New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report
and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
On June 1, 2007, the Program Instructions (PI) issued by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children,
Youth and Families (ACYF) required the State Court Improvement Program
(CIP) for the Basic Grant to conduct an assessment of the interstate placement
of children established by the Safe and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster
Children Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-239). The PI called for the Basic Grant
application for 2007-2009 to include as part of its strategic plan “the steps
planned and undertaken to assess the State courts’ role, responsibilities and
effectiveness in the interstate placement of children.” (p. 9 of PI). A report of
the assessment was to be completed and submitted with the application for the
2008-2010 Court Improvement Basic Grant (SFY 2008) funding, due to the
Administration for Children and Families (ACF) by June 30, 2008.
Background
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1993 established a
grant program for state court improvement. It was designed to help courts
focus on their role in cases relating to foster care and adoption, and improve
their handling of those proceedings. States were advised to work in
collaboration with the State child welfare agency, the citizen review board,
community attorneys, Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), guardians
ad litem, and attorneys who represent agencies to implement all activities of
the CIP. In August of 1994, New Jersey began to organize a State CIP. The
Chief Justice of New Jersey authorized the Administrative Office of the
Courts (AOC), Family Practice Division, to accept the challenge of overseeing
the implementation of the grant program. The former Administrative Director
of the Courts, Robert D. Lipscher, created an advisory committee which was
chaired by Judge Joseph M. Nardi, Jr. The committee was called the Court
Improvement Oversight Committee (Oversight Committee). In or about 2002,
former Administrative Director of the Courts, Richard J. Williams, renamed
the Oversight Committee to the Children in Court Improvement Committee
(CICIC). The CICIC was a Judiciary committee appointed by and advisory to
the Administrative Director of the Courts regarding Children In Court (CIC)
cases relating to child abuse and neglect, juvenile delinquency, foster care and
adoption. The CICIC currently consists of 24 members including CIC and
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 2
Juvenile judges, all child welfare stakeholders and staff from the AOC. The
chairperson of the CICIC is a Presiding Judge of the Family Part who has
expertise in CIC cases.
The CICIC formed a work group to assess the State courts’ role,
responsibilities and effectiveness in the interstate placement of children. This
involved a legal assessment of the laws relating to the interstate placement of
children and an analysis to determine whether New Jersey courts have become
involved in the process of expediting the interstate placement of children. The
CICIC work group included members from the Office of Child Advocate, the
Office of the Public Defender (Office of Parental Representation and Office of
Law Guardian) and the AOC. The CICIC workgroup also included the
Compact Administrator from the Interstate Services Unit from the Department
of Children and Families (DCF), Division of Youth and Family Services
(DYFS).
Even before the CICIC work group met, the Compact Administrator
from DCF’s Interstate Services Unit was asked to provide a letter setting forth
what DCF had undertaken to implement the Safe and Timely Interstate
Placement of Foster Children Act of 2006 (hereinafter the Act). New Jersey
included the letter in its 2007-2009 Court Improvement Program Basic Grant
application. When the CICIC workgroup met, the Compact Administrator
from DCF’s Interstate Services Unit (hereinafter Compact Administrator) was
instrumental in explaining how the interstate placement of children typically
proceeds through the child welfare system depending on whether New Jersey
is the sending state or the receiving state of a child. For the actual assessment,
the Compact Administrator was asked to provide a flow chart depicting how a
child welfare case normally proceeds through the ICPC process whether New
Jersey is the Sending or Receiving State. (See Attachment A). The flow chart
references the New Jersey Home Licensure Requirements Notification and
Agreement to Comply form. (See Attachment B). In addition, the Compact
Administrator was asked to complete a survey which should provide
additional information as to how the interstate placement of children works
either through the ICPC process and/or the Act. (See Attachment C). The
survey should help to identify barriers that exist in the timely implementation
of the Act. The Compact Administrator provided a memorandum dated
October 2, 2006 addressed to the DCF NJ Interstate Services Unit, which set
forth New Jersey’s child welfare agency’s plan and forms to use to implement
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 3
the Act. (See Attachment D). The Compact Administrator provided an
explanation of the Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance
(ICAMA) because the Compact Administrator has used the form to train
judges on issues that relate to the ICAMA in the interstate placement of
children. (See Attachment E). The Compact Administrator also provided a
form titled “ICPC Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ).” (See Attachment F).
The Compact Administrator also sent an updated letter dated April 24, 2008
setting forth what DCF had undertaken to implement the Act. (See
Attachment G). Finally, the Compact Administrator was asked to provide any
statistics she could which are kept by DCF regarding child welfare cases
involved with the interstate placement of children.
The Compact Administrator also identified judges most familiar with
the child welfare cases involved in the interstate placement of children. The
CICIC workgroup sent those judges a questionnaire to learn their typical role
in these cases, whether they are taking any measures to expedite these cases
and what barriers, if any, they have identified in having these cases timely
heard.
There are three laws that relate to the interstate placement of children.
They are: (1) the Safe and Timely Placement of Foster Children Act of 2006
(Act); (2) the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act
(UCCJEA) and (3) the Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children
(ICPC).
I. Legal Analysis of the Safe and Timely Placement of Foster
Children Act of 2006
New Jersey is a current member of the ICPC. Federal Public Law 109239, the Safe and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster Children Act of 2006
(Act), creates new standards that apply to the interstate placement of children
and was signed into law on July 3, 2006. The law became effective October 1,
2006 and amends the United States Code, Title 42, Chapter 7, Social Security,
Subchapter IV—Grants to States for Aid and Services to Needy Families with
Children and for Child Welfare Services. The Act modifies the requirements
States must meet to receive Titles IV-B and IV-E funding and imposes upon
each State’s ICPC central office staff requirements to track data and report to
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 4
the federal ACF. The legal analysis pertaining to the major changes to the Act
is set forth below. Some of the changes impact upon the child welfare agency
which, in New Jersey, is DYFS, and other changes impact upon the court.
A. Revised ICPC
The Act specifically begins by stating that it is the sense of Congress
that “States should expeditiously ratify the revised Interstate Compact for the
Placement of Children.” While New Jersey is a member of the ICPC, New
Jersey has not ratified the revised ICPC. To date, only Ohio and Missouri
have enacted the revised ICPC. Moreover, after Ohio enacted the revised
ICPC, there were revisions being proposed to the revised ICPC which Ohio
has not enacted. Thus, the status of Ohio’s initial enactment may be in
question. It will take 35 States to ratify the revised ICPC. If the revised ICPC
is ratified, the Interstate Commission will be established. The Commission’s
role is to set forth the rules for how the revised ICPC will operate. Said rules
would have the full force and effect of a statutory law in a member state. Due
to the separation of powers doctrine, New Jersey’s Judiciary takes no position
on whether New Jersey’s legislature should ratify the revised ICPC. In the
event New Jersey enacts the revised ICPC, and it is ratified by 34 additional
states, New Jersey courts may be required to conduct another assessment of
what may be required of them by law.
B. Notification Requirements
One requirement the Act imposes upon the courts is found under 42
USC 638(b). It states, “[The] highest State Court shall have in effect a rule
requiring State courts to ensure that foster parents, pre-adoptive parents, and
relative caregivers of a child in foster care under the responsibility of the State
are notified of any proceedings to be held with respect to the child…”
New Jersey Court Rule 5:12-4(i), Notice of Proceedings to Care Giver,
was submitted with New Jersey’s application for the FFY 2007-2009 Court
Improvement Program (CIP) Basic CIP grant. Prior to the submission of New
Jersey’s application for FFY 2007-2009 CIP Basic grant, the Regional Office
of the ACYF asked the AOC for a copy of New Jersey’s Court Rule providing
notification to foster parents, pre-adoptive parents and relative caregivers of a
child. Accordingly, New Jersey Court Rule 5:12-4(i) was sent to ACYF for a
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 5
determination of whether the court rule was in compliance with the new
federal law. New Jersey was advised by the Regional Office of ACYF that
the court rule is in compliance with the new federal law.
DCF also provided a letter to the CIP Director setting forth steps DCF
had taken to comply with the requirements of the Act. The letter is dated May
25, 2007 and was attached to the FFY 2007-2009 CIP Basic grant application
filed with the Regional Office in July 2007. The DCF Interstate Services Unit,
in conjunction with DYFS, created forms which provide Notification of
Placement to the courts as well as to foster parents and relative caregivers of
proceedings held with respect to the child.
No recommendation is required as New Jersey is in compliance with
the notification requirements of the Act.
C. Collaboration Between Courts in Different States
and Between Courts and Parties
A second requirement imposed by the Act for courts is to share
information with other states. With respect to the sharing of information,
there is a requirement found under 42 USC Section 659h(a)(1)(E)(i) that
states, “Courts in different states [are] to cooperate in the sharing of
information.” Two additional requirements found under 42 USC Section
659h(a)(1)(E)(ii) and (iii) respectively are that: courts are authorized to obtain
information and testimony from agencies and parties in other states without
requiring interstate travel and the to permit parents, children, attorneys, and
other necessary parties to participate in interstate placement cases without
requiring interstate travel. The purpose of cutting down on travel is to
implement a best strategy to expedite the interstate placement of children.
One way New Jersey is fulfilling the second requirement of
collaboration between the courts and parties is through New Jersey Court Rule
1:6-2(e), Form of Motion; Hearing, which allows motions to be made by
telephone conference without a court appearance. This may be done in all
civil matters, on the court’s own motion or on a party’s request. This court
rule helps to cut down on travel and expedite child placements.
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 6
Another way New Jersey is fulfilling the second requirement of
collaboration between the courts and parties is by allowing an out of state
attorney to appear Pro Hac Vice. In order to represent a party in New Jersey,
one must be a member of the New Jersey Bar in good standing or be admitted
Pro Hac Vice. New Jersey Court Rule 1:21-1, Who May Practice;
Appearance in Court. New Jersey Court Rule 1:21-2, Appearance Pro Hac
Vice, sets forth the conditions for application for admission by an out of state
attorney. An interested party who resides out of state may want to rely upon
counsel of their choice from his/her home state. New Jersey’s Pro Hac Vice
rule sets forth the parameters for an appearance by an out of state attorney. If
an out of state party chooses to use the Pro Hac Vice Court Rule, the party's
appearance in New Jersey is not required. Thus, this Court Rule ensures
collaboration between the courts and out of state parties.
The New Jersey judicial questionnaire indicated that our judges have
used both of the above court rules in cases involving the interstate placement
of children or that they have not needed to rely upon said rules for an
interstate placement to be completed. To the extent that some of our judges
have used both court rules in the interstate placement of children shows that
these rules do help foster the collaboration between courts and parties.
Judge Stephen Rideout (ret.) has written an article entitled “How Can
Judges Make the ICPC Work Better.” In that article, he suggests “a few
simple ways” that judges can make the ICPC work better to ensure
collaboration between courts in different states and between courts and
parties. Many of his ideas are supported by three sections of the federal
UCCJEA. Section 110 of the model UCCJEA, which is also found in New
Jersey’s UCCJEA under N.J.S.A. 2A:34-62, emphasizes the role of judicial
communications by:
• Authorizing a court to communicate with a court in another State
concerning any proceeding arising under the UCCJEA;
• Allowing communication in different ways such as by telephone,
computer or other electronic medium; and
• Not precluding any method of communication in which a record may be
made and in so doing recognizing that modern communication
techniques are always developing.
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 7
Likewise, Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 111 of the model
UCCJEA, which is also found in New Jersey’s UCCJEA under N.J.S.A.
2A:34-63, supports all modes of communication when taking testimony of
parties or witnesses in another State. Subsections (b) and (c) of both the
model UCCJEA and New Jersey’s statute provide that modern modes of
communication are permissible in the taking of testimony and the transmittal
of documents. Subsection (b) allows any appropriate location for the
deposition or testimony. Subsection (c) even goes further and states that
“documentary evidence transmitted from another state to a court of this State
by technological means that do not produce an original writing may not be
excluded from evidence on an objection based on the means of transmission.”
Finally, Section 112 of the model UCCJEA, which is also found in New
Jersey’s UCCJEA under N.J.S.A. 2A:34-64, deals precisely with the
cooperation between the courts. It sets forth mechanisms courts may utilize to
cooperate with each other in order to decide cases in an efficient manner
without causing undue expense to the parties. The model UCCJEA and State
statute set forth all sorts of requests that one court can make of a court in
another State in order to preserve testimony. The requests include, but are not
limited to:
• Holding an evidentiary hearing;
• Ordering a person to give evidence under the procedures of the State in
which he/she is appearing;
• Ordering a custody evaluation of a child involved in a pending
proceeding;
• Forwarding transcripts of the record to the State making the request;
and
• Ordering a party to a child custody proceeding or any person having
custody of the child to appear in the proceeding with or without the
child.
As a result of Judge Rideout’s simple suggestions to improve the ICPC,
the questionnaire sent to our judges attempted to ascertain if they were using
any of his suggestions to expedite child welfare cases. The judicial responses
indicated that judges were using many of the enumerated suggestions to move
interstate placements along by using the following procedures:
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 8
• Contacting the ICPC administrator in New Jersey or the other State to
obtain information about the progress of an ICPC matter;
• Admitting properly authenticated evidence offered from another State
in a hearing before the judge;
• Allowing parties living in other States to participate as parties in
interstate litigation without having to travel to New Jersey;
• Allowing attorney participation or involvement in such cases without
the lawyer being a member of the bar of the State of New Jersey;
• Allowing attorneys located in another State to file motions in our State
as well as to question and cross-examine witnesses in teleconferences
and video conferences that are convened by a judge in New Jersey
either with local counsel or without local counsel; and
• Communicating directly, such as by telephone, with a judge/judicial
officer in another State to organize the interstate litigation process or to
discuss legal issues.
The questionnaire also indicated that none of the New Jersey judges
participating in the questionnaire had been contacted by judges in other States
either to co-preside with them in hearings or to take any testimony from a
person in New Jersey. In addition, none of our judges were asked to make
inquiries about any case or make any inquiries of our child welfare agency in
any case. However, they also answered that they knew of no New Jersey law
or procedure that would prohibit them from using those procedures.
Although most judges reported that they did not know whether their
efforts met with success or expedited the process, one judge reported that even
in the most difficult case or situations, when a court becomes involved,
someone will take another look at the file and that tends to expedite the home
study because the file has been brought to someone’s attention.
New Jersey is in compliance with this second requirement of insuring
court cooperation, the sharing of information and allowing people outside the
State to participate in hearings without being physically present in New
Jersey.
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 9
Recommendation #1: Notwithstanding the above, New Jersey has
approximately 33 new CIC judges with less than two years of experience.
Training should be developed for all CIC and Juvenile judges, who may
conduct permanency hearings, regarding the interstate placement of children.
This training may encompass aspects of: (1) the Safe and Timely Interstate
Placement of Foster Children Act of 2006 which went into effect on October
1, 2006 and which requires court action to ensure compliance with the law,
(2) the ICPC, (3) aspects of the UCCJEA, (4) applicable Court Rules which
may assist judges in the interstate placement of children, and (5) procedures
and practices which may assist judges in the interstate placement of children.
Training would be funded through the Court Improvement Program and DCF should help
develop the training.
D. Reasonable Efforts
A third requirement imposed by the Act upon the child welfare agency
is found under 42 USC Section 671(a)(15)(C) which deals with the State Plan
for foster care and adoption assistance. Section 671(a) deals with the
requirements of the State Plan to be eligible for payments under Title IV-E. In
general, 42 USC Section 671(a)(15)(A) provides that when the court makes
reasonable efforts findings, the child’s health and safety shall be the
paramount concern. In 42 USC Section 671(a)(15)(B) provides that with
certain exceptions, reasonable efforts shall be made to preserve and reunify
families. However, 42 USC Section 671(a)(15)(C) states that when the
continuation of reasonable efforts of the type described above in 42 USC
Sections 671(a)(15)(A) and (B) is determined to be inconsistent with the
permanency plan for the child, the court must make a reasonable efforts
finding of whether the child welfare agency placed the child in a timely
manner in accordance with the permanency plan including, if appropriate,
through an interstate placement and must take steps necessary to finalize the
permanent placement of the child.
Title 30 of the New Jersey Statutes deals with Dependent and Neglected
Children. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1 deals with the first reasonable efforts finding
and is consistent with federal law. It parallels Section 671(a)(15)(A) and (B).
N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1(a) provides that when the court makes reasonable efforts
finding, the child’s health and safety shall be the paramount concern. N.J.S.A.
30:4C-11.1(b) provides that in any case in which DCF accepts a child in care,
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 10
reasonable efforts shall be made to preserve and reunify families. Reasonable
efforts must be made to prevent the child’s removal from home barring certain
exceptions set forth in N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.2. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1(c) allows
for concurrent planning by stating that reasonable efforts to place a child for
adoption may be made concurrently with reasonable efforts to reunify the
child with the child’s family. Finally, N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1(d) is similar to
Section 671(a)(15)(C) because it also states that when the continuation of
reasonable efforts of the type described above is determined to be inconsistent
with the permanency plan for the child, the court must make a reasonable
efforts finding that DCF placed the child in a timely manner in accordance
with the permanency plan. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1(d), however, makes no
reference to the consideration of an interstate placement which is required by
the Act.
Recommendation #2: The reasonable efforts inquiry needs to be examined
to ensure that relatives or others close to the child who live out- of- state are
being identified and considered by DCF. If an out-of-state placement is
appropriate, DCF needs to ensure that that it is adequately following through
to finalize any appropriate out-of-state placements. DCF should review
N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1, N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.2 and N.J.S.A. 30:4C-61.2 to
determine what language needs to be added to the statutes to make them
comport with the Act; namely, language that states that when pursing a
permanency plan that does not include a return to the parents, the court must
consider, if appropriate, efforts that have been made to effectuate permanency
through an interstate placement. DCF should report any recommended
changes to the CICIC. The CICIC should consider advising all CIC and
Juvenile judges, who may conduct permanency hearings, and the Child
Placement Review Boards of this federal requirement. Depending on DCF’s
recommendations, the CIC Subcommittee of the Conference of Family
Presiding Judges may need to review the CIC Case Processing Manual and
the CIC Judge’s Bench Reference Book to determine if they should be revised.
E. Finding Regarding In and Out of State Placements
A fourth requirement imposed by the Act upon the child welfare agency
is found under 42 USC Section 671(a)(15)(E)(i). It requires that when a court
determines that there exist exceptions for making reasonable efforts to
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 11
preserve and reunify the family as set forth in 42 USC Section 671(a)(15)(B),
a permanency hearing, which considers in-state and out-of-state permanent
placement options, shall be held for the child within 30 days.
N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.2 sets forth when a court determines that DCF is not
required to provide reasonable efforts to prevent the placement of a child. The
criteria include, but are not limited to: (1) a parent who has subjected the child
to aggravated circumstances of abuse, neglect, cruelty or abandonment, (2) a
parent was convicted of murder or other enumerated crimes, (3) the rights of
the parent to another child have been involuntarily terminated, or (4) the
removal of the child is required due to imminent danger to the child’s life,
safety or health. Similarly, N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.3 states that in any case where
a court of competent jurisdiction has determined one of the criteria set forth
above, DYFS is not required to provide reasonable efforts to reunify the child
with a parent. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-61.2 is similar to 42 USC Section
671(a)(15)(E)(i) in that it requires a permanency hearing to be held within 30
days after the court determines that an exception has been established and
DCF is not required to make reasonable efforts to reunify the child with the
parent. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-61.2, however, does not require DCF to consider
interstate placement as a permanency plan for the child as required by the Act.
Recommendation #3: The reasonable efforts inquiry needs to be examined
to ensure that relatives or others close to the child who live out of state are
being identified and considered by DCF. If an out-of-state placement is
appropriate, DCF must ensure that it is adequately following through to
finalize any appropriate out-of-state placements. DCF should review N.J.S.A.
30:4C-61.2 to determine what language needs to be added to the statute to
make it comport with the Act; namely, language that states that when
foregoing reasonable efforts as allowed by law, DYFS shall consider both in
and out of state placement options for the child. DCF should report any
recommended changes to the CICIC. The CICIC should consider advising all
CIC and Juvenile judges, who may conduct permanency hearings, and the
Child Placement Review Boards of this federal requirement. Depending on
DCF’s recommendations, the CIC Subcommittee of the Conference of Family
Presiding Judges may need to review the CIC Case Processing Manual and
the Judge’s Bench Reference Book to determine if they should be revised.
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 12
F. Concurrent Planning Amendment
A fifth requirement imposed upon the child welfare agency under the
Act is found in 42 USC Section 671(a)(15)(F). It allows for concurrent
planning to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian while the child
welfare agency continues to make reasonable efforts to reunify the child with
the child’s family. The statute, however, was amended to provide that such
concurrent plan finding must include identifying appropriate in-state or outof-state placements.
As stated above, N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1(c) allows for concurrent planning
by stating that DCF can make reasonable efforts to place a child for adoption
while DCF continues to make reasonable efforts to reunify the child with the
child’s family. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1(c), however, does not require DCF to
identify appropriate interstate placements as required by the Act.
Recommendation #4: The reasonable efforts inquiry must be examined to
ensure that relatives or others close to the child who live out of state are being
identified and considered by DYFS. If an out-of-state placement is
appropriate, DYFS needs to ensure it is adequately following through to
finalize the out-of-state placements. DCF should review N.J.S.A. 30:4C11.1(c) to determine what language needs to be added to the statute to make it
comport with the Act. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11.1(c) deals with concurrent planning
but makes no reference to provide that a concurrent plan finding must identify
appropriate in-state and out-of-state placements. DCF should report any
recommended changes to the CICIC. The CICIC should consider advising all
Children in Court and Juvenile judges, who may conduct permanency
hearings, and the Child Placement Review Boards of this federal requirement.
Depending on DCF’s recommendations, the CIC Subcommittee of the
Conference of Family Presiding Judges may need to review the CIC Case
Processing Manual and the Judge’s Bench ReferenceBook to determine if
they should be revised. Since DCF is involved in concurrent planning, the
CICIC should consider cross system training for all our stakeholders on this
issue. Training would be funded through the Court Improvement Program and
DCF should help develop the training.
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 13
G. Home Studies
A sixth requirement imposed by the Act upon the child welfare agency
is found under 42 USC 671(a)(26)(A)(i). It affects child welfare proceedings
by requiring States to conduct and complete home studies, which assess the
safety and suitability of placing a child in the home, within 60 days. An
exception to the 60 day requirement is provided (through September 30, 2008)
if the State's failure to complete the home study is due to circumstances
beyond its control, in which case, the State will be given an additional 15 days
or 75 days total to complete the home study.
The Compact Administrator has provided in Attachment A the flow
chart for ICPC requests which sets forth the steps the child welfare agency has
taken to meet the Act’s requirement. The Compact Administrator has also
provided in Attachment D a memorandum shared with the DCF’s NJ
Interstate Services Unit which sets forth the New Jersey’s plan to meet the
requirements of the Act and attaches the forms the child welfare agency must
use to implement the Act.
No recommendation is required as New Jersey has developed
procedures for interstate home studies as mandated by the Act.
H. Child Welfare Agency to Use State, Regional and National
Adoption Exchanges
A seventh requirement imposed upon the child welfare agency under
the Act is found under 42 USC Section 675 which deals with definitions.
Specifically, 42 USC Section 675(1) deals with the child welfare agency's
written case plan that must be presented to the court. Language has been
added to 42 USC Section 675(1)(E) under the case plan definition to ensure
that the case plan documentation include, at a minimum, “child specific
recruitment efforts such as the use of state, regional, and national adoption
exchanges including electronic exchange systems to facilitate orderly and
timely in-state and interstate placements.”
DCF policy and case practice set forth procedures for registering
children with the New Jersey Resource Adoption Exchange, the National
Adoption Exchange (NAE), Downey Side of New Jersey and Adopt a Special
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 14
Kid (AASK) Midwest. For more information see the DYFS Policy Manual,
Part IIM, Section 1900, subsection 1902. (See attachment H).
Originally, the CICIC thought no recommendation was necessary but
the Acting Administrative Director of the Courts has requested that the
following recommendation be included in this report:
Recommendation #5: DCF should review Title 30 and their case practices
to determine if the case plan documentation should include, at a minimum
"child specific recruitment efforts such as the use of state, regional, and
national adoption exchanges including electronic exchange systems to
facilitate orderly and timely in-state and interstate placements." DCF should
report any recommended changes to the CICIC. Depending on DCF’s
recommendations, the CIC Subcommittee of the Conference of Family
Presiding Judges should review the CIC Case Processing Manual and the
CIC Judge’s Bench Reference Book to determine if they should be revised.
The CICIC should consider cross system training for all our stakeholders on
this issue. This is an issue which would definitely be of interest to all child
welfare stakeholders. They should be advised of this new requirement under
the Act if cross system training is not offered.
I. Increased Case Worker Visits
An eighth requirement imposed by the Act upon the child welfare
agency is found under 42 USC Section 675(5)(A)(ii), which deals with
definitions of the term “case review system.” It increases case worker visits.
The Act requires that on-going visitation between the caseworker and the
child occur at least every six months (instead of every twelve months) in
interstate cases and allows the child welfare agencies to contract with private
agencies to make on-going visits, if necessary. This change places additional
responsibilities for monitoring both the placements and the frequency
caseworkers are visiting with children outside the State.
While New Jersey has no corresponding definition or requirement
under N.J.S.A. Title 30, DYFS policy and case practice dictate that children in
out of state placements should be visited quarterly. For more information see
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 15
the DYFS Policy Manual, Part IIJ, Section 1100, subsection 1101, Placement
Decision and Supervision. (See Attachment I).
No recommendation is required as New Jersey requests that children in
out of state placement receive quarterly visits.
J. Amendments to Case Reviews
A ninth requirement imposed by the Act upon the child welfare agency
is found under 42 USC 675(5)(C) which deals with the definition of the term
“case review system.” This statute relates both to the third requirement
imposed upon the courts by the Act regarding the reasonable efforts finding
and the eighth requirement imposed upon child welfare agency regarding
increased case worker visits. The requirement is that the case review system
shall assure that an out-of-state placement shall be considered in a
permanency hearing for a child not being returned home. Also, if the child is
placed out-of-state as set forth above, the court shall determine whether the
out-of-state placement continues to be in the child’s best interest.
New Jersey has no corresponding definition or requirement under
N.J.S.A. Title 30.
Recommendation #6: DCF should review Title 30 to determine whether
it is necessary to amend the appropriate statute dealing with definitions which
affect the child welfare agency and define terms it commonly uses such as a
“case review system” as this is a requirement for the child welfare agency.
As stated in recommendation #2 above, DCF should review N.J.S.A. 30:4C11.3 and N.J.S.A. 30:4C-61.2 to determine what language needs to be added
to the statute to make it comport with the Act; namely, that when pursuing a
permanency plan that does not include a return to the parents, the court must
consider, when appropriate, efforts have been made by DCF to effectuate
permanency through an interstate placement. In addition, language may need
to be added to make sure that courts determine whether the out-of-state
placement continues to be in the child’s best interest at all review hearings.
DCF should report any recommended changes to the CICIC. Depending on
DCF’s recommendations, the CIC Subcommittee of the Conference of Family
Presiding Judges should review the CIC Case Processing Manual and the
CIC Judge’s Bench Book to determine if they should be revised. The CICIC
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 16
should consider advising all CIC and the Juvenile judges, who may conduct
permanency hearings, and the Child Placement Review Boards of this
requirement. The CICIC should also consider cross system training for all
our stakeholders on this issue. Training would be funded through the Court
Improvement Program and DCF should help develop the training.
K. Case Plans to Include Medical and Educational Records
A tenth requirement imposed by the Act upon the child welfare agency
is found under 42 USC 675(5)(D) which deals with the term “case review
system.” It requires that the most recent medical and educational records of a
child and complete copies of same must be given to the foster care provider at
the time of placement and to children aging out of the foster care system. In
fact, a copy of the child’s health and education record must be supplied to the
child at no cost when he or she is leaving foster care. This enhances the
existing requirement which only required same “to the extent available and
assessable.”
New Jersey has no corresponding definition or requirement under
N.J.S.A. Title 30.
Recommendation #7: DCF should review Title 30 to determine whether it
is necessary to amend the appropriate statute dealing with definitions which
affect the child welfare agency and define terms it commonly uses such as a
“case review system” as this is a requirement for the child welfare agency.
DCF should report any recommended changes to the CICIC. The courts may
consider ordering that all case plans include the most recent medical and
educational record of a child. The CICIC should consider cross system
training for all our stakeholders on this issue. Training would be funded through
the Court Improvement Program and DCF should help develop the training. This is an
issue which would definitely be of interest to all child welfare stakeholders.
They should be advised of this new requirement under the Act if cross system
training is not offered.
L. Agency to Collect and Provide Annual Reports to ACF
An eleventh requirement imposed upon the child welfare agency under
the Act, found under 42 USC Section 673B, is the collection of data and
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 17
completion of an annual report to ACF. State ICPC offices must now gather
and report on the following:
• The total number of home studies that New Jersey requested from
another State;
• The total number of home studies that New Jersey completed for
another State;
• The number of home studies completed in 30, 60, 75 and 76+ days;
• The frequency of and reasons for all 15 day extensions;
• The number of extensions that were successful (i.e., when the home
study was completed within 75 days); and
• State actions that assisted in meeting the 75 day requirement.
In a letter from DCF that New Jersey included in its 2007-2009 CIP
Basic Grant application, the Compact Administrator of DCF’s Interstate
Services Unit did advise that “data systems to monitor the timeframes as noted
in the Safe and Timely Act are currently being addressed so that the mandated
yearly statistics may be provided.” In the current information provided in the
flow chart (Attachment A) and the Compact Administrator’s updated letter
(Attachment H), the Compact Administrator advised that fields are being
added to the Interstate database to identify the Act’s data requests. Fields
have been added to DCF’s Interstate Data Base to allow DCF to report the
number of home studies that DCF requested from another State, completed for
another state, and the number of days it took to complete those home studies.
In addition, fields were added to allow DCF to begin tracking the frequency
of, and the reasons for, 15 day extensions and whether or not they were
successful.
The Compact Administrator also advised that a plan was developed to
capture the data for which a computer field was not appropriate such as
reporting State actions that assisted in meeting the 75 day requirement. The
plan is for DCF to periodically evaluate and analyze time frames for home
studies and extensions to identify opportunities for improvement.
Originally, the CICIC thought no recommendation was necessary but
the Acting Administrative Director of the Courts has requested that the
following recommendation be included in this report:
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 18
Recommendation #8: The CICIC committee should discuss the Act’s
data requirements to determine whether it must recommend any changes to
DCF’s Interstate Data Base either to assist DYFS in meeting its requirements
or to track interstate placement of children cases.
II. Legal Analysis of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction
and Enforcement Act
The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA) was adopted in
1979 by New Jersey and it intended to avoid jurisdictional competition and
conflict between states in child custody matters. Its primary goal was to
ensure that custody litigation occurred in the place where the child and her/his
family had the closest connection and required the clerks of State courts to
maintain a registry of certified copies of out-of-state custody determinations.
In 2004, New Jersey adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction
Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), superseding the UCCJA. The UCCJEA provides
clearer standards for states to exercise original jurisdiction over a child
custody dispute, provides standards for continuing jurisdiction, and clarifies
the determination of jurisdiction for modification of custody decrees. Based
on a model developed by the National Conference of Commissioners on
Uniform State Laws, the New Jersey UCCJEA is an effective tool for
determining in each particular case which State court has jurisdiction to make
child custody determinations.
The UCCJEA defines a “child custody determination” as a judgment,
decree or other order of a court providing for the legal custody, physical
custody or visitation of a child but does not include provisions relating to
child support or other monetary obligations of an individual. Also, "child
custody proceeding" is defined as “a proceeding for divorce, separation,
neglect, abuse, dependency, guardianship, paternity, termination of
parental rights, and protection from domestic violence, in which the issue
may appear. The term does not include a proceeding involving juvenile
delinquency, contractual emancipation or enforcement…” [Emphasis added.]
Like its predecessor statute, the UCCJEA is intended to avoid jurisdictional
competition and to promote cooperation among the State courts in the
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 19
handling of child custody determinations and requires the clerks of State
courts to maintain a registry of certified copies of custody determinations of
other States.
Under the UCCJEA, New Jersey courts have a duty to enforce out-ofstate custody/parenting time/visitation orders. N.J.S.A. 2A:34-77a. Pursuant to
N.J.S.A. 2A:34-79, an out-of-state custody/parenting time/visitation order
may be registered in New Jersey either with or without a simultaneous request
for enforcement. New Jersey courts have the authority to enforce a registered
out-of-state custody/parenting time/visitation order pursuant to N.J.S.A.
2A:34-80 and must accord full faith and credit to an order made consistent
with the UCCJEA that enforces an out-of-state custody/parenting
time/visitation order. N.J.S.A. 2A:34-87.
The UCCJEA also was intended to clarify various ambiguities in and
omissions from the previous statute. One significant statutory change
provides that priority shall be given to the home state. N.J.S.A. 2A:34-65.
Further, under the UCCJEA, once a New Jersey court has made a child
custody determination, New Jersey has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over
the determination until specific contrary determinations are made by the court.
Under the prior statute, when a party registered a custody determination, there
was no requirement that notice of such registration be given to the nonregistering party. The UCCJEA now requires such notice of registration, with
the non-registering party to be given the opportunity to request a hearing to
contest the validity of the registered determination. Additionally, the
UCCJEA allows for the issuance of a warrant to take physical custody of a
child if there is an imminent likelihood that the child either would be removed
from the State or would suffer serious physical harm. N.J.S.A. 2A:34-85.
The UCCJEA, through its temporary emergency jurisdiction provisions,
stresses the importance of protecting victims of abuse and their children.
N.J.S.A. 2A:34-68.
Key revisions in the UCCJEA to the procedures for filing and enforcing
out-of-state custody/parenting/visitation orders are summarized as follows:
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 20
Filing
• A notice of registration must now be provided to the non-registering
person.
• Detailed information on Hearings to Contest the Validity of a registered
out-of-state child custody determination is set forth in Section I.E of
Directive #9-07 referenced below.
Enforcement
• The UCCJEA provides that a person seeking enforcement of an out-ofstate custody/visitation/parenting time order may apply for a warrant to
take physical custody of a child if the child is likely to suffer serious
imminent physical harm or removal from New Jersey.
By AOC Directive #7-02, the Supreme Court previously authorized the Clerk
of the Superior Court to delegate the responsibility for filing out-of-state
custody/parenting time/visitation orders to the Family Division Managers in
the vicinages in order to facilitate the filing and enforcement process. There
are now new procedures promulgated by AOC Directive # 9-07, which
supersedes Directive #7-02, that allow each vicinage to accept out-of-state
custody/parenting time/visitation orders presented for filing and/or
enforcement and provides guidance to the vicinages in that regard.
New Jersey has addressed the key changes in the UCCJEA by both the
superseding Directive #9-07, approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey
effective September 24, 2007 and by updating the New Jersey Judiciary
Family Division Dissolution Operations Manual approved by the Judicial
Council, on the recommendation of the Conference of Family Division
Presiding Judges, in order to promote uniform case management statewide.
Court staff is required to adhere to Directive #9-07 and the provisions in the
Operations Manual.
As stated above, the UCCJEA governs all child custody disputes
(including abuse, neglect, dependency, guardianship and termination of
parental rights). Thus, New Jersey has taken measures to facilitate the process
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 21
for the interstate placement of children by addressing the key changes to the
UCCJEA and by promoting uniform case management statewide.
Recommendation # 9: The CICIC should discuss these changes to the
UCCJEA in any cross system training provided to all stakeholders on the
issue of the interstate placement of children. The training should include a
discussion of N.J.S.A. 2A:34-62, 63 and 64, which are discussed in Section
I.C. of this report and deal with the collaboration that is expected between
courts in different States and between the courts and parties to expedite the
interstate placement of children. Training would be funded through the Court
Improvement Program and DCF should help develop the training. The CICIC should
consider advising all CIC and the Juvenile judges, who may conduct
permanency hearings, of this requirement prior to any training. New Jersey
has addressed key changes to the UCCJEA in the New Jersey Judiciary
Family Division Dissolution Operations Manual. The CIC Subcommittee of
the Conference of Family Presiding Judges should also review the CIC Case
Processing Manual and the CIC Judge’s Bench Reference Book to determine
if this should be revised.
III. Legal Analysis of the Interstate Compact for the
Placement of Children
The ICPC is set forth in N.J.S.A. 9:23-5 through 9:23-18. It was
enacted in 1989 and comports with the model interstate compact enacted by
all 50 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands. It is the
purpose of the ICPC to ensure the protection and services to children placed
across State lines for foster care or adoption. The ICPC regulates placement
of children whether New Jersey is the sending State or the receiving State.
The ICPC establishes administrative procedures and financial responsibilities
for the States involved in the interstate placement of children. The Act now
specifies the time within which to conduct home studies which impacts on the
ICPC and improves same.
A. Court Rule
The only New Jersey Court Rule to mention the ICPC is New Jersey
Court Rule 5:12-4(g), Case Management Conference, Hearings or Trial,
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 22
which specifically states that in any case in which the court orders or plans to
order that a child be placed with a person or agency or institution in another
State or U.S. territory, the court must act in compliance with the ICPC. The
Court Rule adds:
The Administrative Director of the Courts, in
Coordination with the Commissioner of the
Department of Human Services, as the duly
designated public authority responsible for
compliance with the Compact [ICPC], may
establish such guidelines and procedures as are
necessary to ensure that all action subject to the
Compact are in compliance therewith.
Recommendation # 10: DCF has replaced the Department of Human
Services. In addition, as set forth above, the Act has changed numerous
federal statutes dealing the interstate placement of children that impact the
courts and the child welfare agency. The Supreme Court’s Family Practice
Committee may consider any changes to this Court Rule proposed by DCF or
the CICIC.
B. General Recommendations from Judicial Questionnaire
One section of the New Jersey judges’ questionnaire focused on delays
which the judges may have observed in cases involving the ICPC. The
questionnaire listed 17 different types of delays and asked the judges not only
to identify the top five delays but also to rank them in order of which is the
most common (ranking #1) and which is the least common (ranking #5). All
the judges identified the same five delays although they ranked them very
differently. The five common delays they observed with the ICPC were:
• Delay in the agency preparing the ICPC package to send to the Sending
State ICPC office
• Delay in the Sending State ICPC office in reviewing and approving the
package and sending it to the Receiving State ICPC office
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 23
• The need by the Sending State ICPC office to return the package to the
local agency for correction and re-submission (e.g., the package was
incomplete)
• Delay by the Receiving State ICPC office in processing the case and
sending it to the local agency in the Receiving State for the Home Study
to be completed
• Delay in the Home Study being done by the local office in the
Receiving State
In addition, the judges were asked to provide their recommendations for
expediting or enhancing the interstate placement of children. Again, all the
judges spoke to issues concerning timeframes and gave the following
suggestions:
• DYFS should tighten controls and assure that every step in these cases
is completed.
• DYFS should have a “tickler” or diary system to follow-up with their
local DYFS caseworkers. Not having a “tickler” or diary system is a
major failing in their system.
• DYFS should provide better training to their caseworkers and should
have an ICPC “expert” in each local office.
• All States receiving a request for an interstate placement should process
them in the same timeframe as if the placements came from within their
own State.
• Procedures should be developed to allow caseworkers in the Sending
State to go to the Receiving State if a timely home study is not
completed and received in order to expedite the process of placing the
child.
• Procedures should be developed to provide for direct access from one
State worker to another without having to go through the interstate
office in both States would also expedite the process.
In Attachments A, however, the Compact Administrator sets forth
measures taken or recommended to their local office DYFS caseworkers to
keep cases moving within the timeframes contemplated by the ICPC. In
addition, the Compact Administrator advises that a tickler system should be
able to be added to their data system, NJ Spirit.
New Jersey Interstate Placement Assessment Report and Recommendations
June 19, 2008
Page 24
Recommendation #11: The Judiciary should share this assessment
report with DCF and any committee or task force called upon to review the
recommendations set forth in this report.
C. General Recommendations from Compact Administrator
The Compact Administrator was also given a questionnaire. That
questionnaire was different from the one presented to the judges who deal
with these cases. Although the Compact Administrator was not to recommend
ideas for expediting or enhancing the interstate placement of children, there
were certain observations made by the Compact Administrator which should
be considered:
• If placements are denied, there appears to be no national standard for an
appeal;
• There is no national standard for a home study report;
• Judges who are not fully versed in all aspects of the ICPC may issue an
unduly restrictive order that affects interstate placement or negatively
impacts the success of the placement in another State due to the laws of
that other State. Therefore, judges, lawyers and all stakeholders
involved in a case should not hesitate to call the DCF NJ Interstate
Services Unit to seek clarifications and to discuss all options for
placement in another State before an order is entered; and
• Judges should explain fully to all potential resource parents or relatives
what will be asked of them in the process of the interstate placement of
children. Otherwise, a resource family's lack of understanding often
causes an initial failure to cooperate by failing to provide necessary
information or failing to submit to background searches which impact
negatively on the timeframes under the Act as they affect ICPC.
Recommendation #12: The Judiciary should share this assessment
report with DCF and any committee or task force called upon to review the
recommendations set forth in this report.
ATTACHMENT A
1
NJ INTERSTATE SERVCIES UNIT FLOW CHART FOR ICPC REQUESTS
The NJ Interstate Services Unit provides Technical Assistance to the Local DYFS
offices as well as other callers. This includes an ICPC on line checklist for different
types of requests ie foster care, adoption, relative, and residential care. The Unit
also provides on line ICPC 100 A and B forms with written instructions as well as
information about the Safe & Timely Foster Care Act, the Interstate Compact on
Adoption and Medical Assistance (ICAMA), ICPC forms such as the
Medical/Financial plan, and DCF Policy sites as needed. Since each case may have
variables, phone calls and e-mails are used to facilitate understanding the process as
well as to insure completeness in a request.
NJ AS SENDING STATE
I.
All incoming mail is stamped with date of receipt.
II.
Interstate Unit reviews ICPC packet in 3-5 business days for completion.
The request must include an appropriately signed 100 A for each child, a
signed court order showing legal custody is held by the agency, a
Financial/Medical plan to support the type of request, cover letter, Social
Summary, and Health and Education record.
(PRIORITY REQUESTS are discussed in III)
a. Packets held/not sent immediatelyBoth Supervisors and Case Managers from the Local Offices are
promptly notified by e-mail and or phone (within 3-5 business days of
receipt) of any problem identified that requires correction in order to
avoid a rejection/return by the proposed Receiving State. Examples
include, 100 A not properly signed, no Medical/Financial plan.
A reminder is sent within 7-10 days requesting contact with the
Interstate Unit and again in 7-10 days another reminder is sent. The
Manager of the office may be copied should the LO not respond in a
timely way.
NOTE: Packets are NOT held unless the information is required for
the Receiving State
III. ICPC Regulation 7 PRIORITY COURT PLACEMENT REQUESTS
a. All Regulation 7 requests are processed in 2 “working” days
by the Interstate Services Unit. They are reviewed to make
certain that they meet Reg. 7 criteria and that they have a
Priority Court Order signed as well as include an ICPC 101
form in addition to other check list information. Any issues
of concern are routed as in II a. However, the DAG may also
be notified if the issue involves a legal concern so that they
2
may notify the Judge regarding a specific concern, for
example when a request does not fit Reg. 7 criteria.
b. All Reg. 7 requests are sent overnight to the proposed
Receiving State’s ICPC Office. They may also be faxed with
a phone call to alert the Receiving State of urgency.
c. All Reg. 7 requests are to be assigned in two work days in the
Receiving State’s ICPC Office. Their Local then has 20
working days to make a decision
IV. All ICPC requests are entered in the NJ Interstate database which is a stand
alone database. All requests are also entered manually in a Log by each Consultant
showing date of receipt, child’s name, receiving state, and date sent out.
Fields to specifically identify Safe & Timely requests are being added to the
Interstate database. Due to priority work on SPIRIT, the SACWIS
database, these fields were delayed. Manual reconstruction of the October
2007 to September 2008 timeframes will occur so that reports can be
generated.
V. All new ICPC requests are sent overnight to the Receiving State ICPC Office
within 3-5 business days of receipt barring any delays as noted in IIa.
A transmittal is enclosed that provides identifying information to
facilitate the processing. In addition all relative (non parent), adoption,
and foster care studies, have a notation specifically requesting a response
in 60 calendar days whether or not the study is “complete” for licensure.
This timeline is due to Safe & Timely Foster Care Act that requires a
response in 60 calendar days.
NJ DCF is seeking to input a “SCAN PDF FILE” system so that
information can be downloaded in one day rather than overnight mail. A
networking issue is being addressed. The equipment has already been
purchased.
VI.
Receiving State’s Interstate Office sends Transmittal to NJ acknowledging
receipt. If assigned to their Local, a copy is forwarded to the DCF Local
with date of assignment. If the Receiving State has concerns and is seeking
clarity, the NJ Interstate Unit promptly notifies the DCF Local by phone
and or e-mail of issue.
Local Office DYFS workers are encouraged to contact the Interstate
Service Unit, if they have not received a Transmittal turnaround in 30
days. Pre that request, they are encouraged to contact the Proposed
Resource before they call to determine if they have been assigned a worker
3
in the Receiving State. At times, the NJ Court has requested both the
DYFS LO worker and DAG to reach out to the Proposed Resource and to
give the Court an update as to status.
NOTE: Paperwork notification of assignment can take one month
depending upon the Receiving State’s communication system.
VII.
If the Receiving State’s Interstate Office sends the Safe & Timely study to
NJ Interstate Unit, it is reviewed and forwarded to the DYFS Local in three
days from receipt through inter office mail. It may also be faxed. The
DYFS Local is advised of any issues of concern and possible resolutions,
since Safe & Timely studies ARE NOT generally ICPC signed approved
studies.
a. The DYFS Local Office is reminded if this is a positive study they have
14 calendar days under Safe & Timely to make a decision regarding
placement of the child. If they chose to not use the placement, they
must document their reasons.
b. Reasons for not placing a child may include difficulty in supporting the
placement financially and medically.
For example, medical coverage can not be obtained under IV-E
Medicaid unless the home meets the Receiving State’s licensure.
In addition, DYFS can not make foster board payments out of state
unless a home meets licensure/certification in the Receiving State.
This issue is being addressed through Regulations and Policy to
determine if payment out of state can be made to eliminate this
deterrent.
Some states do not permit relatives to qualify for TANF or Medicaid for the
first six months of placement; therefore, it is problematic to support
placements.
c. If placed without an approved 100A, supervision is not provided by the
receiving state.
NOTE: Some Receiving States do not forward their Safe & Timely Study to
the Interstate Services Unit. They may forward them directly to the DYFS
Local office.
VIII. 100 A ICPC signed requests are forwarded to the DYFS Local Office within
three working days with a Transmittal.
a. If approved, instructions are given to send a 100 B notifying of placement
so that Supervision can begin as well as supports such as IV-E Medical
coverage.
4
IX.
d. If denied, instructions are given to the DYFS LO to provide any
questions they may have regarding the denial so that it may be
addressed.
1. If a review or an appeal is sought, NJ Interstate Office requests
assistance from the Receiving State’s Interstate Office to
determine who would be the appropriate party to assist with
options.
There are no standard appeal procedures nationwide.
Delay in Receiving State providing status or completing Home study
The NJ Interstate Unit depends upon the DYFS Local Office or the DAG to
inquire about status of a study. When requested, the NJ Interstate Office
promptly contacts the Receiving State’s Interstate Office through phone
calls, and or e-mail asking for a status report which often correlates to an
upcoming court hearing. The DYFS worker is encouraged to contact the
proposed resource directly to assist in the inquiry.
Steps taken:
a. e-mail and phone calls to the Receiving State Consultant.
b. No response, call again and resend e-mail within 5 days.
c. No response call again and resend e-mail including Supervisor of
Receiving State’s Unit within 5 days.
d. No response, NJ ICPC Compact Administrator or Deputy Compact
Administrator may call Receiving State’s Supervisor or send
correspondence.
e. After one month request is made for name of Judge in the Receiving
State that the NJ Judge could speak with to resolve the matter.
f. If no response, the DAG and DYFS Local staff are advised to have the
NJ Judge contact COSCA for assistance with an ICPC matter.
g. Contact the AAICPC Secretariat’s Office to see if there is any
intervention they could provide.
NJ AS RECEIVING STATE
X.
XI.
All incoming mail is stamped with date of receipt.
Interstate Unit reviews ICPC packet in 3-5 business days for completion.
The request must include an appropriately signed 100 A for each child, a
signed court order showing legal custody is held by the agency, a
Financial/Medical plan to support the type of request, cover letter, Social
Summary, and Health and Education record.
(PRIORITY REQUESTS are discussed in III)
a. Packets held/not sent immediatelyThe Sending State Interstate Office Consultant is notified by phone
call and or certed e-mail (within 3-5 days of business days of receipt)
of concerns with a specification of needed material.
5
A reminder is sent within 10 business days copying the Supervisor
that material has not yet been received and they are advised that this
is delaying the study process.
A final reminder is sent 10 business days later advising that if they do
not respond the packet will be returned for completion. Both a phone
call and certed e-mail copying the Interstate Supervisor are sent.
(NOTE: Packets are NOT held if the missing items can be sent at a
later date such as a Health or Education record.)
XII. ICPC Regulation 7 PRIORITY COURT PLACEMENT REQUESTS
a. All Regulation 7 requests are processed in 2 “working”
days by the NJ Interstate Services Unit. They are reviewed
to make certain that they meet Reg. 7 criteria and that they
have a Priority Court Order signed as well as include an
ICPC 101 form in addition to other check list information.
Any issues of concern are routed as in XI b.
The Sending State is notified of concerns asap that would
deter assignment.
d. All Reg. 7 case are sent overnight or faxed to the appropriate
DYFS LO for assignment. The LO is advised of the 20
working days and they are given a date to respond.
XII. All ICPC requests are entered in the NJ Interstate database which is a stand
alone database. All requests are also entered manually in a Log by each Consultant
showing date of receipt, child’s name, receiving state, and date sent out.
All out of state requests that require assignment to a DYFS LO for parent,
relative, Priority Court Order, or foster care aka Resource Home, or an adoption
study are assigned to the LO within three to five working days through SPIRIT the
SACWIS computer system. This system permits immediate confirmation of assignment in
the LO office. An e-mail may also follow the assignment depending upon the case.
Note: Fields to specifically identify Safe & Timely requests are being added
to the Interstate database. Due to priority work on SPIRIT, the SACWIS
database, these fields were delayed. Manual reconstruction of the October
2007 to September 2008 timeframes will occur so that reports can be
generated.
XIII. All new ICPC requests are sent through inter office mail or overnight to the
Assigned NJ LO within 3-5 business days of receipt barring any delays as noted in
XI a.
a. A Transmittal is enclosed that provides identifying information to
facilitate the processing. In addition all relative (non parent), adoption,
and foster care studies, have a notation specifically requesting a response
in 60 calendar days including a date whether or not the study is
6
“complete” for licensure. This timeline is due to Safe & Timely Foster
Care Act that requires a response in 60 calendar days.
b. The Transmittal is also forwarded to the Receiving State in 3-5
working days acknowledging receipt with notification of the assigned
DYFS LO.
If additional information is needed, the Receiving State is also appraised.
XIV.
Upon receipt of the Safe & Timely Interstate Study, it is forwarded by
overnight mail and or faxed to the Sending State’s Interstate Office in three
working days.
A Transmittal identifies it as a Safe & Timely Study. If positive, NJ offers the
Sending State the opportunity to place the child in NJ under ICPC approval as a relative.
Upon the Sending State’s demonstrating an appropriate financial and medical plan,
the placement moves forward. The Sending State is reminded that the proposed
Resource must continue to meet NJ Resource Licensure requirements. This assures
the Sending State of supervision under ICPC.
a. Sending State has 14 calendar days under Safe & Timely to make a
decision regarding placement of the child. If the State choses to not
use the placement, they must document their reasons.
b. If placed without an approved 100A, supervision is not provided by
the NJ the Receiving state.
c. If a positive recommendation is not made, the Sending State is
notified while the original ICPC request may continue.
XV.
100 A ICPC signed requests are forwarded to the Receiving State’s Interstate
Office within three working days with a Transmittal.
a. If approved, instructions are given to send a 100 B notifying of
placement so that Supervision can begin as well as supports such as
IV-E Medical coverage. All 100B requests requiring Supervision are
entered into the SPIRT, SACWIS, system for assignment within 5
working days. Hard copies are also sent inter office mail to the
appropriate LO. The Sending State is copied on the Transmittal
making the assignment.
b. If denied, the Receiving State, may request clarification or request an
appeal. The NJ Interstate Office directs clarification issues to the LO
for response. If an appeal is sought the NJ Interstate Office provides
information regarding the systems that are in place with an identified
person/office who the other state may contact.
NOTE-All requests for appeal or review procedures by Sending States are
promptly handled. NJ’s procedures as a state administered system are clearly
defined.
7
XVI. Delay in Receiving State providing status or completing Home study
The NJ Interstate Unit depends upon the Receiving State’s Local Office to
inquire about status of a study. When requested, the NJ Interstate Office
promptly contacts the DYFS LO through phone call, and or e-mail asking
for a status report.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Steps taken:
E-mail and phone calls to assigned DYFS LO Worker and/or Supervisor or
appropriate party such as Office of Licensing (OOL).
No response, call again and resend e-mail within 5 days.
No response call again and resend e-mail including Supervisor, Office,
Manager, and or Case Work Supervisor within 5 days.
No response, Supervisor/Manager/ARA, or OOL Chief of Staff depending
upon case.
If the Sending State has requested the name of a Judge, they are given the NJ
AOC Contact person as listed in COSCA.
Sending State may contact the AAICPC Secretariat’s Office to see if there is
any intervention they could provide.
ATTACHMENT B
DYFS 15-2
(new )
NJ Resource Home Licensure Requirements Notification & Agreement to Comply
(For Children Entering NJ and Children Leaving NJ)
Effective 07/01/05 NJ DYFS policy regarding relative placements was amended to reflect
all relative placements must meet foster/adoptive care, aka resource home licensing
standards [N.J.A.C. 10:122C].
However, the Division is aware there are occasions when it is in the best interest of a
child to obtain a home study and effect placement in a shorter time frame than a
foster/adoptive home study will allow.
In those instances, a relative home study may be requested. If the home is found to be
safe and appropriate, approval would be given in the form of “Presumptive Eligibility,”
meaning the placement resource is believed to have the qualifications to meet full
licensure standards.
It is important for the placement resource to be aware that Presumptive Eligibility does
not replace the need for the completion of the foster/adoptive home study. Ability to
meet licensure in NJ for example requires attendance of PRIDE training classes. It is also
important for the placement resource to be aware that foster board payments will not be
available from the sending state until the completion of the foster home study and the
child may not be eligible for TANF/Medicaid by virtue of the receiving state’s
(placement resource’s state of residence) regulations.
Placement Resource: Please carefully review and initial each statement listed below.
1.) I agree to participate in and cooperate with the completion of the foster/adoptive
home study process.
_____
Initial
2.) I understand a child initially placed in my home based on Presumptive Eligibility
will be removed if I/we do not cooperate with the home study process or if my
home does not meet Resource Home licensing standards.
_____
Initial
3.) I understand when a child is placed in my home based on Presumptive
Eligibility, there may be a delay of 4-6 months before the child will be eligible
for financial and medical assistance from the sending state. If this is a DYFS
child (going out-of-state), NJ Medicaid will be provided, however, most out-ofstate medical providers will not accept NJ Medicaid.
_____
Initial
__________________________________
Placement Resource Signature(s) & Date
________________________________
Worker’s Signature & Date______________________________________________
ATTACHMENT C
1
NJ INTERSTATE SERVICES UNIT RESPONSE TO SURVEY QUESTIONS
Please describe how a typical interstate placement proceeds step by step.
Who is notified of interstate placement decisions and when?
When do Regulation Seven procedures apply?
How does a Regulation Seven case proceed, step by step and how does it differ
from other cases?
5. Who is notified of interstate placement actions and decisions when in the process?
All of these questions are answered in the FLOW Chart that I prepared for you.
1.
2.
3.
4.
6. What is the administrative or judicial process, if any to resolve disagreements
regarding interstate placement decisions including who may initiate that process?
Questions, 2 g, h, I, j, k are all referenced in the FLOW Chart
The FLOW Chart that I prepared references issues of delays and disagreements.
Basically if NJ Court/LO is in disagreement with a denied study, the NJ Interstate
Unit assists to get clarity. In some cases, specific questions are posed of the
Receiving State.
• Requests for a reference to a section of policy, regulation or law to permit
them to come to that conclusion.
• Request more specific documentation when the proposed resource has not
“cooperated”.
• Determine if the “denial” for the specific type of study could be potentially
approved if a “different” request was made if it appears that this
placement would be in the best interest of the child.
• NJ Interstate Unit requests names of staff persons, their office, title, and
contact information to facilitate the court or other representatives to reach
out.
Examples areChild has been placed with aunt and uncle by marriage in FL and placement is
stable. Aunt is willing to adopt. Uncle is not. FL can not approve them as an
adoptive couple given FL adoption law. HOWEVER, through review dialogue NJ
Interstate learned that FL adoption law has an exception for relatives under
certain circumstances. This information opened an option toward permanency.
Proposed Resource is relative to child. Resource is already a Foster Parent for a
NY private contract agency. NY does not permit more than one agency in a home
at a time. Therefore only solution appeared to be to enter into contract with
private agency to place child. Private agency reluctant to permit contract due to
contract language NJ requires and fiscal issues. NJ Interstate learned that NY has
an exception to Policy on their Regulations that would permit their agency ACS to
be in a contract agency home if the child was related or was “kin”. Placement
determination may now be an option.
Receiving State delayed considerably assigning home study for adoption for a
DYFS child. Child already placed with this relative with approval and placement
2
was very stable. Relative became one year older while study was not completed.
This state’s adoption regulation indicated that she was “too old” so they were
going to deny the placement. NJ Interstate argued that had they completed the
study in a timely way this would not be an issue. NJ also requested the
“appeal/review” process since exceptions could be made.
NJ Interstate takes the position that a review or appeal can be requested in an
interstate matter by
1. Proposed Resource of agency or office that did study and denied the person.
2. Proposed Resource of Interstate Unit if they denied the person.
3. LO who holds legal jurisdiction over the child may request the review through
their Legal representation of DAG or Manager. This would be of the
appropriate authority who denied the placement ie agency rep or Interstate
Unit.
The Law Guardian may request a review on behalf of the child they represent.
4. The Judge may instruct the DAG or Law Guardian to pursue a review or he
may personally request a review. The Judge may chose to use “speaker phone
or other teleconference methods” to speak directly as part of the record during
court hearing to directly question the other state’s representatives or Interstate
personnel.
When the request is made by another state of NJ, NJ Interstate explains the
options depending upon the particulars.
1. Proposed Resource may be told they can formally ask for a review of the LO
denial to be reviewed by the Manager or the ARA or the DYFS Director as the
chain ensues.
2. Proposed Resource may request review if denial came from Licensing to OOL
Supervisor.
3. Proposed Resource may request review/appeal if denied by NJ Interstate of
Erin O’Leary, DCF Director Office of Legal Affairs since NJ Interstate
reports to her.
4. Proposed Resource may contact DCF Commissioner or DYFS Director for a
review if denial came through Division staff.
5. The Sending State’s Local/County Staff may request a review as may their
legal staff or Court personnel. The request would be routed to the appropriate
chain of command depending upon the type of denial.
If the issue is that the Proposed Resource had an approved study but the Court
and LO have decided to place the child with another person or leave the child in
the continued placement, The Interstate Unit would direct the Proposed Resource
to communicate their concerns about this decision to both the LO Manager and to
the Court directly.
6. How and when do courts generally become involved in interstate placement
decisions?
Generally the court is advised of the status of a study by the DAG or LO staff during
a court hearing, or the DAG has brought the matter to the Judge pre a hearing given the
3
importance of the information. The Interstate Services Unit does not generally
communicate directly with the court in each case unless asked to do so. Many NJ
Judges are comfortable in contacting the Interstate Services Unit to inquire status or to
discuss ICPC options for clarity whenever they are closely monitoring permanency for
a child before them. They may require the NJ Interstate Consultant be available for the
hearing on speaker phone. They may also require that the DAG or LO Worker call
weekly for updates.
The NJ Judges are aware they can not require the other state’s staff to respond,
however, they know that they can utilize the NJ Interstate Unit to keep the pressure on
the other state.
7. How does court performance affect timely and safe interstate placements?
Judges that are familiar with ICPC/ICAMA/ICJ law are best prepared to issue orders in
a timely, appropriate manner, with full understanding of possible
ramifications/limitations. When Judges are not fully versed in the implications of
state’s rights and compact law, they may issue an order that does not meet the
specifications such as a Priority Court Order Regulation 7 that is very restrictive.
They may also order placement of a child utilizing a Safe & Timely Assessment
without being aware of the financial and medical support issues in the Receiving State
that could have negative impact on the success of the placement or that this type of
study does not provide supervision.
The NJ Interstate Services Unit is available to provide clarification to the court and
those acting as it’s representatives, DAGs, Law Guardians, and CASA volunteers.
8. A. What are the normal mistakes you see from agencies with ICPC transmittals?
Failure to follow the process of what is needed in an ICPC request.
1. This includes financial/medical plans that are not appropriate.
For example IV-E Medicaid can only be available, a. if the Proposed Resource is
approved as licensed/approved foster parent, or is approved as an adoptive parent with
a subsidy, b. the child was determined IV-E eligible, and c. board payments or subsidy
agreement is in place. Local agency staff do not generally understand this.
(Solution—encourage staff to communicate with IV-E staff assigned to their office)
2. 100A signed by worker not Manager. (Solution-encourage staff asking for checklist
to READ what is needed)
3. Incomplete social/health/education material making it difficult to determine the
Proposed Resource’s level of skill needed for the child. (Solution-Encourage staff to
review good Case Practice)
4. Lack of understanding of ICJ vs ICPC.
The Interstate Unit has a guide/checklist of what is needed for an ICPC. This is
available on line with ICPC forms and instructions. Possible training with CPS staff
assigned to the LO would assist familiarity.
4
B. What are the normal mistakes you see that delay decisions regarding placements?
a) Proposed Resource was not fully appraised of what would be involved in the process
to evaluate them. As a result they often fail to cooperate by canceling appointments,
refusing to share certain information that they feel is personal.
(Solution-insure that the person is FULLY apprised of what they will be asked to do.
NJ Interstate has a form that is provided and witnessed before signing to help Proposed
Resource relatives to have some understanding of the process)
b) Since there is no National STANDARD Home study format, certain information
may have been completed but is not listed in the study. This may include all members
in the home and their income to CARI or Criminal history information while time is
wasted asking for it when it was already completed.
c) Not providing documents that may create a problem to be able to service the child
such as a birth certificate and social security card.
d) Financial/ Medical plans that are not realistic to properly support the placement.
e) Staffing issues in ICPC offices that make it difficult to have fast turnarounds.
9. How do you remind yourself of the need to be in touch with another state about a
case? Do you have a tickler system? Do you just wait until you hear from them? What
about if you don’t hear, how much time passes?
Presently NJ Interstate does not have a “tickler” system. We are dependant upon the
Local staff and DAGs to contact us when they are seeking updates.
HOWEVER, given the additions to the Interstate Database for Safe & Timely fields, we
are planning to have reports run that will coincide with certain time frames such as 30
days after request a reminder to receiving state to check status.
We will be setting up dual Transmittals on new cases so that we will have a tickler
folder for all new cases. This will permit us to remind the assigned Local Office or
Receiving State to request status. Since not all cases are governed by Safe & Timely
(parent studies are not), this would be more comprehensive to follow up.
The length of time that passes before an inquiry is made is referenced in the FLOW
Chart.
NJ sends requests to most every state although volume is highest with PA, and NY.
Other states with high percentage of placements include CA, CT, DC, FL, MD, NC,
SC, TX, and VA. NJ also places about 25% more children out of state than they
receive. States that are County based or have Decentralized ICPC offices ie CA are
often the more time consuming to address issues because of the layers and variables
within one state.
ATTACHMENT D
TO:
NJ Interstate Services Unit
FROM:
Benita Rommel, Supervisor-ICPC Compact Administrator
SUBJECT:
Safe & Timely Interstate Placement of Foster Children Act (PL 109-239)
DATE:
October 2, 2006
OVERVIEW
The purpose of this memo is to give guidance regarding how New Jersey is responding to the
Safe & Timely Interstate Act which became law July 1, 2006 under Title XIX of the Social
Security Act regarding IV-B/E Foster Care & Adoption funds. The intent of Congress with this
law was to lessen the time it currently takes nationwide for inter-jurisdictional placements for
children under the child welfare system and to insure safety. Therefore, this Act requires that
states provide data to the Administration for Children & Families (ACF) commencing October 1,
2006. The data seeks to record from date of receipt in the state responsible to do the study, how
many studies can be completed in 30 to a maximum of 60 days. These referenced studies do not
have to include training/education per this Act. Should a study be completed in 30 days,
incentive money may be paid in the amount of $1,500 per study. Studies completed in 60 days
are presented as the goal. An additional 15 days may be added to total 75 days if there is a
documented reason such as needing medical information or inability to obtain criminal history
results. Reasons for the delay are also to be captured.
Once a positive study is offered to the sending state, data is to be recorded within 14 days to
determine if that placement will be used. States must accept the established receiving state’s
standard. Rejection of the study is to be based on documentation that acceptance would be
contrary to the child’s welfare
Currently there are no Regulations to clarify if there will be fiscal penalties should a state be
unable to meet the presented time frames. The ACF Interim Memorandum (IM) dated August
11, 2006 notes under “Additional Provisions” that the sending state must supply a copy of the
child’s health and education record to the foster parent or foster care provider at the time of the
placement.
NEW JERSEY’S PLAN
Since the current ACF Regulations under Title XIX IV-E reference fully licensed/approved
foster Home studies and N.J.A.C. 10:122C Requirements for Resource Family Parents
effective February 6, 2006 requires PRIDE training before a Resource Home (good for
Foster/Adoption/Kinship Guardianship) can be licensed, a preliminary procedure has been put
into effect to meet the Act’s requirements. This preliminary/requirement procedure for
2
“relative/non blood related individuals” will not include licensure. The approval will provide a
timely means to allow for the placement of children prior to licensure. The approval will also be
based upon the “presumption” that the proposed resource will take the necessary steps to attempt
full licensure. NJ at this time is not altering licensure standards due to this Act.
The procedure/criteria will be as follows:
NEW JERSEY AS RECEIVING STATE
1. Within no more than three calendar days of date of receipt of an ICPC request for a
relative, foster care, or adoption home study, the packet will be reviewed.
2. If the request is not complete, it will not be considered a TRUE request. To be complete
it must contain a properly executed 100A, an appropriate court order, financial/medical
plan, and a social summary of the child/children providing information regarding their
needs ie health, education, developmental etc. If it is not a TRUE request, the date of
receipt will not be calculated as the date it arrived. Contact will be made with the
sending party/local, giving them the opportunity to provide the documentation. Upon
receipt of all documents, this date will then be used as date of receipt of the TRUE
request to start the clock. (After three weeks of documented efforts to obtain the
required information, the packet may be returned to the sending state.)
3. If it is a TRUE request for a NJ foster or adoption study, it will be assigned through
SPIRIT (SACWIS database) to a RWS CWS within three days of receipt in the Interstate
Unit. A copy of the request will be sent via fax/e-mail scan/or interoffice mail so that the
appropriate local will have the needed documents to commence the study. A hard copy
with transmittal will follow. An e-mail will be sent to the RWS CWS to insure that they
are assigning the case in SPIRIT. The RWS CWS or the assigned Supervisor are to
RESPOND immediately preferably through certified e-mail to notify Interstate who is
actually assigned to do the Interstate study in order to insure that NJ is meeting timelines.
4. Requests for foster or adoption will be evaluated by the RWS Unit for “Presumption of
Eligibility” for approval to meet the 60 day time frame. A special Interstate Study
Format effective 10/1/06 approved by Policy is used to make that determination. A copy
of this format may be shared with the sending state.
5. Requests for relative or non related caregiver will also be assigned to the RWS CWS
Unit using the same Interstate Study Format for purpose of Presumption of Eligibility
noted in #4 per an agreement with the Central Office Resource Unit. The proposed
resource, however, will be advised by both the sending state and NJ that they must agree
to comply with the licensure requirements for Resource Home studies or the request will
be denied. The proposed resource is to sign the Resource Home Licensure Requirements
Notification & Agreement to Comply form. The sending state will be asked to provide a
100A for foster care with an appropriate financial/medical plan. NOTE: NJ does not
require that the sending state pay foster board. Presently NJ does not prohibit
relatives from applying for TANF or NJ Medicaid.
6. If upon completion of the Interstate Home Study format the proposed resource does
not meet standards or comply, the study will be denied. The assigned RWS will
promptly notify the Interstate Services Unit by phone/fax and or e-mail with
3
documentation provided so that the identified time frame (30-60 days) for completion is
met.
7. Upon completion of the Interstate Home Study format for a foster or adoption study
request, the RWS will provide this information to the Interstate Services unit within 50
days of receipt unless an extension was needed. The sending state will be advised that NJ
may approve this home as a relative/non blood relative and permit the child/children to
be placed if: (a.) the sending state provides a financial/medical plan that will permit the
proposed resource to support the youngster and (b.) a 100A for relative care is provided.
The RWS assigned Unit will continue to complete the standard process for licensure of
this home.
8. IF the sending state refuses to submit the above, no action is taken. The time line for full
completion will be provided to ACF as part of the data collected.
9. Upon approval of the Interstate Home Study format for a relative/non relative, the
sending state will be advised promptly and the 100A and study will be forwarded via
fax/scan or overnight mail so that the requesting state may start the 14 day timeline for
response on their decision.
10. If the child is placed with an approved 100A pre the full licensure, NJ has entered into a
contract with the sending state to supervise upon receipt of the 100B. However, if the
resource refuses to cooperate with completion of licensure, NJ will request removal of the
child and refuse to supervise. NOTE: NJ will not provide IV-E Medicaid given
current ACF Regulations which currently require verification of eligibility for IV-E,
foster board payments, and full licensure.
11. Within three days of receipt of a licensed Resource Home Study, NJ Interstate forwards
the approved 100A and study via fax/scan or overnight mail to the requesting state so that
they may respond to the 14 day timeline. Since receipt of the actual license may take an
additional two weeks, a confirming source such as an e-mail may be substituted and sent.
12. Requests for Priority Court Order timeframes will remain the same. Proposed relative
resources will be required to agree to complete full licensure as noted in #5.
NEW JERSEY AS SENDING STATE
1. If a request is made for a relative study, per policy the DYFS Local Office will
have to request a foster home study simultaneously. Exceptions to Policy such as
court orders will be noted. Therefore, two sets of 100As will be required-one for
relative care and one for foster care.
2. If a TRUE request (as defined in #3), NJ Interstate will forward the request to the
proposed receiving state within five business days. If the packet is lacking
documentation that does not reject it as being a TRUE request, it will be forwarded
and the Local Office will be expected to provide the material to be sent afterward.
Examples are IV-E, birth certificates, full health records, IEP. If the proposed
receiving state chooses to not forward for assignment, upon receipt of this
information, NJ Interstate will provide this information to the DYFS Local Office that
requested the study. NOTE: SECT. 4 (1)(ii) of the ACT notes that a STATE IS
4
REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE CHILD’S COMPLETED MEDICAL FORMS
AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPECTED 60 DAY COMPLETION
DATE OR THE RECEIVING STATE MAY HAVE VALID REASON TO
TAKE AN ADDITIONAL 15 DAYS ie., 75 TO COMPLETE THE STUDY.
3. When the NJ Interstate Services Unit receives an approved relative, foster, or
adoption study, the approval with the 100A will be forwarded to the NJ Local Office
promptly so that the local will have 14 days to make a decision regarding use of that
home. In the event that a DYFS Local Office receives an “approved” home study
directly with or without a signed100A, the Local Office must notify the Interstate
Services Unit. Home studies that are not accompanied by a 100A do not have the
protection or benefit of the ICPC contract law i.e. supervision and support.
Therefore, it is imperative that the NJ Interstate Services Unit be notified to address
the concern with the receiving state’s Interstate Unit.
4. Priority Court Order timeframes will remain the same. Proposed relative resources
will be required to agree to complete the process for full approval/licensure as a foster
parent.
TIMELINE
NJ Interstate as requesting/sending starting with TRUE request
1. No more than 5 calendar days to review and forward to receiving state’s ICPC Office.
2. Upon receipt of denial or approval, no more than 3 calendar days or less if the 60 day time
frame falls in those days to send to DYFS Local Office to advise of the decision.
3. The DYFS Local Office now has 14 days in which to accept or reject the study as presented.
Should the Local Office reject the study, it must be based upon grounds of “contrary to child’s
welfare” as opposed to questioning the other state’s standards. The reason must be documented
in the child’s DYFS record and provided to the NJ Interstate Unit so that this information may
also be shared with the other state’s Interstate Office.
Note: The Act does not state that the child must be placed after the 14 day timeline.
It simply states that a decision to accept or reject the “approved” offered study must be made.
Any study that is accompanied by an approved signed 100A shall continue to be covered by
Regulation No.6 Permission to Place Child: Time Limitations, Reapplication
NJ Interstate as receiving state for TRUE request
1. No more than 3 calendar days to review and assign to the RWS Local DYFS Office Unit.
2. Upon receipt of denial or approval from the RWS Local DYFS Office, no more than 3
calendar days to forward to requesting/sending state to advise of decision.
DATA COLLECTION FOR October 2, 2006 through September 30, 2007
1. Total number of requests made to NJ completed in 30 days or 30 to 60 days. Date of
receipt in NJ is used as start point for calculation. The requesting state must also be
identified.
2. Total number of requests completed in 60 to 75 days with explanation for delay
documented such as criminal history, lack of medical information etc. and identification
of requesting state
3. Total number of requests completed after 75 days with reason for delay.
5
4. Total number of cases that within 14 days were not to be used since they were viewed as
“contrary to the welfare of the child”. This could include issues with the Medical
Financial Plan that might deter the ability to place the child.
« Previous | Up | Down | Next »
IV Forms Manual » Forms (11-20) » DYFS Form 18-35, DYFS Child Placement Review Notice Of
Change 8-22-2007
DYFS Form 18-35, DYFS Child Placement Review
Notice Of Change
8-22-2007
Double click to view DYFS Form 18-35, DYFS Child Placement
Review Notice Of Change
WHEN TO USE IT
Use this form to notify the Court of any change in case status
regarding a child in out-of-home placement.
All notifications to CPRB are made within 72 hours of the
change occurring.
HOW TO USE IT
Child Placement Review Notice of Change information is
documented in New Jersey SPIRIT at the Court/Legal window.
• Access it through the NJ Spirit desktop > Create > Casework
> Legal Documentation.
• Only complete this template outside of the NJ Spirit
application as part of a contingency plan when the
application is unavailable. However, in doing so, you are still
required to create the form in NJ Spirit when the application
becomes available.
DISTRIBUTION
Original
-
CPRB
Electronic Copy
-
NJ SPIRIT Electronic Case Record
Top
« Previous | Up | Down | Next »
DYFS Form 5-47, Notice of Placement
8-22-2007
Double click here to view DYFS Form 5-47, Notice of Placement
WHEN TO USE IT
This form is used to:
•
•
Notify the court in the county of supervision within five (5)
calendar days of placement, that a child has been placed
or replaced in a reviewable living arrangement.
Provide information to the County Welfare Agency's Child
Support and Paternity Unit (CWA/CSPU) for child support
processing.
HOW TO USE IT
Complete this form in the NJ Spirit application (once a
Legal Action has been completed) by accessing it through
the Desktop > Create > Case Work > Court/Legal > Legal
Documentation > Document drop down > Text hyperlink.
Only complete this template outside of the NJ Spirit application
as part of a contingency plan when the application is
unavailable. However, in doing so, you are still required to
create the form in NJ Spirit when the application becomes
available.
TIPS FOR COMPLETING THE FORM
Family Part, County of: Select the county from the dropdown list,
that has jurisdiction over the placement of the child. This is the
county of supervision.
Is this a repeat placement?: Select "yes" if the child was in
placement in the past and is now re-entering placement.
Indicate approximate total length of time in placement. Check
"no" if the child was never in placement before.
Current Placement: Select the box which corresponds to the
current placement. If none of the categories applies, check
"Other" and enter a brief description of the type of home/facility
in which the child has been placed.
EMPLOYEE'S SWORN STATEMENT
The reasons for the placement are: Briefly describe the reasons
the child entered or reentered placement. Indicate if the
placement is in a selected adoption home.
In the grid, describe the efforts made by the Division to avoid the
necessity of placement or replacement. Check the appropriate
box for each of the fifteen (15) reasonable efforts. If there is an
exception to reasonable efforts skip the grid and go to B. Select
the box that applies to the exception and provide specific details
that support the selection.
Agency Representative Name: Enter the name of the person
who has completed the Notice of Placement.
Agency Representative Signature: The person who completed
the Notice of Placement signs the form.
DYFS Form 5-47 Attachment
Family Part, County of: Enter the county.
The remainder of the attachment prefills from NJ Spirit.
DISTRIBUTION
Original and four (4) copies
-
Court, provide only the
page(s) that contain
child identifying
information
and responses to points
2
and 3 of sworn
statement.
Original
-
Court. (DYFS Form 5-
47
Attachment.)
Four (4) Copies
-
Court. Provide copies
of any
other attachments.
Copy
-
CWA/CSU, sent by
the
IV-E Eligibility and
Determination Unit
Electronic Copy
-
NJ SPIRIT Electronic
Case Record
One form per child
Please type
ICPC 100A
REV. 8/2001
INTERSTATE COMPACT ON THE PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN REQUEST
FROM:
TO:
Notice is given of intent to place - Name of Child:
SECTION I - IDENTIFYING DATA
Ethnicity: Hispanic Origin:
Social Security Number:
ICWA Eligible
Yes
Sex:
Date of Birth
Yes
No
Unable to determine/unknown
Race:
American Indian or
Alaskan Native
Asian
No
Title IV-E determination
Yes
No
Pending
Name of Mother:
Native Hawiian/ Other
Pacific Islander
Black or African American
White
Name of Father:
Name of Agency or Person Responsible for Planning for Child:
Phone:
Address:
Name of Agency or Person Financially Responsible for Child:
Phone:
Address:
SECTION II - PLACEMENT INFORMATION
Name of Person(s) or Facility Child is to be placed with:
Address:
Type of Care Requested:
Foster Family Home
Group Home Care
Child Caring Institution
Residential Treatment Center
Institutional Care-Article VI,
Adjudicated Delinquent
Soc Sec # (optional):
Soc Sec # (optional):
Phone:
Parent
Relative (Not Parent)
Relationship: _______________
__________________________
Other:
__________________________
ADOPTION
IV-E Subsidy
Non IV-E Subsidy
To Be Finalized In:
Sending State
Receiving State
Current Legal Status of Child:
Sending Agency Custody/Guardianship
Parent Relative Custody/Guardianship
Court Jurisdiction Only
Protective Supervision
Parental Rights Terminated-Right to Place for Adoption
Unaccompanied Refugee Minor
Other:
SECTION III - SERVICES REQUESTED
Initial Report Requested (if applicable):
Supervisory Services Requested:
Supervisory Reports Requested:
Parent Home Study
Request Receiving State to Arrange Supervision
Quarterly
Relative Home Study
Another Agency Agreed to Supervise
Semi-Annually
Adoptive Home Study
Sending Agency to Supervise
Upon Request
Foster Home Study
Other:
Name and Address of Supervising Agency in Receiving State:
Enclosed:
Child's Social History
Home Study of Placement Resource
Court Order
ICWA Enclosure
Financial/Medical Plan
IV-E Eligibility Documentation
Signature of Sending Agency or Person:
Date:
Signature of Sending State Compact Administrator, Deputy or Alternate:
Date:
Other Enclosures
SECTION IV - ACTION BY RECEIVING STATE PURSUANT TO ARTICLE III(d) of ICPC
Placement shall not be made
Placement may be made
REMARKS:
Signature of Receiving State Compact Administrator, Deputy or Alternate:
Date:
DISTRIBUTION (Complete six (6) copies):
• Sending Agency retains a (1) copy and forwards completed original plus four (4) copies to:
• Sending Compact Administrator, DCA, or alternate retains a (1) copy and forwards completed original and three (3) copies to:
• Receiving Agency Compact Administrator, DCA, or alternate who indicates action (Section IV) and forwards a (1) copy to receiving agency and the completed original and one (1) copy to sending
Compact Administrator, DCA, or alternate within 30 days.
• Sending Compact Administrator, DCA, or alternate retains a completed copy and forwards the completed original to the sending agency.
One form per child
Please type
ICPC 100B
REV. 8/2001
INTERSTATE COMPACT ON THE PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN
REPORT ON CHILD'S PLACEMENT STATUS
TO:
ICPC
FROM: NJ ICPC
Child's Name:
Birthdate:
Mother's Name:
Father's Name:
SECTION II - PLACEMENT STATUS
Initial Placement of Child in Receiving State
Name of Resource:
Date Child Placed in Receiving State:
Address:
Type of Care:
Placement Change
Effective Date of Change:
Name of Resource:
Address:
Type of Care:
SECTION III – COMPACT PLACEMENT TERMINATION
Adoption Finalized
In Sending State
In Receiving State
Court Order Attached
Child Reached Majority/Legally Emancipated
Legal Custody Returned to Parent(s)
Court Order Attached
Legal Custody Given to Relative
Court Order Attached
Name:
Relationship:
Treatment Completed
Sending State's Jurisdiction Terminated with the Concurrence of the Receiving State
Unilateral Termination
Child Returned to Sending State
Child Has Moved to Another State
Proposed Placement Request Withdrawn
Name of Placement Resource:
Approved Resource Will Not Be Used for Placement
Name of Approved Placement :
Other (Specify):
Date of Termination:
SECTION IV - SIGNATURES
Person/Agency Supplying Information:
Date:
Compact Administrator, Deputy or Alternate:
Date:
MARY LOU WOLFF
DISTRIBUTION (Complete four (4) copies of this form):
• Sending Agency retains a (1) copy and forwards completed original plus three (3) copies to:
• Sending Compact Administrator, DCA, or alternate retains one (1) copy and forwards two (2) copies to:
• Receiving Agency Compact Administrator, DCA, or alternate retains one (1) copy and forwards one (1) copy to the receiving agency
Anne Milgram
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY
Attorney for the New Jersey Division
Of Youth and Family Services
Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex
PO Box 112
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
By:
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
COUNTY
CHANCERY DIVISION-FAMILY PART
DOCKET NO.
ORDER FOR ARTICLE VI
INSTITUTIONAL CARE OF
DELINQUENT CHILDREN
This matter having come before the court on _________________________________________.
I have been advised of the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Equivalent facilities for the child are not available in the State of New Jersey; and
Institutional care in the State of _______________________________, a party to the
Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children is in the best interest of the child.
_______________________________ shall be responsible for supervising the child
(Facility)
and for forwarding quarterly supervisory reports to ____________________________.
(County Probation Department)
_________________________ shall promptly notify ___________________________.
(Facility)
(County Probation Department)
of a lack of progress which could effect the child’s ability to complete the program and/or
require the return of the child to the sending state.
Institutional care in the other jurisdiction is in the best interest of the child and will not
produce undue hardship.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that ___________________________________________ shall
(Name of child)
be transferred to an out-of-state residential facility.
____________________________________________
Honorable
, J.S.C.
DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES
INTERSTATE SERVICES UNIT
INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
ICPC REFERRAL CHECKLIST
RELATIVE PLACEMENT
RETURN TO PARENT PLACEMENT
FOSTER CARE PLACEMENT
ICPC FORM 100A – 7 COPIES
Must be original signature--signed by D.O./ARC Manager/designee
THE REFERRAL PACKET MUST HAVE INFORMATION NOTED BELOW, AND
THERE MUST BE THREE (3) COPIES OF- EACH ONE FOR A COMPLETE
PACKET
COVER LETTER FORMALLY REQUESTING OUT-OF-STATE EVALUATION
(Please use DYFS letter head. Please date) – 3 copies
¾ Discuss any special needs of child(ren)
¾ If required, include a request for a criminal history check and central registry check on the
out-of-State placement resource and any adult members in the household. This request is
especially required for referrals to Pennsylvania.
¾ Include your DO and phone number in case contact is desired by the receiving state worker.
COURT ORDER/LEGAL DOCUMENTS (3 copies)
Most States no longer accept our Voluntary Placement Agreement. States require that we obtain
legal custody of the child(ren) prior to placement with out-of-state placement resource.
Include a signed court order. Options include:
1. A court order reflecting the Division retains custody/jurisdiction of child(ren)
2. Order of Compliance
3. Priority Placement – Regulation 7 ( to be used in conjunction with Title 9 or 30 order)
* Note: All priority court orders require Form 101 - Sending State Priority Home Study Request
be attached.
NJ ICPC FORM 9/01
ICPC REFERRAL
PLACEMENT
CHECKLIST
FOR
RELATIVE,
PARENT,
FOSTERCARE
Page 2 of 2
MEDICAL & FINANCIAL PLAN - 3 copies(Please refer to attached medical financial
plan)
CHILD(REN)’S SOCIAL SUMMARY OR CURRENT DYFS FORM 26-81 (ARC
FORM 23-53) - 3 copies
CHILD(REN)’S HEALTH & EDUCATION RECORD – DYFS FORM 5-16
- 3 copies
TITLE IV-E ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTATION (Form 10-5fc) - 3 copies
¾ Required only when the medical plan includes foster payments to out-of-state placement
resource.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS MAY INCLUDE:
CHILD(REN)’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE (long form)
¾ Required to prove relationship for TANF payments
¾ May be required to enroll child(ren) into school
FOSTER HOME STUDY (original & current update)
¾ Required by receiving State when New Jersey foster parent moves out-of-State
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
¾ Additional supporting documents may be required, such as psychological evaluations (if
child(ren) are in treatment), medical reports, child study team evaluation, police reports, etc.
NJ ICPC FORM 9/01
INTERSTATE ADOPTION ICPC REFERRAL CHECKLIST
100A
Adoption Home Study
State Prints
FBI Prints
Affidavit
CARI Checks
Consent/ TPR on Birthmother
Consent/TPR on Birthfather
Birthmother’s Social & Medical History
Birthfather’s Social & Medical History
Birthmother’s Counseling Statement
ICWA Disclaimer
Child’s Medical or Hospital Birth Records
100B (Date of Placement)
Child’s Social Summary
Statement Regarding Discipline Practice/Philosophy
Legal Risk Statement
Name of Supervising Agency_____________________________
Fee Disclosure
Verbal Approval Given to:_______________________________
IV-E Medicaid Documentation
Date of Verbal Approval:________________________________
ICAMA Forms
Other: _______________________________________________
INDEPENDENT ADOPTION ALSO NEED THE FOLLOWING:
Birth parent(s) Affidavit that counseling was offered and waived. If counseling was received, please
provide the name, address and telephone number of the counseling agency;
Birth parent(s) signed acknowledgement of the notice of lack of condition on placement of the child
regarding non-reimbursement of expenses;
Adoptive parent(s) signed acknowledgement of the notice of lack of condition on placement of the
child regarding non-reimbursement of expenses.
ADOPTION REQUIREMENTS WHEN
BIRTH PARENT PLACES WITH ADOPTION AGENCY / OP48 OR OP49
100A signed by birthparent
(FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE)
Sect I.
Placing part is birth parent
Sect II. Placement resource is agency,
Legal Authority:
A) CONSENT or SURRENDER
Or
B) Surrenders if already signed
type of care is adoption
Birthparent intake which explains circumstances of placement
Child’s Medical Statement (discharge summary)
After approval agency should send:
1.) Surrenders
2.) Final Decree
NOTE:
-Home study not needed as child
surrendered to agency.
-Fee disclosure NOT needed.
(Revised 6/21/05)
ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATORS OF THE INTERSTATE
COMPACT ON THE PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN
ICPC-101
August 1996
SENDING STATE
PRIORITY HOME STUDY REQUEST
To be submitted by Social Worker with other required ICPC materials
Name of Child 1 to be placed__________________________________Age_____Mother’s Name_____________________
Ethnic Group_____________________________________DOB__________Father’s Name________________________
PROPOSED CARETAKER
NAME___________________________________Marital Status: S, M, Sep., D, W, Living with__________________
(circle one)
(name of person)
ADDRESS:__________________________________________________________________________________________
Telephone Home #:______________________Work #:______________________Social Security #:__________________
Relationship to child identified above:______________________________________
Best time of day to contact caretaker:_______Employer_____________________________________________________
(if applicable)
Alternate Contact Name & Address:_____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
ASSESSMENT OF CHILD
Case Plan Attached:
yes
no
Financial/Medical Plan Attached:
yes
no
(circle one)
(circle one)
Special Needs:________________________________________________________________________________________
Handicaps: Mental/Physical____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Service Needs/Treatment Requirements:__________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
School Information____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Other required pertinent information regarding child and family will follow: yes
no
(circle one)
Worker’s Name_______________________________________________
_____________________
(please print)
(Tel. #)
Worker’s Signature____________________________________________
___________
Supervisor’s Signature_________________________________________
___________
(date)
(If required)
1
(date)
_____________________
(Tel. #)
If there is more than one child to be placed with the proposed caretaker, list the name of the child(ren) and all requested
information on a separate page and attach to this form.
ATTACHMENT E
ICAMA
The Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance (ICAMA) is an
agreement between states that provides the framework for formalized
interstate cooperation envisioned under the Adoption Assistance and Child
Welfare Act of 1980. ICAMA was written in January 1986 and enacted by 9
states. New Jersey became a member in 2004. At present, 47 states are
members of the compact as well as the District of Columbia. Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands, New York, Vermont, and Wyoming are not yet members.
The compact provides the force and effect of law with member states and
provides uniformity and consistency of policy and procedures. The main
goal is to ensure delivery of Medicaid and other services to subsidy children
and families who cross state lines. They may have initially been placed
through the Interstate Compact on Placement of Children (ICPC) pre
finalization, or they may have relocated after their adoption was finalized.
The 1980 Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act (PL 96-272)
established a federally aided adoption assistance program under Title IV-E
of the Social Security Act. The 1985 consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act mandated that Medicaid for IV-E children was to be
provided by the state of the child’s residence and it gave states the option of
providing children receiving state-funded (non IV-E) adoption assistance
Medicaid.
Reciprocity is when a member state agrees to given Medicaid to a child who
is not IV-E eligible and this child is generally referred to as state option
only. Reciprocity is not a requirement for joinder. States voluntarily agree
to provide such. At present, seven states have not agreed to provide
reciprocity. In addition not all those who do provide reciprocity will provide
such pre finalization.
Facilitation of Medicaid requires ICAMA forms as well as an attached
subsidy agreement. The forms identify what program the child is eligible
under such as IV-E, State option, or Social Security Disability. Each
member state has a central contact person whereby the forms are sent. Using
the ICAMA forms a family may receive Medicaid within the week or it may
take up to six weeks to process depending upon the state’s set up. Some
state’s Medicaid programs are administered by County offices. Only 25%
of the ICAMA member states administer both ICPC and ICAMA. Most
ICAMA offices are either housed in their state’s Adoption Office or in their
Medicaid Office.
ATTACHMENT F
1
ICPC FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)
1. ONCE 6 MONTHS HAVE PASSED AND THE CHILD HAS BEEN IN THE
RECEIVING STATE WITH AN APPROVED RESOURCE, CAN THE CASE
AUTOMATICALLY BE CLOSED? ICPC does not provide any automatic time frame, like six
months, to permit closure of a case. Per Article V Retention of Jurisdiction, the sending state must
retain legal jurisdiction until there is either concurrence ie the receiving and sending state’s agree on
the plan or the child is adopted or comes of age.
2. ARE CARE AND SUPERVISION ORDERS SUFFICIENT FOR ICPC REQUESTS OR
PROTECTION? No they are not and no state will honor them. The sending/requesting state has to
either have full legal custody or they may obtain an Order of Compliance. Orders of Compliance are not,
however, accepted by all states.
3. APPEALS: WHO HAS THE FINAL SAY WHEN A PROPOSED RESOURCE IS
APPROVED OR DENIED? MUST THE STATE WHO REQUESTED THE HOME
STUDY PLACE THE CHILD THERE? IF THE STATE WHO ASKED FOR THE
HOME STUDY DOES NOT AGREE WITH A RECEIVING STATE’S DENIAL, DO
THEY HAVE ANY RECOURSE? If a home is approved, the sending state has the right to use or
not use the proposed resource. If a home is denied, a review/appeal process can be made by the
proposed resource, the agency, legal representatives, or child’s guardian. Unfortunately, no standard
exists for this process so that it may take some time to clarify how to go about it in the receiving state.
The request to review/appeal should be made through the ICPC (Interstate Unit) office.
4. WHO IS REPSONSIBLE FOR THE CHILD’S SUPPORT BOTH FINANCIAL AND
MEDICAL? IF FOSTER OR ADOPTION SUBSIDY BOARD IS PAID, DO SENDING
OR RECEIVING STATES’ RATES APPLY? Sending/state is responsible for proposed plan. If
it falls through ie TANF and it can not be obtained, the sending agency is still liable under compact law.
A receiving state can not obligate a sending state to pay their board. A receiving state can “recommend”
that their board, if higher, be paid and cost of living would make it hard for the resource to support the
child (often true in CA & HA). The receiving state can also refuse to approve the placement, unless
sending state pays their foster care board.
5. ARE THERE TIME FRAMES FOR COMPLETION OF A STUDY AND SANCTIONS IF
NOT COMPLETED IN A TIMELY WAY? ICPC only puts time frames on Priority Court Order
studies. If the receiving state gives a “documented” reason for a delay, 20 business days can be extended
and then it is not a violation of the court order. Presently no other study has an enforceable time frame
under ICPC. The Safe & Timely Interstate Federal Act passed 07/01/06 requires states to provide
information to Federal Administration Children & Families regarding studies done in 30 or 60 days, with
no training or criminal history. DYFS may receive incentive money if completed in 30 days or they may
lose money if the study takes longer then 60 days.
6. CAN YOU USE ICPC TO REQUIRE SUPERVISION OR TO GET A HOME STUDY
WHEN YOU SEND THE CHILD ON A “VISIT” OR WHEN YOU NEED A “QUICK”
ASSESSMENT FOR A RELATIVE? Under ICPC no supervision is provided with a visit. ICPC
can not be used to get a “quick” home study or CHRI/CPS history. IF you invoke ICPC, you take all the
laws that go with it. A CPS request can be made of a sister agency that may or may not be honored
without ICPC.
7. IF NO ONE RESIDES IN NJ AND DYFS REMOVES A CHILD BECAUSE OF AB/N
AND PARENT PERSON WAS AT AIRPORT, ON VACATION, PASSING THROUGH
OR VISITING WHEN AB/N OCCURRED, DOES ICPC HAVE TO BE INVOKED TO
INSURE THAT CARETAKERS RECEIVE SERVICES OR IS IT THE
2
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATE OF RESIDENCE? DYFS has the responsibility to do
ICPC as no way to require residence state to comply without ICPC.
8. DOES THE COMPACT EXCLUDE PARENT AND RELATIVES AS A RESULT OF
THE NJ APPELATE COURT DECISION AND THE FEDERAL DECISION OF
MCCOMB VS. WAMBAUGH? ICPC regulations include parents and relatives while Articles
do not. A Court can choose what to interpret. However, if the court goes one way ie invokes
ICPC and then changes the rule this is considered a violation and has been successfully
challenged.
9. DYFS REMOVES CHILD FROM PARENT AND NON OFFENDING PARENT COMES
FROM ANOTHER STATE AND WANTS CHILD. DOES ICPC HAVE TO BE USED TO
EVAL THE NON OFFENDING PARENT AND CAN SUPPORTIVE SERVICES BE
REQUIRED TO BE OFFERED BY THER RECEIVING STATE TO THE NON
OFFENDING PARENT? Per Regulation 3 non custodial not unfit parent does not require
ICPC for placement, however, if DYFS wants to be safe and wants eval/services can either ask
receiving CPS agency to assist or try to work through ICPC offices with Judge signing the 100A.
10. IF A PROPOSED RELATIVE IN ANOTHER STATE HOLDS A FOSTER CARE OR
PREADOPT APPROVAL, CAN DYFS JUST SEND THE DYFS CHILD WITH AN
ASSUMPTION THAT THIS IS AN AUTOMATIC ICPC APPROVAL? No assumptions.
License may be for children under 2 not for 11 year old fire setter! Study must be child specific
so an addendum is requested. Also if home is from a private agency, there could be an issue of
how to pay for the placement who would supervise. Case by case and best to check.
11. WHAT TYPES OF ISSUES ARE DIFFERENT IN INTERSTATE PLACEMENTS
COMPARED TO IN STATE PLACEMENTS? PA requires that all relatives be studied as
foster parents but they do not require that foster board payments be made. Therefore, you can
not use a Priority Court Order for PA. In PA, relatives may apply for TANF or Medicaid. NY
will not permit a relative to receive TANF or Medicaid for the first 6 months of placement. In
addition, the relative has to hold legal custody before they can receive this service. This means
that an alternative financial/medical plan must be used to consider a possible “relative”
placement in NY. Several states do not permit TANF ie Ohio, Virginia, & certain Texas
counties. Both MD, OH, and VA charge tuition, if the child is in a FH. Even if we have an
approved private adoption study, states like Indiana and Kentucky require by Regulation that the
child welfare agency review approval not just ICPC. Bottom line-it is important not to assume
that other states do business like NJ and to contact the Interstate Unit for guidance.
12. HOW ARE VIOLATIONS HANDLED AND WHAT IS THE WORSE THAT CAN
HAPPEN? Child could be placed at risk of harm with no services or supervision. States can
sue each other for cost of care, although they seldom do. Placements can fail that might have
been successful. A child can be ordered to return and an adoption can be overturned.
13. WHAT ARE THE GREATEST CAUSES OF DELAY IN ICPC FROM START TO
FINISH? ICPC paperwork is not sent by LO in a timely way to ICPC office. Incomplete ICPC
packet. Receiving state does not assign or follow through in a timely way and this does not
surface until court is due. LO is asked to provide additional info to receiving state and they
don’t do it in a timely way so the study is held up. Lack of cooperation of the proposed resource
who did not understand what they would have to do to be approved. Delay in obtaining waivers
in NJ when other state does not require a waiver.
ATTACHMENT G
April 24, 2008
Ms. Sonia G. Martinez, Esq.
Court Improvement Program Director
AOC Family Practice Division
Hughes Justice Complex
PO Box 983-7 North
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
RE: State Court Improvement Program
Dear Ms. Martinez:
This letter is to provide information to you regarding what action the Department of
Children and Families (DCF) has taken in order to continue to implement the Safe and
Timely Interstate Placement of Foster Children Act of 2006.
The DCF Interstate Services Unit in conjunction with the Division of Youth and Family
Services (DYFS) now has a DYFS Policy and procedure effective August 2007 that
institutes a streamline process to evaluate prospective homes in inter-jurisdictional cases.
This policy was instituted as early as October 1, 2006 in order to comply with the
mandated time frames established in the Safe and Timely Act. Since all NJ Resource
Homes are licensed using the SAFE Model, the Safe & Timely Interstate Act study has
been revised to be a combination of both studies.
Highlights include:
•
•
•
Out of state complete requests for a NJ home assessment are assigned by the
Interstate Services Unit through the DYFS SACWIS system
All assignments are made through a specific unit in the Local DYFS office and
they are advised to have a turnaround response within 55 days to the Interstate
Services Unit.
The SAFE Model, although shortened, is now used for this study so that only one
entry is required to be able to move to the next step when the family completes
the full process
Sonia G. Martinez
Page 2
April 24, 2008
•
•
•
•
•
Upon a positive recommendation, the sending state is given the option of placing
the child through overnight mail notification utilizing the Interstate Compact on
Placement of Children (ICPC).
Requests for DYFS children to be placed out of state are also sent through the
Interstate Services Unit through overnight mail to expedite the request.
The DYFS form 5-47 that provides Notification of Placement to the courts as well
as other entities was updated on 8/22/07 and an additional form 18-35 Notice of
Change also effective 8/22/07 is used to require rather than permit notification to
appropriate parties i.e. foster parents, relative caregivers of proceedings held with
respect to the child.
Both of these forms are available on SPIRIT to facilitate entry and maintain a
comprehensive system record on line.
Several trainings were planned with DYFS Local Offices, however, given the
priority of SPIRIT activity, the trainings will be rescheduled
Data systems to monitor the timeframes as noted in the Safe and Timely Act were
delayed due to the work done to roll out the SPIRIT system. However, the fields are
being added this week and a manual entry to update the system will occur while new
entries will automatically be entered. Therefore yearly statistics will be available to
cover the October 1, 2007-September 30, 2008 year. The Association of Administrators
of the ICPC (AAICPC) continues to collaborate to provide information to member states
through a new web based State Page system regarding appeal procedures and contacts.
AAICPC’s work on the proposed ICPC draft work took the lead this past year so that
additional time is needed to address the web based State Page system. Benita Rommel,
Supervisor of the DCF Interstate Services Unit, continues to act as Chair. Training
regarding Safe & Timely Act has largely been addressed by the Interstate Services
through phone, and e-mail.
Should another state decide to place their child in New Jersey due to a positive
assessment through the Safe and Timely Act, the DCF Interstate Services Unit has
offered to potentially provide services and support through the Interstate Compact on
Placement of Children with proper documentation of a sound financial/medical plan until
such time as the home is licensed as a Resource Home since this Act does not require
licensure.
Sonia G. Martinez
Page 3
April 24, 2008
Since this is a work in progress, steps taken as referenced above will continue to be
monitored. We look forward to working closely with the Court Improvement Program to
find ways to improve the process given our joint responsibilities.
Please feel free to contact me should you have additional questions. I can be reached at
(609 292 3188.
Sincerely,
Benita Rommel, Supervisor
Interstate Services Unit
Enc.
c: Erin O’Leary
Christine Mozes
Kathy Morbit
Cheryl MacDougall
ATTACHMENT H
II Field Operations Casework Policy and Procedures Manual
IIM Adoption Services
1900 New Jersey Adoption Resource Exchange
1902 Registration of Children on the New Jersey Adoption
Resource Exchange
4-19-99
1902.1
Initial Referral
When a child is referred to the Exchange, all registered families are
reviewed to determine possible matches. If no appropriate home is available,
the child is referred immediately to the National Adoption Exchange (NAE),
Downey Side of New Jersey and Adopt a Special Kid (AASK) Midwest. If a
picture of the child is not available, the Exchange Director requests one from
the child's Worker. Within one month of receipt of the request the Worker
obtains a picture and sends it to the Exchange Director who has copies made
for recruitment purposes. The Individual and Family Assessment OutlineAdoption, DYFS Form 26-53c, Parts A and B for a child registered on the
NJARE should be current within one year. If the information is not current, a
memo is sent to the Worker requesting updated information. The Worker
updates the assessment by completing the Individual and Family
Reassessment Outline - Adoption, DYFS Form 26-53d. The material should
include the child's likes, dislikes, a complete description of the child's
appearance, hobbies, personality, and how well he or she relates to adults
and other children. A current photograph of the child should also be
included.
1902.2
Downey Side of New Jersey and AASK
4-19-99
The Exchange Director registers the child with Downey Side of New Jersey
and AASK and sends a copy of the assessment and a photograph of the
child, if available, to the agency.
1902.3
National Adoption Exchange (NAE)
4-19-99
The Exchange Director registers the child with the National Adoption
Exchange by completing a NAE registration form. The Exchange Director
sends a picture of the child, if available, along with written descriptive
information to the NAE.
Upon receipt of the registration form, the child's information is entered into
NAE's computer data base which scans its list of available homes. If a match
is made, a match referral form identifying the potential family is sent to the
child's Worker, with a copy to the Exchange Director.
When color copies of the child's picture become available, the Exchange
Director sends a copy to NAE for registration on their Internet photolisting FACES of Adoption.
The NAE sponsors recruitment activity and publicity on behalf of DYFS
waiting children. Information and agency referral are provided by NAE to
New Jersey families. In addition, NAE maintains a library with information
on adoption which is available to DYFS staff and adoptive families.
ATTACHMENT I
II Field Operations Casework Policy and Procedures Manual
II J Interstate Services
1100 Placement and Supervision of Child Outside New Jersey
1101 Placement Decision and Supervision
2-6-2006
The OSA report and recommendations are reviewed by the Worker and
Supervisor. If the placement resource has been approved by the receiving
State Compact Administrator, and the decision is made to place the child,
travel arrangements for the child are made with the prospective caregiver or
OSA, as appropriate. If board payments will be provided, the method of
payment is explained to the caregiver. Provide information about how to
obtain medical and/or other special services for the child in the receiving
state. See II K 331, Medicaid Coverage for IV-E Children Living Out-ofState. For non IV-E eligible children, see II K 332, Medicaid Coverage for
Children Placed Out-of-State.
The Local Office promptly notifies the Interstate Services Unit of the date of
placement so that supervision and periodic reports may be requested from
the receiving state. The Interstate Services Unit notifies the receiving state of
the placement date and requests courtesy supervision by preparing and
forwarding the ICPC-100B, Interstate Compact Report on Child's Placement
Status.
In general, an evaluation and commitment for post-placement supervision is
a prerequisite to placement. The frequency of reports and length of
supervision varies according to the type of placement being considered (i.e.,
"free placement", "foster home paid placement", or "placement with parent")
as well as the child's adjustment to his new placement.
The OSA provides supervision for as long as needed while DYFS retains
legal jurisdiction and responsibility for the placement. See II J 2205, Article
V. Under the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children, DYFS must
obtain custody of the child, an Order of Compliance (see II J 2224), or an
Article VI Court Order (see II J 2222) for a juvenile adjudicated delinquent.
An order is needed because other states are reluctant to accept parental
consent -- i.e., the Division's residential placement agreement, DYFS Form
25-59 or a consent to independent living, DYFS Form 10-8 -- as the sole
authority for placement.
Reports are customarily requested to be forwarded on a quarterly basis. If
board payments are being provided, supervision must continue until the
child reaches the age of majority, is adopted, or other permanent plans are
established/achieved. Placements may be subject to child placement review.
See II J 1105 and II A 2418.6. The case cannot be closed without the
concurrence of the OSA and the Interstate Services Unit.
If the OSA refuses to provide supervision for the child for some reason,
approval to proceed with the placement is requested from the Local Office
Manager and the Interstate Services Unit.