The fourth core component of youth permanency practice addresses the full range of permanency options available for a youth and includes the following dimensions:

1. A primary emphasis on legal family permanency outcomes through reunification with birth parents, or adoption or legal guardianship by relatives or non-relatives;
2. Extremely limited use of APPLA as a permanency goal;
3. Reinstatement of parental rights for youth who have not been adopted following termination of parental rights; and
4. Evidence-informed recruitment practices for youth who cannot safely reunify with birth parents.

1.  A primary emphasis on legal family permanency outcomes through reunification with birth parents, or adoption or legal guardianship by relatives or non-relatives

The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA), further strengthened by the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (FCA), makes clear that permanency planning efforts for children and youth are to begin as soon as the child/youth enters foster care and should be expedited by the provision of services to families and to the child/youth.   ASFA stipulates five permanency goals for children/youth in foster care: reunification, adoption, legal guardianship, a permanent placement with a fit and willing relative, and another planned permanent living arrangement only if there is a compelling reason why none of the other ASFA permanency goal is the best interest of the child/youth.   Federal law creates a hierarchy of preferred permanency outcomes, beginning with legal family permanency (reunification, adoption, legal guardianship).  This hierarchy, however, is not inflexible and permanency goals for youth can be based on individualized planning that addresses the circumstances of each individual youth.  ASFA requires that reasonable efforts be made “to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the permanency plan and to complete whatever steps are necessary to finalize the permanent placement of the child.” 

Primary Emphasis on Reunification.  Reunifying youth with their parents is a primary goal of the child welfare system.  ASFA requires that reasonable efforts be made to reunify youth with their parents/primary caregivers unless specific conditions mitigate against reunification and a court rules that reasonable efforts, under the circumstances of the case, are not required.

It is important to note that best practice in reunification does not include youth “aging out” of the child welfare system at the age of majority (age 18 or older) and returning to live with birth parents by default. In youth permanency best practice, reunification means that a youth safely returns to live with birth parents rather than exiting the system by “aging out”.

The Next Legal Option: Adoption.  ASFA requires that when a youth has been in foster care for 15 of the last 22 months, the agency “shall file a petition to terminate parental rights of the child’s parents” unless the child is being cared for by a relative, the state has documented a “compelling reason for determining that filing such a petition would not be in the best interests of the child” or the state has not made the reasonable efforts necessary to achieve the goal of the case plan where the goal is reunification. 
The law requires the agency to identify, recruit, process and approve qualified families concurrently with filing or joining the petition for adoption.

Legal Guardianship.  ASFA expressly recognizes legal guardianship as a permanent option for youth in foster care.  The FCA gives States the option of obtaining federal reimbursement for ongoing assistance payments made on behalf of children who exit foster care to guardianship with a relative.  Federal law is clear that legal guardianship follows reunification and adoption as preferred permanency goals.  The law includes case plan requirements that require states to document "the steps that the agency has taken to determine that it is not appropriate for the child to be returned home or adopted" and "the efforts the agency has made to discuss adoption by the child's relative foster parent as a more permanent alternative to legal guardianship." 

It is important to note that the benefits of legal family relationship afforded to youth by legal guardianship (also called permanent legal custodianship in some states) ends at age 18 and offers no legal family tie in adulthood. Best practice in youth permanency assures that the potential for reunification or adoption is fully exhausted before implementing a plan of legal guardianship, as it is the least legally secure type of family relationship for youth in child welfare.

State Examples

Michigan policy states that the only allowable goals are the permanency goals recognized by the federal government and these goals are, in descending order of preference:  reunification, adoption, guardianship, permanent placement with a fit and willing relative; and placement in another planned permanent living arrangement.

Nebraska’s Permanency Objectives Selection Guidebook states that the order of preferred permanency options is: family preservation, reunification, adoption, legal guardianship and then the options of long-term foster care, independent living (if the youth is 16 years or older) and self-sufficiency with supervision.

Oregonengaged in Permanency Roundtables (PRTs) as a tool to increase legal permanency for youth in long-term foster care and to assist in a statewide culture shift toward increasing legal permanency outcomes for all children and youth in care. Working collaboratively with Casey Family Programs, eight Oregon counties implemented PRTs for 378 youth in 2010.

Texaspolicy states that the categories of permanency goals in order of priority are:  family reunification; adoption (relative/kinship adoption and unrelated adoption); permanent managing conservatorship to a relative or suitable individual (relative/kinship conservatorship and unrelated conservatorship); and another planned permanency living arrangement (foster family DFPS conservatorship and other family DFPS conservatorship).

Washington State policy specifies that the social worker must identify one of the following permanency planning options as a primary goal (in order of legal preference) and may concurrently identify other permanency options as alternative goals:  return to the home of a parent, guardian or legal custodian; adoption; third party custody with someone other than the parent (permanent legal custody); dependency guardianship.  

2.  Extremely limited use of APPLA as a permanency goal
Best practice makes clear that because APPLA does not provide a youth with a permanent legal parent, although it may be the outcome for some youth, it should not be a goal. Many states have put strict limitations upon the use of APPLA as a goal and it is the least preferred permanency option for youth in foster care.

State and Local Examples

Alabama’s Unified Court System has developed a Permanency Hearing Order (Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement) which provides the court with a 4-page checklist designed to ensure that APPLA is the most appropriate permanency plan.

Iowa’s Practice Bulletin: Permanency for Children: Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement states that for every case APPLA is considered, the social worker needs to ask, “Why can’t this child have real permanence?” “What are the barriers to adoption, guardianship, or permanent placement with a relative?” “Why is it not reasonable, possible, or appropriate?”

Los Angeles County, California policy identifies the following as prioritized legal permanency outcomes, in this order: 1) reunification with birth parents, 2) adoption by relative, 3) Kin-Gap-legal guardianship with current relative caregivers, 4) adoption by non-relative, and 5) legal guardianship by a non-relative for children age 6 and older. The policy states that a permanent planned living arrangement (APPLA) is not an acceptable or appropriate permanent plan.  

Maryland issued a policy on April 15, 2012 on the use of APPLA as a permanency goal (SSA 12-32). The policy states that “APPLA is the least preferred choice among the permanency plan hierarchy and should be used only when all other plans have been completely exhausted.”   The policy requires that the social worker document in writing answers to 12 questions listed in the policy before an APPLA goal is recommended to the court.  The questions include:  “What other permanency options were considered and why were they ruled out?”  “Why is this proposed plan a valid ‘Permanent Living Arrangement’ ”? The Citizens Review Board for Children (CRBC) reviews the cases of youth in out of home care with APPLA goals.  

Missouri’spolicy states that APPLA may become the permanent goal only when the child objects to TPR, and the juvenile court and/or Division believes it is in the best interest of the child not to pursue termination; adoption has been ruled out; guardianship or transfer of custody has been ruled out; placement with a Fit and Willing Relative has been ruled out; there is an identified appropriate planned permanent living arrangement in which the child wishes to continue living; and all possible additional services are explored with the child and/or the placement provider to provide permanency.

New York City Administration for Children’s Services policy calls for assuring all youth a lifelong connection that is as legally secure as possible to a caring adult committed to functioning in a parental capacity. Established in 2003, this policy requires family-based concurrent plans to be established for youth having or being assigned a goal of independent living.

North Carolina’s policy states that when APPLA is the goal, the agency is required to provide and document services as follows:  Child Placement Services to ensure the child’s ongoing safety and well-being needs are met;  provision of relevant LINKS services, based on a written, objective assessment, and a plan developed with the youth;  access to resources for the youth through the LINKS program and other resources as appropriate; diligent efforts to help the youth to establish a strong personal support network with friends and relatives; and post-placement support for the caregiver in order to avoid placement disruption. The policy requires that APPLA be reviewed at least every six months, or more often as needed, at a facilitated Child and Family Team (CFT) meeting, which includes the youth and caregiver, and their supports, as well as the agency LINKS liaison. The CFT shall review the plan and the agency’s effort to maintain the stability of the placement and to assist the youth in his transition to independence.

Oregon’s policy states that “although APPLA is a type of permanency plan, the Department is required to continue to seek a higher level of permanency.”  A proposed plan of APPLA is to be considered and recommended by the following entities: caseworker and supervisor, the child’s team, a Permanency Committee, the Child Welfare Program Manager, and the Court.

Virginia’spolicy states that local departments of social service may select an alternative goal only when the three priority permanency goals (reunification, adoption, permanent relative custody) are determined to be inconsistent with the child’s best interest. The policy states that the selection of APPLA is appropriate “only if the child has a severe chronic emotional, physical, or neurological disabling condition for which the child requires long-term residential treatment of six (6) months or longer” [emphasis in original].  The policy further states that selection of this goal requires that all other permanency goals have been ruled out as not in the child’s best interest and that opportunities to change the goal and facilitate reunification, adoption or placement with and custody by a relative shall continue to be pursued.

3.  Reinstatement of parental rights for youth who have not been adopted following termination of parental rights

Every State has statutes providing for the termination of parental rights by a court. Termination of parental rights, which can be voluntary or involuntary, ends the legal parent-child relationship. Once parental rights have been terminated, the child is legally free to be placed for adoption.  The National Conference of State Legislature reports that as of 2010, approximately nine states had legislation in place that allows for the reinstatement of parental rights following termination of parental rights:  Alaska, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, and Washington State. If a permanent family has not been achieved within a specific timeframe, a petition may be filed with the court requesting reinstatement of the parent’s rights.  If the court determines that the parent is now able to provide a safe home for the child, the request may be granted. These laws were developed in response to the needs of youth who were aging out of the foster care system and re-establishing ties with parents and family members. 

State Examples

Alaska’s law states that a court shall vacate a termination order if the person shows that reinstatement of parental rights is in the best interest of the child and that the person is rehabilitated and capable of providing the care and guidance that will serve the moral, emotional, mental, and physical welfare of the child.

California’s law provides no threshold as a minimum age for youth for reinstatement of parental rights but if the youth is 12 years of age or older, the youth must sign the petition for reinstatement.  Only the youth can file the petition.

Hawaii’s law allows youth age 14 and older, the youth’s guardian ad litem or attorney or the Department to file a petition with the court to reinstate parental rights.

Illinois’ law allows only the Department of Child and Family Services to file a petition with the court to reinstate parental rights for a youth age 13 or older.

Louisiana’slaw allows counsel appointed for youth age 15 or older or the Department to file a petition to reinstate parental rights.

Maine’slaw does not provide a threshold as a minimum age for youth for reinstatement of parental rights but if the youth is 12 years of age or older, the youth must consent to reinstatement.  Only the Department can file the petition.

New York State’s law allows the attorney for a youth who is at least 14 years of age, the agency or individual to whom guardianship and custody of the juvenile has been committed or the respondent in the termination of parental rights hearing to file a petition to reinstate parental rights. 

Nevada’s law provides for no minimum age threshold for youth for reinstatement of parental rights but if the youth is 14 years of age or older, the youth must consent to the reinstatement.  The youth or a legal custodian or guardian for the youth may file the petition.

North Carolina’s law allows youth age 12 and older, the youth’s guardian ad litem attorney and/or the county department of social services to file a petition to terminate parental rights. 

Oklahoma’s law on reinstatement of parental rights provides the ability for a child age 15 years or older, through an application signed by the child and the child's attorney, to request the court reinstate the previously terminated parental rights of his or her parent under specified circumstances. 

Washington State’s law allows a youth age 12 and older to file for reinstatement of parental rights.  The Children’s Administration has issued a Fact Sheet to guide practice in response to the law. 

4. Evidence-informed recruitment practices for youth in foster care

For young people in foster care who will not return to parents or primary caregivers or find permanency with relatives, it is essential to recruit adoptive families who can promote the young person’s strengths, talents and gifts and meet his or her needs.  Casey Family Programs, through its Breakthrough Series Collaborative on Recruitment and Retention of Resource Families identified several key practice themes that emerged from the sites’ work and have relevance to recruiting specifically for youth in foster care:

• Engage in culturally sensitive recruitment
• Create partnerships with the faith community in recruitment
• Learn about, educate, and engage targeted communities in recruitment efforts
• Recruit new families willing to care for adolescents and sibling groups
• Be responsive and attentive to the needs, questions, and concerns of resource families
• Creating opportunities for resource families and birth families to talk to each other about the youth in care
• Ensure strong partnerships with the agency and clear roles for resource families
• Create opportunities to listen to the voice of youth in care
• Make certain that the perspectives of the resource family are heard in numerous ways
• Find unique ways to hear the perspectives of birth families and honor their involvement in the lives of their children

Examples of adoption recruitment targeting families for older youth in foster care include:  

State Examples

Ampersand Families is a Minnesota Department of Human Services licensed, child-placing agency that provides direct services and national leadership to champion practices in adoption and permanency that restore belonging, dignity and hope.  Its evidence-informed permanency services include child-specific recruitment and placement services for youth who are under the guardianship of the Commissioner or a Minnesota tribe at no cost to counties or tribes through the Minnesota Department of Human Services Public–Private Adoption Initiative.

In Missouri the Foster and Adoptive Care Coalition’s Extreme Recruitment program aims to locate an adoptive parent in 12 – 20 weeks by incorporating intensive, weekly meetings to plan and monitor progress, focused supervisory involvement and preparation of the youth for adoption. The use of a private investigator is also used to increase successful relative contact rates. Of the youth served in 2011, 88% were reconnected with safe, appropriate family members and 63% were matched with an adoptive family.

You Gotta Believe in New York City recruits adoptive parents for young adults, teens and pre-teens by leveraging strong individual casework relationships with youth, identifying adults known to them and exploring their potential as adoptive parent for the youth. Citing research that highlights effectiveness of achieving adoptive parents for older youth from within the youth’s existing network of relationships, You Gotta Believe reaches out and invites identified adults to participate in a ten-week parent preparation program. With a strong vision to prevent teens them from experiencing homelessness after “aging out”, You Gotta Believe has successfully achieved an unconditionally committed, loving and permanent family for hundreds of older youth from the foster care system.

Pennsylvania recently launched a statewide media campaign to promote legal permanency for older youth in foster care, with a powerful focus on youth voice and innovative involvement of youth in recruitment.

The Wendy’s Wonderful Kids program of the Dave Thomas Foundation has been implemented in states across the United States.  Grants are awarded to public and private adoption agencies to hire adoption professionals who implement proactive, youth-focused recruitment programs targeted exclusively on moving the longest-waiting children from foster care into adoptive families. Research from a five-year evaluation shows that children and youth referred to the program are up to three times more likely to get adopted.