
Region VIII January
Colo Juvenile Firesetter
303-776-1224
Prevention Program
Arta D. Banks
University of Colorado
Greg & Denise McHugh, Director
Adoptive Parents
Campus Box 345
Colorado Association of Family
564 Florence St
Boulder, CO 80309-0345
and Children's Agencies
Aurora, CO 80010
303-492-4580
P.O. Box 10067
303-367-4128
Denver, CO 80210
LaWanda Girton
303-698-1876
Karen Beye
Lutheran Family Services/CCC
Managing Director
3707 Parkmoor Village Drive #101
Daniel Moore
Dept. of Human Services
Colorado Springs, CO 8091
Arapahoe County DSS
1575 Sherman
719-597-0700
1690 W. Littleton Blvd
Denver, CO 80203-1714
Littleton, CO 80120-2069
303-866-3063
303-728-5661
Dena Neujahr, Adoption Supervisor
Linda Schell
Deb Riley
Mesa County DSS
Administrator Adoption Services
Child Protection Services
2952 North Avenue
Dept of Human Services
P.O. Box 1300
P.O. Box 20000-5035
Children & Family Services Division
Aberdeen, SD 57402-7300
Grand Junction, CO 81502-5035
State Capitol - Judicial Wing
605-626-2388
970-248-2798
800 E Boulevard
Bismarck, ND 58505-0250
Department of Social Services
Jenelle Peterson, CEO
701-328-4805
Office of Field Management
Loving Homes, Inc.
300 E. 6th Street
212 West 13th Street
Don Schmid, Director
Sioux Falls, SD 57103-7020
Pueblo, CO 81003
Dept. of Human Services
719-545-6181
Children & Family Services Division
Tom Baxter
State Capitol - Judicial Wing
LDS Social Services
Paula Pickle, Executive Director
800 E. Boulevard
10 East South Temple Street
The Attachment Center at Evergreen
Bismarck, ND 58505-0250
Salt Lake City, UT 84150
P.O. Box 2764
701-328-4811
801-240-6500
Evergreen, CO 80437-2764
303-674-1910
Rev. Keith D. Ingle, President
Ron Boyce
Lutheran Social Services of ND
Children's Service Society
Melody Roe, Program Director
1325 South 11th Street
of Utah
The Adoption Exchange
Fargo, ND 58107-0389
1245 400 East - South 400
925 So. Niagara #100
701-235-7341
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Denver, CO 80224
801-355-7444
303-33-0845
Roger Schwinghammer, Executive
Director
LeRoy Franke, Adoption Specialist
Peggy Rudden, Volunteer Director
Catholic Family Service
Dept of Human Services
Arapahoe Advocates for Children
2537 South University
Division of Child & Family Services
3000 S. Jamaica Court, Suite 175
Fargo, ND 58107-0389
120 North 200 West, Suite 225
Aurora, CO 80014-4601
701-235-4457
Salt Lake City, UT 84103
303-695-1882
801-538-4100
Gary Wolesky, Executive Director
Jacquelyn D. Stanton
Village Family Service Center
Marty Shannon
The Bridging Group
1201 25th Street South
Children's Service Society
1350 Chambers Road, Suite 108
Fargo, ND 58106-9859
of Utah
Aurora, CO 80011
701-235-6433
1245 400 East South 400
303-341-0014
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Paula Davis
801-355-7444
Karen Studen
Dept of Social Services
Director, Child Welfare
Child Protection Services
Pat Worthington
Dept. of Human Services
Box 670
Foster Care Citizens
1575 Sherman Street
Watertown, SD 57201
Review Board
Denver, CO 80203-1714
605-882-5050
P.O. Box 45490
303-866-4365
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
Dede Glood
801-524-9068
Judy Rost
Lutheran Social Services
Dept of Public Health &
600 W. 12th Street
Elizabeth Groom, Director
Permanency Planning Specialist
Sioux Falls, SD 57104
Catholic Social Services
Human Services
605-336-3347
of Wyoming, Inc.
220 Lamme, Suite 2-E
c/o Diocess of Cheyenne
Bozeman, MT 59715-3579
Julie Klinger
P.O. Box 425
406-585-9984
Lutheran Social Services
Cheyenne, WY 82003
600 W. 12th Street
800-788-4606
Fielding M. McGehee
Sioux Falls, SD 57104
Adoptive Parent
605-336-3347
503 Hamline Street
Grand Forks, ND 58203
Bill Rankin
Danna Fabella
Tim Sanders, Clinical Supervisor
Department of Family Services
Assistant Director
Family and Children's Services
Social Services Consultant
Contra Costa County Social Services
107 Poplar
Hathaway Building
40 Douglas Drive
Caldwell, ID 83605
Cheyenne, WY 82002
Martinez, CA 94553-4068
1-208-454-0421
307-777-3570
510-313-1584
Mary Johnson
Wanda Scott
Human Services Supervisor
Region IX - January 14, 1997
Division of Family Social Services
Family and Children's Services
6171 West Charleston
P.O. Box 4166
Carole Rourke-Linker,
Bldg. 15
Pocatello, ID 83205
Arizona Department of Economic
Las Vegas, Nevada 89158
1-208-235-2952
Security
808-586-5709
P.O. Box 6123
Donna Euler
Phoenix, Arizona 85005
Linda Maisel
Adoptions Supervisor
602-542-2359
Catholic Community Servcies of
Lutheran Social Services
Northern Nevada
2201 Government Way, Suite J.
Mary Black
P.O. Box 5099
Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814
Black Family Children's Services
Reno, Nevada 89513-5099
1-208-667-1898
522 East Southern Avenue
702-322-7073
Phoenix, Arizona 85040
Janice Kroeger
602-243-1498
Region X
Deputy Attorney General
Department of Health and Welfare
Marcy Valen
Roseanne Hardin, Administrator
P.O. Box 83720- 10th Floor
Arizona Children's Home Association
Family and Community Services
Boise, ID 83720-0036
P.O. Box 7277
P.O. Box 83720 - 5th Floor
1-208-334-5537
Tucson, Arizona 85725-7277
Boise, ID 83720-0036
520-622-7611 Ext. 1331
1-208-334-5700
Claudia Hutchison
Program Coordinator
Jim Brown, Chief
Kathy James, Bureau Chief
Boys and Girls Aid Society
California Department of Social
Family and Community Services
018 S.W. Boundry Court
Services
P.O. Box 83720 - 5th Floor
Portland, OR 97201-3985
744 P Street, MS 19-69
Boise, ID 83720-0036
1-503-222-9661, ext 110
Sacramento, CA 95814
1-208-334-5700
916-445-3146
Nancy Miller
Meri Brennan, Adoption Program
Administrator, Citizen Review Board
Graham Wright
Specialist
325 13th Street NE, #404
Future Families
Family and Community Services
Salem, OR 97310
3233 Valencia Avenue
P.O. Box 83720 - 5th Floor
1-503-348-5430
Suite A-6
Boise, ID 83720-0036
Aptos, CA 95003
1-208-334-5700
Mary Ickies
408-662-0202 ext. 19
Adoption Program Specialist
Chuck Halligan
State Office for Services
Lansing Wood
Foster Care Program Specialist
to Children and Families
1009 Forest Court
Family and Community Services
500 Summer Street NE, 2nd floor
Palo Alto, CA 94301
P.O. Box 83720 - 5th Floor
Salem, OR 97310-1017
415-328-6832
Boise, ID 83720-0036
1-208-334-5700
Beth Meyers
Sara Berman, Chief
Services to Children and Families
L.A. County Department of Children
Linda Rodenbach, Program Manager
7825 North Lombard Street
and Family Services, Adoptions
Region IV Family and Children's
Portland, OR 97203
695 South Vermont Avenue
Services
1-503-731-4646
Los Angeles, California 90005
4355 Emerald Street
Boise, ID 83704
208-334-6800
Jan Knowles
Susan Arts
Permanency and Adoption Specialist
DFYS
State Office for Services
751 Old Richardson Highway Suite
to Children and Families
300
500 Summer Steet, 2nd floor
Fairbanks, AK 99701
Salem, OR 97310
Guy McMinds
Gloria Silas Webster
Director of Social Services
Delores Brown
Quinault Indian Nation
Linda Wang
PO Box 189
DHHS/OCR - Region X
Taholah, WA 98587
2201 Sixth Ave RX 11
Seattle, WA 98121
Lisa Guzman
206-615-2588
Coordinator
Native American Commission
Barbara Pearson
on Children and Families
Northwest Adoption Exchange
Muckleshoot Tribe
Director, NW Adopt Ex
39015 172nd Ave SE
1809 7th Ave
Auburn, WA 98092
Suite 409
206-939-6648
Seattle, 98101
206-282-0082
Chris Robinson
Supervisor
Kathy Tibbles
DSHS/Div of Program & Policy
Division of Family and Youth
Children's Administration
Services
PO Box 45710
PO Box 110630
Olympia, WA 98504-5710
Juneau, AK 99811-0630
360-902-7953
907-465-3633
Marie Jamison, Director
Linda West
Families for Kids Project (Kellogg
Judy Mukpik
grant)
DFYS
Children's Home Society
3025 Clinton Drive, 1st Floor
PO Box 15190
Juneau, AK 99801
Seattle, WA 98115
206-524-6020
Norma Acevedo-Kohout
Wilhelmenia Simpson
Norma Nelson
Brunhilde Eska
Permanancy Specialist
Linda Gonzales
Families for Kids
DFYS
Children's Home Society
550 W. Eighth Ave
PO Box 15190
Anchorage, AK 99501
Seattle, WA 98115
206-524-6020
Mary Marte
Catholic Social Services
David Simmons
225 Cordova St Bldg B
ICW Program Specialist
Anchorage, AK 99501
National Indian Child Welfare
Association
Melody Jamison
3611 SW Hood Suite 201
Fairbanks Counseling
Portland, OR 97201
and Adoption Agency
PO Box 71544
Gwen Townsend
Fairbanks, AK 99708
Executive Director
One Church One Child
451 SW 10th St Suite 120
Renton, WA 98055-2981
Appendix D
THEMES EMERGING FROM THE ADOPTION 2002 CONSULTATION PROCESS
ELIMINATING BARRIERS TO PERMANENCY
The Elimination of Geographical Barriers
A number of geographical barriers to the placement of waiting children were identified, including the lack of
dissemination of information on waiting families and children, a reluctance on the part of agencies to conduct
home studies to place children who are outside of their jurisdictions, a reluctance of agencies to accept home
studies conducted by agencies in other jurisdictions, difficulties in transferring Medicaid benefits, and issues with
the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children.
Lack of Adequate Services to Prevent Out-of-Home Placement, to Efficiently Serve Birth Parents, and to
Support Adoptive Families
Participants and correspondents expressed concern that the supportive services required for good child welfare
practice are unavailable or inadequate. The lack of substance abuse and mental health treatment was specified
repeatedly as a major factor that delays permanency. If no services are made available to the family, caseworkers
and judges cannot accurately assess parental progress and whether there have been reasonable efforts to prevent
placement and/or reunify the family, thereby delaying placement decisions for the child.
Participants also strongly felt that a lack of post-legal adoption services jeopardized many adoptions. In addition,
potential adoptive parents may be deterred from adopting by the fact that they cannot be assured post-legal
adoptive services, which are particularly critical to facilitate the placement of special needs children.
Current Funding Streams
Some participants stressed a need to provide more flexibility to spend money in the front end of the service
continuum for better family assessment, placement prevention, and reunification activities. Some participants felt
that the system currently provides rewards to States to keep children in foster care or reunify them, but not to
place them in adoption. In addition, they felt that potential adoptive parents are often not informed about the
availability of adoption subsidy which urther impedes the movement of foster children into adoption. The funding
stream problems are exacerbated by fragmentation and separation of foster care and adoption in the child welfare
system.
Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA)/Interethnic Adoption Provision
In discussions about MEPA and the Interethnic Adoption provision, groups repeatedly placed a strong emphasis on
the recruitment provisions of MEPA. Most participants volunteered no information or opinions on how to better
ensure compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions. One group of participants insisted that States continue
to ignore MEPA/Interethnic Adoption Provision and that HHS needs only to enforce the current law.
MOVING CHILDREN TO PERMANENCE MORE PROMPTLY
Reasonable Efforts Requirements
Participants indicated that the safety of the child was of paramount concern and that the child's best interests
should be at the heart of all decisions. In general, participants felt that the reasonable efforts requirements need
clarification. In general, the focus groups reacted positively to proposals to add a requirement that a reasonable
effort for permanency standard is needed.
Improvements in Court Processes
All focus groups and many correspondents emphasized that the courts are as crucial as the child welfare system to
ensure timely decision-making. They repeatedly called for the education of attorneys and judges about the
importance of permanency for children. They further suggested that the training of legal and child welfare staff be
combined, when possible, in order to build a common knowledge base that would enable them to better work
together. They cited the Court Improvement Projects, currently underway, as examples of the kind of technical
assistance and leadership that the Federal government can undertake with the judiciary.
Research, Training, and Technical Assistance to Develop New Child Welfare Tools
The groups offered specific proposals to develop new child welfare tools including family mediation, voluntary
relinquishment counseling, and open adoption, particularly for relative placements. The most common suggestion
was for more work in the area of concurrent planning. Participants in focus groups and correspondents advised
that the Federal government should take a leading role in the areas of research, model development, and training
and technical assistance.
Support for Alternative Permanency Arrangements
The groups and correspondents widely agreed that adoption is the most legally secure and developmentally
beneficial permanency arrangement. However, many tribal participants dissented from this view and cautioned that
adoption is frequently culturally inappropriate for Indian children. In addition, even though participants generally
recognized the superior benefits of adoption for children, they also felt that it was important to develop other
permanency options including guardianship, kinship care, and even co-parenting. Particularly with regard to
guardianship and kinship care, participants suggested that Federal and State governments provide more financial
support and services to families. Tribal representatives were especially vocal regarding the need to explore other
permanency options.
DOUBLING THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN WHO ACHIEVE PERMANENCY
Focus on the Children who are Hardest to Place
The participants repeatedly expressed apprehension that numerical targets and financial incentives might drive
States to focus on children who tend to be easier to place (e.g., very young children) and those who merely lack
legal finalization (e.g., those in adoptive placements with foster parents). They cautioned that attention should not
be diverted from the problems of children with special developmental needs, older children, or children in sibling
groups, who are the least likely to find permanency in a timely manner.
The Incentive Structure Inherent in Adoption 2002 Bonuses
Participants discussed their concerns that the Adoption 2002 financial bonuses may affect or distort the incentive
structure in the child welfare system. The participants wanted to use the Adoption 2002 fiscal incentives to benefit
the children who are hardest to place, without resulting in the separation of sibling groups, a disproportionate focus
on younger children, or an increase in adoption disruptions. In addition, they indicated that the bonuses should be
implemented in ways that are respectful of the rights of birth families and that improve the functioning of the
entire child welfare system over the long-term. The groups also were concerned that fiscal penalties might
accompany the bonuses, such as reductions in Title IV-E funds for children who remain in foster care for extended
periods of time.
Appendix E
STATE OF COLORADO
EXECUTIVE CHAMBERS
136 State Capitol
STATE of COMPANY
Denver, Colorado 80203-1792
Phone (303) 866-2471
1876
Roy Romer
February 12, 1997
Governor
Secretary Donna E. Shalala
Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Secretary Shalala:
I am pleased to congratulate you on your adoption policy work, particularly on your
efforts to expedite the placement of children with supportive families. This is an issue
critically important to the State of Colorado and I support President Clinton's goal to
double the number of adoptions by the year 2002.
I am eager to read your report to President Clinton on ways state and federal systems can
better serve children and help to move them quickly out of foster care to permanent and
supportive families. We are dedicated to minimizing disruption in the lives of these
children and look forward to working with Congress and the Administration on this issue.
In Colorado, we are focusing intently on promoting adoptions and strengthening families.
We are working with our state judicial system, with the assistance of the chief justice of
the Colorado Supreme Court, with the Colorado General Assembly, and with
representatives of county governments, private providers, and representatives of the
juvenile corrections, mental health, substance abuse treatment and developmental disability
systems to develop procedures. Our goals are to minimize disruption in the lives of
children, assure their safety, and see that they do not languish in foster care. Your
emphasis on strengthening and supporting adoptions for children who cannot be reunited
with their families of origin is a most important effort.
Again, 1 support your national leadership on the issue of adoption and on the broad issue
of helping children find and flourish in permanent, supportive families
Sincerely,
Roy Pay Pomer Romer
Governor
STATE OF [ELAWARE
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
THOMAS R. CARPER
GOVERNOR
February 12,1997
The Honorable Donna Shalala
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Secretary Shalala:
I was pleased to learn of President Clinton's initiative to double the number of
adoptions in this country by the year 2002. Finding permanent, stable, loving homes for
our most vulnerable children is an important goal for all of us.
During the last year in Delawar we were able to return 177 children to their
fami ies with the assistance of intensive " unification services. In addition, a major
comp onent of our child welfare waive IS the establishment of an assisted guardianship
program for children in foster care. 1 his guar iianship program offers one additional
option to create permanency for children for whom adoption is not possible. In Delaware
we will continue to work diligently with the Family Court and the Foster Care Review
Board to encourage adoption for foster children when that it the appropriate mean- to
achieve permanence.
I fully support the Administration's emphasis on permanency for children and
look forward to your agency's recommen lalions in this area. I will gladly work with you
and Congress to realize our President's goals in this area.
Sincerely,
Jom Sanger Thomas R Carper
Governor
TATNALL BUILDING
CARVEL STATE OFFICE BLOG.
DOVER. DELAWARE 19901
WILMINGTON. DELAWARE 19801
(302) 739 4101
(302) 577 3210
FAX (302) 739 2775
FAX (302) 577 3113
STATE
THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
LAWTON CHILES
February 11, 1997
Secretary Donna E. Shalala
Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Secretary Shalala:
In his proposed budget and other initiatives, President Clinton has indicated his
concern and commitment that adoption promotion be an important piece of our country's
agenda. It is my understanding that you will soon forward a report to the President which
will focus on the goal of doubling the adoptions of foster children throughout the United
States by the year 2002.
I support that goal enthusiastically and know that it is truly realistic. In fact, in
Florida we have increased adoption rates by more than 80 percent over the past five years
and remain committed to that effort. Through a statewide public-private partnership as
part of my Children's Initiative, we have developed a highly visible recruitment
campaign which is successfully matching stable and loving adoptive parents with foster
children.
Evidence tells us that there is an adoptive family for every child and that effective
communication is the key that will open those doors. Florida's outreach tools have
included partnering with churches and the media, an internet adoption home page, and
our Waiting Children pamphlet featuring children in need of adoptive parents. These
efforts have highlighted these children and stimulated inquiries leading to the formation
of new families. At the creative center of this effort are the hearts of people who care
deeply and dedicate their lives daily to the happy futures of these children.
The President's leadership on this issue will unite us is J nation in this important
commitment. I look forward to studying your report and recommendations fully, and
working with the Administration and Congress in surpassing the goal.
With best regards, I am
Lawton LAWTON CHILES
BEA THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
AUG
2619
STATE OF ILLINOIS
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
SPRINGFIELD 62706
JIM EDGAR
GOVERNOR
February 13, 1997
The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Clinton:
Within the week, the Department of Health and Human Services will be
releasing its report on how to double the number of children in foster care
who are adopted or placed in permanent homes by the year 2002. I am
writing to express my support for this goal. I strongly encourage actions,
such as financial incentives, that would help to move more children in foster
care into safe, permanent homes.
Illinois has made adoption a top priority and is currently undertaking a
variety of new initiatives that will give children a sense of permanency in
their lives. For example, the Illinois Department of Children and Family
Services (DCFS) is just beginning to implement a five-year test
demonstration project called "subsidized guardianship" that has been
approved by HHS under a federal waiver. The waiver permits Illinois to use
federal funds in a statewide program to subsidize relatives and foster parents
who will assume guardian responsibilities for children. This initiative
provides children who live in situations where adoption is not an option with
permanency.
In terms of other initiatives, the state is currently researching how it can
provide adoption subsidies in a more equitable and cost effective manner.
DCFS has instituted performance-based contracts in an effort to provide
economic incentives for private agencies to move children to permanency. I
have also recently signed a law that will make it easier to terminate parental
rights in cases of extreme abuse and neglect.
Paper
Once again I would like to emphasize the importance of this issue. I look
forward to working with Congress, HHS, and your Administration in finding
an effective strategy to accomplish the goals outlined above.
Sincerely,
Jim Edgan
Jim Edgar
GOVERNOR
STATE OF MARYLAND
OFFICE CF THE GOVERNOR
February 13, 1997
PARRIS N. GLENDENING
GOVERNOR
ANNAPOLIS OFFICE
STATE HOUSE
103 STATE CIRCLE
ANNAPOLIS. MARYLAND 21401
(410, 974-3901
The Honorable Donna E. Shalala
WASHINGTON OFFICE
SUITE 311.
Secretary of Health and Human Services
444 NORTH CAPITOL STREET, N.W.
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20001
Room 615-F
(202) 635-2215
200 Independence Avenue SW
TDD (410) 133-3095
Washington DC 20201
Dear Secretary Shalala:
Marylanders applaud President Clinton's objective of doubling the number of adoptions
occurring throughout our nation by the Year 2002. There is no more important goal than.
ensuring that all our children, especially those with special needs, are raised by stable, loving
families. When birth parents are unable to properly raise their children despite the provision
of family preservation services, those children must join new families through adoption.
We are anxiously awaiting the Department of Health and Human Services report on the
strategy for achieving this important goal. We look forward to receiving its recommendations.
Maryland, through our Department of Human Resources, is enthusiastic about working with
your Administration on increasing adoptions.
Improving the well being of children is a primary goal of my Administration. With
assistance from the Child Welfare League of America, we have reviewed our entire continuum
of child welfare services. We will be implementing recommendations to improve our efforts
to preserve birth families when feasible and to move children to new permanent families
through kinship guardianship or adoption when necessary.
Adoption has been a key interest of mine. Shortly after entering office, I appointed an
Adoptions Task Force. Their recommendations have already resulted in new permanency
planning legislation and an increased number of adoptions. While final figures are not yet
available for 1996, the number of finalized adoptions increased by at least fifteen percent over
1995.
Again, I applaud the President's objective in increasing adoptions. Maryland stands
ready to assist in achieving his goal for the year 2002.
Donna,
Sincerely,
Great day on
Pamis
Monday with The
Parris N. Glendening
President Thanks!
Governor
P.
2.d
STATE OF MICHIGAN
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
LANSING
JOHN ENGLER
GOVERNOR
February 12, 1997
The Honorable Donna E. Shalala
Secretary, U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services
615 F Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Madam Secretary:
I was pleased to see the President's support for doubling adoptions by the
year 2002. I, too, believe that every child in America deserves to live in a safe and
stable home, whether the child be returned home, adopted, placed in legal
guardianship, or granted another safe, healthy and permanent placement. With
this in mind, Michigan has carefully crafted a child welfare program that has
seen tremendous results.
In Michigan, nearly 60 percent of the children in the child welfare
system are age six and older, part of a sibling group that should be adopted
together, minority race children or children who may have physical, mental or
emotional impairments. Adoption subsidy is an effective tool to assist special
needs children to achieve a permanent home instead of remaining in foster care.
In fact, in Michigan, approximately 90 percent of children adopted were eligible
for the adoption subsidy. Michigan's Adoption Subsidy program provides support
and/or medical subsidy to adoptive families to encourage the placement of these
special needs children. The support subsidy pays for basic support and care for
the adopted children. Medical subsidy pays for necessary treatment for a
physical, mental or emotional condition which existed prior to the adoption.
During fiscal year 1996, the Michigan Family Independence Agency and
its private partners placed a record number 2,189 children in new permanent
families. This is more than double the number of adoptions in 1989 and
represents an 18 percent increase over 1995. The largest increases were in the six
to nine-year-old age group (31.3 percent, up from 28.3 percent in 1995) and black
children (53.0 percent, up from 48.3 percent in 1995). The number of children
adopted by relatives increased from 26.2 percent in fiscal year 1995 to 29.5 percent
in 1996 and approximately 50 percent were placed with their foster parents.
The Honorable Donna E. Shalala
Page 2
February 12, 1997
Despite Michigan's record-breaking success, I believe Michigan can
move even more children into permanent placements in future years. To support
this goal, adoption subsidies in Michigan's proposed fiscal year 1998 budget will
total $102.2 million.
In addition to promoting adoption, Michigan is currently addressing
many aspects of Children's Services. Lieutenant Governor Connie Binsfeld, one
of our state's strongest and most effective advocates on children's issues, headed
the Binsfeld Children's Commission and issued a report that included various
initiatives the state could take to improve the lives of children. Enhanced training
of child welfare workers, the Children Safety Assessment project and other
initiatives begun in recent months will be continued, and additional funds for the
statewide implementation of child death review teams will be provided. The fiscal
year 1998 budget provides a flexible pool of $10 million to implement
recommendations made in the Lieutenant Governor's report. The funds will be
available to local multipurpose collaborative bodies to support locally developed
plans that implement recommendations of the report and increase overall
effectiveness of child welfare efforts.
I look forward to working with the Clinton Administration on initiatives
that would help further the goals of moving more children into the safe, stable
home that all children deserve.
Sincerely,
John John Governor Engler Engly
JE/elh
SUGGESTED FEDERAL ACTIONS TO INCREASE ADOPTION AND PERMANENT
PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN
DOUBLE THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN ADOPTED OR PERMANENTLY PLACED
BY THE YEAR 2002
A - De-link AFDC/ SSI requirement from eligibility for Federal participation in Adoption
Assistance.
B- While recognizing the need for changes in the role of the federal government and the
movement away from entitlement programs, there remain some areas where federal mandates are
needed. It is extremely important that there be an assurance of necessary financial support to
adoptive families of special needs children receiving adoption assistance. Thus it is important to
amend PL 96-272 to require that states provide monthly adoption assistance. Currently the
Federal Title IV-E Adoption Assistance program allows monthly assistance as a state option.
Federal participation is considered an open ended entitlement program for those states that
choose to provide monthly adoption assistance. Since the provision of monthly adoption
assistance is optional, State Legislatures must approve Adoption Assistance budgets during each
budget cycle.. Consequently there is no assurance of continued financial support and the
programs themselves are at risk of abrupt change.. This lack of assurance of ongoing support to
prospective adoptive families constitutes a barrier to adoption of children with special needs.
C - Amend PL 96-272 to allow needs based monthly adoption assistance and require that the
maximum monthly grant be equal to the maximum faster care reimbursement allowed within the
state. This proposal would assure the special needs of the child are mal, would recognize the
different functions of foster parenting and adoption, and would address the discrepancy berween
foster care reimbursements and adoption assistance payments.
D - Continue to require carolling children receiving adoption assistance on Medical Assistance.
E - Allow federal participation for non medical reimbursements such as costs of alterations to
home or van, reimhursements for child care. respite care etc. These reimbursements would not
be subject to & means test.
E - Establish a guardianship assistance program with federal participation when it is determined
that a child with special needs can not return home. could he cared for by relatives or kin but who
don't wish to adopt or for whom adoption and TPR in not in their best interest.. Simply expand
the adoption assistance program to include otherwise eligible children for whom there is a
transfer of guardianship vs. a TPR.
F - Create federal supports and Incentives to assist states in addressing the directive to consider
giving preference to placement of children with adult relatives contained in Section 505 of the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, and the diligent
recruitment of forter and adoptive families reflective of the cthnic and racial diversity of children
for whom foster and adoptive homes are needed as required by Section 554 of the Multiethnic
Placement Act One option could be to oliminate compositive discretionary grants awarded
under Adoption Opportunities. Allocate the dollars directly to states in invest in implementing
these directives.
G . Offer federal incentives to states to establish regionally based programs for recruitment
training and retention of adoptive families. We know recriment is not the primary problem.
The primary problem is developing an infrastructure to quickly provide necessary education,
adoption and foster care studies, and on going support to persons responding to recruitment
efforts. A Regionally based recruitment and retention program could pool the resources (public
and private) of the identified region; provide quick response In inquiries; offer ongoing education
and training programs; and provide ongoing support to families after the adoption.
H - Allow states to seek federal financial participation in meeting the costs of residential care for
children receiving adoption assistance (or guardianship assistance if created). Currently states
may not seek federal Title IV-E federal participation in meeting the costs of residential care
unless the AFDC relatedness standard is met. This is seldom the case. Consequently the cost of
care is financed principally through the state and the adoptive parent. The adoption assistance
received by the parents may be used to contribute to the cost. ^ high percentage of the children
requiring adoption assistance also need residential treatment in order to address their issues.
Federal participation, along with that of the state and the adoptive parent will help ensure the
child receives necessary treatment
MOVE CHILDREN MORE RAPIDLY FROM FOSTER CARE TO PERMANENT
HOMES
A - Enact federal legislation recognizing transfer of guardianship to relative or kin as a
disposition equivalent to long term foster care or Termination of Parental Rights and adoption.
B - Amend P.L. 96-272 to require permanency decisions within 4 months of the out-of-home-
placement unless the court finds a basis for extending the time frame. Award financial
incentives to states who meet the requirement
c -Provide federal support (legislative and financial) enciviraging concurrent planning for
children in out-of-home care. Provide financial support for out-of-home placements where the
foster parent would become the adoptive parent if reunification ufforts are unsuccessful.
INCREASE PUBLIC AWARENESS ABOUT CHILDREN WAITING FOR ADOPTION
AND ENCOURAGE AMERICANS TO CONSIDER ADOPTION
A - Federal policy should formally recognize the child's relationship with relatives, biological
family and foster parents. Policy should support adoptive families of children with special needs
who try to maintain, and where appropriate, nurture these relationships.
B - Allow families receiving adoption assistance to receive the dependent child tax credit with
out having to declare the adoption assistance as income.
c - Provide financial incentives for states to develop and implement creative programs and
services designed to support and encourage cross cultural involvement among families adopting
children interracially.
D - Provide the same level of paid and unpaid parental leave for federal employees who adopt as
is provided to those who give birth. Provide federal direction encouraging states to adopt similar
policies.
3
DIESTATE STATE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Washington Office
400 North Capitol Street, Suite 365
*1858*
Washington, D.C. 20001
(202) 624-5308
ARNE H. CARLSON
KATHEE McCRIGHT
GOVERNOR
February 12, 1997
DIRECTOR
The Honorable Donna Shalala
Secretary
Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Secretary Shalala:
On behalf of the State of Minnesota, I wish to express support for the Administration's goal
to move children more quickly from foster care to safe, permanent homes. Minnesota shares
this vision, and, over the years, has brought together public and private agencies to fashion a
broad framework to support the adoption of children with special needs.
Our state framework includes several elements:
A statewide Task Force on Permanence which meets monthly to address relevant
adoption issues, and identify and recommend needed changes in practice and
policy;
Television and newspaper presentations of children in need of adoption;
Recruitment of prospective adoptive families by public and private agencies from
throughout Minnesota;
A photo listing album with information about specific children in need of
adoptive homes is published bi-monthly and distributed to counties, private
agencies and libraries throughout the state;
A computer-based statewide adoption exchange (with access to the national
adoption exchange) capable of identifying potential matches between waiting
children and waiting families;
A requirement that all county social service agencies complete adoption home
studies at no cost to families or individuals desiring to adopt a child with special
needs; and
A comprehensive Adoption Assistance program which not only helps adoptive
parents meet the ongoing costs associated with parenting children with special
needs, but recognizes the need to reimburse for special non-medical costs.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
The Honorable Donna Shalala
February 12, 1997
page 2
This framework has been integral to the development of positive working relationships between
county agencies and private child placing agencies. As a result, close to one-third of the
children committed to the guardianship of the Commissioner of Human Services are in pre-
adoptive homes at any point in time.
I appreciate your recent request for suggestions on federal actions which could be taken to
encourage the adoption of children with special needs, and have attached a set of specific
recommendations. I am convinced that further supportive actions on the federal level combined
with planned enhancements to Minnesota's efforts will allow many more of our waiting
children to find homes.
I look forward to reviewing your report to the President on adoption to be issued this week,
and will continue to work with you on this very important issue.
Warmest regards,
ARNE Are H. CARLSON
Tarlson
Governor
CAU STATE STATE AND
THE ORK in
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
RALEIGH 27603-6001
JAMES E. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
February 12, 1997
The Henorable Donna Shalala
Department of Health and Human Services
200 In dependence Avenue, S.W,, Room 615F
Washrigton, DC 20201
Dear Secretary Shalala:
I applaud the President's goal to double the number of adoptions and reduce the time
childre 0 are in foster care by the year 2002. All children need permanent, loving families.
In North Carolina, this is a priority for us. As a result of efforts we have already undertaken
in the tate, the number of foster children adopted in North Carolina is up 66 percent in the previous
two years. Likewise, the number of children removed from their homes is down 3 percent since
extra attention has been focused on keeping families together and on finding adoptive homes for
eligible children.
Our efforts to increase adoptions in North Carolina include:
implementation of the Families for Kids initiative sponsored by the W.K. Kellogg
Foundation which emphasizes adoption of foster children who cannot return home;
increase in financial adoption assistance effective July 1, 1994;
strong partnerships between public and private adoption agencies;
a federal Adoption Opportunities grant which provided $100,000 to help find adoptive
homes for 28 foster children with special needs; and
an Adoption Media Campaign, started in July 1994, that has resulted through January
1997 in 90 children being placed into adoptive homes.
I look forward to working with you to better address the needs of these children. All
children deserve to be reared in nurturing, loving homes.
My warmest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Sittat
JBH.p un
CAUNTY OF LOS ASCELLA
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
GLORM MOLINA
500 WEST TEMPLE STREET. 866 KINNETH HAHN HALL OF ADMINISTRATION
YVONNE BRATHWATE BURKE
ISV YAROSLAVSKY
Los ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012
DON KNABE
(213) 974-2222 / FAX (213) 680-3283
MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH
CALIFORNIA
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE
SUPERVISOR SECOND DISTRICT
February 11, 1997
The Honorable Donna E. Shalala
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Secretary Shalala:
We are very pleased to learn about the President's adoption initiative. There is nothing
more important for vulnerable children in our country and in Los Angeles County than to
be permanently placed in loving homes as soon as possible.
We applaud the President's commitment to double the number of adoptions in 5 years and
look forward to reading the report being prepared by the Department of Health and Human
Services on how this goal might be achieved. We are prepared to work with the
Administration, the Congress. and our State leaders in helping California realh this
important objective.
YBB:MS:jar
YVONNE BRATHWAITE Second District BURKE Dunti
Gen GLORIA MOLINA First Malion District Supervisor,
DON KNABE
Supervisor,
Supervisor, Fourth District
morey ZEV YAROSLAVSKY
MICHAELO. Mile ANTONOVICH
Supervisor, Third District
Supervisor, Fifth District
GREAT
8
OF
Cugahoga County
February 13, 1997
COMMISSIONERS
Jane L. Campbell
Timothy F. Hagan
Tim McCormack
The Honorable William J. Clinton
President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
The purpose of this letter is to commend you for your National Adoption Initiative. Here in
Cuyahoga County we are very committed to finding permanency for our children who have entered
the child welfare system. We have taken several steps to insure that effective decision making takes
place starting on the first day of a child's involvement in our system to provide permanency as quickly
as possible for each child.
In the past three years we have nearly tripled the number of adoptive placements that have
taken place from 104 in 1994 to 303 in 1996. At the same time the number of children coming into
permanent custody is growing at an ever faster rate. There were 382 children who came into
permanent custody in our county in 1996. Today we have approximately 500 children waiting for
an adoptive placement. There is a great need to find families for these waiting children in our
community as there is across the nation.
We have added a significant number of staff to our adoption department and made significant
investments in our community education and recruitment efforts. The primary focus of these efforts
is to inform members of our community about the needs of our children who are waiting for
permanent families and to ask them to help in recruiting families for these children. Your leadership
in providing incentives to families to encourage them to adopt :3 very welcome as is your utilization
of the national media to increase public awareness of the needs of these children who are waiting for
permanent families.
We have been aided in this process by a Federal Minority Adoption grant, a grant from the
Kellogg Foundation and a grant from the Casey Foundation These grants have not only provided
us with needed funding but they have also provided us with linkages to technical assistance that have
helped us improve the quality of our adoption and recruitment programs.
The Honorable William J. Clinton
Page two
February 13, 1997
Your strong stand against reducing funds for child protection, foster care and adoption is
critical to meeting the needs of these children. There is a very strong linkage between foster care and
adoptions. In Cuyahoga County over sixty per cent of the adoption placements last year were with
foster parents. Your efforts to support foster parents is critical to supporting the recruitment of
adoptive parents.
Through our Neighborhood Foster Care Initiative in Cuyahoga County we are significantly
increasing the number of foster parents who live in the same neighborhoods as the families of the
children who are in our custody. We believe that Neighborhood Foster Care has great potential for
recruitment of adoptive families through the circles of support for foster children that are growing
in these neighborhoods.
We commend you for your commitment to find permanent families for waiting children. We
believe that your initiative will provide significant support for states and local communities to find and
support permanent families for these children. We look forward to working with you and your
administration to meet the critical goals of your National Adoption Initiative.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Jane L. Cambbell
Timothy F. Nagan
Tim McCormack
/mj
Appendix F
Federal Programs to Support Adoption
With the passage of P.L. 96-272, the Adoption Assistance and Child
Welfare Act of 1980, the Federal government established a clear
focus on the need for permanency for children in foster care and
the importance of permanency planning and timely decision-making
for these children. The law increased protections for children in
foster care by requiring case plans that included a description of
the placement and its appropriateness, and a plan for services to
facilitate the child's return home or to another permanent
placement. An 18 month initial dispositional hearing requirement
was legislated and an administrative or judicial case review was
required at least every six months.
Several important Federal laws and programs promote the adoption
of children with special needs. These include:
Title IV-E Adoption Assistance - Title IV-E of the Social
Security Act provides funds to States to facilitate the
adoption of children with special needs who were or would
have been eligible for AFDC, thereby preventing long or
inappropriate stays in foster care. Federal matching funds
are available to States for a one time payment for the non-
recurring costs of adopting a special needs child, and for
monthly subsidies to adoptive families to assist them with
caring for a child with special needs. Federal funds also
are used to assist States with the administrative costs of
managing the program (e.g., for the recruitment and
assessment of adoptive families), and for staff training.
Adoption Opportunities Program (Child Abuse Prevention and
Treatment and Adoption Reform Act of 1978) - The Adoption
Opportunities Program works to eliminate barriers to adoption
and provide permanent homes for children who would benefit
from adoption. It does so by: (1) promoting adoption
legislation and procedures in the States and territories of
the United States in order to eliminate jurisdictional and
legal obstacles to adoption; (2) promoting quality standards
for adoption services, pre-placement, post-placement, and
post-legal adoption counseling, and standards to protect the
rights of the children in need of adoption; and (3)
demonstrating expeditious ways to free children for adoption
for whom it has been determined that adoption is the
appropriate plan. This discretionary program awards grants
and contracts to public and private non-profit agencies.
The Adoption Tax Credit - In August 1996, President Clinton
signed into law the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996
which authorizes a $5,000 tax credit ($6,000 in the case of a
child with special needs) for qualified adoption expenses.
This tax credit is designed to help alleviate some of the
financial barriers to adoption.
Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 (MEPA/IEP) - The MEPA, as
amended by the Interethnic Adoption Provisions of the Small
Business Job Protection Act of 1996, was designed to
prohibit denial or delay in the foster or adoptive placement
of children on the basis of race, color, or national origin;
increase the number of adoptive and foster care families for
children in foster care; and increase the number of children
who are adopted. These laws seek to ensure that the adoption
process is free from discrimination and delays on the basis
of race, culture and ethnicity.
The Court Improvement Program (CIP) - The CIP provides State
courts with the opportunity to collaborate with the other
organizations and individuals responsible for promoting and
protecting the well-being of children and families to review
laws and procedures designed to provide rights and protection
to parents, families, and children. It provides State courts
with the flexibility to design assessment tools which
identify ineffective laws or procedures and barriers to
effective decision-making, highlight practices which are not
fully successful, examine areas found to be in need of
correction or added attention, and then implement reforms
which facilitate the timely execution of plans for
permanency.
The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) - ICWA established
requirements and standards for child-placing agencies to
follow in the placement of Indian Children for the purpose of
protecting the cultural heritage of these children. These
standards include: the provision of remedial, culturally
appropriate services for Indian families before a placement
occurs; notification of tribes regarding the placement of
Indian children; and, when placement must occur, it requires
that children be preferentially placed in Indian homes.