ICAMA & ICPC Liz Oppenheim Summit of the States on Interstate Cooperation National Center for Interstate Compacts June 1-2, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TREATMENT PLAN REQUIREMENTS
Advertisements

Mandates of Statutory Services and Case Management
Child Protective Services Enhanced Perinatal Surveillance May 30, 2007.
URUGUAY’s efforts to address synergies among the Conventions Workshop on synergies and cooperation with other conventions 2-4 July 2003 Espoo, Finland.
Child Safeguarding Standards
Subsidized Guardianship Permanency Initiative. SG Introduction Focuses on improving permanency outcomes for children in out-of-home care through a comprehensive.
Education Outcome Measures for Courts Child Welfare Agency’s Perspective on the Need for Education Outcome Measures Kathleen McNaught ABA Center on Children.
Surrogate Parent Training
Treatment Plans and Administrative Case Reviews In a Nutshell.
Child Welfare Services Family centered services to achieve well- being through ensuring self-sufficiency, support, safety, and permanence. Dual tracks-
The mission of the Office of the Child Advocate for the Protection of Children (“OCA”) continues to be legislatively mandated. The OCA has responsibility.
“Reform of the Child Care System: Taking Stock and Accelerating Action” South East Europe 3 – 6 July 2007, Sofia.
A court dedicated to protecting children and promoting families
© 2007 by The Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance. All rights reserved.1 Medicaid and Title IV-E Making Medicaid Happen: Providing Title.
Safeguarding Children Revised Standards Proposed Changes in Legislation Developments in Practice Experience of Safeguarding Reviews Request for.
1 Agency/Court Collaboration in the CFSR: ENGAGING COURTS AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM The National Child Welfare Resource Center For Organizational Improvement.
1 Lessons Learned about the Service Array from the First Round of Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs) The Service Array Process National Child Welfare.
1 What Is Child Welfare? Child Welfare in the United States Background for understanding the public child welfare system The Service Array Process National.
Surrogate Parent Training Presenter: Title: District: Date: Presented by:
Medicaid and Non Title IV-E Making Medicaid Happen: Providing Title XIX to Non Title IV-E Populations Sharon McCartney, JD AAICAMA, APHSA.
Allianceforchildwelfare.org Adoptions.
Pennsylvania Child Protective Services Law: Module 4: Reporting and the Role of the Child Welfare Professional Transfer of Learning The Pennsylvania Child.
Hague Conference on Private International Law Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in respect of Inter-country Adoption.
1 Building Bridges Across State Lines: The Interstate Compact on Adoption & Medical Assistance (ICAMA) AAICAMA Annual Conference 2007.
Towards the Best Interests of the Child in Cross- Border Situations - Singapore’s Experience- District Judge Joyce Low Director, Planning, Policy and Administration,
NSW Interagency Guidelines for Child Protection Intervention 2006 Briefing Information Session Child Protection Senior Officers Group.
1 Critical issue module 6 Separated children in emergency settings.
205: Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children 1.
THE FOUR STEP SECTION 106 PROCESS: AN INTRODUCTION TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION All reproduction rights reserved.
The ICPC Process ICPC: How to Navigate Across State Lines and Indian Country The ICPC Process Karen Dinan Senior Counsel Office of the Assistant Attorney.
Prepared by American Humane Association and the California Administrative Office of the Courts.
© Association of Administrators on the Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance - AAICAMA Proposed ICAMA Forms 7.01, 7.02 and 7.03 Presenters:
What is the Interstate Compact? The Compact is a uniform law, adopted in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands, for the purpose.
C.P.S. Safety Plan Model. MISSION: To protect abused and neglected children, to support the efforts of families to care for and parent their own children.
Judge Mark Pouley Commissioner Michelle Ressa October 9, 2012 ICW Summit.
LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT ©PACER Center, Inc., 2005.
1 Using Title IV-E in the Juvenile Justice System ABA Center on Children and the Law National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues.
ARC Chairperson Training Introduction 1. The Language of Special Education Acronyms 2.
The Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 (MEPA) As Amended by the Interethnic Adoption Provisions of 1996 (IEAP)
DIAKON Lutheran Social Ministries/Family Design Resources Tools That Work Conference 11/03 Implementing Best Practice Standards in Permanency Planning.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services Implementing the Affordable Care Act in Massachusetts 2013 Legislative Package.
CHDP DIRECTOR/DEPUTY DIRECTOR TRAINING SECTION III EPSDT: A Comprehensive Child Health Program 1 7/1/2010.
Washington – Oregon ICPC Border Agreement Training.
Association on American Indian Affairs History and Importance of Government to Government in ICW Proceedings Jack F. Trope Executive Director.
School Law and the Public Schools: A Practical Guide for Educational Leaders, 5e © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 5 Individuals.
1 Developing a Framework for an Early Intervention System of Care NECTAC/ ITCA Finance Seminar May 22, 2006.
HB 446/SB 142 Standards for Out-of-State Placement of Ohio Children Stakeholder Meeting April 6, 2010.
Concurrent Permanency Planning. Concurrent Permanency Planning (CPP) The process of working towards reunification while at the same time planning an alternative.
Transfrontier contact concerning children Regional Conference on the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Belgrade,
Guidance Training CFR §483.75(i) F501 Medical Director.
Association of Administrators of the Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance 1 Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance Administering.
Redistribution of Resources in the Process of De-institutionalization Halyna Postoliuk Director of “Hope & Homes for Children” in Ukraine Chisinau November.
Understanding Applicable Laws in Child Protection and Child Welfare Cases: Presentation at TCAP Tribal Courts Conference – Minneapolis August 20, 2015.
Case Study: Rewriting the ICPC Liz Oppenheim Summit of the States on Interstate Cooperation National Center for interstate Compacts June 1-2, 2006.
 Legislative mandate*: ◦ Reform Group Homes & FFAs with robust & diverse stakeholder input ◦ Legislative report with recommendations  Continuum of Care.
OCCAS CONFERENCE September 25 & 26, 2003 ALTERNATIVES TO COURT: CUSTOMARY CARE CUSTOMARY CARE.
Closing the Gap for Skipped- Generation Households.
Foster Care Adoption Kathy Searle Utah Adoption Exchange.
A court dedicated to protecting children and promoting families
Completing the circle: concurrent planning and the use of Family Finding, Blended perspective meetings, and family group decision making processes.
Challenges Today - the Parliaments and their Responsibilities
Washington – Oregon ICPC Border Agreement Training
Washington – Oregon ICPC Border Agreement Training
State and Resource Provider Guide to Implementing EMAC
Texas Department of Family and Protective Services January 23, 2015
Apple Health Core Connections Managed Care for Foster Children
Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act: New Opportunities for Federal Funding for Child Welfare Key Questions and Considerations.
Texas Department of Family and Protective Services December 19, 2014
House Human Services Committee
Foster Care to 21 Carl E. Ayers, MSW
Presentation transcript:

ICAMA & ICPC Liz Oppenheim Summit of the States on Interstate Cooperation National Center for Interstate Compacts June 1-2, 2006

Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance (ICAMA) Background  Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 required that states protect the interstate interests of children receiving adoption assistance through an “interstate compact approved by the Secretary or otherwise” (475 U.S.C. 675 (3)).  In 1986, the first nine states became party to the compact

ICAMA ICAMA is an administratively enacted compact, that is, enabling legislation is enacted by the state legislature delegating authority to administrative officials to enter into specific agreements on behalf of the state. The compact is then executed (execution method”) by the appropriate authority in the state

ICAMA Having an administratively adopted compact in this instance was important because:  Changes in federal programs impacting the compact (Medicaid and adoption assistance)are frequent  The programs of the states are so dissimilar THEREFORE, in order for the compact to work, a greater degree of flexibility and availability for amendment was needed

ICAMA First enacted by 9 states in 1986 Today, 48 states and the District of Columbia are party to ICAMA The two remaining non-member states are committed to joining the compact

ICAMA’s Success State developed solution to federal mandate Provides the mechanism that ensures that children with special needs receive necessary supports and services, wherever they live. Most importantly, medical assistance Prevents needless delays or denials of essential medical benefits by providing standard forms and procedures by which interstate eligibilities and transfers of Medicaid become a proper functioning reality.

ICAMA’s Success States can better recruit and retain prospective adoptive parents and preserve adoptive families when they can assure these families that the services and benefits in their adoption assistance agreements will be provided no matter where they live. ICAMA provides clear lines of communication between states which ensure that problems families encounter will be resolved when they arise.

ICAMA’s Success Is critically important because: –Medical Assistance is perhaps the most critical support for the children covered by the compact –Adoption across state lines is critical to state efforts to increase adoptions from foster care –The internet has blurred all state lines for children waiting for a permanent, safe, and loving family –According to the most recent AFCARS data, of the 532,000 children in foster care, 103,460 had the goal of adoption

–A Comparison of 1997 and 2002 data indicated that the number of children residing in a state other than the adoption assistance state grew by 70% over that 5- year period –Adoption exchanges report that 63% of prospective families who respond to child- specific adoption recruitment do not reside in the same state as the child

Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) Background  Grew out of a recognition of the failure of importation and exportation statutes to provide protection for children  Recognition that a state’s jurisdiction ends at its borders and that a state can only compel an out-of-state agency or individual to discharge its obligations toward a child through a compact

ICPC Background (cont.)  Concern that states did not have to provide supportive services to the children placed in their state  Drafted in New York was the first state to enact it.  Law in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands  State ratification of the compact was through embodiment of the interstate agreement in statute

ICPC Protects Children By: Assuring that children placed across state lines for foster care or adoption are placed with persons of in residential treatment facilities that are: Safe Suitable Able to provide proper care

Protects States By: Fixing legal responsibility Fixing financial responsibility Fixing responsibility for supervision and the provision of services for the child

ICPC’s Success For over 50 years, ICPC has provided states the mechanism by which they could work together to ensure protection and services to children placed across state lines by:  Providing the sending agency the opportunity to obtain home studies and evaluation of the proposed placement

 Allowing the prospective receiving state to ensure that the placement is not “contrary to the interests of the child” and that applicable laws have been followed  Ensuring that the sending agency does not lose jurisdiction over the child once the child moves to the receiving state  Providing the sending agency the opportunity to obtain regular supervision and reports on the child’s progress.

Solutions for the Future: The new ICPC Renewed focus on safety and permanency brought ICPC into the spotlight Confirmed the important role that ICPC plays in ensuring appropriate placements for children Highlighted the problems with the compact as currently written and implemented

ICPC was written before the interstate highway system, before the development of administrative law, and before the computer revolutionized the way we live. The new Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children provides a better legal framework to ensure that children are placed across state lines in a timely manner with safe and suitable persons. The changes in the new compact address the deficiencies documented in the current compact system and the problematic and legally deficient language of the 1960 compact.

The Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children The American Public Human Services Association (APHSA) revised the ICPC with input from a diverse group of state human service administrators, state and local child welfare directors, compact administrators, and a broad and diverse groups of national organizations and over 100 stakeholders across the country. The writing of the new compact began in March 2004 and was completed in March 2006.

ICPC’s Continued Success Is critically important because:  Interstate placements constitute approximately 5.5% (43,000) of children in foster care during a given year  Most of the placements of children across state lines lead to permanency for these children, that is, these children are placement with families who become their permanent families

 For many of the 530,000 children in foster care, many will be placed with relatives who live in states other than the state responsible for their care and protection. Relatives are increasingly the best resource to provide permanency for many of the children in foster care.  Children can’t wait - Timely placements are critical  It is a State Solution to State Problems

For More Information on ICAMA and ICPC CONTACT: APHSA 810 First Street, NE Suite 500 Washington, DC (202)