1. Judge Sheri Roberts, Juvenile Court Newton County November 15, 2011 GA CASA Conference 1

2.  Timeline of Events  Description of Project  View from the Bench  Recommendations that came from the Project  Where we go from here  Questions & Answers 2

3. 3 The Committee on Justice for Children

4.  Scientific Definition:  Children most likely to negatively impact state conformity with CFSR Permanency Composite 3  Practical Definition:  Children most likely to “age-out” without permanency. 4

5. 5 Permanency Composite 3: Achieving permanency for children in foster care for long periods of time Measure C3 - 1: Exits to permanency prior to 18th birthday for children in care for 24 + months: Of all children in foster care for 24 months or longer on the first day of the year shown, what percent was discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday and by the end of the fiscal year? A permanent home is defined as having a discharge reason of adoption, guardianship, or reunification (including living with relative). Measure C3 - 2: Exits to permanency for children with TPR: Of all children who were discharged from foster care in the year shown, and who were legally free for adoption at the time of discharge (i.e., there was a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father), what percent was discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday? A permanent home is defined as having a discharge reason of adoption, guardianship, or reunification (including living with relative) Measure C3 - 3: Children Emancipated Who Were in Foster Care for 3 Years or More: What percent of children were in care for 3 years or longer who either: 1) exited foster care in the year shown with a discharge reason of emancipation or 2) reached their 18th birthday while in foster care but had not discharged?

6. Recipe  Cold Cases Ingredients  89 data elements from AFCARS Foster Care file Final Product  Tastes about 90% good! 6

7.  APPLA is one of the permissible permanency goals under the Adoption & Safe Families Act of 1997.  A child may have a permanency goal of APPLA, but only when the State agency has documented to the court a compelling reason for determining that it would not be in the best interest of the child to follow one of the other four specified options. ▪ 45 CFR § 1355.20(v)  State must consider all other options permanency options first, and even then, must document a compelling reason for any alternate plan: ▪ 45 CFR § 1355.21(h)(3) 7

8.  Examples of a compelling reason may include:  The case of an older teen who specifically requests that emancipation be established as his/her permanency plan;  The case of a parent & child who have a significant bond, but parent is unable to care for the child b/c of an emotional or physical disability and the child’s foster parents have committed to raising him/her to the age of majority and to facilitate visitation with the disabled parent ▪ 45 CFR § 1355.21(h)(3)(i)-(ii) 8

9. SSM § 1006.8: Two Options for APPLA  Long-Term Foster Care Signed, Informal Agreement by Substitute Caregiver and Child  Emancipation Basically Same as Above, but Nobody to Sign Long-Term Foster Care Agreement  Policy recognizes neither option is really permanency, and cautions against adopting as permanency plan for any child. 9

10. DHS Practice Bulletin: Permanency For Children: APPLA. January 2009  Generally Appropriate for some older youth, age 16 or older.  Insists compelling reasons “be convincing and forceful. [They] must be supported with very strong, case-specific facts and evidence which includes justification for the decisions and reasons why all other permanent options for a child are not reasonable, appropriate, or possible.” 10

11. Policy Title: Establishing the Goal of APPLA D.C. CFSA, June 25, 2009  Child at least 16, with concurrent plan to identify adults who will commit to youth after time in foster care ends  Youth must reconsider permanency options 6 weeks before every permanency hearing.  APPLA goal shall be constantly examined and revisited at all relevant team meetings and reviews – never considered fixed or immutable. 11

12. VA DSS, Volume VII, § 3B - 7.6 thru 7.7  The selection of APPLA is appropriate only if the child has a severe chronic emotional, physical, or neurological disabling condition for which the child requires long-term residential treatment of six months or longer.”  But allows APPLA for older youth preparing to transition to ILP when all other goals are have been considered and ruled out. 12

13. 13

14.  Diligent Search must be a priority  Limit use of APPLA  Involve children in plans/connections  Improve ILP services, need consistency  Meaningful representation  Improve judicial oversight  Reduce adoption dissolution  Prosecute sexual abuse  Increase access to reproductive health info 14

15.  State Representative Oliver introduced House Bill 23 in January 2011 to provide transparency and oversight in the administration of psychotropic meds by DFCS.  Partnership between Casey Family Programs, Barton Center at Emory University, DFCS, J4C for independent oversight by local child psychiatrist.  Karen Worthington researched and published paper on the issue. PDF available here: www.gajusticeforchildren.org 15

16.  Online Videos:  Pat O’Brien, You Gotta Believe! www.law.emory.edu/centers-clinics/barton-child-law-policy- center/presentations.html  Sue Badeau, Casey Family Programs www.gajusticeforchildren.org 16