Pennsylvania 
Dependency Benchbook 

     

 

             

Office of Children and Families in the Courts 
 
Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts 

 

 
 

 

The Pennsylvania Dependency Benchbook was written for Pennsylvania judges 
by Pennsylvania judges.  The information contained in this Benchbook is 
intended to provide useful information regarding the subject covered but may not 
contain all relevant information or recent changes to the law or the Rules of 
Juvenile Court Procedure.  The information contained herein is not intended to 
be construed as legal advice or considered a substitute for statutory, procedural 
or other legal authority. 

opyright © 2010 by Office of Children and Families in the Courts/Administrative 

Office of Pennsylvania Courts.  

Office of Children and Families in the Courts 
Pennsylvania Judicial Center 
601 Commonwealth Avenue 
Suite 1500 
P.O. Box 61260 
Harrisburg, PA 17106-1260 

uggested Citation: 

ennsylvania Children’s Roundtable Initiative. Pennsylvania Dependency 

Benchbook. Harrisburg, PA: Office of Children and Families in the Courts, 2010. 

    C

   

      S

  P

                 

 
This publication has been made possible by a Court Improvement Program grant 
from the U.S. Department of Human Services, Children’s Bureau.  The views 
expressed herein have not been approved by the U.S. Department of Human 
Services, Children’s Bureau and, accordingly, should not be construed as 
representing the policy of the Children’s Bureau. 

 

 

   

   

i 

Acknowledgements    
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements

This first edition of Pennsylvania’s Dependency Benchbook benefited from 

the assistance of many individuals.  The Office of Children and Families in the 
Courts would like to acknowledge and thank the Honorable Ronald D. Castille, 
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, as well as all of the 
Supreme Court Justices for their support of this Benchbook and dependency 
court matters in general.   
 

We would like to extend specific thanks to the Honorable Justice Max 
Baer, whose tireless efforts to improve Pennsylvania’s child welfare system have 
significantly improved dependency court matters within the Commonwealth and 
have made this document possible.   
 

We would like to express our particular gratitude to the membership of 
Pennsylvania’s State Roundtable for providing support and guidance for this 
Benchbook.   
 

We would also like to thank the Honorable Chester Harhut, President 
Judge, Lackawanna County as Chairperson of the Dependency Benchbook 
Committee and all of the members of the Committee for their dedication and 
guidance over the many months of planning and development.  In particular, we 
commend the Committee’s vigilance in preserving the Mission and Guiding 
Principles for Pennsylvania’s Child Dependency System throughout this 
Benchbook.   
 

We particularly want to express our admiration and thanks to the 
Benchbook Edit Committee, who contributed an enormous amount of time on 
weekly conference calls over many months to shape, write, review and edit the 
Benchbook’s content, as well as support design and formatting.   
 

We would like to thank the staff of the National Center for State Courts 

who provided research, initial writing and editing of many sections of this 
Benchbook.  We further thank the National Center for Juvenile Justice for their 
support in researching, writing, and final editing of the Benchbook.    
 

Finally, we want to thank the many judges, hearing masters, attorneys, 

and child welfare professionals who will use this tool to implement best practices 
and in so doing help the children and families of Pennsylvania on a daily basis.     

 

 

         

 

                                                                                           

 

ii 

Dependency Benchbook Committee    
Dependency Benchbook Committee
Dependency Benchbook Committee
Dependency Benchbook Committee

Honorable Chester Harhut, Chair 
President Judge, Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Mary Ann Campbell 

Judge, Berks County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Kim Berkeley Clark 

Judge, Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Kevin Dougherty 

Administrative Judge, Family Court Division  
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Susan Gantman  

Judge, Superior Court of Pennsylvania 

onorable Carol Hanna 

Judge, Indiana County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Todd Hoover 

President Judge, Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Brian Johnson 

Judge, Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Charles Saylor 

Judge, Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Kelley Streib 

Judge, Butler County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Carol Van Horn  

Judge, Franklin/Fulton County Court of Common Pleas 

 

 

  H

  H

  H

  H

  H

  H

  H

  H

  H

  H

         

 

               

 

iii 

Dependency Benchbook Edit Committee    
Dependency Benchbook Edit Committee
Dependency Benchbook Edit Committee
Dependency Benchbook Edit Committee

onorable Chester Harhut, Chair 

President Judge, Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Kim Berkeley Clark 

Judge, Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Carol Hanna 

Judge, Indiana County Court of Common Pleas 

onorable Charles Saylor 

Judge, Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas 

 

 

  H

  H

  H

  H

                       

 

   

 

iv 

Consultants    
Consultants
Consultants
Consultants

r. Patrick Griffin 

National Center for Juvenile Justice 

r. Gregg Halemba 

National Center for Juvenile Justice 

s. Mary Durkin 

National Center for State Courts 

s. Mary Beth Kirven 

National Center for State Courts 

r. Lee Suskin 

Fair Shake Consulting of Counsel National Center for State Courts 

AOPC Staff    
AOPC Staff
AOPC Staff
AOPC Staff

Ms. Sandy Moore 
Administrator, Office of Children and Families in the Courts 

r. Angelo Santore, Benchbook Project Manager 

Judicial Program Analyst, Office of Children and Families in the Courts 

Judicial Program Analyst, Office of Children and Families in the Courts 

s. Lynne Napoleon 

s. Elke Moyer 

Executive Assistant, Office of Children and Families in the Courts 

 

  M

  M

  M

  M

  M

   

  M

  M

  M

   

 

   

 

 

 

Table of Contents    
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Table of Contents

Acknowledgments  
Committee Members 
Benchbook Overview   
 
Ch. 1 The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency 

System 
Mission and Guiding Principles for Pennsylvania’s Dependency 
System 
 

Ch. 2  The Role of Judges and Masters  

2.1 Role of Judges 

2.1.1 Oversight and Management of Individual Cases 
2.1.2  Commitment and Leadership in System 

Improvement Efforts 

2.1.3  Collaboration with the Child Welfare Agency and 

the Community 

2.2. Role of the Master 

 
Ch. 3 Jurisdiction 

3.1 Overview 
3.2 Dependency Jurisdiction in General 
3.3 Divisional Responsibilities 
3.4 Jurisdiction in Cases that Cross Borders 

3.4.1 Inter-County Transfer Cases 
3.4.2 Interstate Transfer 
3.4.3 International Transfers 
3.5 The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) 

 
Ch. 4  Right to Legal Representation  

4.1 Overview 
4.2 Legal Representation in Dependency Matters in 

Pennsylvania 

4.2.1 Judge’s Role 
4.2.2 Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) 
4.2.3 Legal Counsel for the Child 
4.2.4 Shared Case Management/Dual Jurisdiction 
4.2.5 Counsel for Parents 

4.3 Pro Se Parents 
4.4 County Solicitors 
4.5 Waiver of Counsel 

 
 
 

i 
ii 
xi 
 
1 

5 

 
21 
21 
21 
22 

23 

24 
 
26 
26 
26 
27 
28 
28 
29 
30 
31 
 
32 
32 
33 

33 
33 
34 
34 
35 
36 
37 
37 
 
 
 

v 

 
 

Table of Contents  

 

Ch. 5  Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care 

Hearing 
5.1 Overview 
5.2 Commencement of Proceedings - Pa.R.C.J.P. 1200 
5.2.1 Voluntary Placement with the Agency 
5.2.2 Order for Protective Custody 

5.3 Shelter Care Hearing - Pa.R.J.C.P. 1242 
5.4 Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) Appointments 

5.4.1 Parent Counsel 
5.4.2 Assignment of Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) and Child 

Counsel  

5.5 Conducting the Hearing 

5.5.1 Evidentiary Standard 

5.6 Findings and Orders 
5.7 Motions and Answers 
Shelter Care Hearing Checklist 
Shelter Care Hearing Benchcard 

 
Ch. 6  Adjudication  
6.1 Overview 
6.2 Dependency 
6.3 Pre-Hearing Requirements and Considerations 

6.3.1 Timing 
6.3.2 Appointment of Counsel 
6.3.3 Notification 
6.3.4 Discovery 
6.3.5 Pre-Adjudicatory Conference 
6.3.6 Stipulations 
6.3.7 Reports and Ex Parte Communication 
6.3.8 Standing 
6.4 Conducting the Hearing 
6.5 Burden of Proof 
6.6 Findings and Orders 
Adjudicatory Hearing Checklist 
Adjudicatory Hearing Benchcard 

 
Ch. 7  Visitation 
7.1 Overview 
7.2 Visitation in Reunification Cases in General 
7.3 Legal Requirements Governing Visitation 
7.4 Sibling Visitation 
7.5 Visitation Arrangements 
7.6 Visits with Incarcerated Parents 
7.7 “Best Interests” Visitation in Non-Reunification Cases 

 

vi 

 

39 

39 
40 
40  
41 
41 
44 
44 
45 

45 
46 
46 
47 
48 
51 
 
53 
53 
53 
54 
54 
55 
55 
55 
56 
56 
56 
57 
57 
58 
58 
60 
63 
 
65 
65 
65 
66 
67 
68 
68 
69 
 

Table of Contents  

 

 
 

Ch. 8  Disposition  

8.1 Overview 
8.2 Preliminary Matters 
8.3 Reports 
8.4 Stipulations 
8.5 Conduct of the Hearing 
8.6 Findings and Orders 
Disposition Checklist 
Disposition Benchcard 

 
Ch. 9  Permanency Options 

9.1 Overview 
9.2 Reunification 
9.3 Adoption 
9.4 Permanent Legal Custodianship (PLC) 
9.5 Permanent Placement with a Fit and Willing Relative 
9.6 Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement 

 
Ch. 10  Permanency Hearing 

10.1 Overview 
10.2 Timing of Permanency Hearings 
10.3 Pre-Hearing Conferences 
10.4 Hearing Objectives 
10. 5 Conduct of the Hearing 

10.5.1 Courtroom Management 
10.5.2 Persons in Attendance 

10.6  Matters to be Determined 

10.6.1 Continuing Necessity of Placement 
10.6.2 Appropriateness of Placement 
10.6.3 Appropriateness, Feasibility, and Extent of 

Compliance with the Permanency Plan 
10.6.4 Progress Toward Alleviating Circumstances 

Requiring Placement 

10.6.5 Appropriateness and Feasibility of Current 

10.6.6 Likely Date that Placement Goal Might Be 

Placement Goal 

Achieved 

10.6.7 Reasonable Agency Efforts to Finalize 

Permanency Plan 
10.6.8  Whether the Child is Safe 
10.6.9  Services Needed to Help Older Youth Transition to 

10.6.10  Whether a TPR Petition Should Be Filed 
10.6.11 When and How the Child Will Achieve 

Independence 

Permanency 

10.7  Admissibility of Evidence, Reports and Other Documents 

 

vii 

70 
70 
71 
71 
72 
73 
75 
77 
79 
 
81 
81 
81 
83 
85 
87 
90 
 
92 
92 
92 
94 
94 
97 
97 
99 
100 
100 
101 
102 

103 

104 

104 

104 

104 
105 

105 
106 

106 

 
 

Table of Contents  

 

10.8  Findings and Orders 
Permanency Hearing Checklist/Questions 
Permanency Hearing Benchcard 

 
Ch. 11  Permanency Hearing to Consider Change of Goal 

(“Goal Change Hearing”) 

11.1 Overview 
11.2 Initiating the Goal Change 
11.3 Goal Change to Adoption 
11.4 Change to Other Permanency Goals 
11.5  Effects of Goal Change 
11.6  Evidentiary Issues in Goal Change Hearings 
11.7  Findings and Orders 

 
Ch. 12  Termination of Parental Rights 

12.1 Overview 
12.2 Jurisdiction of the Court 
12.3 TPR Petitions 
12.4 Scheduling of TPR Hearings 
12.5 Service and Notice 
12.6 Appointment of Counsel 
12.7 Discovery 
12.8 Continuances 
12.9 TPR Methods 

12.9.1 Relinquishment Under the Alternative Procedure 

(Consent) 

12.9.2 Voluntary Relinquishment 
12.9.3 Involuntary Termination 
12.10 Grounds for Involuntary Termination 
12.11 Additional Considerations in Involuntary Termination 

Cases 
12.11.1  Parent-Child Bond Issues 
12.11.2  Putative Fathers 
12.11.3  Incarcerated Parents 

12.12 Decree of Termination of Parental Rights 
Sample Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights Colloquy 
TPR Benchcard 

 
Ch. 13  Appeals 

13.1 Overview 
13.2 CFT Rules at a Glance 
13.3 Trial Judge’s Role in Expediting Appeals 

 
 
 

viii 

 

107 
110 
115 
 
117 

117 
117 
119 
120 
122 
123 
123 
 
125 
125 
126 
127 
127 
127 
128 
129 
129 
130 
130 

131 
131 
133 
135 

135 
137 
137 
138 
140 
142 
 
144 
144 
144 
145 
 
 
 

Table of Contents  

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ch. 14  Adoption  
14.1 Overview 
14.2 Jurisdiction 
14.3 Pre-Adoption Requirements 
14.4 Adoption Hearings 

14.4.1 Preliminary Matters 
14.4.2 Attendance at Hearing 
14.4.3 Testimony and Investigation 

14.5 Adoption Orders 
Sample Questions for the Adoption Hearing 

 
Ch. 15  General Issues 

15.1 Overview 
 
15.2 Aggravated Circumstances 

15.2.1 “Aggravated Circumstances” Defined 
15.2.2 Procedures in Aggravated Circumstances Cases 
15.2.3 Timing of Hearing 
15.2.4 Effect of Determination 

15.3 Family Group Decision Making (FGDM) 

15.4 Common Pleas Court Management System 

15.3.1 Benefits of FGDM 
15.3.2 The FGDM Process 
15.3.3 The Court’s Role 

(CPCMS) 
15.4.1  Management Reports 
15.4.2  Statistical Reports 

15.5 Children in the Courtroom 

15.5.1 Talking to Children in Court 
15.5.2 Children as Witnesses 

15.6 Transitioning Youth 

15.6.1 Independent Living Services for Transition Youth 
15.6.2 Transition Planning for Older Youth 
15.6.3 Youth Opting to Remain in Care Past Age 18 
15.6.4 IL Aftercare Services 

15.7 Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) 

15.7.1 CASA Appointments 
15.7.2 CASA Duties and Responsibilities 
15.7.3 CASA Resources 

147 
147 
148 
148 
150 
150 
150 
151 
152 
153 
 
155 
155 
 
156 
156 
157 
157 
158 
 
159 
159 
160 
162 
 
164 

165 
166 
 
167 
168 
169 
 
172 
173 
174 
175 
177 
 
178 
178 
178 
180 
 

 

ix 

 
 

Table of Contents  

 

15.8 Planning and Funding Services: The Needs 

Based Plan and Budget (NBPB) 
15.8.1 Best Interests and Reasonable Efforts Findings 
15.8.2 County Planning and Budgeting Process 

 
Ch. 16 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare 

Legislation 

16.1 Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 
16.2 Adoption and Safe Families Act 
16.3 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA)  
16.4 Foster Care Independence Act (Chafee) 
16.5 Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing 

Adoptions Act of 2008  

16.6 Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC)  
16.7 Indian Child Welfare Act  
16.8 The Multi-Ethnic Placement Act – MEPA  
16.9 The Pennsylvania Adoption Act 

16.9.1 Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights 
16.9.2 Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights 
16.9.3 Relinquishment of Parental Rights under the 

Alternative  Procedure 

16.10 The Child Protective Services Law 
16.11 The Pennsylvania Juvenile Act 

 
Resources and References 

I.  On-line Resources/Information Clearinghouses 
II.  Judicial Guides, Checklists, and Tools 
 

Glossary/Acronyms 
 
Bibliography 

 

181 

181 
182 
 
185 

185 
185 
186 
187 
188 

190 
191 
192 
193 
193 
194 
195 

195 
198 
 
200 
200 
208 
 
210 
 
219 

x 

 

  xi 

Benchbook Overview    
Benchbook Overview
Benchbook Overview
Benchbook Overview

As commissioned by the Pennsylvania State Roundtable, the Office of 

Children and Families in the Courts (OCFC), in collaboration with the 
Dependency Benchbook Committee, has developed this Benchbook to assist 
new and experienced judicial officers in their efforts to provide timely and 
comprehensive action in child welfare cases and assure safe and permanent 
homes for children who are abused, neglected, or dependent.   In order to 
achieve this goal, the Benchbook provides:   
 

•  A summary of the legal requirements for dependency court 

proceedings, as well as detailed information on a number of special 
topics, such as the rights of older dependent youth and legal 
representation of children, parents, and guardians. 

•  Best practices derived from the innovations implemented in various 

Pennsylvania courts and the cumulative experience of judicial officers 
in the state, as well as national level policy making and research 
organizations, such as the National Council of Juvenile and Family 
Court Judges and the American Bar Association’s Center on Children 
and the Law.    

•  Tools such as hearing checklists, lists of critical questions, and 

proposed colloquies to assist in the conduct of hearings. 

A recommended first step in using the Benchbook is to read Chapter 1: 
The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System.  This chapter provides 
an overview of the history of reform efforts in the state, current reform objectives 
and strategies, and the Dependency Mission Statement and Guiding Principles.  
The Mission Statement of  “Protect Children; Promote Strong Families;  Promote 
Child Well-Being; Provide Timely Permanency”  provides the context for the 
themes that are echoed throughout the Benchbook and the recommended 
practices that support the overarching dependency system goals of increasing 
safety, well-being, and timely permanence for abused and neglected children.   
  

Initial reading might also include Chapter 2: The Role of Judges and 
Masters, which describes the multiple responsibilities of judicial officers in the 
dependency system, including oversight and management of individual cases, 
leadership in efforts to improve the system, and participation in collaborative 
efforts with the child welfare agency and community.   

ther essential background information is provided in Chapter 3: 
Jurisdiction, which examines Pennsylvania’s court division structure as it affects 
child welfare case processing and the jurisdictional laws governing cases that 
cross county or state lines or involve tribal communities.   

  O

 

 

   

 

Benchbook Overview  

 

Because judicial officers have a preliminary responsibility to appoint 

counsel for children, parents, and guardians, the Benchbook also includes a 
discussion of these matters in Chapter 4: Right to Legal Representation.  

The main body of the Benchbook consists of chapters devoted to each of 

the hearings held in a Pennsylvania child welfare case, beginning with the shelter 
care hearing (Chapter 5:  Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care 
Hearing), proceeding in sequence through adjudication (Chapter 6:  
Adjudication, supplemented by Chapter 7:  Visitation), disposition (Chapter 8:  
Disposition), post-dispositional review (Chapter 9:  Permanency Options, 
Chapter 10:  Permanency Hearing, and Chapter 11: Permanency Hearing to 
Consider Change of Goal (“Goal Change Hearing”)), and concluding with 
termination hearings (Chapter 12: Termination of Parental Rights, 
supplemented by Chapter 13: Appeals) and adoption hearings (Chapter 14:  
Adoption). 

or each of these hearing types, the following information is provided: 

•  An overview of the purpose of the hearing and the issues to be 

addressed.  

•  A summary of the legal requirements as delineated in Pennsylvania 
statutes and the Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure. 

•  General guidance in preparing findings and orders.  
•  Best practices, interspersed in the appropriate sections of the text and 

highlighted in text boxes. 

•  A checklist that addresses the timing of the hearing, who should be 
present, notice and legal representation requirements, hearing 
procedures, the critical questions to be addressed, and the findings 
and content of the order. 

To further assist judges and masters presiding over these hearings, the 

Benchbook includes a separate set of Bench Cards.  The two-sided bench card 
for each hearing incorporates essential material from the corresponding hearing 
checklist in a shortened, easily accessible format located at the end of each 
hearing chapter.   The bench cards are fashioned after those developed by the 
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges for the widely used 
Resource Guidelines and Adoption and Permanency Guidelines, but are specific 
to Pennsylvania law and procedures.   
 

Following the core chapters devoted to dependency hearings, Chapter 

15: General Issues contains useful information on a variety of matters that have 
a more global application and may apply to the overall hearing process, such as 
the effective use of alternative dispute resolution techniques, the appropriate 
handling of child testimony, and considerations applicable to youth aging out of 
dependency.   
 

 
 

   

  F

 

xii 

 

 xiii 

Benchbook Overview  

 

Chapter 16: Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 
provides a brief synopsis of the provisions of federal law that have had the most 
significant impact in the child welfare area, as well as the Pennsylvania Juvenile 
Act, the Child Protective Services Law, and the Pennsylvania Adoption Act. 

he Benchbook concludes with a Resources and References section, a 

Glossary, and a Bibliography of the references cited in the text. The Resources 
and References chapter includes links to the websites of national level child 
welfare policy making, research organizations, and information clearinghouses, 
as well as various tools and guidelines that have been developed for judicial 
officers who handle child welfare cases.    

  T

 
 

         

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 The Charge for Pennsylvania’s 
Chapter 1 ---- The Charge for Pennsylvania’s 
Chapter 1 
 The Charge for Pennsylvania’s 
 The Charge for Pennsylvania’s 
Chapter 1 
Chapter 1 
Dependency System    
Dependency System
Dependency System
Dependency System

“In recent years, the Federal Government has increased their focus on 
achieving safety, permanency, and well-being for abused and neglected 
children.  Through a combination of legislation, regulations, and executive 
policy guidance, the Federal Government has encouraged agencies, 
courts, and other stakeholders to work together to place children who are 
in the child welfare system into safe, permanent, and loving homes” 
(Flango and Kauder, 2008, p. 1). 

American courts have had a central role in the protection of children since the 

first modern child welfare case, that of Mary Ellen Wilson, an eight-year-old girl who had 
for years been whipped, frozen, starved, and otherwise severely abused by her 
guardians before coming to the attention of “charitable visitors” in 1874 and being 
brought under the control of the New York Supreme Court pursuant to the Habeas 
Corpus Act.  Mary Ellen’s plight, and the public outrage it stirred, led to the creation of 
the first child protection organization, the New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty 
to Children, as well as some of the first laws aimed at protecting children from 
exploitation, abuse and neglect at the hands of those with responsibility for their care.   
 

Since that time, cases involving alleged child abuse and neglect have required 

courts to strike a delicate balance between parental rights and children’s rights, 
between family stability and child safety, stability and permanency.  This Benchbook is 
intended to help judicial officers strike that balance in a way that is consistent with the 
Mission and Guiding Principles for Pennsylvania’s Child Dependency System, which 
was created by the Children’s Roundtable Initiative in 2009 and endorsed by the 
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the Juvenile Court Judges Commission, the 
Department of Public Welfare’s Office of Children, Youth and Families and the County 
Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania.  That foundational document, reproduced 
at the end of this chapter, identifies four fundamental mission priorities for all 
professionals involved in Pennsylvania’s child welfare system: protecting children; 
promoting strong families; promoting child well-being; and providing timely permanency.  
Embedding these mission priorities into all aspects of the child dependency system will 
lead to better outcomes for our children and a brighter future for our communities.  
 

One overarching principle emerges from the Mission and Guiding Principles 
document, and is woven throughout this Benchbook: the vital importance of judicial 
leadership in the child welfare arena.  That includes both administrative leadership in 
collaboration with the child welfare agency and other professionals that comprise the 
child welfare system, as well as courtroom leadership that ensures all parties remain 
focused on the goal of safe and timely permanency, while reducing potential trauma to 
the child.   
 

1 

 

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

In addition, wherever possible, practical, court-tested techniques that serve to 
further the goals of the Mission and Guiding Principles are suggested throughout the 
Benchbook.  These “themes” include: 

ctive and ongoing court oversight.  In dependency matters, the court maintains 

oversight until court supervision of the case is terminated.  This Benchbook encourages 
the sitting judge or master to actively listen and ask questions that challenge all those 
before the court to expedite safe permanency for the child and families involved in each 
individual case.  More frequent and timely court oversight can effectively move children 
to safe permanency quicker. 

ne judge/one family.  In view of the complexity of most dependency matters, having 
one judge hear the family’s entire dependency case, from initial hearing until conclusion 
of court involvement, is preferred.  In jurisdictions utilizing masters or hearing officers, 
the approach applies to those judicial officers and includes the oversight of the judge.  
This practice promotes stability and continuity throughout the case to help ensure safe, 
timely permanency for children. 

arly appointment of competent, well-trained legal counsel.  The assignment of 

competent, well-trained legal counsel for all parties is extremely important in 
dependency proceedings.  Understanding one’s rights and responsibilities, as well as 
the potential legal consequences of action or inaction is critical to the outcome of a 
case.  As such, courts should ensure counsel for all parties are well-trained and well-
equipped to provide comprehensive and thorough client representation.  Additionally, 
counsel should be appointed as early as possible upon filing of a dependency petition, 
preferably prior to the shelter hearing. 

ontinuous focus on safety.  Paramount in all child dependency matters is the issue 

of safety.  Safety includes both physical and emotional aspects of a child’s 
development.  While parents and family are ordinarily the foundation for child safety, 
when this fails the responsibility shifts to the child welfare professionals and ultimately 
the court.  Safety assessments, decisions, plans, and follow-up regarding safety are key 
elements of the dependency system and must be attended to at each judicial review. 

imely processing.  Childhood is an incredibly short span of time, with dramatic 
development needing to occur as the foundation of all subsequent health and well-
being.  Research has demonstrated again and again that children who grow up in 
stable, loving, permanent family environments do much better in all areas of adult living.  
Accordingly, timely service implementation, judicial review and decision-making are 
critical.  The issue of timeliness and recommended optimal time requirements will be 
highlighted throughout the Benchbook. 

oncurrent planning.  The court holds the ultimate responsibility to ensure 

permanency for all dependent children, either by safe reunification or by securing a 
safe, alternative permanent home for the child.  Simultaneous planning for both options 
may be necessary to achieve the overarching goal that all children grow up in loving, 

 

  A

  O

  E

  C

  T

  C

2 

  3 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

permanent homes.  Accordingly, specific elements of concurrent planning will be 
highlighted at each stage of the dependency court process. 

ervice front-loading. This Benchbook recognizes the importance of providing 
services for children and families upon the initiation of the case.  The more quickly 
services are provided to families the more likely they are to engage in services, thereby 
achieving more timely permanency.   

aintaining family connections.  This Benchbook 

emphasizes the importance of family connections, even in 
cases where families may not be reunified, and calls attention to 
the damage that can be caused to children when proper steps 
are not taken to maintain these connections while ensuring child 
safety.   

“I spent so much time 
scared, angry and 
confused.  I know 
things could have 
been different for me if 
someone would have 
realized how important 
it was for me to be 
connected to my 
family.”   

  -

eeping siblings together.  Central to the need to maintain 
family connections is the more specific need to maintain sibling 
connections.  Often siblings see one another as their only links 
to their families and many older siblings feel responsible for the 
care and well-being of younger siblings.  Ongoing, safe, sibling 
contact should be a priority to promote child well-being.   
 
Engaging fathers.  Locating fathers early in the court process, ensuring needed 
services are provided in a gender-sensitive manner, arranging for meaningful/frequent 
contact and including paternal relatives in the care and planning for children are critical 
to a court system that values child well-being.   

 D.S., 20, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

  

sing kinship care and “least restrictive” placements.  With the passage of the 
Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008, the need to 
identify kin has become more important than ever.  In the past, kin have often not been 
considered as resources, because popular belief dictates that if the parents are 
inadequate then their relatives must be as well.  This has been proven to be a myth and 
with innovative tools such as Family Finding and web-based search engines, extended 
families can be found more often and with more success.  Once located, a thorough and 
unbiased assessment may identify appropriate kinship resources.  

arly implementation of visitation.  As with the front-loading of services mentioned 
earlier, the timely implementation of an appropriate visitation schedule is imperative to 
manage the child’s level of stress caused by the removal.  Research has shown that in 
most instances children benefit from frequent and regular visitation.  Parental and 
sibling contact often enhances children’s emotional well-being and adjustment during 
periods of out-of-home care, and improves parents’ positive feelings about the 
placement while decreasing their worries about their children.  Further, successful 
visitation is strongly correlated with achieving the placement outcome of reunification, 
achieving other permanency planning outcomes and decreasing time in care (PA 
DPW/OCYF, 1999, p. 11).   

 

  S

  M

  K

  U

  E

 

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

Individualized services identified with family input. The “cookie cutter” approach to 
providing services to families does not work.  Each family with which the system works 
is different and services need to be tailored to fit each family’s individual needs. The 
identification and delivery of services is best accomplished through a collaborative 
process with the family.  This collaborative process may begin before the court has 
taken jurisdiction of the matter.   

reating a culture and expectation of non-adversarial process. The use of 
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has significantly moderated the traditional 
adversarial approach to dependency court, and the tendency to focus attention and 
energy on “winning” rather than children’s best interests.  ADR approaches provide an 
opportunity for parents to be empowered to determine their own solutions.  This shift 
from traditional court approaches to family and solution-focused approaches requires 
significant change in court business processes, but its benefits far override any 
difficulties with implementation. 

ecognizing and reducing trauma for children and families.  It is all too easy to see 

  -

the physical toll that abuse and neglect at home can have on children who come into 
court. However, just as significant and often overlooked is the traumatic toll that the 
dependency process itself can have on children and families.   Families are complex 
social structures and their disruption has the 
potential to be injurious to both children and adults.  
Michael Town, a Circuit Judge in Hawaii, coined the 
phrase “jurigenic effect” to describe the unintended 
harm sometimes caused by involvement in the court 
system.  Judicial officers should be mindful of this 
form of trauma and take steps to mitigate it.  The 
broader concept of trauma is addressed throughout 
the Benchbook and in more detail in the Science 
Companion in order to provide a fuller 
understanding of how courts can better serve 
children.     

“I just wanted to be a normal kid, 
but foster children never feel 
normal.  We always feel as if 
other kids know our histories, 
what ugly events led to our being 
pulled from our homes.  In my 
case, I’ve felt different my whole 
life.” 

 J.B., 18, Former Pennsylvania 
Foster Youth 

  C

  R

   

4 

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

  MMMMission and 

uiding PPPPrinciples 
G
G
G
G

For 
 
PENNSYLVANIA’S 
CHILD DEPENDENCY SYSTEM 

     

         

  5 

Prepared By: 
 
CHILDREN’S ROUNDTABLE INITIATIVE 
OFFICE OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES IN THE COURTS 
SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

May 2009 

   

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

Introduction 
___________________________________________________ 
 

With approximately 20,000 children in Pennsylvania’s foster care system, the 

need to examine and enhance our child dependency system is paramount.  To do so, 
collaboration between the courts and the child welfare agencies is essential.  This point 
was highlighted in the 2004 Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care Report to 
Congress stating,  
 

“Although child welfare agencies and the courts share responsibility 
for improving outcomes for children in foster care, institutional 
barriers and long-established practices often discourage them from 
collaborating.  Effective collaboration requires that both entities 
change the way they think about their respective roles, 
responsibilities, and priorities and engage in a new way of doing 
business together. Jurisdictions in which courts and agencies have 
been able to make this shift have yielded better results for children” 
(Pew Commission, 2004, p. 38). 

The initiative set forth herein combines the efforts of professionals from both the 

child welfare service and legal system in attaining the overarching goals of child safety, 
well-being and permanency.  All involved in this work, from child welfare professionals 
to attorneys to commissioners and judges, are united in this common goal of helping 
children and families.  To support and guide these efforts, this document was created by 
the Pennsylvania Children’s Roundtable Initiative. 
 

The document identifies a new mission for Pennsylvania’s child dependency 
system and sets forth guiding principles that will lead to accomplishing that mission 
under the name:  
 

“Families 4 Children” stands for the collection of Pennsylvania  

individuals and organizations who have agreed to communicate and cooperate in 
pursuing the common purpose of finding or creating safe, permanent homes for every 
dependent child in Pennsylvania as quickly and practically as possible.  This common 
purpose should be achieved through application of the Mission Statement and Guiding 
Principles set forth below, which are symbolized in its logo and summarized in its name.   

HILDREN’S ROUNDTABLE INITIATIVE 

_________________________________________________ 
 

The Children’s Roundtable Initiative, supported by the Office of Children and 

Families in the Courts (OCFC) within the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts 
(AOPC) and established by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in 2006, formally 
adopted the Mission Statement & Guiding Principles on May 29, 2009.  The Children’s 
Roundtable embodies a collaborative, cross-system statewide infrastructure that allows 

 

 

    C

6 

  7 

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

for effective administration and communication via a three-tiered system. 
 

he first tier of the infrastructure is comprised of local Children’s Roundtables.  

These exist in each judicial district and are convened by a judge.  Members include 
supervisory and dependency judges, children and youth professionals, county solicitors, 
child and parent advocates, academic experts, and anyone interested in making a 
positive contribution to the functioning of the dependency system within counties.   
 

The intermediate level (tier 2) of the infrastructure is comprised of Leadership 
Roundtables.  There are eight Leadership Roundtables dividing Pennsylvania’s sixty 
judicial districts into groups based on size. The number of judicial districts per 
Leadership Roundtable varies slightly to keep like-size judicial districts together, with a 
minimum of five (5) judicial districts per roundtable.   
 

These Leadership Roundtables are comprised of three members from each local 

Children’s Roundtable including a Dependency Judge, the Children & Youth 
Administrator, and one additional Children’s Roundtable member.  Leadership 
Roundtables provide a forum for members to identify, discuss, and share concerns and 
solutions.   
 

Issues are identified during Leadership Roundtable meetings and common 

themes are brought to the highest roundtable level the State Roundtable.  The State 
Roundtable (tier 3) is comprised of at least two members from each Leadership 
Roundtable and others with specific expertise in child dependency matters.  In addition 
to facilitating intrastate communication, the State Roundtable sets priorities related to 
child dependency court improvement efforts and is involved in the national dependency 
reform movement to keep Pennsylvania apprised of evolving trends and best practices.    
 

As recommended in the 2004 Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care 
Report, the Children’s Roundtable Initiative encourages strong communication and 
collaboration on behalf of children.  The State Roundtable first met in June of 2007.  
Through a collaborative discussion process at that meeting, a consensus was reached 
that a paradigm shift must occur regarding the way we presently work with children and 
families in Pennsylvania.  The State Roundtable adopted a philosophical framework of 
respect by empowering families to identify their strengths and make their own decisions 
regarding the future of their children.  It was further agreed that practice supported by 
the initiative henceforth would be strength-based and family-centered, engaging families 
in a manner that would guide them in developing their own collaborative solutions.  That 
paradigm shift is described in this document.  

  T

             

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

LOGO & NAME 
_____________ 
 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________ 

escription of Logo 

This logo depicts the picture and words that we believe a child would create from 

blocks and crayons if that child were asked to show what he or she really wanted from 
the Pennsylvania child dependency system: 
 
To grow up in a safe, nurturing, and permanent family.    

This logo is child and family-friendly, representing a new philosophy and 

approach to child dependency in Pennsylvania which builds on the strengths of the 
family as a foundation for protecting children. 

he adult figures represent all families and the child figure represents all children.  

he blue circle contains the Mission Statement set forth below. 

escription of Name 

______________________________________________________________________ 

The name “Families 4 Children” summarizes the ultimate goal of this initiative 

and the Pennsylvania child dependency system: 
 

To ensure that every child grows up in a safe, nurturing, and permanent family. 

The name also stands for the “family” of Pennsylvanians who are “for” children 

and are communicating and cooperating with each other to achieve that goal.  

    _

  D

 

 

  T

  T

    D

   

   

8 

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

 MISSION STATEMENT & GUIDING PRINCIPLES 
  ___________________________________________________ 
 

The ultimate goal of “Families 4 Children” is to ensure that every child grows up 
in a safe, nurturing, and permanent family.  This goal will be accomplished through the 
following four mission priorities: protecting children; promoting strong families; 
promoting child well-being, and providing timely permanency.   
 

Embedding these mission priorities into all aspects of the child dependency 

system will lead to better outcomes for our children and a brighter future for our 
communities.  
 

These principles represent the fundamental beliefs that should guide the overall 

operation of the child dependency system in Pennsylvania and be reflected in the 
delivery of all services to children and families within that system. These beliefs should 
also guide court and policy decisions at all levels within the system and the relationships 
among all participants in the system.  Doing so should increase child safety and well-
being while reducing the number of dependent children in Pennsylvania and/or the 
length of time that any particular child remains dependent. 
 

To accomplish this mission and redefine, refocus, and redirect the goals, actions, 

and operation of the child dependency system in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court of 
Pennsylvania, through its Office of Children & Families in the Courts and the Children’s 
Roundtable Initiative, presents the following Mission Statement and Guiding Principles.  

  9 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

MISSION STATEMENT 
_____________________________________________ 

  “Protect Children;  
          Promote Strong Families;  
  
 
                      

   

Promote Child Well-Being; 

Provide Timely Permanency” 

All children have the right to be protected from physical neglect and abuse, 

including sexual victimization, and from emotional neglect and abuse. 

rotect Children 

Promote Strong Families 
 

romote Child Well-Being  

All children have the right to live in a strong family that provides a safe, nurturing, 
and healthy environment in which to be reared, as families are the primary source of the 
protection and nurturing of children. 

All children have the right: to be happy, thriving, self-actualized, educated, 
healthy, and content; to have the opportunity to reach their full potential as individuals 
capable of healthy relationships and productive lives; and to have a fair chance in life 
with opportunities for healthy, balanced, and well-rounded development. 

rovide Timely Permanency 

All children have the right to live in a permanent family and to timely permanency 

decisions, as these are critical to the health and welfare of dependent children. 

 

     

    P

 

  P

 

  P

 

 

 

10

 

  11

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

PROTECT CHILDREN 
___________________________________________________ 

UR BELIEF: 

All children have the right to be protected from physical neglect and abuse, 

including sexual victimization, and from emotional neglect and abuse. 

UIDING PRINCIPLES: 

Pennsylvania’s child dependency system shall protect children who: 

  Are without proper parental care or control, subsistence, without education as 

required by law, or other control necessary for that child’s physical health, mental 
health, emotional health, or moral development; 

  Have been placed for adoption in violation of law; 

•  Have been abandoned by their parents, guardian or other custodian; 

•  Are without a parent, guardian, or legal custodian; 

•  Are habitually and without justification truant from school; 

•  Have committed an act of habitual disobedience of the reasonable and lawful 
commands of their parent, guardian, or other custodian and are ungovernable 
and found to be in need of care, treatment, or supervision; 

•  Are both under the age of ten years and have committed a delinquent act; 

•  Were formerly under the jurisdiction of the court or on informal adjustment who 

commit an ungovernable act; 

•  Are born to a parent whose parental rights regarding another child have been 
involuntary terminated within three years immediately preceding their date of 
birth and the conduct of the parent poses a risk to their health, safety, or welfare. 

In protecting children, the system shall also: 

•  Recognize and address the trauma a child experiences as a result of abuse and 

neglect. 

•  Recognize and address the trauma a child experiences as a result of placement. 

•  Ensure that “reasonable services” are provided to parents or other caregivers 

prior to removal, if possible. 

 

  O

  G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 •

 •

   

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

•  When placement is required to ensure child safety, first and foremost, make all 
reasonable steps to immediately locate a safe, kinship care option, preferably 
within the child’s community. 

  Utilize shelter and congregate care facilities only when the child’s immediate 

physical and emotional needs require such care. 

  Ensure that the voice of the child is heard at each stage of the process. 

  Regard child safety, well-being, and timely permanency as the shared 

responsibility of those within the system and the community. 

 •

 •

 •

 

 

12

 

  13

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

All children have the right to live in a strong family that provides a safe, nurturing, 

and healthy environment in which to be reared, as families are the primary source for 
the protection and nurturing of children. 

GUIDING PRINCIPLES: 

Pennsylvania’s child dependency system shall: 

 

PROMOTE STRONG FAMILIES 
_________________________________________________ 

UR BELIEF: 

  O

•  Recognize that a family is the primary source for the nurturing and protection 

of a child and has the primary responsibility to meet a child’s needs for 
permanency, safety, and well-being.  

•  Encourage families to utilize all available resources to meet that 

responsibility. 

•  Define “family” broadly to include parents, relatives, those not related by 
blood but who have a close and meaningful relationship with the child. 

  Recognize that a child should be maintained with his or her parents whenever 

possible and, if not, then with other family members. 

•  Recognize that the family is significant to all aspects of the child’s 

development. 

•  Recognize that families are capable of change and, with support, most can 

safely care for their children. 

•  Engage families respectfully. 

•  Recognize that each family is both unique and diverse and provide services 
tailored to its unique and diverse strengths and needs by respecting its 
economic, ethnic, class, cultural and religious beliefs, values, practices, and 
traditions. 

Inspire hope, growth, and change in each family by identifying its strengths. 

•  Engage custodial and non-custodial parents, as well as kin in the care of their 

children. 

•  Engage non-participating parents effectively. 

Include family members in the ongoing care of their children, even when 
those children are temporarily placed outside of the family home. 

 •

• 

• 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

•  Support families by stressing the importance of formal education for the child. 

•  Educate families in parenting and life skills. 

•  Ensure that a child in placement maintains safe family connections. 

•  Find and engage absent parents, siblings, and other relatives to keep children 

connected to their birth families. 

•  Value extended family members as permanent resources for children. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14

 

  15

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

PROMOTE CHILD WELL-BEING 
_________________________________________________ 

UR BELIEF: 

All children have the right:  to be happy, thriving, self-actualized, educated, 

healthy and content; to have the opportunity to reach their full potential as individuals 
capable of healthy relationships and productive lives; and to have a fair chance in life 
with opportunities for healthy, balanced, and well-rounded development. 
 

GUIDING PRINCIPLES: 

Pennsylvania’s child dependency system shall: 

 

•  Recognize and promote the physical, emotional, social, and educational well-

being of each child. 

Inspire hope, growth, and change in each child by identifying his or her strengths. 

•  Recognize that each child is unique and provide services tailored to his or her 

unique strengths and needs. 

•  Provide opportunities for each child to develop individual talents and skills. 

•  Provide opportunities for each child to build self-confidence and self-esteem. 

•  Empower every child to develop a sense of individual responsibility and 

accountability for their actions. 

Identify and engage an adult with whom a child can develop a reliable, 
sustaining, and meaningful life connection. 

  Ensure that siblings are placed together unless there is a compelling reason not 

to provide such placement. 

Implement a visitation schedule including siblings, parents, and kin that meets 
the developmental needs of each child, understanding frequent, and quality 
visitation as being key to successful family reunification. 

  Seek and strengthen informal and formal community resources for children and 

families. 

  Ensure that early assessment is made of each child’s cognitive development 

and, where possible, include family members in any recommended treatment. 

•  Encourage a child’s interaction with peers in order to foster healthy social 

development. 

 

  O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
• 

• 

 •

• 

 •

 •

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

•  Strengthen an older child’s ability to live independently as he or she transitions 
into adulthood by providing supportive services such as education, life skills 
training, prevention services, and employment and housing education. 

 

 

 

16

 

  17

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

PROVIDE TIMELY PERMANENCY 
_________________________________________________ 

UR BELIEF: 

All children have the right to live in a permanent family and to timely permanency 

decisions, as these are critical to the health and welfare of dependent children. 

UIDING PRINCIPLES: 

Pennsylvania’s child dependency system shall: 

• 

Identify all possible practices and strategies that address the needs of a child and 
family and encourage solutions which do not require court intervention. 

•  Recognize that a child should be reunified with his or her parents whenever 

possible and, if not, then with other family members. 

•  Understand the need for urgency in service delivery and decision-making for 

those children who do require court intervention. 

•  Whenever possible, employ non-adversarial court processes including facilitation 

and mediation strategies as a means for resolving concerns. 

•  Employ family finding strategies in recognition of the potential trauma caused by 

family separation. 

•  Employ decision-making and planning strategies that are family driven. 

•  Employ family engagement strategies as a means of insuring strength-based 

family centered skills for professionals serving children and families. 

•  Employ non-adversarial, family-driven planning strategies at the initial stages of 

the dependency process and at any other stage at which a plan is being 
developed or updated. 

•  Assure timely and thorough court hearings and expeditious decisions for each 

•  Assure competent legal representation for children and parents before a shelter 

care hearing and throughout the legal process. 

  Ensure that the voices of parents or other caregivers are heard at each stage of 

the process. 

 •

child. 

•  Employ concurrent planning for permanency as each case commences and at 

every stage of the proceedings. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  O

  G

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

 

•  Minimize the length of time children must spend in foster care and other 

temporary living situations. 

•  Timely accomplish permanency for every dependent child according to the law. 

•  Terminate court intervention in the life of a child when that child is no longer 

dependent. 

• 

Identify, create, and implement additional systemic improvement practices. 

•  Ensure that recruitment activities are fully pursued to identify the best adoptive 

family for those children who cannot return to their families. 

•  Ensure close coordination with Orphans’ Courts aimed at finalizing adoptions in a 

timely manner. 
 

•  Recognize that permanent legal custodianship is a viable option when 

reunification or adoption is not possible. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

 

  19

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

CHILD DEPENDENCY SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 
_________________________________________________ 

UR BELIEF: 

To accomplish the Mission Statement and implement the Guiding  
Principles above, the Pennsylvania child dependency system must improve in 
every facet and at every level, increase the resources dedicated to that system, 
and measure its progress toward these new goals. 

GUIDING PRINCIPLES: 

Pennsylvania’s child dependency system shall: 

 

•  Communicate and cooperate with others within the child dependency 

system working toward the common goal of providing each child with a 
safe, nurturing, and permanent family. 

•  Provide appropriate and effective prevention, intervention, and treatment 
programs and ensure that all decisions made and all services offered are 
designed to meet the unique needs of each child and family. 

•  Ensure strong and responsible leadership from all facets of the 

dependency system, beginning with our courts. 

•  Ensure competent, trained legal counsel for children and parents who 

qualify for court-appointed legal counsel. 

•  Ensure that children and parents are fully informed about their rights, the 
court process, and the function and duties of legal counsel who represent 
them. 

•  Utilize the Children’s Roundtable Initiative as a mechanism for local and 

statewide communication, decision-making, and leadership. 

  Collect and manage data, then evaluate and plan for future needs. 

 •

•  Create unified methods to measure practices and outcomes. 

•  Establish and monitor accountability for all system participants. 

•  Employ highly trained, competent, and caring staff who are prepared to 

serve children and families in accordance with the Mission Statement and 
Guiding Principles set forth herein. 

•  Treat all child dependency professionals with respect and dignity, 

establish clear expectations and standards for their performance, evaluate 
them regularly, and compensate them appropriately. 

 
 

  O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System  

 

•  Assure that families receive priority in the delivery of human services 

including mental health treatment, drug and alcohol treatment, training and 
employment connections, housing services, child care services, and other 
needed services. 

  Educate community members and organizations to the within Mission 
Statement and Guiding Principles and the functioning of the child 
dependency system. 

 •

•  Encourage community members and organizations to participate in all 

aspects of the child dependency system, because local communities are 
our greatest resource in meeting the needs of families and children. 

•  Develop and work within a strong and integrated network of service 

systems, since neither the child dependency system, nor any other system 
can alone address all the needs of children and families. 

•  Support the educational needs of all dependent children and advocate on 

their behalf. 

processes. 

•  Continually increase the effectiveness of all services, programs, and 

•  Advocate for stable and sufficient funding to support all aspects of service 

delivery and account for the expenditure of all such funds. 

•  Ensure that courts, child welfare agencies, permanent families, and all 
other participants in the child dependency system are provided with the 
necessary resources and capacity to implement these Guiding Principles 
and accomplish the mission to “protect children, promote strong families, 
promote child well-being, and provide timely permanency” in 
Pennsylvania. 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     

20

 

21 

 

 The Role of Judges and Masters    
Chapter 2 ---- The Role of Judges and Masters
Chapter 2 
 The Role of Judges and Masters
 The Role of Judges and Masters
Chapter 2 
Chapter 2 

The Mission and Guiding Principles for Pennsylvania’s Dependency 

System reproduced in Chapter 1 articulates three major roles for judges in the 
dependency court:  (1) Oversee and manage the progress of individual cases; (2) 
Demonstrate commitment and leadership in efforts to improve the system as a 
whole; and (3) Promote collaborative efforts with the child welfare agency and 
the community (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p.15).   
 

2.1.1 Oversight and Management of Individual Cases 

As the Resource Guidelines emphasize, child welfare cases—because of 

their length, their scope, and continuous nature of the determinations that they 
require—involve the court in the lives of the parties and the operations of the 
child welfare agency to a degree unlike any other court case.   Because the 
decisions are “interlocking and sequential,” the court must perform a more 
managerial and directive function than in other litigation.   Subsequent sections of 
this Benchbook highlight various best practices related to judicial oversight of 
cases in the context of individual hearings, as well as overall operations 
(NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 14).   They include:  

  Communicating the expectations of the court regarding adherence to a 
timely court process and the need for proper preparation by all parties for 
all court events.  

•  Establishing rigorous case flow management policies and practices, 

such as timetables/deadlines for the various stages of case processing, 
strict continuance policies, setting the next hearing date and distributing 
orders at the conclusion of each hearing, and requiring that all reports be 
submitted and distributed to all parties in advance of hearings or in 
accordance with established timelines.  

•  “Front-loading” the court process in order to set the stage for expedited 
proceedings and avoid later delays.  In practice, “front-loading” means 
doing all of the following at the earliest possible point: appointing counsel 
for the child and parents/guardians; conducting inquiry into paternity 
issues; finding and notifying absent parents; identifying any domestic 
violence issues and, if appropriate, issuing protective orders; identifying 
potential relative placement options; and establishing visitation schedules.   

•  Conducting expedited review hearings at critical stages of the case. 
•  Taking the initiative to solicit pertinent information if it is not otherwise 

presented during the hearing. 

•  Setting aside sufficient time for hearings to ensure that all parties have 

an opportunity to be heard and all issues can be addressed.    

 •

2.1  Role of Judges  
 

 

 

 

 
 

Role of Judges and Masters  

 

*Best practice – Court Scheduling* 
 

In dependency cases, it is important that court administration, not the child 

welfare agency, control the scheduling process and manage all court hearing dates 
and times.  The Common Pleas Case Management System (CPCMS) Dependency 
Module allows this to be done easily.   
 

The scheduling of multiple cases during a single large time slot (or “cattle 

calls”) is discouraged.  Hearings should be scheduled based on “time-specific 
scheduling” or “block scheduling,” with sufficient time allotted for each hearing.  The 
court should be sensitive to everyone’s time schedule with special consideration 
given to children and parents.   

•  Encouraging the use of Family Group Decision Making and other 

methods of alternative dispute resolution to allow family members to 
become active participants in the decision-making process.  

•  Ensuring that case plans address the specific needs of the child and 

• 

family and hold the child welfare agency and other parties accountable for 
the delivery of services. 
Identifying Indian Child Welfare and Interstate Compact issues at an 
early stage of the case to avoid delay and disruptions in efforts to achieve 
permanency.  

•  Ensuring that a proper record is made at each and every hearing, 

starting at shelter care and throughout the life of the case.  All written 
documents and reports introduced and admitted should be used as 
evidence during the hearing.    

In addition to these managerial functions, the judge should ensure that:  
(1) all parties are treated with courtesy and respect, both inside and outside of 
the courtroom; (2) the family understands the judicial process and the timelines 
that apply to the case; and (3) the court’s written findings of fact and conclusions 
of law are written in easily understandable language that allows the parents and 
all parties to fully understand the court’s order.   

2.1.2  Commitment and Leadership in System Improvement Efforts  

Judges should be active participants in the development of policies, rules, 

 
and standards by which the court and related agencies and systems function 
(NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 18).  Judicial impartiality does not preclude a judge from 
acting as an advocate for additional resources or more opportunities for training 
and education, or serving as a convener of committees or working groups 
devoted to identifying systemic problems and developing solutions.  In addition, 
as one of the key principles the Adoption and Permanency Guidelines points out, 
judges should “ensure that the court has the capacity to collect, analyze, and 
report aggregate data relating to judicial performance,” including compliance with 

 

 

   

22

 
 

 

Role of Judges and Masters  

 

requirements related to outcomes for children and families, compliance with 
statutory timelines, overall compliance with goals, and historical trends (NCJFCJ, 
2000, p. 6).  Such data provides useful information for ongoing monitoring of 
operations, evaluating programs and other initiatives over time, and assessing 
the need for judicial and other resources.   These analyses can be shared with 
other stakeholders to both encourage progress toward common goals and 
identify areas in need of improvement (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, 
p.15).   
 

Judges can also play an important role in ensuring competent 

representation for parents and children who appear in dependency proceedings.  
They can join in efforts to establish initial training and experience thresholds, 
standards of practice, and ongoing specialized training requirements for court-
appointed counsel.  They can communicate the expectation that hearings will 
proceed as scheduled, barring exceptional circumstances, and that all parties will 
be prepared to proceed.  Finally, judges can contribute to the training of 
attorneys, as well as other system stakeholders by participating in seminars and 
conferences (NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 22). 
 

2.1.3  Collaboration with the Child Welfare Agency and the 
Community 

Judges should encourage and promote collaboration and mutual respect 
among all participants in the child welfare system (NCJFCJ, 2000, p. 6).  Judges 
should initiate or participate in meetings with child welfare agency 
representatives at the state and local level.  They should encourage greater 
cooperation in the development of training, including multi-disciplinary training, 
which addresses issues of mutual interest, such as improving court reports and 
in-court testimony, expanding access to services, and making more efficient use 
of court time (Hardin, 2002, p. 13).  
 

The Children’s Roundtable is an example of this collaborative effort to 

engage all stakeholders.  Supported by the Office of Children and Families in the 
Courts (OCFC) within the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC), 
it was established by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in 2006.  The 
Children’s Roundtable is convened by the courts and collaboratively operated 
with judges as leaders.  Judicial leadership in this area encompasses developing 
the mission/vision, setting the agenda, managing subcommittees/workgroups, 
effectuating the decisions made at meetings, and participating in Leadership 
Roundtables (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p.15).  
 

The Adoption and Permanency Guidelines encourage judges to help the 

community understand that child protection is a community responsibility 
(NCJFCJ, 2000, p. 6).  This can be accomplished by appearing regularly in the 
community to inform citizens about the child welfare system and to encourage 
volunteer participation (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p.16).  The 

  23

 
 

Role of Judges and Masters  

 

2.2  Role of the Master 
 

 

Ideally, a dependency case should be heard by a judge at each stage of 
the proceeding, and all parties will be better served if the same judge presides 
over the case from start to finish (NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 20).  However, in 
Pennsylvania as in many other jurisdictions across the nation, judge-supervised 
judicial officers (referred to hereafter as “masters”) are appointed to handle 
certain hearings or stages of a case.   The Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court 
Procedure – Dependency Matters view this as an acceptable practice and clearly 
articulate the authority of masters (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1187).  In fact, the judicious use 
of masters has several potential advantages.  It is generally more cost-effective 
and affords each case more time and focused attention, allowing for closer 
monitoring and fewer delays.  Moreover, as long as there are clear policies and 
guidelines governing the handling of these cases, a judge/master team can 
maintain consistency in case processing and outcomes.  Finally, a master who is 
appointed to hear dependency cases exclusively or predominantly can develop a 
level of specialization and expertise that would be difficult for a judge handling a 
general docket (NCJFCJ, 1995, p.21). 

n Pennsylvania, the President Judge (or his or her designee) may appoint 

masters to hear designated dependency matters.  Following appointment, 
masters may not practice before juvenile courts in the judicial districts where they 
preside over dependency matters (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1185).   By rule, a master does 
not have the authority to preside over Termination of Parental Rights hearings, 
adoptions, or any hearing where any party seeks to establish a permanency goal 
of adoption or change a permanency goal to adoption.   However, once a 
permanency goal of adoption has been approved by a judge, all subsequent 
reviews or hearings may be heard by the master unless a party objects.   
Masters may not issue contempt orders or orders for emergency or protective 
custody (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1187).  They may not issue warrants, but may recommend 
that a judge do so if the circumstances make it necessary.  The President Judge 
may place other restrictions on the classes of cases to be heard by the master.  
 

The parties to a case retain the right to have a hearing before a judge, 

rather than a master.   Pa.R.J.C.P. 1185 directs the master to inform all parties of 
this right before beginning the hearing.  If a party objects to having the matter 
heard by the master, the case should be scheduled for an immediate hearing 
before a judge.   

nder Pa.R.J.C.P. 1190, masters may accept stipulations in any class of 

cases that they are permitted to hear, subject to the usual stipulation 
requirements of Pa.R.J.C.P. 1405, including the requirement that the court take 
whatever additional corroborating evidence is necessary to support an 

 

  I

  U

community can also be an effective partner in advocating for greater availability 
and access to services for children and families when there are gaps.  

24

 

  25

Role of Judges and Masters  

 

independent determination that a child is dependent.   At the conclusion of the 
hearing, Pa.R.J.C.P. 1191 requires that the master’s findings and 
recommendations to the judge be announced in open court and on the record, 
and submitted in written form to the juvenile court judge within two business days 
of the hearing.  Upon request, a copy of the findings and recommendation is to 
be given to any party. 

 party may contest the master's recommendation by filing a motion with 

the clerk of courts within three days of receipt of the recommendation, requesting 
a rehearing before a judge, and stating the reasons for the challenge.  A copy of 
the findings and recommendation may be attached to the motion for rehearing.  

he master’s decision is subject to approval by the judge.  Within seven 

days of receipt of the master's findings and recommendation, the judge is to 
review the findings and recommendation of the master and:  (1) accept the 
recommendation by order; (2) reject the recommendation and issue an order with 
a different disposition; (3) send the recommendation back to the master for more 
specific findings; or (4) conduct a rehearing (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1191).   When the 
judge, in rejecting the master's recommendation, modifies a factual 
determination, a rehearing is to be conducted. The judge may reject the master's 
findings and enter a new finding or disposition without a rehearing if there is no 
modification of factual determinations (See In re Perry, 313 Pa.Super. 162, 459 
A.2d 789 (1983)).   Rule 1191 does not prohibit the court from modifying 
conclusions of law made by the master.   

he Pennsylvania Judicial Deskbook advises that, because the findings 

and recommendations of a master do not become an order of a court unless 
confirmed in writing by a judge, the judge is ultimately responsible for the work of 
the masters and must have confidence that the masters are well trained and 
knowledgeable in the substantive and procedural aspects of the practice of 
dependency law (Field, 2004, 19).  The Deskbook recommends that judges:  “(1) 
make sure that each master is fully trained in dependency law and procedure; (2) 
set up model guidelines for the conduct of hearings, including timeframes, 
sample questions and forms of orders; (3) meet regularly with masters to ensure 
that any issues or problems are addressed early and adequately; and (4) make 
sure that masters approach each case fully prepared to ensure the rights of all 
parties, to hear testimony, to listen to and understand the facts presented, and to 
make fully informed recommendations in an articulate form of order” (Field, 2004, 
p. 20).  

  A

  T

  T

 
 

   

 

 

 

26 

 

Under Article V, Section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the Courts of 
Common Pleas are given jurisdiction over all cases “except as may otherwise be 
provided by law.”  This general jurisdiction extends to child welfare cases, among 
many others.   

lthough jurisdiction over each case belonging to the Court of Common 
Pleas is vested in the court as a whole, for the sake of administrative efficiency 
cases may be allocated among divisions—specialized units of judges given 
responsibility for particular kinds of court business.  In a judicial district large 
enough to have permanent divisions, proceedings in child welfare cases are 
handled by judges sitting in the court’s Juvenile Court Division.  However, 
terminations of parental rights and adoption matters are reserved for the 
Orphans’ Court Division. 
 

The conduct of dependency actions is governed primarily by the Juvenile 
Act, the Pennsylvania Child Protective Services Law, and the Rules of Juvenile 
Court Procedure.   These statutes and rules have been amended to meet the 
requirements of federal law, including the Adoption and Safe Families Act 
(ASFA), and are intended to ensure children’s rights to safe, timely permanency.  
(A more complete explanation of the federal and state statutes and regulations 
may be found in Chapter 16: Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare 
Legislation.) 

  A

uvenile courts are given authority to hear proceedings and make 
dispositions in cases in which children are alleged to be dependent.  A multi-part 
definition of “dependent child” is provided in 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302.  A dependent 
child is one who: 
 

lacks “proper parental care and control, subsistence, education as 
required by law, or other care or control necessary for his physical, 
mental, or emotional health, or morals”; 

•  has been placed for care or adoption illegally; 

•  has been abandoned, or otherwise lacks a parent, guardian or legal 

custodian; 

is habitually truant without justification while subject to compulsory school 
attendance; 

  J

  3

• 

• 

.2  Dependency Jurisdiction in General 

 Jurisdiction    
Chapter 3 ---- Jurisdiction
Chapter 3 
 Jurisdiction
 Jurisdiction
Chapter 3 
Chapter 3 

.1  Overview 

 

  3

 

 
 

Jurisdiction  

 

•  has committed a delinquent act and is under ten; 

•  has habitually disobeyed reasonable parental commands and is 
ungovernable and in need of care, treatment or supervision; 

•  was adjudicated dependent previously, remains under the court’s 

jurisdiction, and has committed acts qualifying him as ungovernable; 

•  has been referred pursuant to an informal adjustment and has committed 

acts qualifying him as ungovernable; or 

•  was born to a parent whose current conduct poses a risk to the child’s 

health, safety or welfare and whose parental rights with regard to another 
child were involuntarily terminated within the 3 years preceding this child’s 
birth. 

Juvenile courts operate under the guidelines established in the Juvenile 

Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6301 et seq.  Juvenile dependency proceedings are governed 
by the Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure, Rule 1100 through Rule 
1800. 
 

Juvenile courts hear all phases of a dependency action, including shelter 

care, adjudication, disposition, and permanency hearings.  However, under 20 
Pa.C.S. § 711, the jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas over adoption 
petitions and related matters, including voluntary and involuntary termination of 
parental rights, must be formally exercised through the Orphans’ Court Division.  
(The only exception is for Philadelphia, where 20 Pa.C.S. § 713 entrusts these 
matters to the Family Court Division.)  Because only 20 of Pennsylvania’s 60 
judicial districts have Orphans’ Court Divisions,1 42 Pa.C.S. § 951 provides that, 
in any judicial district that lacks such a division, “there shall be an orphans' court 
division composed of the court of common pleas of that judicial district.”   

hat this means is that, at least in districts with separate divisions, 
if a dependency case progresses to the point that parental rights must be 
terminated and the child placed for adoption, the matter must be taken up 
in the Orphans’ Court Division for separate termination and/or adoption 
proceedings.  The juvenile dependency case is not transferred to the 
Orphans’ Court, but rather a separate file is opened and the case 
proceeds independently and concurrently.  For the sake of continuity, 
however, the judge who adjudicated the child dependent or conducted 
                                                            
1 Under 42 Pa.C.S. § 951(a)-(c), Orphans’ Court Divisions are established in Allegheny, Beaver, 
Berks, Bucks, Cambria, Chester, Dauphin, Delaware, Erie, Fayette, Lackawanna, Lancaster, 
Lehigh, Luzerne, Montgomery, Philadelphia, Schuylkill, Washington, Westmoreland, and York 
Counties. 

  W

3.3  Divisional Responsibilities 
 

27

 

  28

Jurisdiction  

 

permanency or other dependency court hearings in the matter may be 
administratively assigned by the President Judge to preside in Orphans’ 
Court over these separate proceedings (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(i)).   
 

In addition to Juvenile and Orphans’ Court Divisions, Allegheny and 

Philadelphia Counties have separate Family Court Divisions established 
pursuant to the authority of 42 Pa.C.S. § 951.  In some cases, tension may arise 
between juvenile court dependency proceedings and custody actions, which may 
be filed or pending with the Family Court Division.  In any case, there should be 
coordination between court divisions, with the best practice being the assignment 
of one judge to preside over any proceeding involving a family, regardless of the 
division in which it is heard. 

*Best Practice – One Judge - One Family* 

The broad concept behind the One Judge – One Family Model is that the same 

judge or judge-master team that hears a family’s dependency case also hears 
delinquency, custody or even criminal matters involving the same family.  While this is 
not practical in all jurisdictions, application of the One Judge – One Family principle 
within the dependency sphere requires that the same judicial officer who adjudicates a 
case continues to hear proceedings involving that family up through and including 
Termination of Parental Rights and Adoption proceedings.  This practice provides 
stability and continuity throughout the case, reduces confusion and the possibility of 
conflicting orders, and puts the judge in a better position to make appropriate decisions. 

3.4  Jurisdiction in Cases that Cross Borders 
 

Sometimes dependency cases originate in one county, state or country 
and end with services and court supervision being provided in another.  These 
cases can often be frustrating and time-consuming, but despite these challenges 
families must receive appropriate services and have their needs met.   
 

3.4.1  Inter-County Transfer Cases 

Under Pa.R.J.C.P. 1302, a court has the authority to transfer a 
dependency case at any time. Upon transfer of a case, the transferring court 
shall transmit certified copies of all documents, reports, and summaries in the 
child’s court file.  CPCMS allows for electronic case transfer from county to 
county.  The electronic transfer of cases must also be accompanied by copies of 
physical documents. 

 
 

 

   

           

Jurisdiction  

 

*Best Practice - Case Transfers* 
 
When cases are being transferred from county to county, the court and 
agency should consider the resources of the receiving county and needs of the 
child/family.  Some children/families may require a specific service that may not be 
available in the receiving county.  The loss of such a service may delay progress and 
create a barrier which may hinder the child/family’s long-term goal.  In these 
situations, it may be beneficial for the sending county to maintain jurisdiction and 
cross county lines to provide the service.  A judge should exercise caution in these 
cases.   
 

It can also be beneficial for a judge to make a courtesy call to the judge in the 
receiving county to provide some background on the case.  Consideration should be 
given whether judicial calls should be on the record with notice to counsel. 
 

•  The Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance provides 
legal guidelines and requirements for ensuring that adopted special needs 
children are provided medical assistance in a timely manner when they 
move from one state to another. This Compact also ensures that children 
who are placed into foster or residential care and are Title IV-E eligible 
receive medical cards, either in Pennsylvania or the state in which they 
are placed.  

  The Interstate Compact on Juveniles coordinates the interstate 

movement of delinquent juveniles who are being referred between courts 
on a probationary status. This compact allows for courtesy supervision to 
be provided in another jurisdiction in order to carry out the orders of a 
home jurisdiction. This compact also returns runaways and arranges 
transportation for the juveniles served by this compact.   Pennsylvania’s 
Interstate Compact for Juveniles Act can be found at 62 P. S. § 731. 

 •

•  The Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) governs 

the transfer and continued supervision of children who are moving 
between states for the purpose of adoption, foster care, or institutional 
placement. This Compact also assures that all Pennsylvania requirements 
are met prior to the placing of a foreign child in Pennsylvania for the 
purpose of adoption. The majority of dependency cases that cross state 
lines will involve the ICPC.  The Pennsylvania ICPC law can be found at 
62 P. S. § 761. 

Most transfers of children across state lines in the child welfare arena are 

governed by three interstate compacts.   
 

3.4.2  Interstate Transfer 

 
 

 

 

 

29

 

 
 

 

 

 

Jurisdiction  

 

The ICPC applies to four primary situations in which children may be sent 

to other states (ASPHA, 2002, p. 4): 
 

•  placement preliminary to an adoption; 
•  placements into foster care, including foster homes, group homes, 

residential treatment facilities, and institutions; 

•  placements with parents and relatives when a parent or relative is not 

making the placement; or 

•  placements of adjudicated delinquents in institutions in other states. 

The Compact clearly spells out who must use the Compact when they 

“send, bring, or cause a child to be brought or sent” to another party state. These 
persons and agencies, called “sending agencies,” are the following (ASPHA, 
2002, p. 4): 
 

•  a state party to the Compact, or any officer or employee of a party state; 
•  a subdivision, such as a county or a city, or any officer or employee, of the 

subdivision; 

•  a court of a party state; and 
•  any person (including parents and relatives in some instances), 
corporation, association, or charitable agency of a party state. 

While the majority of placements that cross state lines are governed by 

the ICPC, not all placements of children in other states are subject to the 
Compact, nor are all persons who place children out of state. The Compact does 
not include placements made in medical and mental health facilities or in 
boarding schools, or “any institution primarily educational in character” (ASPHA, 
2002, p. 4) (see Article II(d); see also Regulation No. 4). Article VIII(a) also 
specifically excludes from Compact coverage the placement of a child made by a 
parent, stepparent, grandparent, adult brother or sister, adult uncle or aunt, or the 
child’s guardian. 
 

3.4.3  International Transfers 

Placement of children from other countries in Pennsylvania for the 
purpose of adoption may be subject to the requirements of the ICPC, the 
Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance or the Interstate 
Compact on Juveniles.  In addition, the Pennsylvania Refugee Resettlement 
Program, which is funded by the US Department of Health and Human Services, 
Administration for Children and Families, Office of Refugee Resettlement, 
provides a continuum of employment, educational, case management, health 
and financial support services to newly arrived refugees in Pennsylvania, 
including potential supports for children.  More information on programs and 
community service providers for refugees can be found at 
http://www.refugeesinpa.org.    

 

  30

 
 

Jurisdiction  

 

3.5  The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) 
 

ICWA is a federal law that seeks to keep American Indian children with 
American Indian families.  Congress passed ICWA in 1978 in response to the 
alarmingly high number of Indian children being removed from their homes by 
both public and private agencies.  The intent of Congress under ICWA was to 
“protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and 
security of Indian tribes and families” (25 U.S.C. § 1902).  ICWA sets federal 
requirements that apply to state child custody proceedings involving Indian 
children. 
 

ICWA defines an “Indian child” as any unmarried person who is under age 

eighteen and is either (a) a member of an Indian tribe or (b) is eligible for 
membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian 
tribe.  Under ICWA, individual tribes have the right to determine both 
membership and eligibility for membership.  However, in order for ICWA to apply, 
the tribe must be federally recognized.   

f it is believed that a child could have ties to an American Indian tribe or if 

someone alludes to the child having ties, it is the child welfare agency’s 
responsibility to make efforts to determine the ties and to contact the tribe or 
tribes.  While Pennsylvania does not have any federally recognized Indian tribes, 
the ICWA legislation remains applicable to children coming before Pennsylvania 
courts.  In all cases involving the foster care placement of, or termination of 
parental rights to, an Indian child, the Indian custodian of the child and the Indian 
child's tribe have a right to intervene at any point in the proceeding. 
 

More information on American Indian tribes and child welfare and ICWA 

can be found at the National Indian Child Welfare Association website at 
http://www.nicwa.org/   or U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian 
Affairs at http://www.bia.gov/.     
 

  I

31

 

32 

 

High quality representation of all parties in dependency proceedings is 
necessary to produce good outcomes for children and families.  It is clear that 
justice flows best from a system in which all parties are represented by 
competent and actively engaged legal counsel.  In the end, courts’ decisions are 
only as good as the information upon which they are based, and it is the attorney 
(or Pro Se litigant) who is ultimately responsible for collecting, preparing, and 
delivering that information.  
 

Historically, there has been a recognized deficiency in the quality of legal 

representation in dependency cases across jurisdictions.  This is attributable to a 
variety of factors, including unclear role definition, lack of standards of practice, 
low expectations, high caseloads, inadequate compensation, inadequate 
resources, and the mistaken view that attorneys working in these cases are 
relieved of the traditional rigors of the practice of law.  This situation has 
improved as courts have come to recognize the importance of legal counsel in 
achieving the system’s goals of safety, permanency, and well-being for children.  
 

The assignment of competent, well-trained legal counsel for all parties is 

extremely important in dependency proceedings (PA Children’s Roundtable 
Initiative, 2009, p. 14).  Understanding one’s rights and responsibilities, as well 
as the potential legal consequences of actions or inactions is critical to the 
outcome of a case.  As such, courts should ensure counsel for all parties are 
well-trained and well-equipped to provide comprehensive and thorough client 
representation.  Additionally, counsel should be appointed as early in the case as 
possible, preferably prior to the Shelter Hearing.  
 

Attorneys should also be engaged in systemic efforts to improve the 

handling of dependency cases.  They should understand the culture change 
going on in this area and have a strength-based, family engagement focus in 
their work while zealously representing their clients.  The agency and the court 
should include attorneys representing parents and children in trainings aimed at 
improving practice in the county.   
 

With quality legal representation as a stated system objective, a number of 

projects have been undertaken to create enhanced practice.  Much of the work 
has focused on the representation of children, as this was considered the least 
developed area.   However, over time, more attention has been focused on 
parents’ counsel, in recognition of their critical role in achieving good outcomes 
for children involved in dependency proceedings by protecting due process and 
statutory rights, presenting balanced information to judges, and promoting the 
preservation of family relationships when appropriate.    

Chapter 4 ---- Legal Representation in 
 Legal Representation in     
Chapter 4 
 Legal Representation in 
 Legal Representation in 
Chapter 4 
Chapter 4 
Dependency Matters    
Dependency Matters
Dependency Matters
Dependency Matters

.1  Overview  

 

  4

 

Legal Representation in Dependency Matters  

 

Judges should understand that attorneys working on dependency cases 

often receive limited compensation or, in some cases, none; they should be 
acknowledged for the public service they are providing.  However, this should not 
preclude quality work.  The court, which is ultimately responsible for the 
appointment of counsel, can have a great degree of positive influence on 
representation in dependency matters.  The judge sets the tone in dependency 
matters and should expect that all counsel come into hearings prepared.  The 
judge also has the authority to remove or stop appointing ineffective counsel.  If 
judges are only as good as the attorneys in front of them, they should take steps 
to assure those attorneys are of the highest quality.   
 

4.2.2  Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) 

The GAL is the child’s voice in the courtroom, especially if the child is not 
of age to articulate his or her own best interests.  Pa.R.J.C.P. 1128 requires the 
presence of the child’s attorney at all proceedings with no exceptions provided.  If 
the child has a GAL and legal counsel, both attorneys shall be present.  
Additionally, the Juvenile Court Rules have specifically 
set forth the duties and responsibilities of the GAL in 
Pa.R.J.C.P. 1154.    

“My new Guardian Ad 
Litem, she is amazing.  
She’s there to talk to if I 
need her.  I have the 
number for her office, if 
she doesn’t pick up she 
calls me back within the 
same business day.  
She’s just better, she 
cares and it shows.” 

  -

The GAL should always be kept apprised of any 
changes to the child’s placement, custody, visitation or 
treatment plan.  Both the county agency and the GAL 
should be proactive in assuring the GAL is informed of 
all actions that affect the child’s safety, well being and 
permanence.  This includes ensuring that the GAL has 
access to all relevant court and agency records, such 
as reports on the child’s guardians, reports on the child, 
and the child’s medical and school records (Pa.R.J.C.P. 
1154 (2)).  To fully understand the child’s 
circumstances and represent the child’s best interest to 
the court, the GAL may need to further investigate by interviewing potential 
witnesses, including the child's guardians, caretakers, and foster parents.  In 
representing the child’s best interest to the court, the GAL should fully advise the 
child of the proceeding and discuss potential outcomes with the child to ascertain 
the child’s wishes to the extent possible. At hearings, the GAL must play an 
active role in the case by cross-examining witnesses, presenting witnesses, and 
presenting evidence necessary to communicate to the court the child’s wishes 
and best interests.  

 J.J., 19, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

   

4.2  Legal Representation in Dependency Matters in 

.2.1  Judge’s Role 

  4

Pennsylvania  

 
 

 

 

33

 

  34

Legal Representation in Dependency Matters  

 

Too often the GAL’s first encounter with the child occurs moments before the 

first hearing begins.  Subsequent meetings follow suit with the GAL and the child 
meeting in the courtroom or hallway prior to each proceeding.  This type of meeting 
has proven to be ineffective and simply does not provide adequate time for the GAL 
to understand the child’s wishes or best interests.   

Instead the GAL should meet with the child immediately upon appointment to 

the case to ascertain the child’s wishes if the child is of appropriate age.  The visits 
should continue on a regular basis in a manner appropriate to the child’s age and 
maturity (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1154).   

In many jurisdictions, GAL caseloads are overwhelming, making regular 

meetings with child clients challenging.  To address this issue, some jurisdictions 
have begun teaming GALs with caseworkers who meet with children and report back 
to the GALs.   

Ideally, the GAL should remain with a case throughout its life span with the 
courts.  Maintaining one GAL throughout the case provides continuity for the child 
and helps to build a positive relationship.     
 

There are significant differences between the GAL and the child’s legal 
counsel.  The GAL is concerned with the child’s “best interests” whereas legal 
counsel is concerned with the child’s legal interests.  A child may waive his or her 
right to legal counsel, but a child cannot waive his or her right to a GAL.   

enerally, a GAL is assigned to represent all interests of the child if the 

reasons necessitating the child’s placement are a result of the “acts of the 
parent”.  These reasons are identified in 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302 (definition of a 
dependent child) and include (1), (2), (3), (4), and (10).   

f, however, the child’s own behavior plays a role in the allegation of 

dependency, there may be underlying legal liability, in which case the child may 
need separate counsel.  These reasons are identified in 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302 (5), 
(6), (7), (8), and (9).  The provisions of Pa.R.J.C.P. 1151 specify the 
circumstances under which a GAL and separate legal counsel should be 
appointed to protect the child’s best interests and legal interests.  If the child 
waives legal counsel, then the GAL should represent both the child’s best 
interests and legal interest.   
 

4.2.4  Shared Case Management/Dual Jurisdiction 

Shared Case Management occurs when a child is adjudicated as both 

Dependent and Delinquent.  In this situation, the child is in need of 

  G

  I

4.2.3  Legal Counsel for the Child 

*Best Practice – GAL Meetings with the Child* 

 
 

   

   

   

   

 

Legal Representation in Dependency Matters  

 

representation from a GAL and/or legal counsel for the dependency matter, as 
well as legal counsel for the delinquency matter.  While this can get burdensome 
and complex, the different attorneys represent the differing interests of the child.  
The GAL represents the best interests of the child in the dependency matter; 
legal counsel represents the child’s legal interests in the dependency matter; and 
if necessary separate legal counsel represents the child’s legal interests in a 
delinquency case.   

4.2.5  Counsel for Parents 

All parties in a dependency proceeding have the right to representation by 

legal counsel.  Section E of Pa. R.J.C.P 1151 addresses the requirement to 
apprise parents and other parties of their right to counsel, as well as the timing of 
appointment:   
 

“If counsel does not enter an appearance for a party, the court shall 
inform the party of the right to counsel prior to any proceeding. If 
counsel is requested by a party in any case, the court shall assign 
counsel for the party if the party is without financial resources or 
otherwise unable to employ counsel. Counsel shall be appointed prior 
to the first court proceeding” (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1151 (E)). 

The court should make every effort to ensure that parents and other 
parties to the case are clearly advised of their right to counsel and have legal 
representation at the beginning of dependency cases.   If counsel is not 
present at subsequent hearings, the court should again advise of the right to 
counsel. 

 
 

 

 

 

       

35

 

  36

Legal Representation in Dependency Matters  

 

*Best Practice – Parents’ Counsel* 

Parents’ Counsel should meet with parents immediately upon appointment to 
the case to appropriately understand their needs and the circumstances of the case.  
Counsel should maintain contact with parents on a regular basis to keep them aware 
of the proceedings and get updates regarding any progress or changing needs.   

The timely appointment of counsel and active representation in the early 

stages of the case reduces the potential for delay in subsequent proceedings due to 
scheduling conflicts and/or lack of attorney preparation.  Early appointment of counsel 
also encourages greater participation by parents in shaping and complying with the 
provisions of service plans.   

Often families that enter the child welfare system have a general lack of 

understanding of the system, which can be compounded by various disabilities and 
life struggles.  Attorneys for parents should clearly explain in plain language the 
proceedings and discussions occurring, as well as the potential consequences of 
noncompliance with court orders or family service plans.  Parents’ attorneys should 
also reiterate timeframes and deadlines related to the child welfare system, and the 
possibility that failure to meet them may ultimately result in their parental rights being 
terminated.   

Ideally, the attorney for the parent or parents should remain with the case 

throughout its life span with the courts, both for sake of continuity and to help build 
positive relationships.     
 

4.3 

Pro Se Parents 

While best practice dictates that all parties would be represented by 
appropriate, legal counsel in the dependency system as early in the process as 
possible, it is still possible for parents to refuse representation.   
 

Parents who refuse representation in dependency matters should receive 
the same accommodations as any Pro Se litigant.  Accommodations to be given 
to Pro Se parties may include: 
 

•  Notification of the ongoing right to legal representation. The parent 

can request attorney representation at any time.   

•  Explanation of the court process. As in any other court proceeding, the 
Pro Se litigant in a dependency matter needs to understand that both 
sides will be heard.   

•  Explanation of the elements of the dependency case. The parent 

should understand what occurs in dependency matters and the potential 
consequences of the hearings, including the potential for the court to 
ultimately terminate the parents’ rights toward the child.   

•  Explanation of the rules of procedure and evidence and the proper 
forms of questioning.  The court should specify what is and is not 

 
 

 

   

   

   

   

 

Legal Representation in Dependency Matters  

 

admissible in a dependency hearing, and should explain that if the parent 
chooses to question witnesses, these questions should be open-ended to 
avoid the appearance of advocacy. 

•  Explanation of the meaning of the court’s rulings and orders.  Finally, 
the court should rule immediately and explain clearly to the parent what it 
is that the court is expecting.   

.4  County Solicitors 

Unlike counsel for the parents or the child, who are appointed on a case 
by case basis, the solicitor’s appearance can be automatically entered for each 
dependency case (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1150).  The solicitor’s primary responsibility is to 
represent the county child welfare agency in dependency court proceedings.  In a 
broader sense, the solicitor serves as advisor and counselor, as well as legal 
representative of the agency.  The solicitor is also responsible for ensuring that 
agency staff are prepared for hearings.   

dditionally, the solicitor should keep the agency administrator and staff 

advised regarding current legal developments, including federal and state 
statutory changes, as well as appellate decisions and rule changes, if they may 
affect the agency and the conduct of dependency hearings. 

*Best Practice – Solicitor/Agency Preparation* 

Before any court proceeding the solicitor should ensure that the agency staff 

is well prepared for the hearing.  The solicitor should prepare with the agency for 
each court appearance.  A good way to do this is through devising a regularly 
scheduled time to review each case and discuss facts, issues, witnesses and 
documents necessary for the hearing.  Additional time or open schedules should be 
kept for emergency hearings and unexpected case developments.    

4.5  Waiver of Counsel 
 

A child may waive legal counsel only; at no time may a child waive the 

right to a GAL.  All other parties may waive their right to counsel for any 
proceeding.  A party who waives the right to counsel may revoke the waiver at 
any time and must be informed of the right to counsel at all subsequent hearings 
(Pa.R.J.C.P. 1152).     

f the right to counsel is waived, Pa.R.J.C.P. 1152 requires that the court 
determine if the waiver is “knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.”  The comment to 
Pa.R.J.C.P. 1152 suggests that the court conduct a colloquy with the party on the 
record regarding the following points: 
 

 
 

  4

 

   

   

37

  A

  I

  38

Legal Representation in Dependency Matters  

 

 
 

 

 

1.  Whether the party understands the right to be represented by counsel; 
2.  Whether the party understands the nature of the dependency 
allegations and the elements of each of those allegations; 

3.  Whether the party is aware of the dispositions and placements that 
may be imposed by the court, including foster care placement and 
adoption; 

4.  Whether the party understands that if he or she waives the right to 
counsel, he or she will still be bound by all the normal rules of 
procedure and that counsel would be familiar with these rules; 
5.  Whether the party understands that counsel may be better suited to 

defend the dependency allegations; and 

6.  Whether the party understands that the party has many rights that, if 
not timely asserted, may be lost permanently; and if errors occur and 
are not timely objected to, or otherwise timely raised by the party, the 
ability to correct these errors may be lost permanently. 

*Best Practice – Additional Colloquy Question* 

In addition to the colloquy suggested in the comment to Pa.R.J.C.P. 

1152, courts may wish to inquire as to whether the party has taken any 
substance into their body that would make them unable to understand any of the 
previous questions.  

The court may assign “stand-by” counsel if a party waives counsel at any 
proceeding or stage of a proceeding.  Whenever representation is waived, the 
waiver only applies to the hearing for which it is made.  The party may revoke the 
waiver of counsel at any time, and the court must inform the party of the right to 
counsel again at each subsequent hearing.  

   

 

   

  39

 

Chapter 5 ---- Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter 
 Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter 
Chapter 5 
 Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter 
 Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter 
Chapter 5 
Chapter 5 
Care Hearing    
Care Hearing
Care Hearing
Care Hearing

The child welfare system is a large, complex system with many stakeholders that 
work to improve the lives of children and families.  The focus of the county child welfare 
agency is to protect children and strengthen families.  Numerous families receive 
voluntary services from the agency, and as a result the large majority of cases served 
by the agency will never be seen by the court system.  Only a small percentage of 
cases require court oversight and supervision.  This court oversight and supervision 
may apply to children within their homes or children who have been removed from their 
home.   
 

The removal of a child from a home may be accomplished on a voluntary, 
cooperative basis or may be met with great resistance by the family.  Although ideally a 
contested removal should occur after a court hearing as to the need for such action, the 
circumstances usually require immediate action by the agency, before a preliminary 
protective hearing can be arranged.  As such, there are several ways in which children 
may enter care.  The primary means of entry pursuant to Pa.R.J.C.P. 1200 include: 
 

1)  the filing of a dependency petition; 
2)  the submission of an emergency custody application; 
3)  the taking of the child into protective custody pursuant to a court order or 

statutory authority; 

4)  the court accepting jurisdiction of a resident child from another state; or 
5)  the court accepting supervision of a child pursuant to another state’s 

A Standard Dependency Petition is typically filed by the agency, but may be filed 

by others through application (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1320).  A Standard Dependency Petition is 
typically handled on a non-emergency basis and will proceed directly to adjudication 
and disposition.   
 

A case may come into the system through an application for a court order of 

protective custody.  Typically, this happens in emergency situations via an oral request 
of the agency, in which, the child is taken into protective custody when the court 
determines that removal is necessary for the welfare and best interests of the child.  
The order may be oral, but must be reduced to writing within 24 hours or the next court 
business day (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1210).    

hile Pa.R.J.C.P. 1201 and 1202 allows specified medical professionals, police 

and the agency to take a child into temporary protective custody, the agency must 
assert that protective custody is needed and the child must remain in the custody of the 
agency.  The agency must ensure the necessity of the child remaining in care through a 
shelter care application.  This application may be oral, but must be reduced to writing 
within 24 hours and submitted to the court, with an emergency shelter care hearing to 
follow within 72 hours (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1240).   

  W

order. 

 

5.1  Overview  
 

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 

Lastly, a case may come into the system as a result of the court accepting 

jurisdiction of a resident child from another state; or accepting supervision of a child 
pursuant to another state’s order. 

*Best Practice - Pre-Trial Voluntary Services* 
 

Entry into the court system may be avoided, especially in situations involving truancy 

or medical issues, through the practice of “front-loading” of pre-trial services.  Early 
intervention and the provision of services can be of great benefit in assuring children’s 
welfare while avoiding needless court involvement.  Services in such situations are voluntary, 
and parents are free to refuse to participate until the court has taken jurisdiction of the 
matter.  But family cooperation and identification of needed services may be accomplished 
through Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), including mediation, facilitation, as well as 
various types of family conferencing (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 13).   

amily Group Decision-Making (FGDM), the preferred practice in Pennsylvania, 

allows the family to participate in the decision-making process along with the child welfare 
agency, service providers, and other interested persons.  Involving the family in decision-
making helps to build communication, cooperation, and collaboration between the family and 
child welfare professionals (NCJFC, 2000, p.13).  Of course, these practices can also be 
used after the filing of a petition and at all stages of the case.  A more detailed discussion of 
the use of FGDM and similar innovative practices may be found in Chapter 15: General 
Issues. 
 

5.2  Commencement of Proceedings  

As delineated above, Pa.R.J.C.P. 1200 sets forth the different ways a case can 

arise on the judicial docket.  These include the filing of a dependency petition, the 
submission of an application for emergency custody, the actual taking of the child into 
protective custody pursuant to a court order or statutory authority, or the acceptance of 
jurisdiction or supervision over a case originating in another state. 

5.2.1  Voluntary Placement with the Agency  

Dependency cases may also begin with the child being placed in agency custody 

under a time-limited voluntary agreement.  As the comment to Rule 1200 explains, if 
custody of a child with the agency is by virtue of a voluntary placement agreement and 
custody will exceed thirty days, dependency proceedings must be initiated through a 
petition filed by the thirtieth day.  If a guardian requests return of the child and the 
agency refuses, then a dependency petition must be immediately filed at the time of 
such refusal. 

While the actual agreements in a voluntary placement scenario are rarely the 

subject of review by the court, the required provisions to be included in such 
agreements are set forth in 55 Pa. Code § 3130.65. 
 

 

 

  F

 
 
 

   

   

   

   

 40

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 
 
 
 
child is placed pursuant to a voluntary agreement.  The case plan should include, at a 
minimum, each treatment goal that must be achieved for reunification to occur, the 
services to be provided, and the terms of visitation. 

As is recommended therein, the agency should prepare a case plan whenever a 

 

5.2.2  Order for Protective Custody  

a.R.J.C.P. 1210 outlines requirements for emergency protective custody orders.  

Both the application for the order and the order itself may be verbal.  However, the 
request for an order must be reduced to writing within 24 hours.  Likewise, the court’s 
oral order must be reduced to writing within 24 hours or by the next court business day.  
The court’s order must specify, among other things, (1) the reasons for taking the child 
into protective custody, (2) whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent placement, 
and (3) a finding that remaining in the home is contrary to the welfare and best interests 
of the child. 

Although the rule authorizing an order for immediate removal does not reference 

its ex parte nature, it is clear that the court is required to act promptly on an agency 
request, whether orally or by written application, to decide whether to authorize 
protective custody of the child.    

.3  Shelter Care Hearing  

  P

   

 

*Best Practice – Presiding over Shelter Care Hearings* 

Although judges and masters are both able to hear Shelter Care hearings, whenever 
possible the judge should receive preference.  The shelter care hearing is the most important 
hearing in the case.  Having the hearing in a formal location in front of a judge can set the tone 
for the entire case.   

 
Once the child is removed from the home in an emergency situation, a shelter 

 
 
care hearing must be conducted by a judge or a court-appointed master within 72 hours 
of taking custody (42 Pa.C.S. § 6332; 23 Pa.C.S. § 6315(d)).  This is a statutory 
“informal hearing.”  

Upon application or the filing of a dependency petition, a shelter care hearing 

must be conducted in those cases where removal of a child is planned but has not yet 
occurred, or where a voluntary agreement is revoked by the parent and the agency 
intends to seek to keep the child in care. 
 

Although in some courts the shelter care hearing has been transformed into an 
adjudicatory hearing, this procedure does not represent best practice.  It is contrary to 
the carefully developed sequence of proceedings that assure adequate representation 
and time to reflect on the options available to parents.  This sequence allows for 
appropriate safeguards to ensure that the well-being of the child is considered and the 

   

   

  5

 

 

 

41

 

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 
 
 
due process rights of the parent or guardian, as reflected in the Juvenile Act and the 
Juvenile Court Procedural Rules, are protected (See In re: A.S., 594 A.2d 714 (Pa. 
Super. 1991)). 
 
 
The primary purpose of the shelter care hearing is to evaluate the agency’s 
 
contention that allowing the child to remain in the home would be detrimental to the 
child’s welfare and best interests.  Under Pennsylvania law, as amended to conform to 
ASFA, parental rights are secondary to the basic interests of the child in these 
proceedings, and “the health and safety of the child supersede[s] all other 
considerations” (In the Interest of C.B., 861 A.2d 287, 295 (Pa. Super. 2004)).  If it is 
necessary for a child to be removed from the home, the placement of the child is 
expected to be the least restrictive environment available to meet the needs of the child.   
 

*Best Practice – Least Restrictive Placement Setting* 

If it is necessary for a child to be removed from the home, the placement of the 

child is expected to be the least restrictive placement available.  The placement should be 
the most family-like setting available for the child, consistent with the best interests and 
special needs of each child (55 Pa. Code § 3130.67 (b) (7) (i)).   

 primary consideration for placement should be with a fit and willing relative of the 

child or someone who has a close connection to the child.  These kinship caretakers are 
typically the least restrictive placement options and can preserve the child’s connections 
to family.  In Pennsylvania, kinship caretakers are required to become licensed foster 
parents and should be encouraged by the judge or master to fully cooperate with the 
agency in completing the necessary requirements of foster care licensing.  In an 
emergency situation a child can be placed with a kinship caretaker, but that caretaker 
must become a fully licensed foster parent within 60 days.   

ther placement considerations should include:  geographical proximity to the 

family and community affiliations, educational stability, and cultural relevance of the 
placement to assure timely permanence and well-being.   
 

Every effort should be made to place siblings together.   

Additionally, while in agency care and in placement, any move of a child from one 
placement to a different placement (regardless of the level of care) should occur only via 
court action. 
 

In general, the continuum of placement restrictiveness is as follows: 

  A

  O

 

 

 

Less 
Restrictive 

Most 
Restrictive 

Kinship 

Foster 
Care 

Group 
Home 

Shelter  Residential 
Treatment 
Facility 

 42

43

Holding a substantive shelter care hearing is key to the court process and 

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 
 
 
 
ensuring that all parties are engaged and understand what is required of them.  
During this initial hearing, the court is becoming familiar with the child and the 
family’s needs and in so doing must consider a multitude of issues.  As such, a 
minimum of 30 minutes (and preferably up to 60 minutes) should be allocated for a 
shelter care hearing. 
 

 

A number of issues should be considered at this first hearing:  interim 

placement options, development of an interim (but specific) visitation schedule, 
identification of any medical/psychological/educational needs of the child, provision 
of interim services (for the child and possibly the parents), and the determination of 
additional court orders that may be required (i.e. court-ordered evaluations, 
paternity determinations, restraining orders, child support, notice to additional 
parties, etc.).   
 

*Best Practice – Obtaining Parents’ Medical History* 

he court should require the agency to collect the medical/psychological history of 

both the biological parents and the child as early in the process as possible.  This 
information can be helpful in a variety of ways including:  assisting the court in decision 
making, assuring appropriate services are identified, and creating a documented history 
for the child.   This information may be beneficial to all parties in the short term, but may 
also prove beneficial if the case advances to TPR and adoption.  
 

 
 
 
A substantive shelter care hearing requires a significant initial investment of 
time and resources.  This investment, often referred to as “front-loading” the court 
process, is viewed as key to establishing the basis for expedited case processing, 
ensuring that the family remains involved, and minimizing the time that the child 
remains in care.  Important components of front-loading the court process include: 
 

  T

• 
timely appointment of counsel for the child and parents/guardians; 
•  establishment of the schedule/terms of visitation where appropriate; 
•  examination of options for placement with relatives; 
• 

identification of any domestic violence issues and, if appropriate, 
issuance of protective orders; 

•  assessment of the need for expert examinations or evaluations of the 
child or parent’s physical and/or mental health and issuance of the 
appropriate orders; and 

•  early inquiry into paternity issues and location of, notice to, and 

engagement of absent parents. 

 

 

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 

*Best Practice – Finding and Engaging Absent and Putative Fathers* 
 

The child welfare system has long been criticized for being maternally focused and for 

failing to involve fathers (particularly absent fathers) and their relatives.  
 

Every effort should be made as early in the process as possible to identify and engage 
the true father of the child.  Fathers and paternal relatives may prove invaluable to dependent 
children, as placement resources, additional supports, sources of health history information, 
and permanent connections.  Additionally, early engagement of fathers and their relatives 
allows the agency to work with the family as a whole at the front-end of the process, which can 
save valuable time later on, thus expediting services to families and timely permanency for 
children.  Cases may occur where no father has ever been conclusively identified and multiple 
potential fathers exist.  In such circumstances, the court may proceed with the current father of 
record, but if any doubt exists as to paternity, the court through the agency should make every 
effort to determine paternity.  
 

Too often the mother is relied on as the sole source of information regarding the father.  
Unfortunately, especially if the father has not been involved in the child’s care and support, the 
mother may not always provide complete information.  This should not be taken to mean that 
no father exists or that the father or paternal family members are not interested in or capable 
of helping the child.  Accordingly, other sources of information on the father and his 
whereabouts, including members of the mother’s family, should be called upon as well. 
 

Since the hearing must take place on short notice to everyone involved (even 

the judge or master has little time to prepare as it is often an add-on to the 
schedule), witnesses and evidence may be unavailable.  However, only a 
preliminary determination is expected until the more comprehensive adjudication 
hearing can occur within 10 days. 

 

5.4  Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) Appointments 

5.4.1  Parent Counsel 

Although the time frame is short, legal counsel for the parent or guardian should 

be assigned after the child’s removal from the home and prior to the shelter care 
hearing (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 14).  This assignment will facilitate 
the orderly conduct of the shelter care hearing. 

If the parent or guardian appears at the hearing unrepresented, the judge or 
master should take a direct approach at the outset of the hearing in advising them of the 
availability of court-appointed counsel and the benefit of legal representation.  The 
parent or guardian is under stress and great anxiety, and is in obvious need of impartial 
advice and advocacy.  If the parent waives counsel, the judge or master must be 
satisfied, after a thorough colloquy, that a waiver of counsel is knowingly, intelligently 
and voluntarily made (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1152(B)).   

 
 
 

   

   

   

   

 44

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
waive such appointment (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1151(A) and 1152(A)).  In certain situations, legal 
counsel for the child must be appointed as well (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1151(B); 42 Pa.C.S. § 
6302; see Chapter 4: Right to Legal Representation, for further details.)   

5.4.2  Assignment of Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) and Child Counsel  
 
The court must assign a Guardian Ad litem for the child, and the child may not 

 

*Best Practice – Assignment of Counsel* 

Both children and families should have legal representation available to them upon 

entering the Shelter Care Hearing.  At the time of the Shelter Care Hearing the parents have 
the right to enter their own counsel, accept the counsel provided, or waive rights to any 
counsel.     

The emergency nature of these hearings may preclude the provision of counsel for 

parents at the Shelter Care Hearing.  However, if counsel cannot be provided for the Shelter 
Care Hearing, the parent should be provided counsel as early in the process as is possible.   

Ideally, all counsel—including the child’s GAL and/or legal counsel, the parent 
attorney/advocate and the agency solicitor—should remain with the case throughout its life 
span with the court.  Counsel can thus work collaboratively, while still allowing each to provide 
vigorous representation.  In combination with a “one-judge, one-family” model, this approach 
can provide for more collaboration in the courtroom, a less adversarial tone in hearings, and 
better outcomes for children and families.   

.5  Conducting the Hearing 

The judge or master should assure that all persons present are identified for the 
record.  If parents or guardians are not in attendance, the agency representative must 
indicate the steps taken to provide each person with notice of the proceeding.  The 
hearing may go forward if a parent or guardian is not present.  If there has not been 
notice, and a parent or guardian later submits an affidavit to that effect, a rehearing 
must be held within 72 hours (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1241 (comment) & 1243). 

In addition to advising the parties of their right to counsel, the judge or master is 
to ensure that each party has a copy of the shelter care application (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1242 
(A)).  If the matter is being heard before a master, the right to have the matter heard by 
a judge should also be explained (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1187(B)).   

The hearing may be preceded by an informal conference to narrow or discuss 
issues, especially where all parties have counsel present.  In addition, related issues, 
not necessarily part of the hearing itself, can be addressed.  For example, the parties 
may discuss whether a caretaker should file a Protection from Abuse action, seeking an 
immediate temporary order that requires an abusive person to leave the house so the 
child can remain.  Informal meetings at this stage may also be used to lay the 

   

   

   

  5

 

   

   

 

45

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 
 
 
groundwork for a FGDM conference, or for the utilization of Family Finding to locate a 
kinship caregiver. 

 

Although the hearing is designated “informal,” it should be formal enough to 

convey the authority of the law.  Security personnel should be present.  If possible, a 
court reporter should make the record.  If not recorded, full minutes of the hearing must 
be kept (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1242(B)).  All witnesses, including agency caseworkers, should be 
sworn and subject to cross-examination. 

The parents or guardians are to be provided a full opportunity to present their 

testimony (including calling witnesses), so they may convey their version of events.  If 
the child’s non-custodial parent is ready, willing, and able to provide adequate care for 
the child, the child cannot be determined to be dependent.  However, the court has the 
authority to transfer custody to the non-custodial parent if evidence for dependency 
would have existed, but for the existence of the non-custodial parent (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1409 
comments).   

Written reports must be made available for examination by all counsel, and the 

parent or guardian if unrepresented.  Any reports may be controverted by the other 
party (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1242(B)).  All parties shall be treated with proper respect and 
fairness. 

5.5.1  Evidentiary Standard 

All evidence helpful in determining the issues raised, including oral or written 

reports, may be received and relied upon to the extent of its probative value 
(Pa.R.J.C.P. 1242(B)(3)). 

.6  Findings and orders 

The judge or master is required to set forth his/her findings as to the following 

(Pa.R.J.C.P. 1242(C) AND (E)); (NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 41): 
 

1.  Were there sufficient facts to support the shelter care application? 
2.  Is custody with the agency warranted?  Where will the child be placed 

(kinship care, foster care, group home, kinship care, etc.)? 

3.  Would remaining in the home be contrary to the welfare and best 

interests of the child?  If the court can answer yes to this question the 
final order should include the statement, “It is contrary to the welfare of 
the child to remain in the home.  It is in the best interests of the child to 
be placed.”  This language must be included in the initial order 
removing the child from the home (shelter order or the emergency 
order) in order for the agency to claim federal reimbursement of 
placement expenses for the child for the duration of this placement 
episode.   

   

   

   

   

   

  5

   

 46

47

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 

4.  Is the placement proposed by the agency the least disruptive 

placement to meet the needs of the child? 

5.  If a shelter care application was submitted by a person other than the 

agency, is that person a party to the proceedings? 

6.  Are any additional orders needed concerning the conduct of the 

parents or agency efforts to provide services? 

7.  Are additional orders needed to address the immediate needs of the 

child, such as immediate medical treatment or evaluation?  

8.  Were reasonable efforts made by the agency to prevent the child’s 

placement? 

9.  If services were not offered in the case of an emergency placement, 

was the lack of efforts reasonable? 

*Best Practice – Reasonable Efforts* 
 

The determination of “reasonable efforts” must not only be made at the shelter care 
hearing stage, but must be revisited at each subsequent hearing.  (CPCMS forms for these 
hearings require the judicial officer to address the reasonable efforts determination.)   The 
requirement ensures that every reasonable opportunity is provided to the family and child 
to prevent unnecessary separation.  In addition, the “reasonable efforts” finding is federally 
mandated and affects the agency’s ability to qualify for federal funding for the placement of 
the child and services to the family.   

 
In addition, the judge or master may place in the order any conditions imposed 

 
 
upon any party; a determination of placement or temporary care of the child; transfer of 
custody to the non-custodial parent; and any orders for visitation (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1242(E)).  
Although a judge cannot require services at this stage, the court can ask the agency to 
offer service pending the adjudicatory hearing.  Early intervention through agency 
services or family examinations/assessments (i.e., medical, psychological, drug/alcohol, 
etc.) may aid in expediting permanency.   
 
 
facilitate understanding and compliance. 

 
A copy of the order should be distributed immediately to all parties in order to 

.7  Motions and Answers 

A motion, orally on the record or in writing, may be made at any stage of the 

proceeding.  The judge should review the motion to ascertain whether a directed 
response would be beneficial to the court or the parties.  In no event is a failure to 
answer deemed an admission of the well-pleaded facts of any motion (Pa.R.J.C.P. 
1344). 

 
 
 

  5

   

     

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 

SHELTER CARE HEARING CHECKLIST 
 

1.   TIMELY HEARING: 

 
____Date Child Removed: ______________________________ 

 
           ____Date of shelter care hearing: _______________________ 

___Determine if written notice of time, place and purpose of the shelter care 

was issued to: 

____Child’s mother and attorney 
____ Child’s father and attorney 
____Child’s guardians/custodians and attorney 
____Child and GAL and/or attorney 
____Tribe (if ICWA applies) 
____Ask County Attorney and County Agency to detail efforts made to 
notify/locate absent parents.    

____If inadequate notice given, reset hearing.  Date of rescheduled hearing:  
____Order County Attorney and/or agency to locate and notify absent parents of 

next hearing. 

3.  WHO SHOULD ALWAYS BE PRESENT: 

WHO MAY BE NEEDED: 

  _

 

Note:  The shelter care hearing must be held within 72 hours of child’s removal.) 

2.  NOTICE OF HEARING: 

__ Judge 
__ Mother 
__ Father  
__ Guardians/Custodians 
__ Child(ren) 
__ Spouse of Child, if any   
__  Parents’ Attorneys 
__ Guardian ad Litem 
__ Child’s Attorney 
__ Agency Solicitor 
__ Caseworker 
__ CASA 
__ Court Reporter 
__ Security Personnel 
 

 

 
4.  PROCEDURE: 

 

care. 

 

__ Extended Family Members 
__ Friends of the Family 
__ Foster/Preadoptive Parents 
__ Other Witnesses 
__ Service Providers 
__ Law Enforcement 
__ Probation Officer 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

48

____Explain the purpose of the proceeding and give advisements of rights. 
____Receive all relevant and material evidence to determine need for shelter 

 
 
 

  (

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 
 

 

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 

____Receive all material and relevant evidence helpful to determine questions of 

placement, reasonable efforts, visitation, and education.     

evidence and cross-examine persons making the reports. 

____Allow parties/counsel to examine and contest written reports received as  
 
____Make contrary to the welfare and reasonable efforts findings. 
____Make findings as to whether shelter care was necessary or still is necessary 

to keep the child safe. 

____If the father is unknown, begin process of establishing paternity.   
 

5.  ADVISEMENT OF RIGHTS AND PURPOSE OF PROCEEDINGS: 

____Advise of contents of petition and nature of allegations. 
____Right to legal counsel. 
____Right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. 
____Right to present witnesses and introduce evidence. 
____Right to issue subpoenas by the Court. 
____Receive factual basis under oath and on the record. 

6.  PLACEMENT OPTIONS: 

 
____Ask County Agency to provide details of child’s proposed placement. 
____Determine whether the placement proposed by County Agency is the least 

disruptive and least restrictive and most family-like setting that meets the 
needs of the child. 

____Specify the child’s placement in the least restrictive setting.  
____Return child to the home. 
____Leave child in the home without County Agency supervision and without 

services. 

____Leave child in the home with County Agency supervision and services. 
____Remove/continue removal of the child and place/continue to place with 

someone other than County Agency. 

____Remove/continue removal of the child and place/continue to place child with 

___Ask county agency to provide details regarding visitation between child and  

Note:  Visitation should be frequent and meaningful so as to be reduce trauma 
of placement.) 

County Agency.  

 

7.  VISITATION: 

____Mother 
____Father 
____Siblings 

 

  _

 
 
 

  (

     

 49

Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing 
 

 

 
____Adjudication Hearing Date: __________________________________ 

(Note:  The Adjudicatory Hearing must be held within 10 days of the filing of the 
petition if the child is in custody and 45 days if a child is not in custody.)  

A court should distribute the orders at the conclusion of the hearing, and explain 
the significance to the parties, if necessary.   

____Ask county agency to provide details regarding the child’s school 

8.  EDUCATIONAL STABILITY: 
 

.  SCHEDULE NEXT HEARING: 

  9

placement.   

 
 
 

 
 

 

 

50

 

 

   

 

a.R.J.C.P. 1240, 1242 (B) (3), 1243 

 
An informal hearing to determine (a) whether shelter 
care is necessary; (b) whether allowing the child to 
remain in the home would be contrary to the welfare 
of the child; (c) whether reasonable efforts were made 
to prevent such placement; or (d) if, in case of 
emergency where services were not offered, whether 
lack of efforts were reasonable.  Shelter care hearing 
is not a substitute for the adjudicatory hearing. 
 
Hearing within 72 hours of removal (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6332). 

f the child is not released and a parent or guardian or 
other custodian has not been notified of the hearing, 
did not appear or waive appearance at the hearing, 
and files his affidavit showing these facts, the court 
shall rehear the matter without unnecessary delay 
and order release of the child, unless it appears from 
the hearing that shelter care is required under 42 
Pa.C.S. § 6325. 

pon application or the filing of a dependency 

petition, a shelter care hearing will also be conducted 
in those cases where removal of a child has not yet 
occurred, but is planned or a voluntary agreement is 
revoked by the parent and the agency intends to keep 
the child in care. 
 
All evidence helpful in determining the questions 
presented, including oral or written reports, may be 
relied upon to the extent of its probative value.  Thus 
hearsay may be admissible.    
 
Child in Custody:  Adjudicatory hearing within 10 
days of the filing of the petition. 

hild Not in Custody:  Adjudicatory hearing as soon 

as practical but within 45 days of the filing of the 
petition. 
 

  P

  I

  U

  C

Purpose of Hearing 

Time Frame  

Rules of Evidence 

Next Hearing 

SHELTER CARE HEARING BENCHCARD 

   

Relevant Statutes 

42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6325, 6332, 6334 

 

 

51

SUMMARY OF KEY QUESTIONS/DECISIONS 
SHELTER CARE HEARING  

 

•  Are there sufficient facts to support the shelter care application? 

Is custody with the agency warranted?  Where will the child be placed (kinship 
care, foster care or other)? 

If a shelter care application was submitted by a person other than the agency, is 
that person a party to the proceedings? 

  Would remaining in the home be contrary to the welfare and best interests of the 

child? 
 
Is the placement proposed by the agency the least disruptive and most family-
like placement to meet the needs of the child? 

•  Has Family Finding been done to identify all possible family and caregivers?   

•  Has the family been offered a Family Group Decision Making Conference?   

  Were reasonable efforts made by the agency to prevent the child’s placement?   

•  Were the services offered by the agency relevant to the family’s problems? Were 

they adequate, accessible, and well-coordinated?  Were there other cost-
effective services that should have been offered?  

If services were not offered in the case of an emergency placement, whether the 
lack of efforts were reasonable? 
 

•  Are any additional orders needed concerning the conduct of the parents, such as 
restraining orders or orders expelling an allegedly abusive parent from the 
home? 
 

•  Are any additional orders needed concerning the agency’s efforts to provide 

services? 
 

•  Are additional orders needed to address the immediate needs of the child, such 

as immediate medical treatment or evaluation or other examinations? 

•  What steps have been taken to ensure educational stability for the child? 

•  What are the terms and conditions for parental visitation or sibling visits? 

•  What consideration has been give to financial support of the child? 

 

 

hese questions are adapted from the text of this chapter, the Mission and Guiding 

Principles for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System and the Preliminary Protective 
Hearing Checklist provided in the Resource Guidelines (NCJFCJ, 1995, p.43). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  T

• 

• 

 •

• 

 •

• 

 52

  53

 

 Adjudication    
Chapter 6 ---- Adjudication
Chapter 6 
 Adjudication
 Adjudication
Chapter 6 
Chapter 6 

6.1  Overview 
 

The adjudication hearing is the bench trial before a judge or master in 
which a determination is made as to whether the child is in fact “dependent” 
within the meaning of the Juvenile Act.  This is the most formal of the hearings in 
a dependency case, with respect to both the admission of evidence and the child 
welfare agency’s burden of proof.  

he adjudication acts as the official entry point of a child into the 
dependency system and provides the basis for court-ordered agency services 
and interventions.  A prompt and fully developed adjudication hearing can be 
instrumental in setting the stage for planning for the child’s needs and achieving 
permanency.  Judicial diligence, oversight, and concern are key components if 
the court proceedings are to meet these goals while safeguarding the 
constitutional and due process rights of the parties.          

 

If the court sustains the allegations of dependency, the child is officially 
adjudicated dependent.  At this point the case goes to the disposition hearing, 
which determines the services to be provided to the child and family and whether 
or not they are appropriate.  In many jurisdictions the adjudication and disposition 
are held jointly as a means to expedite the process.  While the combining of the 
hearings is acceptable, it should be noted that burden of proof differs between 
the two hearings and findings for each hearing must be recorded and committed 
to the order.  (See Chapter 8: Disposition.)  

 

6.2  Dependency 
             

In view of the focus at the adjudication hearing on whether or not there is 
dependency, the judge or master must be familiar with the statutory definition of 
“dependent child” found at 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302.  (For a listing of the categories of 
dependency, see Chapter 3: Jurisdiction.)  The agency must check mark in its 
petition (a CPCMS statewide form) the specific subsection of Section 6302 under 
which the child’s situation is covered, which generally are in the categories of 
neglect (including failure to thrive, parental incapacity), abuse (physical, sexual, 
emotional), or status offenses (truancy, incorrigibility, ungovernability).  There is 
also a subsection that applies to a parent who has had parental rights terminated 
as to another child within the past three years, and is currently engaging in 
conduct that poses a risk to the well-being of the child.  

 

  T

           

Adjudication  

 

 
 

 

 

6.3  Pre-Hearing Requirements and Considerations 
 

6.3.1  Timing 

The adjudication hearing must be promptly held, no later than ten days 

after the petition is filed for a child who has been removed from the home 
(Pa.R.J.C.P. 1404(A)).  If the child is still in the home, the matter may not be as 
urgent, and the hearing may be held any time within 45 days of the filing date 
(Pa.R.J.C.P. 1404(B)). 

t should be noted, however, that delay may impede efforts to reunify the 

family, or in the alternative to find a permanent placement (PA Children’s 
Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 13).  Even if a child is not in shelter care, it is 
important that the adjudicatory hearing be held in a timely manner so that 
services can be initiated quickly if the allegations of dependency are proven, or 
the petition can be dismissed if they are not.  A prompt hearing may also facilitate 
the use of such practices as Family Group Decision Making (FGDM), Mediation, 
and Family Finding.   

It is highly recommend that when a child is in shelter care, the established 

timeline for the adjudicatory hearing should not be continued even if the parties 
agree, except where there is newly discovered evidence, unavoidable delay in 
the notification of parties, an unavailable witness, or unforeseen personal 
emergencies or illness (NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 47). 

 

 

* Best Practices - Continuances* 

Continuances are necessary in any court setting, but their use should be 
strictly limited in dependency cases.  Under the Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court 
Procedure, “continuances should not be granted when they could be deleterious to 
the safety or well-being of a party” (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1122, comments).  In a dependency 
proceeding, any continuance will serve to extend the child’s stay in care and the 
family’s involvement in the system, potentially harming both.   
 

Practices that may cut down on the number of continuances include: 
 

•  Proper and timely notification to all parties in advance of a hearing, such as to 

allow them time to make the necessary preparations to attend and participate.   

•  Early identification of family members, including fathers.   
•  Regularly scheduled hearing dates, determined in advance. 
•  The use of pre-trial conferences and other ADR processes. 
•  Development of judge/attorney teams.  

  I

     

 54

Adjudication  

 

6.3.2  Appointment of Counsel 

All parties should have the opportunity to receive adequate legal 
representation prior to the adjudication hearing.  In some cases, the issue of 
representation has already been settled at the shelter care hearing, but often, 
due to the emergency nature of that hearing and the short timeframe in which it 
must occur, counsel may not have been provided to all parties.   

Any unrepresented parties must be advised of their right to legal counsel.  

Parents have a right to counsel at adjudicatory hearings, even if obtaining 
counsel may cause a delay in the hearing (In Interest of S.N.W., 524 A.2d 514 
(Pa. Super. 1987)).  Further, parents are entitled to effective assistance of 
counsel (In re: N.B., 817 A.2d 530 (Pa. Super. 2003)).  A caregiver afforded 
standing as a party is likewise entitled to representation by legal counsel at all 
stages of the proceedings under the Juvenile Act (In re: D.K., 922 A.2d 929 (Pa. 
Super. 2007)).   

.3.3  Notification 

All parties to the adjudication hearing should receive formal notification.  

This includes the agency solicitor, the child’s GAL and/or legal counsel, parents, 
foster parents, pre-adoptive parents or relatives providing care for the child, the 
county agency, the Court Appointed Special Advocate if any, and any other 
persons as directed by the court (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1361). 

he importance of locating and notifying absent and putative fathers is 

discussed in Chapter 5: Entering the Child Welfare System. 

.3.4  Discovery 

A comprehensive set of rules (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1340-1342) govern discovery 

and inspection for all phases of dependency proceedings, beginning with the 
period preceding the adjudication hearing.  The agency is required to make 
disclosure of certain information under Pa.R.J.C.P. 1340(B), including the names 
and addresses of witnesses and any police report or other record or report 
intended to be used as evidence.  As the comment to Pa.R.J.C.P. 1340 notes, 
however, the purpose of the discovery rules is to encourage an informal 
discovery process.  Only when the informal process fails and a dispute arises 
does court intervention become necessary.   

f they are to be used as evidence, the agency may be required to disclose 

reports whose confidentiality would otherwise be protected under the Child 
Protective Services Laws, 23 Pa.C.S. 6301 et. seq.   However, the disclosure is 
required only as to reports that will be submitted as evidence, and the names of 
confidential sources who have reported possible abuse are not to be disclosed. 

  6

  T

  6

  I

 

 
 

   

   

 

 

 

55

Adjudication  

 

Pa.R.J.C.P. 1342 authorizes the court to order pre-adjudicatory 
conferences, which can be extremely useful in working out preliminary matters, 
focusing issues, and eliminating potential causes of delay.  If the court’s calendar 
is too full to permit the judge to preside, the conference may be held before a 
master appointed for the purpose.  Moreover, nothing in the rule precludes the 
court from ordering the parties to conference outside of the presence of a judge 
or master.  Again, it may be useful to explore the use of techniques such as 
mediation, facilitation or FGDM during the pre-adjudication phase.  (See Chapter 
5: Entering the Child Welfare System, for a discussion of best practices related to 
pre-trial voluntary agreements for services.)  

.3.6  Stipulations 

  6

After the petition is filed, the agency and the parents may arrive at an 
agreement to be incorporated as a stipulation and presented for the court’s 
review (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1405).  These agreements can be family-based if derived 
from a FGDM conference arranged by the agency.  They may also result from a 
pre-adjudicatory conference.  Of course, the use of mediation or facilitation is 
also likely to result in a stipulated finding and plan that meets the needs of the 
child (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 13).  All of these possibilities 
obviously lessen the need for extensive court hearings.  Nonetheless, the court 
must still make an independent determination that the child is dependent; thus, 
any stipulation is subject to rejection if the judge is not convinced by the 
information available that dependency has been established.    If the stipulation is 
rejected by the court, a full adjudicatory hearing is conducted (Pa.R.J.C.P. 
1405(B)).   

hen adjudications are uncontested, in the form of an admission by the 

parents or an agreement or stipulation among the parties, the Resource 
Guidelines recommend that the court’s findings accurately record the reasons for 
the agency’s intervention and avoid “negotiated” findings that do not accurately 
describe the abuse or neglect.  Adjudicatory findings are the basis for the case 
plan, are important to the case review, and are ultimately the benchmark against 
which progress is measured (NCJFCJ, 1995:  47).  

 

6.3.7  Reports and Ex Parte Communication 

  W

The judge or master can more ably conduct an adjudication hearing by 

reviewing some background information about the child before taking the bench.  
A starting point is the dependency petition, which will indicate the type of alleged 
dependency, the location of the child, the participants, and whether Aggravated 
Circumstances (see Chapter 15: General Issues) may be present. 
 

6.3.5  Pre-Adjudicatory Conference 

 
 

 

 

 

 56

Adjudication  

 

In some counties, a more comprehensive “solicitor’s report” or 

“caseworker’s report” is prepared by the agency and distributed to counsel for all 
parties, as well as to the court.  Because it contains background information, as 
well as the agency’s recommendations in the form of a proposed order, this 
report can be of great use in preparing for the hearing.  Of course, the report is 
not evidence; thus, the judge or master cannot base the ultimate decision on any 
matters in the report that are not established by properly accepted evidence at 
the hearing itself. 

Ex parte communications by anyone with the judge or master are 
improper (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1406 and 207 Pa.Code § 33(3)(A)).  All parties must be 
informed of any ex parte letter or contact that a judge or master may receive.  
Correspondence can be returned to the sender unread, but if it is reviewed the 
contents must be revealed to all of the parties.   

In the event the legal standing of a party who is not a biological parent is 
contested in a dependency proceeding, the court should not unduly postpone or 
delay the adjudicatory hearing to consider the issue.  Often, a standing issue 
cannot be readily decided, especially in view of the various statutes and 
extensive case law that must be considered.  It may require a separate hearing. 

n general, as noted in In re: L.C. II, 900 A.2d 378, 381 (Pa. Super. 

2006): “Although the Juvenile Act does not define “party”, case law from 
this Court has conferred the status of party to a dependency proceeding 
upon three classes of persons: (1) the parents…(2) the legal 
custodian…or (3) the person whose care and control of the juvenile is in 
question.”  One who stood in loco parentis to a child at the time of removal 
and whose care and control of the child is in question at the adjudication 
hearing qualifies as a party to the dependency proceedings (In re: D.K., 
922 A.2d, 929 (Pa. Super. 2007)).   
 

Standing should not be confused with the right to be heard.  The Juvenile 

Act affords any relative providing care for the child the right to be heard at any 
dependency hearing (42 Pa.C.S. § 6336.1).  This right to be heard has also been 
extended to a foster parent and a preadoptive parent.   

6.4  Conducting the Hearing 
 

The judge or master should at the outset convey to all in the courtroom the 

nature of the proceeding:  This is a hearing to determine whether the child is in 
fact dependent as asserted by the agency. 
 

All counsel should then be recognized to state their name and who they 

represent.  The GAL and/or the child’s counsel must also be identified.  

.3.8  Standing 

  6

  I

 

 

 
 

 

 

57

Adjudication  

 

Although Pa.R.J.C.P. 1406 refers to the court conducting the hearing in an 

informal manner, its importance should be established by the judge or master’s 
tone at the outset.  It is akin to a bench trial, although opening statements by 
counsel are normally very brief if made at all.  At all stages of the hearing, the 
judge or master should explain, whenever necessary, how the hearing will 
proceed. 

he hearing proceeds with due process considerations of notice of the 

contentions and an opportunity of all parties to present testimony and other 
evidence, in accordance with the usual rules of evidence.  All witnesses are 
subject to cross-examination, even by a Pro Se party who has waived counsel 
(Pa.R.J.C.P. 1406(C)). 

  T

.5  Burden of Proof 

The burden of proof imposed by law upon the agency is to establish by 

“clear and convincing evidence” that the child is dependent (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6341(c)).  The court is not free to apply a best interest of the child standard (In re:  
Haynes, 473 A.2d 1365 (Pa. Super. 1983)); (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1409 Comment). 

.6  Findings and Orders 

Under Pa.R.J.C.P. 1408, the court must enter a finding that specifies 
which of the allegations in the petition have been sustained and are the basis for 
the finding of dependency.  The findings may be announced orally at the 
conclusion of the hearing and later set forth in a written order.  A deadline of 
seven days is imposed by the rules for the court to enter a finding of what 
allegations, if any, were proved by clear and convincing evidence (Pa.R.J.C.P. 
1408 and 1409(B)). 
 

Under Pa.R.J.C.P. 1409(C), the court’s order must contain the 

following: 

 
 

  6

 

  6

 

1)  A statement as to whether the court finds the child to be 

dependent from clear and convincing evidence. 

(2)  The specific factual findings that form the bases of the 

court’s decision. 

(3)  Any legal determinations made. 
(4)  Any orders directing the removal of a child from the home 

or changes in the child’s current residential status, 
including orders as to placement, visitation, or changes in 
custody. 

(5)  Any orders as to services, investigations, evaluations, 

studies, treatment plans, reports, or other steps that may 
assist in the preparation for the disposition hearing.  

  (

 

 58

Adjudication  

 

The court’s written findings should provide enough detailed information to 

justify agency and court choices for treatment and services (without going into 
the details of the abuse or neglect).  In addition, if this is the first judicial order 
authorizing the child’s removal from the home, the court must specify whether 
continuation in the home would be contrary to the child’s welfare, whether the 
agency made reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for placement, 
or whether the agency’s lack of efforts was reasonable due to emergency 
circumstances (see Chapter 5: Entering the Child Welfare System, for a fuller 
discussion of reasonable efforts requirements). 

n Pennsylvania, dependency findings and orders for adjudication 

hearings are contained within the CPCMS Dependency Module.  These court 
forms contain the needed information to assist the court in asking the necessary 
questions, in managing the case, in meeting federal requirements, and in 
capturing statewide data.  The forms also allow for the entering of detailed text, 
which can outline the specific directives of the court.   

  I

 

 
 

   

 

59

 

       

 

   

Adjudication  

 

ADJUDICATORY HEARING CHECKLIST 
 

TIMELY HEARING:  
 
___ Date child removed: ______________________________________ 
___ Date of Adjudicatory Hearing: _______________________________ 

1. 
 
 
 
  
(Note:  The Adjudicatory Hearing must be held within 10 days of the filing of the 
petition if the child is in custody and 45 days if a child is not in custody.)  

NOTICE OF HEARING: 

  _

. 

  2

 

__Determine if written notice of time, place and purpose of the 

Adjudicatory Hearing was issued to child and child’s: 

 
___ Mother and attorney    
___ Guardians/custodians and attorney  ___ GAL and/or attorney    
___ Tribe (If ICWA applies) 

 
 
 
___ If a party is not present and not properly served, reset Adjudicatory 

___ Father and attorney 

Hearing as to the absent party.   

___Proceed with Adjudicatory Hearing as to parent/party who had proper 

notice. 

___Determine whether efforts are being made by county agency to 

locate/notify absent parent(s).   

WHO SHOULD ALWAYS BE PRESENT: 

WHO MAY BE NEEDED: 

__ Judge 
__ Mother 
__ Father  
__ Guardians/Custodians 
__ Child(ren) 
__ Spouse of Child, if any   
__  Parents’ Attorneys 
__ Guardian ad Litem 
__ Child’s Attorney 
__ Agency Solicitor 
__ Caseworker 
__ CASA 
__ Court Reporter 
__ Security Personnel 

__ Extended Family Members 
__ Friends of the Family 
__ Foster/Preadoptive Parents 
__ Other Witnesses 
__ Service Providers 
__ Law Enforcement 
__ Probation Officer 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

PROCEDURE: 
 
___ Explain the purpose of the proceeding and give advisements of rights.   
___ Provide opportunity to admit or deny allegations.   
 

___ If parent(s) admits:  

 

60

 
 

 
 
 
 

 

. 

  3

 

. 

  4

 
 
 
 

 

Adjudication  

 

 
 

___ Determine competency. 
___Determine which allegation(s) of the Petition will be 

admitted. 

 
___ If parents deny:     
 
 
 
 

proven.  

___ Receive factual basis under oath on the record.  

___ Allow opening statements. 
___ Take oath of witnesses. 
___ Receive evidence. 
___Determine which allegations of the Petition have been 

5.    CHILD’S WELL-BEING & FAMILY SERVICES:  
 

___Determine the child’s placement prior to disposition.   
___Ask county agency to evaluate relatives and friend of the family as 

possible caregivers.     

lacement: 

ervices: 

___If disposition is to be set at a later time, ask county agency to address 

what services can be given to the parents prior to disposition.   

___Offer family the opportunity to have a FGDM Conference. 
___Order services appropriate to the family that will allow child to 

remain/reunify with the family.   

___Address whether the child needs any physical/mental examinations 

prior to disposition. 

 
Visitation: 
___Determine if the visitation plan is in the best interest of the child and if 
parties are in agreement with the plan (plan should include visitation 
with parents and siblings, if siblings are in different placement 
settings).   

___Advise parent(s) that visitation is expected and to contact the county 

agency if unable to make visit.  

  Educational Issues:  
 

___Determine if the child’s educational needs are being met. 

CONTRARY TO THE WELFARE AND REASONABLE EFFORTS 
FINDINGS:   

Note:  Contrary to the welfare and Reasonable Efforts findings must be 
detailed and child specific.) 
___Ask county agency to detail efforts made to avoid protective placement 

of child. 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

  P

  S

 

  (

 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

. 

  6

 

 61

Adjudication  

 

___Determine whether continuation in the home would be contrary to the 
child’s welfare.  (Note:  This finding must be made at the first court 
hearing authorizing the child’s removal).   

Reasonable Efforts Findings (Choose one of the following three options): 
___County agency made reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the 

need for placement, including: ______________________________ 

___The lack of efforts to prevent/eliminate need for removal was 

reasonable due to the following emergency circumstances: 
_______________________________________________________ 

___County agency has NOT made reasonable efforts to prevent or 

eliminate the need or placement because:  
_______________________________________________________ 

SCHEDULE NEXT HEARING: 
 
___ Disposition Hearing Date: __________________________________ 
       (Note:  The Hearing must be held within twenty (20) days of 

adjudication.) 

___ Three-Month Review Hearing Date: __________________________ 
___ Six-Month Review Hearing Date: _____________________________ 
___ Permanency Hearing Date: _________________________________   

A court should distribute the orders at the conclusion of the hearing, and 
explain the significance to the parties, if necessary.   

62

 

 

 
 

 

 

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

   

. 

  7

 

 

a.R.J.C.P. 1240 - 1243, 1340 - 1342, 1406 (discovery) 

 
To determine by clear and convincing evidence whether 
a child is dependent pursuant to the definition of 
dependent child in 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302. 
 
Hearing within 10 days of petition if the child is in 
custody. 

he time frame may be extended for another 10 days if 

the court finds that despite due diligence, evidentiary 
material is not available and there is clear and convincing 
evidence that the life of the child is in danger if the child 
were released (42 Pa.C.S. § 6335(a)(1) & (2)). 

f the child is not in custody, the hearing should be within 
45 days (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1404). 
 
The statute does not set forth specific details on the 
admissibility of evidence so it is in the trial court’s 
discretion as to whether evidence is admissible.  The 
statute does provide that a party has the right to present 
evidence and to cross-examine witnesses (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6338).   
 
Clear and Convincing Evidence 42 Pa.C.S. § 6341(c) 

tipulations and agreements cannot substitute for the 

presentation of evidence from the parties and/or 
disinterested parties.   The court must make an effort to 
assure the presentation of evidence.  
 
Child in Custody:  Disposition hearing must be held 
within 20 days of the findings of clear and convincing 
evidence of adjudication (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1408 & 1510). 

he majority of jurisdictions in Pennsylvania hold the 
adjudicatory and disposition hearings consecutively for 
the purposes of timeliness and convenience.  
 

  P

  T

  I

  S

  T

   

 

 

Purpose of Hearing 

Time Frame  

Rules of Evidence 
 

Standard of Proof 

Next Hearing 

 

ADJUDICATION HEARING BENCHCARD 
 

Relevant Statutes 

42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6302-6341 

 

63

 

 

KEY QUESTIONS/DECISIONS  
ADJUDICATION HEARING 
 
•  Which allegations of the petition have been proved or admitted, if any? 

•  Do the facts prove that the child was without proper parental care and 

control? 

•  Do the facts prove that immediate, proper parental care and control is 

unavailable to the child without state intervention? 

•  Are there aggravated circumstances? 

• 

Is there a legal basis for continued court and agency intervention? 

•  Have reasonable efforts been made to prevent the need for placement or 

safely reunite the family? 

•  Has Family Finding been done to identify all possible family and 

caregivers?   

•  Has the family been offered a Family Group Decision Making Conference?   

If the disposition hearing will not immediately follow the adjudication 
hearing: 
 

•  Where will the child be placed until the disposition hearing? 

Is there a need for further testing or evaluation of the child and/or parents 
in preparation for disposition? 

Is the agency taking steps to evaluate relatives as possible caretakers? 

Is the agency continuing to try to notify noncustodial parents? 

If the child will be in foster care, what are the terms for parental visitation, 
sibling visits, and financial support of the child? 

hese questions are adapted from the text of this chapter, the Mission and 

Guiding Principles for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System and the Adjudication 
Hearing Checklist provided in the Resource Guidelines (NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 52). 
 

• 

• 

• 

• 

  T

 64

“Every time I was sent to a 
new placement I wasn’t 
allowed to talk to my dad or 
my sister for a month and 
that made me so angry.  
How do you expect kids to 
be put in a new home with 
strangers and not be 
allowed to talk to the people 
they love and trust?”   

 A.K., 21, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

  -

  65

One of the most important ongoing issues in a dependency matter is that 
of parent-child visitation.  In cases where the goal is family reunification, parents 
enjoy a qualified right to visit their children regularly.  Moreover, in such cases 
frequent visitation is essential to preserving vital parent-child bonds that, once 
broken, cannot easily be restored.  Visitation may also serve to reduce the child’s 
separation trauma during the time of out-of-home placement.  It may help the 
parent stay motivated and focused on achieving reunification.  And even when 
some other permanency goal has replaced reunification, regular visitation may 
nevertheless be in the best interests of the child. 

or all of these reasons, it is important that courts exercise oversight over 

visitation arrangements, and not leave this responsibility solely to the agency.  
The court should determine initially whether visitation can be done safely, and if 
so ensure that it begins promptly and occurs as frequently as possible.  Visitation 
progress should always be assessed at court reviews, and reports and testimony 
regarding visitation should be presented at every hearing to inform the court’s 
orders regarding continued visitation.   

  F

 

7.2   Visitation in Reunification Cases in General 

In order to proceed effectively toward successful reunification in a case 
involving out-of-home placement, frequent and meaningful family visitation is 
essential.  Visitation is also a key component of the 
agency’s “reasonable efforts” toward the goal of 
reunification, which the court must review on an 
ongoing basis.  Thus, specific visitation conditions 
should be incorporated in the court’s orders at the end 
of each hearing. 

 Visitation    
Chapter 7 ---- Visitation
Chapter 7 
 Visitation
 Visitation
Chapter 7 
Chapter 7 

.1   Overview 

 

  7

 

Research has shown that children are not only 

more likely to be reunified with their parents if they 
have early and frequent visitation, but will suffer less 
trauma in the meantime.  Frequent visitation yields 
the following benefits: 

Increases parents’ motivation to change. 

•  Reduces the pain of separation. 
•  Promotes attachment. 
• 
•  Helps parents practice skills learned. 
• 
 

Increases the likelihood of timely permanency. 

 

   

 

Visitation  

 

 

Visitation orders need to be tailored differently for the youngest children.  

Children between the age of 6 months and 3 years are most vulnerable to 
separation anxieties or attachment issues, and thus need more frequent contact 
with their parents.  Generally, however, these visits may be shorter.  Older 
children, though vulnerable, have language skills to better cope with change, and 
thus usually need less frequent visits to maintain their connections.  But the visits 
may need to be longer. 

The court, on a case by case basis, should ensure that the quantity and 

quality of visits are appropriate for the family.  It is not recommended that 
visitation be left to the discretion of the agency.  A visit should, if practical, 
include daily living activities.  Interactions should be sensitive to the parents’ and 
child’s emotions.  It is natural for children to become agitated following visits and 
does not mean the parent erred during the visit.  It is better to monitor the child’s 
reaction over time.  For parents with addictions, random drug testing may be 
critical.  While sobriety during visits is critical, a positive drug screen at any point 
in the life of the case should not be the sole basis for suspending or cancelling a 
visit.  The visitation plan should be modified over time with strategic planning of 
the initial arrangements, the middle phase, and finally, the transition plan.   
 

Visitation also calls for oversight by the court as to the appropriate level of 

supervision.  This includes moving to unsupervised visits as quickly as safety 
allows, overnight visits and the children being placed in the home on a trial basis.  
The court’s directives should inform all as to the expectations of visitation.  Both 
the court and the agency may have to be creative with visitation, such as the use 
of technology for video conferencing and virtual visits using web cams.  Parents 
should also be encouraged to attend medical appointments, school functions and 
other activities of the child.  Consider also involvement of foster parents, who are 
invaluable in programs where special training allows them to role model and 
assist at visits with parenting techniques.   Consider arranged visits with foster 
parents to nurture relationships. 

 

   

   

*Best Practice – Visitation Practices* 

n any prehearing report, the judge should require the agency to include a specific 

section discussing the visitation history while in care as to each parent and the 
siblings, and any specific recommendations as to the immediate future.  A judge 
should also facilitate collaborated agency and community efforts to improve visitation 
practices, and encourage strategies for quality visits (PA Children’s Roundtable 
Initiative, 2009, p. 12).  

7.3   Legal Requirements Governing Visitation  

As long as the goal is reunification, a parent may not be denied visitation 
“except where a grave threat to the child can be shown” (In the Interest of M.B., 
674 A.2d 702, 705 (Pa. Super. 1996)).  This standard reflects the parents’ 

  I

 

   

 66

67

Visitation  

 

 

constitutionally protected liberty interest in such visitation, and also the significant 
consideration of allowing a parent to maintain a meaningful and sustaining 
relationship with his or her child (Id.) (See also In re: B.G., 774 A.2d 757 (Pa. 
Super. 2001); In re: C.J., 729 A.2d 89 (Pa. Super. 1999)).   
 

     The term “grave threat” is not specifically defined in case law other than to 
limit visits by a parent who suffers from “severe mental or moral deficiencies” (In 
Interest of Rhine, 456 A.2d 608, 613 (Pa. Super. 1983)).  Poor parental judgment 
during visits is not enough to limit a parent’s visitation, nor a contention that the 
parents at visits are “undercutting” the authority of foster parents, or that the 
caregivers complain of “acting out” by the child after the visit (In re: B.G., supra). 

 
For the most part, the Juvenile Act does not contain any guidelines as to 
parent-child visitation in dependency cases.  By Administrative Regulation, the 
county agency is generally required to provide opportunities for visits between 
the child and parents “as frequently as possible, but no less frequently than once 
every two (2) weeks” (55 Pa. Code § 3130.68).  Note that the regulation specifies 
only a minimum required frequency, however; courts should be reluctant to 
approve “cookie-cutter” minimum visitation plans that always provide for visits 
every two weeks, without consideration of each child/family’s unique needs.  
Relying solely on the administrative regulation provides parents with 52 hours per 
year or 2 ¼ days of visitation.  Clearly this level of visitation is minimal at best.      
 

There are three exceptions to the regulation that the agency must provide 
opportunities for visitation at least every two weeks.  First, when visits are clearly 
not in keeping with the placement goal—for instance, in adoption cases—
visitation may be discontinued.  The same is the case when visitation has been 
freely refused in writing by the parents.  Finally, the regulation authorizes the 
agency to petition the court for approval to reduce or eliminate visits whenever 
they are not in the child’s best interests.  However, it has been held that the “best 
interest” standard specified in the regulation serves only as an internal guide for 
the agency, and does not set a standard for the court order.  Accordingly, the 
court’s obligation is to apply the “grave threat” standard if reunification is the goal 
(In re: C.J., supra). 

.4   Sibling Visitation 

  7

The preferred method for ensuring sibling contact is to place siblings 

together.  When this is not possible, frequent, ongoing sibling contact and 
visitation is critical.  Visitation with siblings can be of great value in serving the 
best interests of the child (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 11-12).  
Federal law (see the account of the “Fostering Connections to Success and 
Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008” in Chapter 16) recognizes the special 
relationship siblings may have with one another and requires states to make 
“reasonable efforts” in dependency cases to provide “for frequent visitation or 
other ongoing interaction between the siblings.”  An exception exists if visits or 

 

   

 

 

 

Visitation  

 

“I was happy that my 
youngest brother and I were 
always placed together so I 
could keep an eye on hm.  
To be honest, I always felt 
like his mother.  I thought it 
was important that, as 
siblings, we could maintain 
a relationship.  Fortunately 
my other siblings were 
placed in foster homes 
nearby.” 

 C.S., 18, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

  -

 

contact is contrary to a sibling’s safety or well-
being.  Under the Act, the case plan should reflect 
efforts to keep siblings as near to each other as 
possible, with regular sibling face-to-face visitation 
once a month at a minimum, and regular phone 
contact as well.  Clearly this is a minimum 
standard with ongoing sibling visitation needing to 
be much more frequent in many cases.   

It should be noted, however, that under 

Pennsylvania law, a sibling does not have 
standing to seek a court-ordered visitation with a 
minor sibling (Ken R. on behalf of C.R. v. Arthur 
Z., 682 A.2d 1267 (Pa. 1996)).  Parents may also 
refuse visits as to a child remaining in their home, 
after a sibling has been adjudicated dependent (In 
the Interest of C.F., 647 A.2d 253 (Pa. Super. 
1994)).    

 

7.5   Visitation Arrangements  
 

 

   

There are a wide array of approaches to visitation across Pennsylvania.  
In one county, visits take place on weekends at the courthouse, with organized 
play therapy available.  Many other counties have separate, specially designed 
Family Centers to accommodate supervised visitation, with rooms that mimic 
living rooms and kitchens but are equipped with observation mirrors.  Some 
counties strongly encourage the use of community settings for visits, such as 
parks and public restaurants.  In others, visitation arrangements are made by 
private providers pursuant to their own standards and methods.  Regardless of 
the location and setting, visitation should support the development of healthy 
family relationships.    

n some instances, supervision may be required to ensure the child’s well-
being during visits.  Observation during visits may also be necessary to help the 
agency gauge parenting skills and identify training or other needs.  Over time, 
observation of interactions between a parent and child during visitation will 
indicate the presence or absence of a true, healthy bond between them.  
Additionally, over time visits should progress from supervised to unsupervised 
settings.   

  I

7.6   Visits with Incarcerated Parents 

Visitation with an incarcerated parent is subject to the same general 
standards as visitation in other cases, depending primarily on the case plan goal; 
however, the fact of confinement brings up difficult practical concerns.  
Accommodations to the incarcerated parent need not be made (In re: C.J., 

   

 

 

 

 68

69

Visitation  

 

 

supra).   Nonetheless, perhaps there can be some time planned for a visit in 
conjunction with the inmate being brought to the courthouse for a juvenile court 
hearing.  Videoconferencing at a state institution set up for a hearing can also be 
kept open for a short period of visual and audio contact.  Also, a county prison 
can establish a visitation area that is child-friendly, and not so intimidating for a 
child visitor. 

.7   “Best Interests” Visitation in Non-Reunification Cases  

Once the goal shifts away from reunification, the “grave threat” standard is 

no longer to be applied.  The traditional “best interests of the child” is the sole 
guiding basis for continuing visitation.  This is a discretionary determination by a 
judge or master to use his or her experience and wisdom, a judgment call that is 
more intuitive than scientific, and for which there are no formulas or bright line 
tests.  Some guidance was offered in the case of In the Interest of M.B., supra, 
674 A.2d at 706: 

To determine whether visitation is in the child’s interest the court 
may consider all evidence relating to the child’s best interest 
including but not limited to the following factors:  (1) length of 
separation from natural parents; (2) effect of visitation on the child; 
(3) the age, sex and health of the child; (4) the emotional 
relationship between child and parents; (5) the special needs of the 
child; and (6) the effect on the child’s relationship with the current 
caregiver, usually the foster parents. 

 

Another important consideration is the wishes of the child, particularly in 

cases in which the child has been subject to physical, sexual or emotional abuse.  
Certainly, visits in such cases must be properly supervised.  An older child’s 
preference should also carry great weight, particularly where the child is of high 
school age.    

If the child is in a pre-adoptive home, maintaining parental visits will 

generally serve no purpose.  Moreover, visits will likely prolong or delay 
emotional transitions and create confusion and anxiety for the child. 

 

   

  7

 

 

 

 

     

         

 

 

  70

 

 Disposition    
Chapter 8 ---- Disposition
Chapter 8 
 Disposition
 Disposition
Chapter 8 
Chapter 8 

8.1  Overview 
 

In the timeline of dependency proceedings the disposition hearing occurs 

immediately after adjudication.  The adjudication and disposition are separate 
processes and serve two different purposes.  The majority of jurisdictions in 
Pennsylvania hold these hearings consecutively for the purposes of timeliness 
and convenience.  This occurs for several reasons:  many, if not all, of the parties 
are the same at both hearings, much of the evidence presented is similar, it 
helps to expedite the process, and many times the outcomes overlap.  When 
these hearings are held jointly the judge or master should ensure that all 
necessary findings for each hearing are included in the final order.   

 disposition hearing is not a permanency hearing.  In the juvenile court 
process, disposition is the stage at which the court determines who shall have 
custody of the child in question, as well as what services should be provided to 
the child and family.  In the interest of protecting the child from further neglect or 
abuse, the court must decide whether to remove the child from the home, 
continue out-of-home placement and review safe alternatives to placement, or 
return the child to the home. 

n cases where information is incomplete at the time of adjudication (i.e., 

Family Service Plans/Permanency Plans, professional reports or evaluations are 
not available), the court may adjudicate the child and defer disposition.  If the 
child has been removed from the home, the disposition hearing must be held 
within 20 days after adjudication (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1408 & 1510).   In these 
circumstances, the child is typically ordered to remain in the current placement 
setting, if placed out-of-home, until the disposition hearing.  Bifurcating the 
process in this manner allows more time to obtain information on the case and 
aids the judge or master in making the most appropriate decision on the custody 
and placement of the child.  This also allows the agency the opportunity to more 
fully engage the family in identifying the most appropriate services.  

 

* Best Practice – Frontloading Services* 

Identifying appropriate services to families early in the process is imperative.  

Whether the adjudication and disposition hearings are held simultaneously or 
separately, the judge or master can take this opportunity to order the agency to 
provide immediate services to alleviate the circumstances necessitating placement.  
The court can order the agency to do an exhaustive search for absent or putative 
fathers and kin resources or offer the families some type of Alternative Dispute 
Resolution (including FGDM, mediation or facilitation).  The provision of these 
services prior to disposition or at an expedited review after disposition promotes 
timely permanency for the child (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 13).   

  A

  I

 

Disposition 

 

8.2  Preliminary Matters 

As is the case with other dependency hearings, notice must be provided 
to all parties in advance of the dispositional hearing.  Notice of the hearing must 
be provided to the agency solicitor, the child’s GAL and/or legal counsel, parents, 
foster parents, pre-adoptive parents or relatives providing care for the child, the 
county agency, the Court Appointed Special Advocate if assigned, and any other 
persons as directed by the court (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1501).     
 

Likewise, parties at the dispositional hearing are entitled to be represented 
by counsel, as discussed more fully in Chapter 4: Right to Legal Representation. 
 

In addition, the rules governing discovery and inspection in dependency 

cases (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1340-1342), discussed above in Chapter 6: Adjudication, 
also apply prior to dispositional hearings.   

.3  Reports  

At the dispositional hearing, the court may consider various written reports 

that may not have been allowable or available previously.  Reports can include, 
but are not limited to, results of examinations, written reports by experts 
regarding the case, and the Family Service Plan/Child Permanency Plan 
(Pa.R.J.C.P. 1509). 

The Family Service Plan (FSP) is the plan developed for the family by the 

agency.  Creation of this plan should be accomplished with the family’s input.  
Under 55 Pa. Code § 3130.61, the FSP must include identifying information on 
the family members, the circumstances which necessitated placement, service 
objectives and services to be provided to achieve the objectives, actions to be 
taken by the parents, children, the county agency or other agencies, and the 
dates when these actions will be completed.  In counties that use Family Group 
Decision Making (FGDM) to identify needed services the FGDM plan is often 
incorporated into the FSP document.   

The agency is generally required to complete a written FSP within 60 days 

of accepting a family for service (55 Pa. Code § 3130.61).  However, if a child is 
in emergency placement and continued placement is necessary, the agency has 
only 30 days from the time of placement to complete the FSP (55 Pa. Code 
§ 3130.66).  If the agency has not completed the FSP by the time of the 
dispositional hearing, it may be appropriate to bring the parties back for a post-
hearing review of the completed FSP. 

Additionally, upon placement of a child, the agency is required to prepare 
a Child’s Permanency Plan (CPP) (amendment to the FSP) for each child.  The 
CPP also provides a wide variety of information for the courts and should be 

 
 

   

   

   

   

  8

   

 71

Disposition 

 

provided to all parties.  The CPP includes specific information regarding the 
child, such as:  circumstances which made placement necessary, the child’s 
permanency goal and concurrent planning goal, the placement type and location, 
medical and educational information, appropriateness of the placement, 
justification for the placement’s level of restrictiveness, and anticipated duration 
of the placement (55 Pa. Code § 3130.67).     

*Best Practice – Concurrent Planning* 

In all cases where children are removed from the home, the agency should 

engage in concurrent planning.  Concurrent planning is the practice whereby the 
agency simultaneously establishes and executes one permanency goal along with a 
concurrent plan for the child.  If for any reason the primary goal does not work out for 
the child, the concurrent plan can be immediately effectuated.  Concurrent planning 
can significantly shorten the length of time a child remains in care since virtually no 
time is lost from the end of the primary plan to the initiation of the concurrent plan. 

The court’s role in concurrent planning is to determine that both the 

permanency goal and concurrent plan are appropriate and are established in a timely 
manner.  The court reviews the status of the concurrent plan at future hearings, but 
the concurrent plan should initially be established at disposition.         

he services provided in any plan should be specifically tailored to the 

child and family.  Each family with whom the system works is different and 
therefore services need to be tailored to fit each family’s individual needs. The 
identification and delivery of services is best accomplished through a 
collaborative process with the family.  In many counties this is identified through 
a FGDM meeting or other family conference.   

 

 
When the parties admit the allegations or stipulate to a set of facts as to 

8.4  Stipulations 
 
 
dependency, they often agree to a disposition order at the same time.  
Stipulations are a very efficient and valuable way to reach the necessary 
outcome because the parties are taking part in the resolution of the issues, as 
opposed to simply acquiescing in a court-imposed ruling.   

  T

 

In some counties alternative dispute resolution processes such as 
mediation or facilitation may be utilized to reach this agreement.  Regardless of 
the method used, the agreement should address, in detail and with 
completeness, how this matter will move to resolution in a definite and 
acceptable time frame.  Particular emphasis should be placed on the facts which 
led the agency to initiate dependency proceedings, and a court must be sure the 
parties understand the serious nature of the situation and the applicable law.  At 
this stage, it is imperative that the judge or master inform the parents what 
improvement on their part must be shown before the child can come home. 

 

72

 
 

 

   

   

   

Disposition 

 

*Best Practice – Active, Ongoing Court Oversight* 

Once the court is certain that a stipulated agreement is well-considered and 
within the abilities of the parties, it would be prudent to set a review in three or four 
weeks to be sure all of the services are in place and all parties are moving towards 
the goal and cooperating with each other.  Agency case workers and service 
providers should participate in the review.  The review notice should be given at the 
conclusion of the disposition hearing.   

The judge or master sets the stage for what happens in the courtroom, 

starting with an introduction, an explanation of the judicial role and a description 
of what is going to happen in the courtroom.  Before proceeding, the court should 
likewise ask those in the courtroom to introduce themselves and identify their 
relationship to the child.   
 

lthough dependency court is a less formal setting than many civil 

proceedings, some decorum and formality should be observed and all parties 
should show consideration for the seriousness of the matter at hand.  This 
includes the manner in which parties are addressed.  By addressing parties by 
their proper names, as opposed to their roles as “Guardian”, “Dad”, and “Mom”, 
the court conveys a tone of respect for both the proceeding and those involved.  
This culture of caring and collaboration sets a positive tone for the hearing and 
can ensure the child and the family leaves the hearing with hope. 

ll procedures and rules of evidence applicable to adjudication hearings 
are applicable to disposition hearings, except that “helpful” evidence that would 
not be competent in an adjudication hearing may be considered to the extent of 
its probative value in a dispositional hearing (42 Pa.C.S. § 6341(d)).  The court 
may entertain both testimonial evidence and documentary evidence during the 
proceeding.  Testimonial evidence may be offered by all persons and agency 
representatives who have current knowledge of the child and the family, so the 
court can use this relevant knowledge in making permanency decisions for the 
child.  Documentary evidence from the agency, private providers, schools and 
health care providers, should be secured by counsel and the Guardian, and 
provided to the court and all parties.  Written reports can directly assist a judge in 
reaching a decision, in addition to giving caseworkers additional perspective as 
to the needs of a child and family.  Further, where concerns regarding child 
safety can be clearly identified, necessary services can be implemented and 
clear objectives for family members set, which will provide touch points for later 
reviews. 
 

The key discussion in a disposition hearing is whether it is clearly 
necessary that the child be placed or continued in placement away from home 
and which services should be provided at the early stages of the case.   If initial 

  A

  A

.5  Conduct of the Hearing 

 
 

 

  8

   

 73

74

Disposition 

 

“I felt fortunate to have 
been placed with my aunt, 
someone I’ve known my 
whole life, someone I can 
have fun with, laugh with.  
I felt really blessed when 
she came and got us that 
night.” 

 D.S., 18, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

  -

placement is clearly necessary, the court should 
attempt to place the child and his or her siblings, if 
possible, with a safe relative minimizing any potential 
trauma.  Each child has a family, immediate and 
extended.  Locating members of that extended family 
widens the circle of caring adult relationships for the 
child and permits meaningful connections which help 
the child develop a sense of belonging.   

he court has great latitude to impose 

conditions and limitations which serve the best 
interest of the child.  Often a discussion on disposition 
is necessary before significant planning can begin, bearing in mind the goal of 
arriving at an appropriate long-term plan for the child’s future, one which speaks 
to the needs and problems of the child and parents.  

*Best Practice – Maintaining Family Connections* 

The single most identified factor contributing to positive outcomes for children 
is the maintenance of meaningful connections and relationships with safe, supportive 
family members.  Accordingly, it is important to transform the ideology of courts and 
agencies from providing placements with licensed strangers, to finding and 
connecting children with safe family members.  By doing that, we honor relationships 
between family members, give a family the opportunity to heal and develop trust with 
the agency, and provide a child with a much-needed sense of belonging (PA 
Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 10). 
 

epending on the nature of the case, a judge or master may consider 

asking the family to engage in FGDM, if it has not yet been undertaken.  
Although a judge or master should not order a FGDM conference, as this is a 
voluntary practice, the judge or master can order the agency to provide 
information regarding the practice and order the family to meet with a facilitator 
who can explain the process of FGDM clearly so as to make an informed 
decision.  Alternatives to proceedings in front of a judge, like FGDM, mediation 
and facilitation, can lessen the stress on a family and be quite useful. With the 
parties working together to find solutions in a non-adversarial environment, 
focusing on the family’s strengths, the parties and the caseworkers can make a 
huge difference in successfully resolving cases (for more information on FGDM, 
see Chapter 15: General Issues). 

hould no agreement be reached, the court will make the determination 

as to whether the child can stay at home with safety measures in place or should 
be placed away from the home, and if so, where, specifically, the child is to 
reside.    

  T

  D

  S

 
 

 

 

   

Disposition 

 

8.6  Findings and Orders 

In its written findings of fact and legal conclusions, a court must address 

both the immediate and long-term plans for the maintenance of the child, 
including the nature of the placement and why it is necessary and appropriate, 
under the circumstances.   

*Best Practice – Active, Ongoing Court Oversight * 

When placement out of the home is necessary the court should include 

the type of placement and specific name and location of the placement, whenever 
possible.  This should include the names of kin, foster families or facility names.  
Circumstances may arise when it is not appropriate to identify the name or 
address of a resource family.  In such a case, it may be appropriate to use 
“confidential” in the order to protect that information.   

In addition it is sometimes not possible for the agency to identify a specific 
placement location immediately.  In these instances the placement type should be 
identified generally with the judge or master requesting the case be returned to 
the court within 30 days to determine the actual placement of the child and issue 
a new order.  
 

 If a child is moved prior to a court hearing the case should be brought 

back before the court to make a determination on the appropriateness of the 
move.  This practice can provide insight to the court on the frequency of moves 
endured by the child.  In all situations, care should be exercised to limit placement 
moves and the corresponding trauma that moves have on the child.  Finally, in 
any placement move experienced by the child, the court should re-examine the 
child’s educational stability and plan.   
 

he court must also review the case plan, as well as the concurrent plan 

proposed by the agency, to determine whether it is appropriate as is or with 
modification, and whether it is capable of being implemented, monitored, and 
followed by the family.  The findings and conclusions must include the services 
ordered and the corresponding needs to be met.   
 

nder 42 Pa.C.S. 6351(b), before entering a dispositional order that would 

remove the child from the home, the court must formally find that remaining in 
the home would be “contrary to the welfare, health or safety of the child” and, 
unless there are “aggravated circumstances” in the case (see Chapter 15: 
General Issues), must also determine the following: 

•  Whether the agency made reasonable efforts to prevent placement; 
•  Whether an emergency situation made it reasonable to make no 

preventive efforts; or 

 

  T

  U

 

 
 

   

   

   

 75

Disposition 

 

•  Whether, in a case in which a previous determination was made at a 
shelter care hearing that reasonable efforts were not made to prevent 
removal from the home, reasonable efforts are now under way to make it 
possible for the child to return home. 
 

Under Pa.R.J.C.P. 1515, other areas to be covered in the order include: 
 

•  The terms, conditions and limitations of the disposition; 
•  The name of the person or organization that is to provide care or 

supervision of the child; 

•  Any evaluations, test, counseling or treatments (with time frames for 

completion where applicable); 

•  Any ordered Family Service Plan or Permanency Plan, if not already 

•  Visitation schedules or limitations related to parents, siblings and other 

prepared; 

family members; 

In Pennsylvania, dependency findings and orders for dispositional 
hearings are contained within the CPCMS Dependency Module.  These court 
forms contain the needed information to assist the court in asking the necessary 
questions, in managing the case, in meeting federal requirements, and in 
capturing statewide data.  The forms also allow for the entering of detailed text, 
which can outline the specific directives of the court.   

f a child is placed in foster care, the court should also order child support 
if the parents are able to help cover the costs of care, keeping in mind that child 
support obligations should not be unduly burdensome. 
 

When possible, the order should also set the date for the Permanency 

Review Hearing (see Chapter 10: Permanency Hearing) and be distributed 
immediately to all parties.   

  I

   

 
 

 

 

76

 

 

 

 

Disposition 

 

DISPOSITION HEARING CHECKLIST 

TIMELY HEARING:  

 
 

____ Date Child Removed: _____________________________________ 
____ Date of Disposition Hearing Care Hearing: ____________________ 

(Note:  The Disposition Hearing must take place no later than twenty (20) 
days after child is adjudicated dependent.) 

NOTICE HEARING: 

____Determine if written notice of time, place and purpose of Disposition 

Hearing was issued to the child and the child’s: 
  ___ Father and attorney 
  ___ Mother and attorney 
  ___ Guardians/custodians and attorney    ___ GAL and/or attorney 
  ___ Tribe (If ICWA applies) 
  ___ Determine status of any absent parents/parties. 

 

 

WHO SHOULD BE PRESENT:    

     WHO MAY BE NEEDED: 

__ Judge 
__ Mother 
__ Father  
__ Guardians/Custodians 
__ Child(ren) 
__ Spouse of Child, if any   
__  Parents’ Attorneys 
__ Guardian ad Litem 
__ Child’s Attorney 
__ Agency Solicitor 
__ Caseworker 
__ CASA 
__ Court Reporter 
__ Security Personnel 

PROCEDURE: 

__ Extended Family Members 
__ Friends of the Family 
__ Foster/Preadoptive Parents 
__ Other Witnesses 
__ Service Providers 
__ Law Enforcement 
__ Probation Officer 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

____Explain the purpose of the disposition hearing, (which is to determine 
whether the child, who was adjudicated dependent, will remain in or 
be returned home, or be placed in another setting).  

____Identify all parties present. 
____Advise parties of their rights, including the possibility of termination of 
parental rights if child is in foster care for fifteen (15) of the last 
twenty two (22) months. 

77

 
 

   

 
 

 
 
 
 

.   

  1

. 

  2

 

 

. 

  3

 

 
 

 

. 

  4

 

 

Disposition 

 

____Determine whether timely service of process and notice of the 

hearing was given to the necessary parties. 

 

____Take testimony to determine if it is clearly necessary to remove the 
child from the home and determine the best placement; testimony 
shall be offered by the agency and fact witnesses, including parents; 
expert testimony, if needed, will be given, and aggravated 
circumstances testimony, if appropriate, shall be offered. 

** When alternatives to removal are not possible or practical,  
clear necessity is shown. ** 

. 

 

ISSUES RELATED TO DISPOSITION: 

____An agency’s reasonable efforts regarding services which would 

____Family visitation and payment of child support, if the child is placed 

permit reunification. 

outside the home. 

____Ongoing services and non-placement reviews, if the child is placed in 

the home. 

____Educational needs of the child. 
____ Long term plan for the child. 

ISSUANCE OF ORDERS: 

Orders shall address these points: 
____Disposition of the child in home or out. 
____Services and assessments ordered for the child and the family. 

  SCHEDULE NEXT HEARING: 

____Three-Month Review Hearing Date: __________________________ 
____Six-Month Review Hearing Date: ____________________________ 
____Permanency Hearing Date: _________________________________ 

A court should distribute the orders at the conclusion of the hearing, and 
explain the significance to the parties, if necessary.   

 
 

 

  5

 

. 

  6

 

. 

  7

   

 
 
 

 

 78

  79

a.R.J.C.P. 1340-1342; 1408, 1510 & 1512 (A) (1).  

  
Hearing at which the judge considers all the 
evidence, such as reports and recommendations, 
regarding the child’s placement.  The judge also 
reviews the case plan developed by the parties to 
determine if it addresses all of the problems 
affecting the child. 
 
Not later than 20 days after adjudication if the child 
has been removed from the home (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6341(c)).  The court may continue the hearing for a 
reasonable time to receive reports and other 
evidence bearing on the disposition or the need for 
treatment, supervision or rehabilitation (42 Pa.C.S. 
§ 6341(e)).    
 
In disposition hearings all evidence helpful in 
determining the questions presented, including oral 
and written reports, may be received by the court 
and relied upon to the extent of its probative value.  
Thus hearsay may be considered (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6341(d)).    
 
Permanency Hearing: within 6 months of the date 
the child was removed from the home or date of 
disposition, whichever is earlier (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6351(e)).    

ermanency Hearing: Or within 30 days if there is 
an allegation of aggravated circumstances or the 
court finds that reasonable efforts are not required 
to reunify the family (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(e)).    

est practice is to conduct review hearings a 

minimum of every 3 months. 
 

  P

  P

  B

Purpose of Hearing 

Time Frame  

Rules of Evidence 

Next Hearing 

 

DISPOSITION HEARING BENCHCARD 

Relevant Statutes 

42 Pa.C.S. § 6351 (a) and (b) 

KEY QUESTIONS/DECISIONS 
DISPOSITION HEARING 
 
•  What is the appropriate disposition of the case and long-term plan for the 
child?  (i.e., What disposition does the predisposition report recommend?) 

•  Where should the child be placed? 

• 

Is this the least restrictive, most appropriate, most family-like placement 
option? 

•  Does the agency-proposed case plan reasonably address the problems 

and needs of child and parent? 

•  What is the concurrent plan for the child? 

o  Was the concurrent plan established in a timely manner is it 

appropriate to the child’s circumstances? 

 

•  Has the agency made reasonable efforts to eliminate the need for 

placement or prevent the need for placement? 

•  What if any child support should be ordered? 

•  What visitation with parents is appropriate? 

•  What visitation with siblings is appropriate? 

•  When will the case be reviewed? 

•  Has Family Finding been done to identify all possible family and 

caregivers?   

•  Has the family been offered a Family Group Decision Making Conference?   

hese questions are adapted from the text of this chapter, the Mission and 

Guiding Principles for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System and the Disposition 
Hearing Checklist provided in the Resource Guidelines (NCJFCJ, 1995, p. 63-
64). 
 

 

          T

 80

 

 

 

 

  

 Permanency Options    
Chapter 9 ---- Permanency Options
Chapter 9 
 Permanency Options
 Permanency Options
Chapter 9 
Chapter 9 

9.1  Overview 
 

ASFA amended the Social Security Act, at 42 U.S.C. § 675(5)(C), 
requiring states to establish a hierarchy of permanency goals for children in the 
child welfare system, giving the highest preference to reunification.  Subsequent 
amendments to the Juvenile Act, at 42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f.1), governing 
determinations to be made at permanency review hearings, adopted the federally 
mandated order of preference for children in Pennsylvania dependency 
proceedings.  The basic hierarchy is as follows:     
 

1.  Return the child to the parent, whenever this course is “best suited 
to the safety, protection and physical, mental and moral welfare of 
the child.”  

 

2.  Place the child for adoption (with the county agency being required 
to petition for a termination of parental rights) where reunification is 
not best suited to the child’s safety and welfare. 

3.  Place the child with a permanent legal custodian, where adoption is 

not best suited to the child’s safety and welfare. 

4.  Place the child permanently with a fit and willing relative, where 

legal custodianship is not best suited to the child’s safety and 
welfare. 

5.  Place the child in some other court-approved and permanent living 

arrangement, in instances where the agency has shown a 
“compelling reason” for ruling out all of the above four options.   

The court’s role in reviewing the permanency goal, as well as the 

concurrent plan goal (discussed more fully in Chapter 8: Disposition) is to 
determine that they are established in a timely manner which is appropriate to 
the child’s circumstances.  (For time requirements applicable to the agency’s 
permanency planning, see Chapter 8: Disposition.) 
         
9.2  Reunification 
 

Reunification of a child and parent is the preferred permanency choice 

under ASFA and the Juvenile Act (42 Pa.C.S. § 6301(b) and 42 Pa.C.S. § 
6351(f.1)(1)).   The deleterious impact on a child that is caused by the separation 
from his or her parents is well documented; therefore the majority of permanency 
hearings focus on reunifying the family whenever possible.  When reasonable 
efforts fail to prevent the removal of the child from the parent’s home, reasonable 
efforts must be made to reunite child and parent.   

  81

Permanency Options 

 

It is important to note that the issue of whether the agency has made 
reasonable efforts to return a child home is distinct from the issue of whether the 
child should be returned home.  Safety is always the first consideration in all 
court decisions, including reunification.  The agency and the court must make 
every reasonable effort to secure a safe environment by providing parents with 
the services and resources to create an environment where the child can be safe 
(PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 9).   

 

Examining the agency’s efforts to reunite the family provides insight into 

whether the child can be safely reunited with his or her parents.  Factors the 
court should consider have been enumerated in Making it Permanent: 
Reasonable Efforts to Finalize Permanency Plans for Foster Children (Fiermonte 
and Renne, 2002, p. 12-17):  

  Whether the services provided to the parents by the agency have changed 

their behavior and provided them with the skills to parent effectively. 

 
 

 

 •

 

o  Many case plans require parents to take parenting and/or anger 

management classes; however, the fact that a parent has 
completed the course does not mean the parent’s behavior has 
changed.  The judge or master should consider evidence regarding 
visits between the parent and child to determine whether actual 
behavior has changed for the better. 

o 

 

 

 

•  Whether the child wants to return home. 

 

If possible, depending on the age of the child, the judge or master 
should talk to the child directly to determine the child’s wishes.  
(See the discussion of “Children in Court” in Chapter 15: General 
Issues.)  In any case, the child’s advocate should inform the judge 
of the child’s position on returning home and the child’s basis for 
that position. 

•  Whether visits between the child and the parent have been successful.   
 

o  Visitation is one of the most important tools in effectuating 

reunification.  The judge or master should inquire of the agency if 
the parent has consistently kept the visitation appointments and if 
the visitations have been meaningful and effective. 

•  Whether the family situation has changed since the child entered the 

o  Do additional services now make the safe return of the child 

possible?  For example, do the parents now have access to day 

system. 

 

 82

 
 

Permanency Options 

 

care or after-school care for the child that they did not have before, 
so that the child will no longer be left home alone? 

•  Whether additional concerns have arisen that prevent the child from 

returning home. 

o  Often, circumstances change and the agency needs to change the 
services/service plan to meet the new circumstances.  The judge or 
master must assure that the child is not out of the home because 
the parents do not know what is required of them to get the child 
returned home.  The judge or master should also ensure that what 
needs to be completed is specific and understandable and that it 
serves the best interests of the child. 

 

 

9.3 Adoption  
 

When a child cannot safely return home, adoption is the preferred legal 

permanency option under ASFA and the Juvenile Act (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f.1)(2)).  
Adoption is the legal and permanent transfer of all parental rights and 
responsibilities to the adoptive parents.  Adoption requires the termination of 
each natural parent’s rights.  This provides the child with a new permanent legal 
family in which the child has the same legal standing and protection as if he/she 
had been born into the family.  More importantly, adoption provides a sense of 
belonging to a stable family with emotional and physical security for a lifetime.  
Another advantage of adoption over less preferred placements is the fact that it 
ends the court’s oversight, so that the family has the opportunity to continue 
without further state interference.  If, however, an adopting family needs 
additional support from the agency, the state can offer further assistance through 
financial subsidies and post adoption services.  

ASFA and the Juvenile Act require that the agency demonstrate 
reasonable efforts to secure the child’s adoption in an appropriate home and to 
ensure the adoption process is thorough so that the placement is not challenged 
later.  The judge or master should inquire at the permanency hearings as to 
efforts the agency is making to find a permanent adoptive home for the child.  
Once the permanency plan has been changed to adoption, the agency is 
required to make reasonable efforts to identify, recruit, and process prospective 
adoptive homes for the child.   Reasonable efforts include determining the child’s 
wishes, looking at current caregivers and relatives as possible adoptive families 
or identifying other possible prospective adoptive parents.   

In Pennsylvania, a child over the age of twelve must consent to the 

adoption; however, it is good practice to find out how a child of any age feels 
about an adoption.  A child who objects to adoption may just need more time to 
develop a trusting relationship with the prospective adoptive parents.  In any 
case, the judge needs to determine the reasons for the child’s opposition —

 

 

 

 

83

 
 

Permanency Options 

 

whether the child is opposed to adoption itself, to specific prospective adoptive 
parents, to the prospect of losing contact with siblings, etc.   

n looking for adoptive parents the agency should first consider the current 

caregivers and relatives.  The agency must determine the willingness of current 
caregivers and relatives to adopt and address any concerns they may have 
about adopting the child.  Although caregivers and relatives should never be 
pressured into adopting, their initial reluctance may often be overcome if their 
underlying concerns are addressed.  Relatives often hesitate because they 
believe that the child may return to the parent, for example.  The agency needs 
to make clear that any adoption will be preceded by a termination of the 
biological parent’s rights, and that this termination will be final and permanent.   

f current caregivers or relatives are unwilling or unable to adopt, the 

agency must develop a child-specific recruitment plan.  This may entail looking 
for other relatives or placing the child on adoption exchanges and local or 
national adoption lists.  The agency should be aware of and utilize all available 
public and private adoption agencies to secure a home for the child.  This 
includes possible out-of-state placements.  The Interstate Compact on the 
Placement of Children (ICPC) makes it possible to place a child in another state 
as it ensures that a proper home study and evaluation of prospective parents 
meets the legal requirements of both states (For further details on the ICPC, see 
Chapter 16: Summary of Major Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation). 

ome children are hard to place for a variety of reasons, including age, 

disability, membership in a sibling group, ethnic background and/or special 
medical needs.  The agency still needs to work diligently to find homes for these 
children.  Under the Multi-ethnic Placement Act (MEPA) and the Inter-ethnic 
Adoption Provision Act of 1996 (IEPA), a child cannot be denied an adoptive 
placement because of the ethnicity of either the child or the prospective adoptive 
parent.  If the court finds that a placement is being delayed because the agency 
is restricting its search efforts in violation of these laws, the court should order 
the agency to broaden its search to include prospective parents of all ethnicities 
and national backgrounds (Further details on MEPA are contained in Chapter 16: 
Summary of Major Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation). 

egardless of who the prospective adoptive parents are or where they 

reside, the agency should make certain that the prospective adoptive parents are 
well informed about the adoption process and the fact that adoption is a lifelong 
commitment.  They should also be informed of any subsidies or other benefits 
they may be entitled to if the child has special needs.  Current caregivers may be 
concerned about losing the agency’s support if they adopt the child, so it is 
particularly important they be informed that they may qualify for subsidies and 
post-adoption services.   Subsidies may include such things as: 

  I

  I

  S

  R

 

•  Regular monthly payments 

 84

 
 

Permanency Options 

 

etc.) 

•  Medical coverage 
•  Respite care 
•  Reimbursement for “special costs” (wheelchairs, medical equipment,  
 
•  Special services such as tutoring or physical therapy 
•  Counseling – family and individual 
•  Reimbursement for legal expenses incurred in the adoption process 
 

  -

Legal custodianship in Pennsylvania, as defined in 42 Pa.C.S. § 6357, is 
the equivalent of legal guardianship under 42 U.S.C. § 675 (7) as amended by 
ASFA, and is a formal legal arrangement that transfers custody of a minor child 
from the natural parent to a relative or other caregiver.  A legal custodian is given 
the primary rights and duties associated with parenthood, including physical 
custody of the child, the right to make care and treatment 
decisions, and “the right and duty to provide for the care, 
protection, training, and education, and the physical, 
mental, and moral welfare of the child” (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6357).  In the hierarchical scheme of permanency 
options, permanent legal custodianship is less desirable 
than reunification or adoption, but preferable to 
permanent relative placement and other planned 
permanent living arrangements (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6351(f.1)(3)).  It has a higher preference than relative 
placement because it provides permanency and stability 
without ongoing state oversight, while often maintaining 
ties with siblings, extended family members and the 
biological parents.    
 

“I am very lucky to 
have formed a bond 
with my foster 
parents who 
eventually became 
my legal guardians.  
I finally found the 
home I always 
wanted.”   

M.M., 18, Former 
Pennsylvania 
Foster Youth 

The two hallmarks of legal custodianship are permanency and self-
sustainability.  The legal custodianship order remains in place until a court 
terminates it, or until the child is adopted, turns 18 or marries.   When legal 
custodianship is set as the permanency plan goal the court should make every 
effort to ensure the parties understand that the relationship is to be permanent 
and that a change in custody will not be made lightly.  Parental rights are not 
permanently terminated as they would be in an adoption case, and the parents 
may play a role in the child’s life.  Therefore, the parent may later seek a change 
in the custodianship arrangement.  The court should inform the parents that 
although they may have a continuing role in the child’s life, decision-making 
capacity and legal custody belong to the legal custodian.  The legal custodians 
should know the responsibility they are assuming is permanent and cannot be 
abdicated to the parents just because the parents continue to have a role in the 
child’s life.   
 

9.4  Permanent Legal Custodianship (PLC)  
 

 

85

 
 

Permanency Options 

 

The biological parents need not consent to a permanent legal 

custodianship in order for the court to establish it.  However, since the court will 
no longer have an oversight role following a permanent transfer of legal custody, 
it is imperative the custodian and the parent be able to maintain a cooperative 
relationship, with both parties having a clear understanding of the duties and 
responsibilities of custodianship.   

he Department of Public Welfare’s Office of Children, Youth and Families 
(OCYF) has published Bulletins delineating the rights and duties of the custodian 
and the parents.  The custodian’s rights and duties include, in addition to those 
already enumerated: 

  The right and duty to make decisions on behalf of the child, including 
decisions regarding the child’s travel, driver’s license, marriage, and 
enlistment in the armed forces 

•  The right to petition for child support from the child’s parent 
•  The obligation to pay legal expenses related to a parent’s request to 

change custody or visitation 

  The right to visitation when it does not affect the health and safety of 

he parental rights and duties include: 

the child 

•  The right to petition for custody of the child 
•  The right to pass on property to the child 
•  The duty to pay child support 

lthough the custodianship is considered permanent, it may be terminated 

with judicial approval, following the filing of a petition by the agency.  (Because 
the grant of permanent legal custody closes the dependency case, however, this 
is technically a new proceeding.)  The biological parent or the legal custodian 
may also file motions to have the legal custodianship terminated.  Whether the 
petition is filed by the agency following a determination that the child is in danger, 
by a parent seeking the return of the child, or by a custodian wishing to be 
relieved of custodial responsibilities, the court must decide whether to continue or 
revoke the legal custodianship on the basis of the best interests of the child. 

n considering whether legal custodianship serves the best interests of the 

child, the court must be acutely aware of the pros and cons of the arrangement 
(Fiermonte and Renne, 2002, p. 52):  

•  Legal guardianship is sometimes better for relative caregivers when 
termination of parental rights is inconsistent with cultural or family 
traditions.   

ros: 

  P

 86

  T

 •

  T

 •

  A

  I

 
 

Permanency Options 

 

•  The child may not want parental rights to be terminated; legal 

guardianship provides permanence while maintaining ties to the 
biological family. 
It is sometimes easier to find a relative to care for sibling groups, 
special needs children, or older children who may be difficult to place. 

•  There is no ongoing state supervision. 

ons: 

•  Because the guardian is not the child’s legal parent, the guardian’s 

ability to make permanent, binding decisions on behalf of the child is 
limited. 

•  Lack of permanency may cause some concern to the child.   
•  A biological parent whose rights are not terminate may attempt to undo 

•  Legal guardianships are inherently less stable and less permanent 

the arrangement. 

than adoption. 

 
 Permanent Placement with a Fit and Willing Relative  

9.5 

he Pennsylvania Kinship Care Program Bulletin outlines that when a 

child is initially removed from the home, the agency should give first 
consideration to placing the child with a relative; therefore a child’s initial 
placement will likely be with a relative if one is available.  Ideally, that relative will 
choose to adopt or become the legal custodian of the child if reunification is not 
possible.  If the relative is unwilling, the court is obligated to determine if there is 
another appropriate person willing to adopt or become a permanent legal 
custodian.  Otherwise, under ASFA and the Juvenile Act, “permanent placement 
with a fit and willing relative” is considered the next best alternative – after 
reunification, adoption and permanent legal custodianship (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6351(f.1)(4)). 
 

Placement with a relative offers many potential advantages, including 

dampening the traumatic impact of removal, allowing for the continued 
maintenance of family bonds, and preserving the child’s cultural identity.  ASFA, 
Pennsylvania’s Kinship Care Program Bulletin and the Juvenile Act all strongly 
support relative placements in lieu of placements with strangers whenever 
possible.  Moreover, periods of placement with relatives are not counted for 
purposes of the requirement that a petition for termination of parental rights be 
filed whenever a child has been out of the home for 15 of the most recent 22 
months (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f)(9)(i)).   

n the other hand, relative placement as a permanency option is subject 
to drawbacks that should not be overlooked.  For example, the relative may not 
be able to protect the child from the neglectful or abusive parent.  Moreover, 
there is a possibility that the relative does not really feel capable of caring for the 
child but feels compelled to do so.   The authors of Making it Permanent suggest 

• 

  C

  T

  O

 

87

Permanency Options 

 

the following pros and cons be considered when a permanency goal of relative 
placement is proposed (Fiermonte and Renne, 2002, p. 69): 

•  Relatives often have a sense of familial responsibility and may be more 

committed to keeping the child on a long-term basis. 
It is easier to preserve the bond the child has to his biological family, 
including siblings. 

•  Relatives may reduce the trauma of being removed from the home. 
•  Relatives preserve the child’s cultural identity and heritage. 
•  The child is often able to adjust to living with kin more easily than living 

•  Relatives often receive fewer services than nonrelatives. 
•  The most appropriate relative is often a grandparent who may have 

limitations due to age. 

•  Relatives may protect the parent or deny the maltreatment occurred, 

thus engaging in behavior that could put the child at risk. 

•  Relatives may be loyal to the parent and unwilling to adopt because it 

would sever the parent’s rights. 

•  Relatives and parents may be hostile toward one another, making it 

harder for the agency to work with the parent. 

with strangers. 

ons 

  C

ermanent placement with a fit and willing relative is one of the least 

defined options provided in the statute.  Neither ASFA nor the Juvenile Act define 
“relative” or “fit and willing” nor do they create new legal authority for the relative.  
However, some guidance is provided by the Kinship Care Program established in 
Act 25 of 2003, which defines a relative as someone related “within the third 
degree of consanguinity or affinity to the parent or stepparent of the child and 
who is at least 21 years of age” (Act 25 of 2003).   

n general, “fit and willing” can be defined as the ability to ensure the 

child’s safety and meet the child’s needs (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 
2008, p. 2).  In Pennsylvania, a kinship caretaker must become a licensed foster 
parent, once licensed as a foster parent the kinship caretaker is entitled to the 
same payments and services as non-relative foster parents, while at the same 
time ensuring they are able to safely meet the child’s needs (Act 25 of 2003).  In 
an emergency situation a child can be placed with a kinship caretaker, but that 
caretaker must become a fully licensed foster parent within 60 days.   
 

ros 

  P

• 

 
 

  P

  I

         

 88

Permanency Options 

 

*Best Practice – Kinship Caretaker* 

The judge or master should inquire as to whether the kinship caretaker has 

cooperated with the agency to finalize the foster care licensing process and 
encourage the potential kinship resource to complete the process as soon as 
possible.  The judge or master should also ensure that the agency is providing all 
necessary services to support the kinship resource.   

ollowing placement with a relative, the agency continues to be involved 
in the case and provide supervision.  The level of supervision required may vary 
depending on the resources of the relative placement.  The court should ensure 
the agency has done a thorough home evaluation and determined what services 
the family needs and whether the agency can provide the necessary services.  
The dependency case remains open and the court continues to conduct 
permanency hearings until court supervision is terminated.  A relative who wants 
relief from agency and court oversight may pursue the adoption or permanent 
legal custodianship options.  

ince placement with a fit and willing relative has a lower priority than 

adoption or legal custodianship, the judge or master should make sure that the 
agency has made reasonable efforts to ensure the placement is suitable for the 
child and the relative is not taking the child unwillingly, or solely in order to 
prevent the termination of parental rights.  The judge should inquire as to the 
following issues (Fiermonte and Renne, 2002, p. 67-70): 

  F

  S

 

•  Whether the relative should adopt or enter into a guardianship 
•  Whether the child has a bond with the family 
•  Whether nonrelatives are willing to adopt or accept guardianship 
•  Whether the placement will help preserve the child’s family identity 
•  Whether the placement will help preserve sibling bonds 
•  The child’s wishes with respect to the placement with the relative 

caregiver 

•  Whether this is the right family for the child 
•  Whether family dynamics compromise the relative’s ability to safeguard 

the child from abusive parents 

•  Whether the agency has observed the interaction between the child and 

•  Whether the relative is committed and able to provide a stable, long-term 

relative 

home for the child 

•  Whether the relative received counseling when appropriate 
•  Whether the relative is committed to the child 
•  Whether the placement is stable and long-term 
•  Whether the agency has collected and reported to the court sufficient 

information about the relative’s home 

 
 

 

 

89

 
 

Permanency Options 

 

•  Whether the agency has complied with the ICPC when the relative lives 

out of state 

•  Whether all the necessary services have been provided 

n any case, both the agency and the court should do their best to make 

placement with a fit and willing relative truly permanent through adoption or legal 
custodianship.  Placement with a relative as the selected permanency plan 
should not be used as a stopgap measure just to satisfy the permanency 
guidelines; it should be the best available choice.  Even if a relative is available, a 
better alternative may still be a non-relative who is committed to the child and 
willing to adopt or accept guardianship.   

9.6  Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement  

nother Planned Permanent Living Arrangement (APPLA) is the least 

preferred option for ensuring permanency for a child.  ASFA and the Juvenile Act 
(42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f.1)(5)) require the agency provide the court with a 
“compelling reason” why one of the other permanency options is not available to 
the child.  While the least preferred of all options, APPLA should not be viewed 
as a catchall or as long-term foster care.  It must be both planned and 
permanent.   The preamble to the ASFA regulations specifically states that long-
term foster care is not a permanency option, noting that “far too many children 
are given the permanency goal of long-term foster care, which is not a 
permanent living situation for a child.  The [compelling reason] requirement is in 
place to encourage States to move children from foster care into the most 
appropriate permanent situation available” (65 Fed. Reg. 4036).   

his does not mean a permanent foster care situation cannot be 
approved, as long as there is an understanding that the living situation will be 
permanent and the relationship between the foster parent and the child will 
endure.  Permanent foster care means the child will not be moved from home to 
home and have his/her life disrupted until he/she ages out of the system, but 
rather that the child has a home that is stable and promotes physical and 
emotional well-being even after the dependency case is terminated.  The OCYF 
has published a bulletin which states that permanent foster care is only 
acceptable if the agency has documented that (1) it would be in the child’s best 
interest not to return home, be adopted, or be placed with a legal custodian or a 
relative; and (2) this particular foster family intends to provide for this child 
permanently and their commitment to the child extends beyond the child reaching 
the age of 18 (OCYF Bulletin 3130-01-01, 2001, p. 99). 

n some situations, the permanent plan may be APPLA with group care 
and supervised independent living services being provided to the child.  Group 
care suggests the child is unable to function in a family setting and requires 
additional attention that can only be provided in a group setting.  The court 
should periodically review the placement and inquire as to whether any other 

  I

 

  A

  T

  I

 90

Permanency Options 

 

placement options have become available.   Perhaps the child has developed a 
relationship with a mentor that could lead to a legal custodianship or perhaps a 
relative is now available who was not previously available for relative placement. 

*Best Practice – Family Finding* 

It is imperative that the court ensure all children, especially those with a goal 

of APPLA, have meaningful and significant connections with responsible, caring 
adults.  One strategy being used throughout Pennsylvania is known as Family 
Finding.  Much more than a web-based search, Family Finding offers methods and 
strategies to locate and engage the relatives of children living in out-of-home care.  
Family Finding is used to provide each child with lifelong, supportive adult 
connections.  Where possible, courts should encourage the use of Family Finding 
methods (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2000, p.13).     

Independent living (IL) is the provision of services to help an adolescent 
live independently.  It is important to note that IL is a service not a permanency 
option.  IL services are typically provided at age 16 up to age 21.  The judge or 
master should ensure that the agency is providing all the services necessary to 
meet the adolescent’s physical, emotional, psychological and educational needs.  
Stability is key and the judge or master should make sure that services are 
sufficient and will continue until the adolescent reaches the age of majority.  The 
authors of the Pennsylvania Judicial Deskbook suggest that the following 
services should be provided (Field, 2004, p.171): 

  Safe and adequate housing 
•  Access to education 
•  Job skills training and access to employment 
•  Means to maintain family connections, including connections with 

siblings and extended family  

•  Means to maintain cultural identity and connections to peers 
•  Access to health care, including physical, mental and dental health 

services and gynecological services for girls 

•  Training in the use of transportation systems, financial management, 

home management and self-advocacy 

 •

More information on IL services is available in the “Transitioning Youth” section 
of Chapter 15: General Issues.)   
 

Whatever the APPLA, the court continues its permanency reviews every 
six months, or more frequently if it appears likely that the child’s circumstances 
may change and a more preferred option may become available.  At the reviews 
the judge or master should affirm that the services continue to be provided and 
that the child is developing long-term relationships with adults, whether they be 
extended family members, foster parents or mentors.  The court should always 
be looking for a more permanent home for the child. 

 
 

   

  (

 

91

   

 

 

92 

 Permanency Hearing    
Chapter 10 ---- Permanency Hearing
Chapter 10 
 Permanency Hearing
 Permanency Hearing
Chapter 10 
Chapter 10 

0.1 Overview 

 

  1

 

After a child has been adjudicated dependent and the court has issued a 

disposition order under 42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(a), Pennsylvania’s Juvenile Act 
requires the court continue its oversight of the case by holding a series of 
subsequent hearings “for the purpose of determining or reviewing the 
permanency plan of the child, the date by which the goal of permanency for the 
child might be achieved and whether placement continues to be best suited to 
the safety, protection and physical, mental and moral welfare of the child” (42 
Pa.C.S. § 6351(e)).  All such post-dispositional hearings, whenever they occur, 
are denominated “permanency hearings” in Pennsylvania.  Moreover, the 
Juvenile Act specifies a long list of determinations that must be made at all 
permanency hearings—again, whenever they occur.   

owever, as a practical matter, the primary focus and issues emphasized 

at these hearings will vary substantially, depending on the posture of the 
dependency case involved.  In general, early permanency hearings often serve 
as status review hearings, in which the primary concerns are with issues of 
compliance with the initial permanency plan, progress being made towards plan 
goals, and minor plan adjustments that may be necessary in view of changes in 
circumstances.  In later permanency hearings, on the other hand, the focus is 
likely to shift to the steps that are needed to finalize permanency—and whether 
the original goal still appears to be appropriate and feasible.  In some cases, it is 
necessary to hold a permanency hearing to choose a new goal.  Considerations 
applicable to permanency hearings where the focus is on changing the 
permanency goal are distinctive enough to warrant treatment in a separate 
chapter (see Chapter 11: Permanency Hearing: To Consider Goal Change).   
 

The following sections will not only discuss requirements common to all 

permanency hearings, but will offer practical suggestions for making the best and 
most efficient use of these hearings at various stages of dependency 
proceedings, in order to achieve the overall goal of safe, timely permanence. 

  H

10.2  Timing of Permanency Hearings 

Permanency hearings must be held within the time frames dictated by 42 

Pa.C.S. § 6351(e) and Pa.R.J.C.P. 1607.  Generally speaking, courts are 
required to hold permanency hearings every six months from the start of a case 
until its final resolution.  But in cases involving “aggravated circumstances,” 
including criminal misconduct, gross abuse or neglect, or abandonment on the 
parent’s part, a faster timetable is imposed (for a more complete discussion of 
aggravated circumstances, see Chapter 15: General Issues).    

 

 

 

Permanency Hearing 

 

A permanency hearing must be held within six months of the date of the 

 
child’s removal from the parental home for placement or pursuant to a transfer of 
temporary legal custody or other disposition, whichever is earliest (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6351(e)(3)(i); Pa.R.J.C.P. 1607(B)).  Thereafter, the court must conduct a 
permanency hearing every six months until the child is returned to a parent or 
guardian, or removed from the jurisdiction of the court.  

A permanency hearing must be held within 30 days of (42 Pa.C.S. § 

6351(e)(3)(ii) and Pa.R.J.C.P. 1607(A)): 
 

1.  an adjudication of dependency at which the court determined that 

aggravated circumstances exist and that reasonable efforts to prevent or 
eliminate the need to remove the child from the child’s parent, guardian or 
custodian or to preserve and reunify the family need not be made;  
2.  a permanency hearing at which the court determined that aggravated 

circumstances exist and that reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the 
need to remove the child from the child’s parent or to preserve and reunify 
the family need not be made or continue to be made and the permanency 
plan for the child is incomplete or inconsistent with the court’s 
determination; 

3.  an allegation that aggravated circumstances exist regarding a child who 

has been adjudicated dependent; or 

4.  a motion alleging that the hearing is necessary to protect the safety or 

physical, mental or moral welfare of a dependent child.   

Note that these mandated time frames do not preclude scheduling a 

permanency hearing sooner than the law prescribes—for example, whenever it 
becomes clear that the present plan is no longer appropriate.  Moreover, 
individual courts may choose to establish a more expedited schedule of 
permanency hearings as a matter of good practice. 

 
 

   

   

 93

Permanency Hearing 

 

*Best Practices – Frequent Judicial Oversight* 

requent judicial oversight keeps everyone accountable.  Although permanency 

hearings are mandated to occur at least every six months, best practice guidelines 
encourage conducting permanency hearings at a minimum of every three months—
particularly in the early stages of the case or at other critical junctures.   Beginning the 
permanency planning at the 3-month mark rather than at the 6-month mark recognizes 
the child’s need for early resolution of permanency and is a more effective way of 
assuring progress toward securing permanency for the child.  In cases, where the 
parents are not working on their family service plan goals or where it is unlikely that the 
parents will ever be able to remedy the conditions that led to removal and placement, 
holding permanency hearings in a 3-month cycle will result in earlier permanency for 
children. 

otions are also an efficient way to resolve issues that need to be brought to 

the court’s attention between permanency hearings.  Single issues can be heard 
without crowding the court docket or trying to advance hearing dates. 

udges and masters should take the lead in scheduling status hearings that 

address single issues that should not be left unattended between permanency 
hearings.  This is an efficient way to provide early resolution of issues.  It is not 
necessary for caseworkers to complete full family service plans for each status hearing. 

0.3 Pre-Hearing Conferences 

ourts should consider holding pre-hearing conferences that include all 

parties and their legal representatives for review in complex cases.  This enables 
the judge or master to get a feel for the number of potential witnesses and the 
type of evidence that may be introduced, set limitations on witnesses, make 
advance rulings on evidence, and handle other issues that may contribute to 
effective time management and the smooth running of the hearing.  In addition, a 
pre-hearing conference may provide an occasion for the use of facilitation or 
mediation strategies. 

s a rule of thumb, a complex case is one involving multiple siblings, one 

in which sexual abuse, physical abuse resulting in serious bodily injury, or 
aggravated physical neglect is alleged, or one in which so many witnesses will be 
called that more than two hours will be required to complete the hearing. 

10.4  Hearing Objectives  

he general purpose of any permanency hearing is to make progress 

toward finding a permanent placement for the child.  The court should not just 
receive an “update” of what occurred between review hearings, but should 
actively engage the parties and work toward identifying a permanent placement 
for the child. 

 

94

  F

  M

  J

 

  C

  A

 

  T

 
 

  1

Permanency Hearing 

 

At every permanency hearing, the judge or master must review and 
determine the child’s permanency plan, the date by which the permanency goal 
might be achieved, and whether the placement continues to be best suited to the 
safety, protection and physical, mental and moral welfare of the child.  The court 
may also assess the status of the case, re-examine long-term goals, or refine or 
update the case plan, if necessary.   

s noted above, however, hearings that are denominated “permanency 
hearings” in the Juvenile Act may have different functions, depending on when 
they occur in the dependency proceeding.  Some of the basic sub-types of 
permanency hearings include: 

xpedited Review Hearings for Youth in Shelters—If at the time of 
disposition, the child has not been returned to the care of the parents or 
guardians and remains in shelter care, respite care, or other short-
term/temporary placement, the judge or master should review the child’s 
placement within 30 days to ensure that the child has either returned 
home or has been placed as directed by the dispositional order. 

xpedited FSP Status Hearings—Pennsylvania statutes encourage an 

expedited court process through adjudication and disposition.  Ideally, 
adjudication occurs within 10 days of petition filing and most courts 
routinely consider dispositional issues immediately after adjudicatory 
determinations are made.  Review of the appropriateness of the Family 
Services Plan (FSP) should be a central component of the dispositional 
process.  However, the agency has up to 30 days in removal cases and 
60 days in non-removal cases to fully complete the case plan.  
Consequently, a fully developed FSP might not be available for 
consideration at the time of disposition.    

he court has statutory discretion to proceed with disposition even if a 

FSP is not available.  But waiting six months for the next required 
permanency review to examine the FSP is probably too long, given the 
short permanency time frames envisioned by ASFA and Pennsylvania 
statutes. 

In these instances, it makes sense for the court to schedule an expedited 
FSP status hearing that allows for an in-court examination of the FSP 
(with all parties present). This practice helps to ensure that all parties 
understand FSP provisions/expectations, and it allows the court to 
examine the steps that have already been taken with respect to the plan.  
This hearing should probably occur within 45-60 days of the disposition 
hearing.   

6-Month Permanency Hearing—This is the first statutorily required 
permanency hearing after disposition.  At this hearing, the agency is 

  A

  E

  E

  T

 
 

 

 

 95

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

required to submit an updated FSP and, depending on the court, a report 
summarizing case progress to date.  The report usually also addresses 
the continuing appropriateness of the placement, the permanency plan 
and an estimated date for achieving this plan.  

deally, the agency has “front-loaded” services, which is crucial to 
successful reunification or permanency.  At this hearing the judge or 
master should make sure that all the services are in place and fine-tune 
the permanency plan.  As in every proceeding, the court must determine, 
through proper inquiry, whether the children are safe.   

 

This hearing marks the beginning of a transition in focus from examining 
case progress to the initiation of some definitive steps to finalization of the 
child’s permanency plan.  Serious discussion of a child’s concurrent plan 
is appropriate if substantial case progress has not occurred.   
 

*Best Practice – Concurrent Planning* 

In all cases where children are removed from the home, the agency should 

engage in concurrent planning.  Concurrent planning is the practice whereby the 
agency simultaneously establishes and executes one permanency goal along with a 
concurrent plan for the child.  If for any reason the primary goal does not work out for 
the child, the concurrent plan can be immediately effectuated.  Concurrent planning 
can significantly shorten the length of time a child remains in care since virtually no 
time is lost from the end of the primary plan to the initiation of the concurrent plan. 

The court’s role in concurrent planning is to determine that both the 

permanency goal and concurrent plan are appropriate and are established in a timely 
manner.  The court will review the status of the concurrent plan at future hearings, but 
the concurrent plan should initially be established at disposition.         

2-Month Permanency Hearing — By this time (unless extenuating 

circumstances apply) the focus of the permanency hearing process should 
clearly shift to finalization of the child’s permanent plan.  If the plan goal 
remains reunification but the child cannot now be returned home, the 
judge or master should set very clear expectations regarding what needs 
to happen to achieve this goal within a clearly defined time frame.  In 
these situations it is also appropriate for the judge or master to schedule 
expedited status reviews to ensure that steps are being taken to return the 
child home.  The judge or master should make it clear, that if expectations 
are not met, a goal change is likely to occur at the next permanency 
hearing. 

8-Month Permanency Hearing — Again, unless some very extenuating 
circumstances apply, the primary decision made at this hearing will be to 

96

  I

  1

  1

   

   

 

Permanency Hearing 

 

immediately reunify the child with the parents or guardians or, if this is still 
not possible, to schedule a permanency hearing to consider changing the 
goal (with the agency being required to file the appropriate pleading 
requesting termination of parental rights or permanent legal guardianship) 
or a hearing to determine the specifics of an APPLA-type permanent plan.   

ermanency Hearing:  To Consider Change of Goal — (see Chapter 

11)   
 

  P

10.5 Conduct of the Hearing 
 

10.5.1 Courtroom Management 

At times permanency hearings can be more contentious than adjudication 

hearings.  Often, the facts alleged in the petition for dependency and even the 
issue of dependency itself are not in dispute.  However, after time has elapsed, 
the parties are not always in agreement as to what should happen.  The parents 
may feel they have done everything required of them to be reunified with their 
children.  The agency may not agree.  In particular, a Permanency Hearing to 
consider a change of goal can be particularly emotionally devastating to both 
child and parents.  

 

The permanency hearing must be driven by the judge or master.  It is 

important for the judge or master to set the tone for the hearing, and to control 
the proceedings.  The judge or master should make it clear what the issues are 
and keep the parties focused.   

 
At the onset, the judge or master should state the purpose of the hearing 

 
and what the court is going to decide.  This keeps the parties and the lawyers 
focused.  Unless there is an emergency, only matters that are properly before the 
court should be decided.  However, the safety of the child is always relevant! 

It is important that the parties have an opportunity to be heard and have 
their positions considered as this hearing is often about the process and not the 
result.  In particular, the judge or master should consult with the child to ensure 
the child’s views have been ascertained to the fullest extent possible.  On the 
other hand, it is important not to let the parties and the lawyers turn the hearing 
into a family therapy or “venting” session.  Testimony and evidence should be 
relevant to the proceeding and focused on the determinations that must be made 
at a permanency hearing.   

The judge’s or master’s demeanor should reflect the seriousness of the 

proceedings, particularly when interacting with parents.  The parties should feel 
that they have the opportunity to be heard at the appropriate time.  The judge or 
master should strongly discourage people from speaking unless they are being 
addressed by a lawyer or the court.  The judge or master should control the 

 
 

 

   

   

 97

98

Permanency Hearing 

 

emotions of the parties, making it clear that parties and others who have relevant 
evidence, or who have a legitimate interest in the child or the outcome, will be 
heard, but that persons who are out-of-control may be asked to leave the 
courtroom.   

*Best Practices – Considerations for Permanency Hearings* 

More frequent reviews can shorten the time it takes to review a case in court.  
These short reviews keep all parties on their toes and it is easier for the court to “pick 
up where it left off at the last review”, instead of “rehashing” issues that were already 
litigated.  The progression of the case is easier to follow as well. 

Remember to allow additional time in cases with multiple siblings as the court 

must independently review the case and plan for each child. 

The court should have basic questions for caseworkers, foster parents, service 

providers, therapists, etc. in order to assess compliance, progress, and the quality of 
the services and the permanency plan.  Remember to give each party and interested 
person the opportunity to be heard. 

The child welfare agency’s proposed permanency plan should be provided to all 
parties and their legal representatives sufficiently in advance of the hearing to allow for 
preparation and response.    

If there has been a family conference as part of a family group decision-making 
process, the report and recommendation from that conference should be included with 
the child welfare agency’s report and submitted to the court for approval as the 
permanency plan.   

Citing the importance of the permanency hearing as a step in the move to 

permanency for the child, The Adoption and Permanency Guidelines recommend that 
the court should not accept stipulations to the plan or agreed orders without full 
examination of the parties to ensure their understanding of the issues under 
consideration and that the plan meets the best interests of the child (NCJFCJ, 2000, p. 
20). 

 
 

 

   

   

   

   

   

   

The judge or master must demand that the professionals involved in the 
case—the lawyers, caseworkers, services providers, and others—be prepared.  
If the lawyers and others know that the judge or master has high expectations, 
they will be prepared. 

he judge or master should be an active listener, and should ask 
questions to supplement the record, to clarify matters, or to cover matters that 
were neglected by the parties.  This is especially important when a party is Pro 
Se and unable to adequately examine witnesses.  Moreover, the court’s 
obligation to make an informed decision may require the judge or master to 

  T

 

Permanency Hearing 

 

intervene by asking questions, in order to develop the evidence necessary to 
inform the decision.  

 
The court should allow sufficient time for the matters to be heard.  The 

 
Resource Guidelines recommend that 30 minutes be allocated for a routine 
review hearing, while the Adoption and Permanency Guidelines recommend 60 
minutes for a true permanency hearing (NCJFCJ, 1995: 74; NCJFCJ, 2000: 19).  
In allocating time for a hearing, the court should include the time it takes (at least 
five minutes) to complete the written court order contained in the AOPC’s 
CPCMS so the order can be distributed to all parties at the conclusion of the 
hearing (see the discussion of Court Orders, below). 

0.5.2 Persons in Attendance  

As is the case with other hearings in dependency matters, participation in 
permanency hearings is restricted.  However, age-appropriate children, parents 
(including putative fathers), relatives, other adults with custody, and anyone else 
with a proper interest should be permitted to attend.  The judge or master should 
ensure that all parties, including the parents, have legal representation.  If the 
parents are not represented, the judge or master should make sure they 
understand they are entitled to representation and that they are voluntarily 
choosing to proceed without representation (see Chapter 4: Right to Legal 
Representation). 

he child must be present at all proceedings, except for good cause 
shown (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1128).  The child’s attendance at the permanency hearing is 
particularly important, because the court needs to know the child’s wishes 
regarding the permanency plan.  Even though these may be contrary to the 
child’s best interest, it is important for the judge or master to view the case 
“through the eyes of the child.”  To that extent, whenever possible, the child 
should be present so that the judge or master can hear directly from the child.  
The judge or master should consult with the child in a manner appropriate to the 
child’s age and maturity.  If the child is not present in court, or does not wish to 
speak to the judge or master, the views of the child must be ascertained to the 
fullest extent possible and communicated to the court by the GAL, attorney, or 
CASA.  The judge or master must ensure that the child’s wishes are known in 
every case (further information on accommodating children in court is provided 
in Chapter 15: General Issues). 

f paternity has not been established at this point, it is important for the 

judge or master to insist that paternity be established.  If paternity has been 
established but the father is not participating in the hearings, visiting the child, or 
working on family service plan goals, the judge or master should direct the 
caseworker to take affirmative action to engage or involve the father.  If the father 
is incarcerated, the judge or master should demand the caseworker make 
personal contact with the father at the correctional facility.  Most correctional 

  1

  T

  I

 
 

 

 99

100

Permanency Hearing 

 

facilities have videoconferencing capabilities allowing the father to participate by 
videoconference or at least by teleconference.  

oster parents, pre-adoptive parents and relatives providing care are all 

entitled to timely notice and the opportunity to be heard at permanency hearings, 
although this does not give them legal standing in the proceeding unless they 
have been awarded legal custody (42 Pa.C.S. § 6336.1).  If the foster parents, 
pre-adoptive parents, or kinship caregivers have not submitted a written report 
(see discussion below, under “Admissibility of Evidence, Reports and other 
Documents”) or do not ask to be heard, the judge or master should nevertheless 
engage them concerning the child’s progress, behaviors, needs, etc.   When 
children have been placed outside of the home, caregivers spend more time with 
them than the parents, caseworkers or the lawyers.  As such, they are in the 
unique position to observe and assess the child’s behavior, progress, adjustment 
and needs on a daily basis.  It is also important to ascertain whether foster 
parents are helping to facilitate the permanency goal, and working toward safe 
reunification in partnership with the agency.   

0.6 Matters to be Determined 

42 Pa.C.S. §6351(f) and (f.1) require the court to ensure that ten basic 

issues be determined at permanency review hearings.  If these matters are not 
covered by counsel, then the judge or master should take the lead.  Following 
this chapter are checklists of suggested questions to assist the court in covering 
the matters set forth below.   However, it should be remembered that the lists of 
suggested questions are not exhaustive, and that the questions must be adapted 
to suit specific cases and the language tailored to suit specific witnesses.    

0.6.1 Continuing Necessity of Placement 

The court must determine whether the placement continues to be 

necessary and appropriate for the child and whether the child is safe.  If the child 
is placed, the court must determine whether the placement continues to be best 
suited to the safety, protection, and physical, mental, and moral welfare of the 
child.  Judges and masters should ask why placement is still needed, whether 
the child is or should be placed with siblings, if there is any family member 
available for placement or visitation with the child, if the placement is meeting 
the child’s needs, if the child is happy, safe, and adjusted to the placement.  An 
additional inquiry into the services needed to assist a child who is sixteen years 
of age or older to make the transition to independent living should also be made 
(see the discussion of Transitioning Youth in Chapter 15: General Issues.) 

  F

  1

 
 

  1

 

 

       

 

Permanency Hearing 

 

*Best Practices – Kinship Care* 

he judge or master should encourage kinship care where such care provides for 

the safety of the child.  If relatives are not known to the agency or readily available, 
inquiries should be made as to the agency’s use of Family Finding or other family 
engagement techniques.   

f relatives and extended family are available, Family Group Decision Making 

should be considered.  It allows the family to develop its own plan that provides for 
the child’s safe care and, as a consequence, the family becomes invested in the plan 
and is more likely to follow the plan and make progress on the goals (PA Children’s 
Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p.13). 

The determination of the appropriateness of the placement involves the 

consideration of the child’s needs and is based on information about things such 
as the child’s behavior, health, mental status, education and development.   

Questions that may assist in this determination are ones about the safety 
of the child, the visitation plan and whether it is adequate and, if separated from 
siblings, whether or not sibling visits are occurring.  The court should also 
determine whether the child’s medical needs are being met and ask questions 
about immunizations, dental care, glasses, medications and other special 
medical needs, as well as the need for mental health or other therapeutic 
services and whether or not these are being provided (PA Children’s Roundtable 
Initiative, 2009, p.13). 
 

“The most difficult thing 
was switching schools 
so frequently, it was 
hard to maintain 
friendships and keep up 
with school work.” 

 C.S., 18, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

  -

If the child is displaying behavioral issues, or if 
the placement was due to truancy or ungovernability, 
the judge or master should also inquire as to the 
child’s level of compliance and assess the progress 
that has been made toward alleviating those 
placement conditions.  Special attention should be 
given to the child’s educational needs and 
development, what services are needed to assist the 
child age 16 or older in transitioning to independence; 
and whether the child’s basic needs for clothing and 
personal care items are being met. 

0.6.2 Appropriateness of Placement 

  T

  I

  1

 
 

 

 

     

oster Youth 

  F

 101

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

*Best Practices – Proximity to School and Community* 

Because removal from home is traumatic, it is important for the child to have 

some sense of normalcy and be connected with familiar things.  This can be 
accomplished in several ways, including keeping the children in their home community 
or placing the children with a person known to them. If the child was involved in sports 
or music prior to entering foster care, then those things should continue.  The court and 
the agency should make every effort to ensure that a child’s personal belongings 
accompany the child into foster care. 
 

The judge or master should consider whether or not the child would have to 

change schools when entering placement.  If at all possible, transfers should be 
avoided.  This is especially important for children in their senior year of high school. 
 

In addition to ensuring that the child’s basic needs are being met, the judge or 

master should make sure that the child has opportunities to develop pro social skills 
and self-esteem and have fun.  Therefore, it is certainly appropriate for the judge or 
master to engage the child in conversation regarding the child’s interests, and to make 
orders providing for opportunities to engage in extra-curricular activities. 

0.6.3 Appropriateness, Feasibility, and Extent of Compliance with 

the Permanency Plan 

hen making a determination as to the compliance and progress of 

parents or guardians, the judge or master may want to consider asking a 
caseworker for an opinion of the level of compliance with the permanency plan.  
Questions should also be asked regarding attendance at visitation and the 
quality of the visits for both parents.   

ased upon the information received during the hearing, the judge or 

master should rate the level of compliance as “no, minimal, moderate, 
substantial or full.”  In determining progress the court should concentrate on 
changes in behaviors rather than on whether the parent “attended” all sessions 
or completed certain tasks. 

  1

  W

  B

102

                         

 

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

*Best Practices – Issues to be Emphasized at Permanency Hearings* 

Although Pennsylvania statutes essentially create an all-inclusive statutory 

“permanency hearing” category that encompasses both routine review-type hearings 
and hearings that truly focus on finalizing permanency, this should not diminish the 
importance of this distinction in actual court practice.   

One way to operationalize the distinction is by reference to the matters that 

the judge or master is required to address at permanency hearings under 42 Pa.C.S. 
§ 6351.  In most instances, in permanency hearings that are scheduled within the first 
year of a case, the issues that are of overriding concern include the appropriateness, 
feasibility, and extent of compliance with the permanency plan, progress made 
toward alleviating circumstances necessitating placement, and whether reasonable 
efforts are being made to finalize the permanency plan.   

In permanency hearings involving children who have been in placement for 12 

to 18 months or longer, on the other hand, other issues become of paramount 
concern, including the continuing necessity and appropriateness of placement, the 
appropriateness and feasibility of the current placement goal, the likely date that the 
placement goal might be achieved, whether a petition for termination of parental 
rights should be filed, and when the child will achieve permanency.   

10.6.4 Progress Toward Alleviating Circumstances Requiring 

Placement 

In assessing the progress made toward alleviating the circumstances that 

necessitated the original placement, the court should consider whether the 
parents were offered reasonable and appropriate services, whether the parents 
requested services that were not provided, and inquire as to what the parents still 
need to accomplish before reunification would be recommended by the agency.  
Remember, the agency is required to make reasonable efforts to reunify the child 
with the parents unless they have been relieved of this requirement by the court.  
This includes offering appropriate and reasonable services.   The judge or master 
should not hesitate to hold the agency accountable for failure to make 
reasonable efforts.  However, once a finding of no reasonable efforts has been 
made, federal and state funding for the costs of the child’s placement may be lost 
by the county, until the agency comes into compliance by providing reasonable 
efforts. 
 

Based upon the information received during the hearing, the judge or 

master should assess the level of progress as “no, minimal, moderate, 
substantial or full.”   

 

 

 

 

 

       

 103

104

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

10.6.5 Appropriateness and Feasibility of Current Placement Goal 

At every permanency review, the court should determine whether the 

placement goal is appropriate and feasible, and if not, whether a new placement 
goal should be set.  The judge or master should seek an opinion from the agency 
and consider the positions of the GAL or counsel for the child, the parents and 
their counsel, and the CASA before reaching a decision.  The judge or master 
should state on the record or in writing the reasons the goal is or is not 
appropriate and feasible. 

For more detailed discussion of goal changes, see Chapter 11: 

Permanency Hearing: To Consider Change of Goal. 

 

10.6.6 Likely Date that Placement Goal Might Be Achieved 

Judges and masters should determine the likely date by which the 
placement goal will be achieved.  Common sense is often the best tool.  
Remember, this date is a projected date and not a deadline. 

10.6.7 Reasonable Agency Efforts to Finalize Permanency Plan 

At the permanency hearing, the judge or master must determine whether 

or not the agency made reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan that is 
in effect.  Although it may be harsh to render a finding of no reasonable efforts, it 
is important to hold the agency to its obligation to make reasonable efforts to 
finalize the plan (see Chapter 5: Entering the System/Shelter Care Hearing for 
more information on reasonable efforts determinations). 

0.6.8 Whether the Child is Safe 

  1

The judge or master should always assess the safety of the child at every 

permanency hearing.  Any party may present evidence about the safety of the 
child.  The judge or master must consider any evidence of conduct by a parent, 
guardian, foster parent, or any person supervising the care of the child that 
places the health, safety or welfare of the child at risk, including evidence of the 
use of alcohol or a controlled substance, regardless of whether the evidence or 
the conduct was the basis for the determination of dependency (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6351(f.2)).  Each parent should be considered individually.   If the child is unsafe, 
the judge or master should consider whether the child might be safer under a 
safety plan developed by the agency. 

As noted above, unless good cause has been shown, the child should be 
present at the hearing.  If the child is not present the court should ask where the 
child is and why the child is not present.  It is critical for the court to see the child.  
The child’s physical appearance is important to the assessment of safety.  Is the 
child overweight or underweight?   Does the child appear to be clean?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Permanency Hearing 

 

Additionally, the child’s affect and demeanor can aid in the assessment of well-
being.  Does the child appear happy and content or sad and depressed?  In 
cases of physical abuse, the judge or master can see first-hand how the child is 
healing.  The court should take the opportunity to have the child photographed at 
each review hearing, or if the child is not present for some reason, the judge or 
master should demand that a picture be received, in order to create a record of 
the child’s physical development and growth.   
 

10.6.9 Services Needed to Help Older Youth Transition to 

Independence  

Although the agency is only required to provide services to transition a 

child into independent living when the child is 16 years of age or older, in reality 
this process should begin much earlier.  These services should be ordered 
whenever it becomes appropriate.  Information on the individual needs of the 
child and the development of skills should be sought.  General areas of inquiry 
might be vocational and career counseling, secondary and post-secondary 
education, employment, daily living skills and the possession of necessary 
identification and documents such as a birth certificate and a social security card.  
Children with disabilities should have a transition plan included in their Individual 
Education Plan if they are eligible for special education services.  Some children 
may need to transition into a supervised living environment through the adult 
mental health system.  This process takes a long time and should be initiated 
before the 16th birthday (See the discussion of Transitioning Youth in Chapter 15: 
General Issues). 

10.6.10 Whether a Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) Petition      

Should Be Filed 

Absent compelling reasons to do otherwise, when a child has been in care 

for 15 out of the past 22 months, the agency is required to ask for a change in 
the permanency goal from reunification to another permanency goal, usually 
adoption, and to file a petition for termination of parental rights (For more detailed 
discussion, see Chapter 11: Permanency Hearing: To Consider Change of Goal 
and Chapter 12: Termination of Parental Rights).  The judge, not the agency, 
determines whether there is a compelling reason NOT to file a petition for 
termination of parental rights.  Therefore, it is imperative that the judge be aware 
of all the facts and circumstances of the case to make the final decision as to the 
maintenance of parental rights. 
 

hen considering whether or not to order a petition for termination to be 

filed, the judge should consider several factors including whether or not 
aggravated circumstances have been filed and found (see the discussion of 
aggravated circumstances in Chapter 15: General Issues); the length of time the 
child has been in placement; and whether or not the agency is in the process of 
identifying an adoptive resource for the child.   

  W

 
 

 

 

 

 105

106

Permanency Hearing 

 

Under certain circumstances, there may be a compelling reason not to file 
a termination petition.  These include that the child is being cared for by a relative 
and that relative does not wish to pursue an adoption; that good progress has 
been made by the parent(s) or guardian(s) and the expectation is that they will 
achieve compliance with their permanency plan shortly; or the needed services 
were not provided by the agency for the child to be reunited with the parent(s) 
within the time frames set by the permanency plan (for more information, see 
Chapter 12: Termination of Parental Rights). 

A TPR petition should be filed when there have been aggravated 

circumstances founded with no reasonable efforts and the child has been in care 
for 6 months or longer; when the child has been abandoned and no parent has 
made substantial or continuing contact for a period of 6 months; or at any time 
when it is clear to the judge or hearing officer that reunification is not viable and 
adoption seems to be the most appropriate permanency goal for the child. 

If the permanency goal is changed to adoption, the judge should inquire 

about whether the agency or parents’ attorneys have discussed voluntary 
relinquishment and consent to adoption with the parents.  An inquiry should also 
be made regarding the child’s desire for adoption if the child is 12 years of age or 
older.  The judge may also want to consider whether post-permanency 
counseling is appropriate for either the child or parent (for more information, see 
Chapter 14: Adoption). 

ote that, once the child has been in care for 15 out of 22 months, the 

court may want to consider a goal change even if termination of parental rights is 
not an option.   It is certainly time to assess whether the parents are meeting 
expectations, whether the child is happy and safe in the current placement, and 
whether another permanency goal should be considered. 

  N

10.6.11 When and How the Child Will Achieve Permanency 

Finally, on the basis of all the determinations made above and all the 

evidence presented at the permanency hearing, the court must determine if and 
when the child will be returned to parents or guardian, in cases in which 
reunification is in the child’s best interests; otherwise, if and when the child will be 
placed for adoption, placed with a legal custodian, placed with a fit and willing 
relative, or placed in another planned, permanent living arrangement.  These 
options are listed in order of preference and the determination is made based 
upon what is best suited to the child’s safety, protection and welfare (42 Pa.C.S. 
§ 6351(f.1)). 

0.7 Admissibility of Evidence, Reports and other Documents 

A judge or master has broad discretion concerning the admissibility of 

evidence, reports, and documents at a permanency hearing.   The judge or 

 
 

  1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

master should consider any evidence that is helpful in determining the 
appropriate course of action, including evidence that was not admissible at the 
adjudicatory hearing (Pa.R.J.C.P 1608(D)). 

 
Per Rule 1608(E), the modified or updated FSP must be submitted to the 
 
court and counsel at least 15 days before the permanency hearing.  However, if 
the  FSP  has  not  been  modified  or  updated  or  if  the  hearing  is  an  expedited 
review or status hearing, the FSP, report and recommendations from the agency, 
Family Plan, proposed orders of court, CASA report, etc. should be submitted to 
the court and counsel at least 72 hours in advance of the hearing. 
 

Foster parents, pre-adoptive parents and relative caregivers are also 

entitled to submit a pre-hearing report to the court regarding the child’s 
adjustment, progress and condition, and to have the report examined and 
considered as evidence (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1604).  Any such reports should be 
submitted to all counsel, ideally prior to review by the judge or master.   

 

 

If requested, due process requires that the judge or master permit cross-

examination of those who have provided information upon which the judge or 
master may rely.  All parties have a right to cross-examine witnesses and 
challenge evidence.  “Where reception of hearsay evidence would deprive the 
parent of an opportunity to confront and cross-examine a witness, such evidence 
may not be admitted” (In the interest of Jones, 429 A.2d 671 (Pa. 1981)).   
 

*Best Practice – Handling Reports* 

 

 

 
Some courts have designated a person or department to receive written reports 
and distribute them to the judge or master and counsel in advance of the hearing.  This 
practice gives the judge or master and counsel an opportunity to receive and review the 
report prior to the hearing and essentially at the same time.   

Note:  If a parent is not represented, due process requires that the report be 

provided to the parent when given to the court and counsel.   

10.8 Findings and Orders 
 

After a permanency review hearing, the judge or master must issue a 

written court order.  The court order is the document that drives the case.  If well-
written and timely entered, the order gives clear and comprehensible direction to 
all parties of what the court expects.  It enables the caseworker to initiate the 
necessary services, and fine-tune the family service plan.        
 

 107

Permanency Hearing 

 

A good court order should state the court’s findings of fact and 
conclusions of law—well-written, detailed findings can save time later as they 
may be incorporated at the permanency hearing to consider a change of goal or 
at a TPR hearing.  In cases of multiple siblings, the findings, conclusions, and 
orders should be child-specific. 

*Best Practices – Findings and Orders* 

Whenever possible, “rule from the bench” so that the parties understand what 

happened at the hearing and what is expected to occur in the future.     
 

If possible, the parties should leave the courtroom with a copy of the court 
order.  Handing out court orders gives parties an immediate, written record of what was 
decided, what they are expected to do prior to the next hearing, any social services that 
have been specifically ordered, and the date and time of the next hearing.  
 

Providing parties, especially parents, with a copy of the court order at the 

conclusion of the hearing can increase their participation in the case plan.  This can 
have a positive impact on successful “front-loading” of cases by involving parents 
earlier in the court process.  
 

Dedicate the last few minutes of a hearing to allow sufficient time to create the 

order.  Parties can wait for the order to be completed and distributed.   
 

It is important that the child and the parents (especially those who may not be 

represented) understand the court’s findings of fact and the legal conclusions.   The 
parties deserve an explanation.   Remember—not all parents or children can or will 
read the written order. 
 

If an appeal is filed, well-written and well-recited findings and orders make a 

good record for the appellate court.  This is especially important with the new fast-track 
rules.   

he order should clearly communicate to the parties, foster parents, 

providers, and other interested persons what is expected between the 
review hearings.  Whenever feasible, detailed court orders should also 
contain dates or timelines for implementation of specific orders.  This can 
increase accountability and encourage timely case progress. 
 

The judge or master is the gatekeeper to making a good record.   
Therefore, the order should indicate the names of the parties and all counsel and 
whether the parties and attorneys were present at the hearing, 

he order should clearly reflect what occurred at the review hearing, what 

is expected to occur before the next hearing, and what will occur at the next 
review hearing (goal change, possible case closure, etc.)  If possible, the order 
should provide the date, time, and place of the next review hearing.  

 T

  T

 

 
 

 

 

108

Permanency Hearing 

 

In Pennsylvania, dependency findings and orders for permanency 
hearings are contained within the CPCMS Dependency Module.  These court 
forms contain the needed information to assist the court in asking the necessary 
questions, in managing the case, in meeting federal requirements, and in 
capturing statewide data.  The forms also allow for the entering of detailed text, 
which can outline the specific directives of the court.   
 

The court order should clearly set forth who has legal custody of the child, 

including who will make educational and medical decisions for the child; the 
physical placement of the child, including the name and address of such person 
(unless disclosure is prohibited by the court); the specific visitation schedule for 
the parents or guardians; and any conditions, limitations, restrictions, and 
obligations in its permanency order imposed upon any parties to the action.    
 

 
 

 

 109

110 

Permanency Hearing 

 

CHECKLISTS OF SUGGESTED QUESTIONS 

Note:  These lists of questions are not exhaustive.  It is important to adapt the 
questions to a specific case and, within a case, to tailor the questions for each 
sibling, parent, and guardian.   Additionally, the judge or master must always 
determine whether the agency has made reasonable efforts to reunify the 
child with the parents or to finalize the permanency plan.   

hese suggested questions concern the issue of the need for placement 

and the quality of the placement. 
 

(cid:1)  How long has the child been in out-of-home placement? 
(cid:1)  If the child is in a residential treatment facility (RTF), is the RTF still 
medically necessary?  If not, where will the child be placed upon 
discharge from the RTF? 

(cid:1)  If the child is in placement through juvenile probation, are there issues 
in the home that would prevent the child’s return?  Are there relatives 
available or does the child need foster care? 

(cid:1)  Is placement still needed?  Why? 
(cid:1)  Should the child be placed with siblings? 
(cid:1)  Are their any relatives available for purposes of placement or 

(cid:1)  Is the current placement still appropriate?  If not, why? 
(cid:1)  Is the permanency plan still appropriate and feasible? Why or why 

visitation?  

not? 

(cid:1)  Is the child safe?  If not—why?  
(cid:1)  Is the placement meeting the child’s needs? 
(cid:1)  How has the child adjusted to placement?  
(cid:1)  Has the child bonded to the foster family?  
(cid:1)  Is the child happy? 

 
 

 

  T

 

These suggested questions concern the child’s needs and behaviors. 
 

(cid:1)  What is the level of compliance of the child?  (In an applicable case.) 
(cid:1)  In cases where the removal was based upon the child’s conduct 
(truancy, ungovernability, etc.), what progress has been made in 
alleviating the conditions that led to the original placement? 

(cid:1)  Is the child safe?  If not—why? 
(cid:1)  If the child is not placed with siblings, are sibling visits occurring? 
(cid:1)  Has the child had all appropriate/required immunizations? 
(cid:1)  Has the child seen a dentist?  Does the child need glasses? 
(cid:1)  Does the child have any special medical or mental health needs?  Are 

these needs being met? 

(cid:1)  Is the child prescribed any medications?  Is the child compliant with 

medication? 

(cid:1)  Is the child in need of mental health services or other therapeutic 

services?  Is the child receiving these services? 
(cid:1)  Is the child experiencing any behavioral issues? 
(cid:1)  Are the child’s educational needs being met?  Is the child on target 

educationally?   

(cid:1)  What services are needed to assist a child 16 years of age or older in 

transitioning into independent living? 

(cid:1)  Does the child need clothing? 
(cid:1)  What extra-curricular activities is the child involved in? 

hese suggested questions concern compliance and progress of the 

parents/guardians. 
 

(cid:1)  What is the level of compliance of the mother? 
(cid:1)  What is the level of compliance of the father? 
(cid:1)  What progress has the mother made toward alleviating the 

circumstances that led to the original placement? 

(cid:1)  What progress has the father made toward alleviating the 

circumstances that led to the original placement? 

(cid:1)  Are the parents regularly visiting the child? 
(cid:1)  Do the visits go well? 
(cid:1)  Have either of the parents requested any services that the agency has 

not provided or cannot provide? 

 

These suggested questions concern the permanency plan and the 
permanency/placement goal. 
 

(cid:1)  Is the permanency plan appropriate and feasible?  Why or why not? 
(cid:1)  Were reasonable efforts made to finalize the permanency plan?  If 

(cid:1)  Is the current permanency/placement goal appropriate and feasible? 

(cid:1)  If the current permanency/placement goal is not appropriate, what is 

(cid:1)  What is the likely date that the permanency/placement goal might be 

not—why? 

Why or why not? 

the new goal? 

achieved? 

hese questions concern the issue of whether a petition for termination 

of parental rights should be considered. 
 

(cid:1)  Has a petition for aggravated circumstances been filed?  Have 

aggravated circumstances been previously found?  (For additional 
information—see Chapter 15: General Issues for more information on 
aggravated circumstances.) 

(cid:1)  If the child has been in placement for at least 15 of the last 22 months 
or the court has determined that aggravated circumstances exist and 

  T

  T

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

 111

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

that reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need to remove the 
child from the child’s parent or preserve and reunify the family need 
not be made or continue to be made, has the county agency filed or 
sought to join a petition to terminate parental rights (TPR) and to 
identify, recruit, process and approve a qualified family to adopt the 
child?   

(cid:1)  If the permanency goal has been changed to adoption or a TPR 

petition has or will be filed, has the agency or the parents’ attorneys 
spoken with the parents about a voluntary relinquishment or consent 
to adopt? 

(cid:1)  If the child is 12 years of age or older, does the child want to be 

(cid:1)  Should the parents and/or the child be referred to adoption 

adopted? 

counseling? 

(cid:1)  If the agency has not filed a TPR petition has the court considered the 

following: 
(cid:2)  whether the child is being cared for by a relative best suited to the 

physical, mental and moral welfare of the child; 

(cid:2)  whether the county agency has documented compelling reason for 
determining that filing a petition to terminate parental rights would 
not serve the needs and welfare of the child; or 

(cid:2)  whether the child’s family has not been provided with necessary 
services to achieve the safe return to the child’s parent within the 
time frames set forth in the permanency plan? 

These suggested questions concern the issue of when the child will 
achieve permanency. 
 

(cid:1)  When will the child be returned to the child’s parent, guardian or 

custodian in cases where the return of the child is best suited to the 
safety, protection and physical, mental and moral welfare of the child? 
(cid:1)  When will the child be placed for adoption, and the county agency file 
for termination of parental rights in cases where return to the child’s 
parent, guardian or custodian is not best suited to the safety, 
protection and physical, mental and moral welfare of the child? 
(cid:1)  When will the child be placed with a legal custodian in cases where 

the return to the child’s parent, guardian or custodian or being placed 
for adoption is not best suited to the safety, protection and physical, 
mental and moral welfare of the child? 

(cid:1)  When will the child be placed with a fit and willing relative in cases 

where return to the child’s parent, guardian or custodian, being placed 
for adoption or being placed with a legal custodian is not best suited to 
the safety, protection and physical, mental and moral welfare of the 
child? 

(cid:1)  When will the child be placed in another living arrangement intended 
to be permanent in nature which is approved by the court in cases 
where the county agency has documented a compelling reason that it 

 

 

112

 
 

 

Permanency Hearing 

 

would not be best suited to the safety, protection and physical, mental 
and moral welfare of the child to be returned to the child’s parent, 
guardian or custodian, to be placed for adoption, to be placed with a 
legal custodian or to be placed with a fit and willing relative? 

These suggested questions concern the issue of the child’s progress, 
behaviors, needs, etc. (questions for the caregivers). 
 

(cid:1)  Describe the child’s interaction with you (the foster parent). 
(cid:1)  Is there any change in the child’s behaviors after the child returns from 

a visit with the parents, siblings, or other family members? 

(cid:1)  Does the child sleep well?  Does the child sleep through the night? 
(cid:1)  Does the child have nightmares or bad dreams? 
(cid:1)  How does the child interact with other children? 
(cid:1)  How has the child adjusted to school?   
(cid:1)  How is the child doing in school—academically and behaviorally? 
(cid:1)  Does the child talk about his family?  What does he say? 
(cid:1)  Does the child seem happy or content? 
(cid:1)  Does the child need anything? 
(cid:1)  Is the child involved in extracurricular activities? 
(cid:1)  Do the parents call the child or write letters? 
(cid:1)  How does the child react or respond to the letters or telephone calls? 

hese suggested questions are designed to engage the child. 

  T

 

(cid:1)  Do you want to speak?  Would you like the courtroom cleared? 
(cid:1)  Are you happy at home or in your placement?   
(cid:1)  Do you feel safe in your placement or at home? 
(cid:1)  Where are you attending school?  How are you doing in school? 
(cid:1)  What do you like to do for fun? 
(cid:1)  What are you interested in? 
(cid:1)  If the agency or the court could provide you with something that you 

wanted, what would it be? 

(cid:1)  Do you have a life plan? 
(cid:1)  What are your goals or plans after you complete high school? 
(cid:1)  Do you need clothing, glasses, etc? 
(cid:1)  How often do you see your parents and/or siblings?  If it were possible 

would you like more visits with them? 

(cid:1)  Do you enjoy the visits with your parents and/or siblings?  Why or why 

not? 

(cid:1)  Has your attorney or your caseworker talked to you about continuing 
services and supervision after you turn 18?  Have you agreed to 
continued services and supervision? 

(cid:1)  If you have not agreed to continued services and supervision, why not?   

 113

 
 

Permanency Hearing 

 

(cid:1)  Tell me about your plans when your case is closed.  Do you have a 
job?  Where will you live?  How will you eat?  Who will buy your 
clothes? 

(cid:1)  For children who are parents ask the following: 

(cid:2)  Are you visiting your child (if the child is in foster care)?  How   
      often?  How do the visits go?  Do you attend your child’s medical    
      and dental appointments?  Does your child seem happy?  Does  
      your child seem healthy? 
(cid:2)  Does your child need anything?   
(cid:2)  Are you receiving/paying child support? 
(cid:2)  Does your child have contact with the other parent? 
(cid:2)  Does your child have contact with other family members? 
(cid:2)  If your case is closed, how will you care for your child? 

 

 

114

       

 

 

a.R.J.C.P. 1607 (Scheduling of Permanency Hearings) & 1608(D) 

(Evidence in Permanency Hearings). 
 
The child should attend every hearing unless waived by the judge.  
At the permanency hearing the court determines if the agency has 
made reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan in effect 
for the child. 

he court will make a permanency decision as to whether the plan 
for the child should be: reunification, adoption, legal custodianship, 
placement with a relative or another permanent living arrangement.  
The court should also consider concurrent planning for the child to 
achieve permanency more quickly. 

ime is of the essence for permanency of children.  The purpose of 
the permanency hearing is to determine when the child will achieve 
the permanency goal or whether modifying the current goal is in 
the best interest of the child.   
 
A permanency hearing must be held within 6 months of the child’s 
removal from the home or a transfer of temporary legal custody or 
other disposition, whichever is earlier. 

 permanency hearing must be held within 30 days of a 

determination that reasonable efforts to reunify the family are not 
required. 
 
Evidence of conduct by the parent that places the health, safety or 
welfare of the child at risk, including evidence of the use of alcohol 
or a controlled substance can be presented to the court regardless 
of whether it was the basis for the determination of dependency.  
“Any evidence helpful in determining the appropriate course of 
action, including evidence that was not admissible at the 
adjudicatory hearing, shall be presented to the court” (Pa.R.J.C.P. 
1608(D)). 
 
A permanency hearing must be held every 6 months until the child 
is removed from the jurisdiction of the court.  

est practice is to conduct review hearings a minimum of 

every 3 months. 

  P

  T

  T

  A

  B

 

Purpose of 
Hearing 

Time Frame  

Rules of Evidence 
 

Next Hearing 

PERMANENCY HEARING BENCHCARD 

Relevant Statutes 

42 Pa.C.S. § 6351 

 

 

115

KEY QUESTIONS/DECISIONS 
PERMANENCY HEARING 
 
•  Were reasonable efforts made by the agency to reunify the family and to 

finalize a permanent plan? 

• 

Is the plan in the best interest of the child? 

•  Will placement be continued for a specific time, with a continued goal of 

family reunification? 

•  What date will the child be returned home? 

If/when will the child be legally free to be adopted? 

• 

• 

• 

o 

If adoption is the goal, when will the petition for TPR be filed? 

o  Are the parents currently willing to relinquish parental rights? 

o  Have adoptive parents been identified? 

If legal custodianship is the plan, why is it preferable to TPR and 
adoption? 

If/when will the custody of the child be transferred to an individual or 
couple on a permanent basis? 

•  What are the child’s special needs?  Who is to provide the services to 

meet the child’s needs? 

These questions are adapted from the text of this chapter and the Mission 
and Guiding Principles for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System and the 
Permanency Hearing Checklist provided in Resource Guidelines: 
Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (NCJFCJ, 
1995, p.75-76) and Adoption and Permanency Guidelines:  Improving 
Court Practice in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (NCJFCJ, 2000, p. 20-
22) 

 

       

     

   

 116

Chapter 11 ---- Permanency Hearing: To Consider Change of Goal 
 Permanency Hearing: To Consider Change of Goal 
Chapter 11 
 Permanency Hearing: To Consider Change of Goal 
 Permanency Hearing: To Consider Change of Goal 
Chapter 11 
Chapter 11 
(“Goal Change Hearing”)    
(“Goal Change Hearing”)
(“Goal Change Hearing”)
(“Goal Change Hearing”)

117

The “goal change hearing” is the name commonly given to the 
permanency hearing that initiates the permanent removal of the child from the 
parents.  Although this term will not be found in the Juvenile Act or the 
Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure, it will be used here to denote 
any permanency hearing in which any party or the court itself seeks a change in 
the permanency goal, from reunification to some other option. 

ost dependency cases begin with a permanency goal of reunification 

with the parents or guardians.  During the permanency review process, the judge 
or master monitors the parents’ compliance with the permanency plan and their 
progress toward remedying the circumstances that led to the removal of the 
child.  The judge or master also assesses whether the agency has offered 
reasonable services and made reasonable efforts to reunify the child with the 
parents or guardians. 

  M

When reasonable efforts have been made to reunify the child with the 

parents but the child has remained in care and reunification is not viable or 
imminent, the court must consider changing the goal from reunification to another 
permanency goal.  In many cases, this means a change to adoption.  

The “goal change hearing” can be emotional for both the child and the 

 
parents.  Like every permanency hearing, the goal change hearing must be 
judge-driven.  While it is important to give the parties the opportunity to be heard, 
it is equally important for the judge to maintain control over the hearing, to rule 
from the bench whenever possible, and to explain decisions on the record so as 
to assure that all parties understand (see the general discussion of the conduct 
of permanency hearings in Chapter 10: Permanency Hearings). 

It should be noted that, under Pa.R.J.C.P. 1187(A), a master does not 

have the authority to preside over any hearing in which any party seeks to 
establish a permanency goal of adoption or change the permanency goal to 
adoption.  However, once the goal has been changed to adoption by the judge, 
the master may hear all subsequent review hearings, unless a party objects or 
exercises the right to have a hearing before the judge.  

11.2  Initiating the Goal Change 

The Juvenile Act generally requires the agency to request a goal change 

and file a petition for termination of parental rights when the child has been in 
care for 15 out of 22 months (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f)(9)).  This requirement is 
consistent with federal law, as amended by ASFA (42 U.S.C. § 675 (5)(C) and 
(E)).   

11.1  Overview 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

Goal Change 

 

In addition, there are other points when the agency should request or the 

court should consider a goal change.  In cases involving aggravated 
circumstances, including severe physical abuse, sexual abuse, or aggravated 
physical neglect, where it is demonstrated at the outset of the case that the 
circumstances that led to removal cannot be remedied and that the child cannot 
be safely reunified with the parents, the court can establish a goal other than 
reunification from the beginning.  The permanency goal should also be changed 
when there have been aggravated circumstances found and the court has 
determined that reasonable efforts to preserve or reunify the family are not 
required, when the child has been abandoned and no parent has made 
substantial or continuing contact for a period of 6 months, or at any time when it 
is clear to the judge that reunification is not viable and another permanency goal 
seems to be more appropriate for the child (see Chapter 15: General Issues, for 
more information on aggravated circumstances).   

In most cases the goal change is initiated by the child welfare agency, but 

there is no reason why any party may not seek a goal change. 

.  The agency — The agency generally initiates the request for goal change 
through an amendment to the family service plan.  This amendment gives 
notice to the parents that the agency is requesting a goal change.   

.  The court — There is nothing in the rules or the Juvenile Act that 

precludes the court from ordering the agency to change the permanency 
goal or to order the filing of a petition for termination of parental rights. 

.  The parent — A parent can agree to a goal change.  In cases proceeding 
to adoption, the parent can file a petition to voluntarily relinquish his or her 
parental rights.  See discussion of voluntary termination, below. 

.  The child 

1.  The Guardian Ad litem or counsel for the child may initiate a goal 

change in the interest of the child or at the request of the child.  It is 
crucial that the views of the child regarding the goal change be 
ascertained to the fullest extent possible and communicated to the 
court by the child, the GAL, attorney, or CASA pursuant to 42 
Pa.C.S. § 6351(e.1).     

.  In cases where the child is 12 years of age or older, the child must 
consent to adoption and it is important to know whether the child is 
consenting to adoption before the goal is changed to adoption and 
a petition to terminate parental rights is filed. 

  2

3.  The Guardian Ad litem or counsel for the child may also file a 

petition for termination of parental rights (23 Pa.C.S. § 2512(a)(4)). 

 
 

 

  A

  B

  C

  D

 

 

 118

119

Goal Change 

 

*Best Practice – Goal Change Initiation* 

While not required by Pennsylvania statute or rule of court, the request to 

change a goal can come in many forms.  The official change in goal by the court is 
most commonly initiated by the agency.  This is typically done by the agency 
petitioning the court for a permanency hearing with notice they are requesting a goal 
change.   
 

Additionally, nothing precludes the court from initiating a change of goal.  In 

some counties the judge informs all the parties at the Permanency Hearing that a 
hearing to change the goal will occur at the next scheduled Permanency Hearing.  It 
is particularly beneficial to provide all parties with the date of the upcoming goal 
change hearing to prevent any issues of parties not receiving appropriate notice.   

1.3  Goal Change to Adoption 

As noted, when a child has been in care for 15 out of the past 22 months, 

the agency is required to ask for a change in the permanency goal from 
reunification to another permanency goal—in most cases, adoption—and file a 
petition for termination of parental rights, unless certain exceptional 
circumstances apply.  These include (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f)(9)):  

 

1. 

2. 

3. 

that the child is being cared for by a relative who does not wish to 
pursue an adoption; 
that the agency has documented a “compelling reason” why filing a 
termination petition that would not serve the child’s needs and 
welfare; or  
that services necessary to achieve reunification within the time 
frames set by the permanency plan were not provided by the 
agency.   

When considering whether to change the goal and to order the filing of a 

petition for termination of parental rights, the judge should consider several 
factors including whether or not aggravated circumstances have been filed or 
found, the length of time that the child has been in placement, and whether or not 
the agency is in the process of identifying an adoptive resource for the child. 

Although the processes of goal change to adoption and the filing of the 

petition for termination of parental rights go hand in hand, they are two separate 
issues.  It may be in the best interest of the child to change the goal to adoption 
but not order the petition to terminate parental rights.  For example, if a child has 
been abandoned by the parents but is not in a pre-adoptive foster home or is in a 
residential treatment facility, it might be prudent to change the goal, but delay the 
filing of the petition for termination of parental rights until a pre-adoptive resource 

 
 

   

 

  1

 

 

 

Goal Change 

 

has been identified.  It should be noted that identification of a pre-adoptive 
resource is not a prerequisite to the filing of a petition to terminate parental rights.   

 

 

*Best Practices – Combining Goal Change and Termination Hearings* 

Consider hearing the goal change and the termination of parental rights at the 

same time.  The evidence at both hearings is essentially the same and hearing both at 
the same time is more efficient.  The Juvenile Act suggests that it is appropriate for the 
dependency judge to also preside over the termination hearing (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(i)); 
see also Chapter 12: Termination of Parental Rights). 
 

In addition to promoting judicial economy, the combined hearing has other 
benefits.   If an appeal is taken, there is one appeal, which should result in a faster 
resolution of all the issues.  This of course leads to faster permanency for a child. 
 

Additionally, the Adoption Act permits parents to voluntarily terminate their 

parental rights (23 Pa.C.S. § 2501).  If a parent does not contest a goal change 
to adoption, consider ordering the agency to discuss voluntary relinquishment of 
termination of parental rights.  Voluntary termination prevents a trial and the child 
is freed for adoption at an earlier stage and thus will achieve permanency 
sooner.  Voluntary termination also provides a benefit to the parents in that it 
does not constitute an aggravated circumstance (as would an involuntary 
termination) should the parents have other children that come into care and are 
adjudicated dependent. 

11.4 Change to Other Permanency Goals 

When the conditions for a goal change are fulfilled but adoption is not 

possible or is not in the child’s best interests, the court should consider ordering 
a change from reunification to another goal that will provide a permanent 
placement for the child.   
 

A.  Permanent Legal Custodianship (PLC) & Subsidized Permanent 

Legal Custodianship (SPLC) 

When neither reunification nor adoption is a viable option for permanency, 
PLC or SPLC is the favored goal.   While it may not afford the child the 
same degree of permanency as adoption—because PLC is essentially a 
custody order subject to modification like any other custody order—it does 
provide the child with the opportunity for a permanent relationship and 
case closure.  In many cases the legal custodian is a relative, but legal 
custodianship may be given to an unrelated foster parent or any suitable 
adult. 

 
 

 

   

 

 

 120

Goal Change 

 

SPLC provides the custodian with a subsidy similar to foster care 
payments to ensure the custodian is financially able to meet the needs of 
the child.   The subsidy ends when the child reaches the age of 18.  
Therefore, SPLC may not be appropriate if the foster family is not willing 
to provide support to the child after the child turns 18. 

The PLC or SPLC may be ordered at any time after the child has been in 
care for at least six months and the child has been with the PLC/SPLC 
resource, for at least six months (See the discussion in Chapter 9: 
Permanency Options). 

f reunification is not viable and the child is placed with relatives who do 
not wish to adopt or become permanent legal custodians, the court should 
consider a permanency goal of placement with a fit and willing relative (42 
Pa.C.S. § 6351(f.1)(4)).  Again, the pros and cons of this option are 
discussed more fully in Chapter 9: Permanency Options. 

C.  Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement (APPLA) 

The following are examples of living arrangements that qualify as APPLA:  
long-term foster care, group care/residential treatment, and supervised 
independent living.  These arrangements are not, however, a permanency 
goal—APPLA is the permanency goal. 

PPLA is the least favored of all permanency options.  Accordingly, before 

changing the goal to APPLA, the court should demand the agency 
document compelling reasons that all other permanency options are not 
possible for the child.  When changing a goal to APPLA, the court should 
enter detailed findings in support of a goal of APPLA.  Some possible 
compelling reasons to order a goal change to APPLA might include: 
 

1.  an older child who requests emancipation or independent living; 
2.  a child and a parent have a significant bond that precludes 

termination of parental rights, but the parent is unable to care for 
the child due to emotional, mental, or physical disability or 
limitations and the foster parents are committed to providing a 
home until the child reaches majority and will facilitate visitation; 
3.  a child needing long-term medical or psychiatric care that cannot be 

provided in a family or foster care setting.   

  I

  A

B.  Placement with a Fit and Willing Relative  

 
 

 

 

 

 

       

 

121

Goal Change 

 

*Best Practice – Ensuring Connections* 

It is imperative that the court ensure all children, especially those with a goal 

of APPLA, have meaningful and significant connections with responsible, caring 
adults.  One strategy being used throughout Pennsylvania is known as Family 
Finding.  Much more than a web-based search, Family Finding offers methods and 
strategies to locate and engage the relatives of children living in out of home care.  
Family Finding is used to provide each child with lifelong, supportive adult 
connections (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 11).   
 

Yet another strategy being used in various jurisdictions includes partnering 

with the business and faith communities to provide mentorship opportunities for older 
youth.  These partnerships are providing invaluable adult support and connections for 
older youth, especially as they transition to adulthood.   

here possible, courts should encourage the development and use of models 

that ensure children are connected to responsible, caring adults.   
 

11.5  Effects of Goal Change 

hen a permanency goal is changed from reunification to another 

permanency goal, the agency is basically relieved of continuing efforts toward 
reunification.  However, if reunification is or remains the concurrent plan, the 
agency must continue to offer services and make reasonable efforts to reunify.   
 

Irrespective of a goal change, the judge or master can order the agency to 

continue to offer services and make reasonable efforts when it is in the best 
interest of the child.  For example, if a goal is changed to APPLA, continued 
visitation between the child and parents may be in the child’s best interests.  This 
may especially be true in instances where the child is older and has stronger 
connections to his or her birth family.   
 

Upon ordering a goal change, the judge should review the existing 
visitation schedule to determine whether the visitation schedule should be 
changed in keeping with the new permanency goal and the best interests of the 
child.     
 

In deciding whether to change the visits, the judge should consider the 

  W

 

  W

 
 

   

1.  Is there a concurrent plan of reunification? 
2.  Have the parents been consistently visiting? 
3.  What is the bond with the child and the parents and the child and the 

caregivers? 

4.  What is the quality of the visits? 

following: 
 

 122

Goal Change 

 

5.  Are the visits supervised or unsupervised?  What is the frequency of 

6.  How do the visits affect the child?  Are there any behavioral changes 

the visits? 

noted after the visits? 

7.  What are the child’s wishes? 
8.  Is the child placed with relatives or family friends where continued 

contact would likely occur after case closure? 

9.  If the new goal is adoption, the court should consider a reduction in 
visitation that is consistent with a permanency goal of adoption. 
10. If the child is bonded with the parents and having frequent visits, 
consider a gradual reduction in visits so as to minimize the loss. 
11. Seek an opinion from the child’s therapist or other expert on any 
reduction of visits and the effect that it may have on the child. 

1.6  Evidentiary Issues in Goal Change Hearings 

In a permanency hearing where goal change is being considered, the 
court should consider the full record that reflects the parents’ compliance and 
progress as it relates to whether they have remedied (or will remedy) the 
circumstances that led to removal and placement of the child.  In the ordinary 
permanency hearing, the court is generally looking at what has transpired 
between review hearings.  At the time of a permanency hearing with a goal 
change emphasis, the full history and record is relevant. 
 

While compliance with the FSP is an issue bearing on the goal change, 

what the court is really examining is the progress (or lack thereof).  While the 
parents’ refusal or failure to comply is relevant, the real issue is progress.  It is 
not unusual for parents’ to be compliant and cooperative, but make no progress.  
Conversely, some parents are not compliant, but manage to remedy the 
conditions that led to removal of the child without the help of the agency.  The 
real issues are: have the parents remedied the conditions that led to removal, 
can the child be safely reunified with the parents in a reasonable period of time, 
and does reunification best serve the needs and welfare of the child. 
 

CAUTION—If the permanency hearing for goal change and the 

termination of parental rights hearing are being heard at the same time, keep in 
mind that hearsay evidence that may be admissible in the permanency hearing 
may not be admissible in the termination hearing. 

1.7   Findings and Orders 

As it does following any permanency hearing, the court issues a written 
court order at the conclusion of a goal change hearing.  The order is especially 
important where a goal change occurs, because orders granting goal changes 
are often appealed.  

 
 

  1

 

  1

 

 

 

123

Goal Change 

 

In addition to what is normally contained in a permanency hearing order, 
the order entered pursuant to a goal change should clearly set forth the reasons 
that the request for a goal change was granted or denied (see the discussion of 
orders in Chapter 10: Permanency Hearings). 

n Pennsylvania, dependency findings and orders for permanency 
hearings include those in which change of goal occurs are contained within the 
CPCMS Dependency Module.  These court forms contain the needed information 
to assist the court in asking the necessary questions, in managing the case, in 
meeting federal requirements, and in capturing statewide data.  The forms also 
allow for the entering of detailed text, which can outline the specific directives of 
the court.   
 

If the court has done its job throughout the review process, the court 
orders should clearly track the compliance and progress of the parents and 
should make a clear record to support the court’s decision for the goal change.  
Entering detailed findings at each permanency review can assist the court at the 
time of goal change and can shorten the length of the hearing where goal change 
occurs. 

  I

 
 

   

 124

 Termination of Parental Rights    
Chapter 12 ---- Termination of Parental Rights
Chapter 12 
 Termination of Parental Rights
 Termination of Parental Rights
Chapter 12 
Chapter 12 

2.1 Overview  

 

  1

   

Termination of parental rights (TPR) stemming from child abuse and 
neglect is one of the most difficult proceedings over which a judge must preside.  
A TPR order divests the parents of any legal status with respect to the child, 
including all rights and privileges to have further contact and to be informed of 
the child’s adoption and well-being.  Simultaneously, it divests the child of any 
rights regarding or relationship with the biological parent.  It has often been called 
the “death penalty” of dependency court, because of the seriousness and finality 
of a termination order severing of all ties between a child and the biological 
parents.  However, when parents are unable or unwilling to do what is necessary 
for a safe and timely reunification with their children, another permanency goal 
must be chosen.  For the vast majority of dependent children, adoption is the 
preferred goal.  Before a child can be adopted, parental rights must be 
terminated.   
 

The federal Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) and the Pennsylvania 

Juvenile Act require the child welfare agency to file a TPR petition when a child 
has been in foster care for 15 of the most recent 22 months.  TPR proceedings 
are governed by Pennsylvania’s Adoption Act, 23 Pa.C.S. § 2501 et seq., with 
legal grounds for termination being specified in 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511.  The Adoption 
Act does not bar bringing the petition sooner than the ASFA requirements, so 
long as one of the nine grounds for TPR as set forth in 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511 is 
present. 
 

In certain circumstances, these timeframes need not be strictly followed.  

These circumstances can include situations where a child is in the care of a 
relative who does not wish to adopt or the agency alleges and the court approves 
other compelling reasons that establish that a termination of parental rights is not 
feasible or in the best interest of the child.   
 

Specific details as to the time frames and exceptions are set forth in the 
Juvenile Act in 42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f)(9).  The Juvenile Act emphasizes the need 
for child permanency with the recognition that child development is enhanced in 
stable, permanent families and that delays in permanency are most often 
disadvantageous to the child.  
 

erminating parental rights can occur in three ways: through legal 
consent, voluntary relinquishment, or involuntary termination.  Both legal consent 
and voluntarily relinquishment may serve to preserve a parent’s dignity while 
preventing a lengthy, contested hearing.   However, the agency may sometimes 
oppose a consent or voluntary relinquishment and seek an involuntary 
termination in order to establish “aggravated circumstances” as to the parents’ 

  T

 

125

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

 termination action can sever the rights of one or both parents, 

simultaneously or in separate proceedings.  Regardless of the method used, 
parents in TPR proceedings may experience a wide range of emotions that can 
be compounded with issues of mental illness, substance abuse or developmental 
disabilities, which may leave them confused about the process.  Accordingly, it 
becomes incumbent on the court to ensure that all legal requirements under the 
Adoption Act and procedural due process requirements are strictly followed. 

  A

other children, present or future (for more information on aggravated 
circumstances, see Chapter 15: General Issues). 

As is discussed more fully in Chapter 14: Adoption, when parental rights 

are terminated, the agency continues with legal custody of the child and 
becomes the intermediary.  The agency has the responsibility to secure an 
adoptive family and the responsibility for finalizing the adoption within a 
reasonable time frame.   While having an identified adoptive resource is not a 
prerequisite for TPR, ideally there should be a strong likelihood of an eventual 
adoption.   

Due to the constitutional issues, as well as the stresses naturally involved, 
termination of parental rights proceedings should be given high priority.  Delaying 
or deferring termination often means missed opportunities in the life of a child.  
Moreover, when termination decisions are delayed, a child’s emotional issues 
may deteriorate, negatively impacting timely permanence.  A judge should make 
every effort to reduce delay in TPR hearings. 

*Best Practice – Active Judicial Oversight* 

The presiding judge should be actively involved in management of the TPR case 

and take steps to identify issues that may cause unnecessary delay (PA Children’s 
Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 14).  The use of effective tools such as pre-hearing 
conferences, mediation and other facilitation processes, can help identify any possible 
problems that may delay prompt disposition and can streamline the issues in dispute.  

2.2 Jurisdiction of the Court  

As is discussed more fully in Chapter 3: Jurisdiction, under 20 Pa.C.S. § 

711, only judges with Orphans’ Court authority are permitted to preside over TPR 
hearings in Pennsylvania.  (The only exception is for Philadelphia, where 20 
Pa.C.S. § 713 entrusts these matters to the Family Court Division.)  However, in 
those judicial districts in which the jurisdiction of the Dependency Court and the 
Orphans’ Court are separated by statute, the judge who hears the dependency 
matter may be permitted to have the authority of an Orphans’ Court judge for the 
purpose of concluding the adoption of dependent children, including the TPR 
hearing, through a local order of the President Judge (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(i)) (see 
also Chapter 3: Jurisdiction). 

 
 

   

   

                  1

 

 

 126

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

ermination of parent rights proceedings begin with the filing of a petition 

to terminate parental rights (23 Pa.C.S. § 2512).  While this petition is typically 
filed by the child welfare agency solicitor, it can also be filed by the child’s 
Guardian Ad Litem, by an individual with custody who intends to adopt the child, 
or by one parent seeking to terminate the rights of the other.  The petition must 
allege facts in sufficient detail to clarify the petitioner’s legal and factual theory of 
the case and to give the parties notice of the issues.   

12.3 TPR Petitions  
 

  T

2.4  Scheduling of TPR Hearings 

Given that a relatively high percentage of termination cases result in 

contested hearings, scheduling sufficient time for the proceeding is of utmost 
importance.  Because issues are often complex and long-standing, and impact 
the constitutional rights of parents, sufficient time should be allowed for the 
parties to present evidence and testimony.  If multiple days are needed, the court 
should make every effort to schedule the hearing on consecutive days.   
 

*Best Practice – Avoiding Delays* 

Courts can reduce delays by scheduling a pre-trial conference or utilizing 
alternative dispute resolution practices such as mediation or facilitation to resolve 
issues when possible.   
 

Courts may also enhance efficiencies by scheduling practices that are based 

on time estimations provided by assigned counsel, by assigning the case to the judge 
who handled the juvenile proceedings and by assuring counsel is available to the 
parents prior to the hearing.   
 

12.5 Service and Notice 
 

The court should ensure service was made in a proper and timely manner.  

The proof of service or the efforts attempted to provide service must be placed 
on the record. 
 

Service of the TPR petition must be by personal service, by registered or 

certified mail return receipt requested, or by means directed by the court (23 
Pa.C.S. § 2513).  Rule 15.6 of the Orphans’ Court Rules does not recognize first 
class mail as sufficient for notice of an involuntary TPR proceeding.  The better 
practice is to require more than a first class mailing in every TPR case.   
 

 

 
 

  1

 

 

 

127

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

If whereabouts are unknown, or a parent’s identity is unknown, service by 
publication may be required.  The agency should recognize when to proceed with 
publication upon advice of its solicitor.  The court may require it if not satisfied 
that proper service and notice has been made as to any person.   
 

*Best Practice – Locating Absent Parents* 

Judges should insist on serious efforts to locate and notify parents when they are 

not present at earlier stages of litigation.  Asking any parent or relative present at initial 
hearings on record as to the whereabouts of missing parents should be encouraged. 

he court should require the agency to develop standards to improve parent 

location early in the process, to utilize tools such as parent locator service, family finding 
strategies, or to develop a set of form letters asking for information about missing persons 
and inquire of the local child support service agency (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 
2009, p. 10). 
 

  T

If a petition seeks the involuntary termination of parental rights of any 

individual (including a putative parent), and service cannot be accomplished by 
personal delivery, or upon an adult member of the household, or by registered or 
certified mail to a last known address (returned as undelivered), Rule 15.4 and 
15.6 of the Orphans’ Court Rules provide for further notice by publication if 
required by general rule or special order of the local Orphans’ Court.  This 
additional step is not required under Orphans’ Court Rules 15.2 and 15.3 as to 
voluntary relinquishment petitions.  Unknown persons, if a reasonable 
investigation was made, do not require notice under Pa.O.C. Rule 15.6. 
 

Although not controlling as to Orphans’ Court proceedings, one can find 

some guidance in the note to Pa.R.C.P.No. 430 as to illustrations of a good faith 
effort to locate someone: “(1) inquires of postal authorities including inquiries 
pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, (2) inquiries of relatives, neighbors, 
friends, and employers of defendant, and (3) examinations of local telephone 
directories, voter registration records, local tax records, and motor vehicle 
records.”  At a minimum, the agency should indicate the steps taken under the 
“Family Finding” program and resources available in the child welfare field.   
 

The court should ensure that the record clearly reflects the efforts made to 
provide notice, whether they were reasonable, and whether the court is satisfied 
that service and notice requirements have been met.          

2.6 Appointment of Counsel 

With respect to legal representation for both children and parents in TPR 

proceedings, 23 Pa.C.S. §2313 provides as follows: 
 

 
 

 

  1

 

 128

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

Parent: The court must appoint counsel for a parent in an involuntary TPR 
proceeding if, upon petition of the parent, the court determines that the 
parent is unable to pay for counsel without substantial financial hardship 
(23 Pa.C.S. § 2313 (a.1)). 

hild: The court must appoint counsel to represent the child in an 
involuntary termination proceeding when the proceeding is being 
contested by one or both of the parents.  The court may appoint counsel 
or a Guardian Ad Litem to represent any child under 18 years old who is 
the subject any TPR proceeding whenever it is in the best interests of the 
child.  No attorney or law firm is permitted to represent the child and the 
adopting parents simultaneously (23 Pa.C.S. § 2313 (a)). 
 

*Best Practice – Appointment of Counsel* 

While parents have a right to counsel only if they petition the court and show that 

they are unable to afford their own without “substantial hardship”, it might benefit the 
court to devise a process whereby counsel are made available to all parents.  This saves 
valuable court time, prevents possible reversals on appeal, and promotes timely 
permanence for children (23 Pa.C.S. § 2313(a.1)).   

2.7 Discovery 

Discovery in Orphans’ Court matters is currently governed by local 
procedure.  In the absence of a local rule, discovery matters are to be handled 
according to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.   

In most counties discovery is handled on an informal basis.  Courts should 

 
require the agency in a TPR proceeding to make the discoverable material in 
their files available to counsel and establish time frames to respond to discovery 
requests.  All reports should be sent to counsel and the parents well in advance 
of trial and prior to submission to the judge, giving the parties an opportunity to 
prepare responses or present alternative evidence. 

inally, the court should ensure a full and adequate Orphan’s Court record 

for appellate review by making the dependency record—including the original 
dependency petition and all orders that followed it—a part of the TPR record. 

2.8 Continuances  

elays of any kind should be discouraged by the court.  One of the most 

common causes of delay in TPR proceedings can be traced back to omissions in 
the early stages of the dependency process, such as failure to identify the father.  
When a non-custodial parent is identified and brought into the process as early 
as possible, it becomes more likely to achieve an earlier resolution.  If the parent 

 

129

  C

  F

  D

 
 

 

  1

   

   

  1

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

is not located early in the process, it will be difficult to meet this standard and 
may delay permanency for the child.   

Efficient management and court oversight can eliminate many systemic 

sources of delay.  This includes issues regarding notice, scheduling, appointment 
of counsel, and continuity between the dependency and orphan’s court 
proceedings. 

*Best Practice – Limiting Continuances* 

Establishing strict criteria for granting continuances can reduce delays.  The 

court should consider the welfare of the child in deciding any party’s request for 
continuance. 
 

2.9 TPR Methods 

Parental rights can be terminated through three different processes:  

Alternative Procedure for Relinquishment (often referred to as Consent to 
Adoption), Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights, and Involuntary 
Termination of Parental Rights. 
 

12.9.1 Relinquishment under the Alternative Procedure (Consent) 

A parent or parents may choose to give up their parental rights through 

the consent procedure under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2504.  Unlike a voluntary 
relinquishment, consent does not require the parent or parents’ appearance at 
the court hearing.   
 

The alternative procedure requires that the parent or parents each 
execute a Consent to Adoption.  Once the consent is executed, counsel for the 
intermediary (the child welfare agency solicitor) must file a petition to confirm 
consent to adoption (with the consents attached) with the Clerk of the Orphans’ 
Court.  Upon receipt, a hearing for the purpose of confirming a consent to an 
adoption must be scheduled. 

The statutory language for a consent is contained in 23 Pa.C.S. § 2711-12 

of the Adoption Act.  The consent requires two witnesses, and cannot be signed 
until 72 hours after the birth of the child.  A written consent may be revoked by 
the consenting parent up to thirty days after signing.  This revocation must be 
written and delivered to the adoption agency, the attorney handling the matter, or 
the court scheduled to hear the matter.   
 

The hearing on the Petition to Confirm Consent must be scheduled ten or 

more days after the Petition is filed.  Notice of the hearing must be given to the 
relinquishing parent(s) and other parent, to the putative parent whose rights 
could be terminated, and to the parents or guardians of a consenting parent who 

 
 

   

 

              1

 

 

   

 130

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

is a minor.  Notice must be provided by personal service or registered mail or by 
such other means as the court may require upon the consenter and shall be in 
the form provided in section 23 Pa.C.S. § 2513(b). 
 

12.9.2 Voluntary Relinquishment 

Parents may also petition the court to voluntarily relinquish their parental 
rights to the agency (or in some cases to an adult intending to adopt) under 23 
Pa.C.S. § 2501-2502. 
 

While the Adoption Act requires the filing of a petition prior to the court 
hearing a parent’s voluntary relinquishment of parental rights, in dependency 
matters this may not be routinely done.  Often, a voluntary relinquishment occurs 
after the filing of a petition for involuntary termination of parental rights.  In 
essence, the petition for involuntary termination is filed, but, prior to the TPR 
hearing, the parent decides to voluntarily relinquish.  When this occurs, the court 
can adopt the involuntary relinquishment petition as the petition for voluntary 
relinquishment and in doing so can simultaneously meet all legal requirements 
and eliminate delay.   
 

In accepting the voluntary relinquishment of the parent, the judge should 
take extraordinary steps to ensure the relinquishment is knowingly, intelligently, 
and voluntarily made.  The judge should make sure the parent understands the 
consequences of relinquishment and is fully aware of the right to have a trial to 
contest the matter.  One method used by many courts is a colloquy that both 
informs and solicits responses as the basis for the court’s determination.  A 
sample colloquy is offered at the end of this chapter.  

*Best Practice – Making the Record* 

Often times, in both voluntary and involuntary terminations, the parents will not 
appear at the hearing.  In either instance it is important for the judge to make a proper 
record.  The record should address that proper notice was provided to the parents 
and the specific reasons for the termination.   

12.9.3 Involuntary Termination 

The “Involuntary Termination” section of the Adoption Code, 23 Pa.C.S. § 

2511-13, applies to situations in which a parent refuses to relinquish parental 
rights.  In this situation, the petitioner is typically the county child welfare agency.   

 
 

   

 

 

 

 

131

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

*Best Practice—One Judge/One Family* 

Having a One Judge/One Family system is extremely beneficial in cases 
culminating in TPR proceedings.  The judge presiding over the matter, has become well 
acquainted with the family’s situation, and the attempts made by the agency to bring 
together a better and stronger family, and benefits greatly from this knowledge and 
perspective when it becomes necessary to consider a TPR.  

n agency’s initiation of an involuntary termination proceeding often 

comes at the end of months of substantial efforts by the agency to rehabilitate 
and reunite the family, efforts which ultimately proved unsuccessful.  For this 
reason, it is important that the agency document the services given to the 
parents and their failure to make progress toward reunification.   
 

While the law provides nine distinct grounds for involuntary termination of 

parental rights, discussed in detail below, the most common grounds in cases 
where the agency is pursuing termination are abandonment, repeated and 
continued incapacity, and failure of services offered by the agency to rectify the 
situation that led to intervention.  In evaluating the petition for termination of 
parental rights, the positions of the parties, and the testimonial evidence from the 
hearing, the judge must examine whether there is clear and convincing 
evidence of parental conduct meeting the statutory requirements for involuntary 
termination.  If so, the judge must consider the effect of the proposed termination 
on the child and whether termination is in the child’s best interests.  In making 
this assessment, the court must consider the extent to which a bond exists 
between the child and parents and, if a bond exists, the impact that severing the 
bond will have on the child.  The finding of a bond does not preclude termination 
of parental rights.  Instead, the judge’s approach must be two-pronged—first 
evaluating the existence of a bond, then the impact that severing the bond will 
have on the child.  
 

When rendering a decision with regard to a pending Petition for 

involuntary termination of parental rights, it is essential that the statutory 
requirements of each section be met.  It is also helpful to the court to set forth a 
history of the placement of the child.  This should include a factual summary in 
addition to the grounds on which Involuntary Termination has been based.  
Including the date of initial referral to the agency, date of adjudication of 
dependency, history of placement(s), and copies of all court orders can assist in 
building the record for the judge’s decision.  

  A

 
 

 

 132

 
 

 

 

 

 

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

*Best Practice—Combined Hearings* 

In many counties, the Permanency Hearing in which a goal change is being 
considered and the TPR Hearing are combined.  Combining these proceedings results in 
one appeal, which can expedite the appellate process and enhance timely permanence 
for children. 

 

12.10 Grounds for Involuntary Termination 
 

may be granted under any of the following grounds: 
 

Under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a), an involuntary termination of parental rights 

(1)  The parent, by conduct continuing for a period of at least six 
months immediately preceding the filing of the petition either has 
evidenced a settled purpose of relinquishing parental claim to a child or 
has refused or failed to perform parental duties.  In cases in which this 
ground is alleged, the court should pay attention to the amount and 
regularity of the parent’s visits with the child, attendance at medical and 
educational appointments, ongoing contact between the parent and child, 
whether the parent evidenced a commitment to the child and the ultimate 
goal of reunification, utilized the opportunities offered by the agency, 
provided gifts, cards, or letters, and made contact with the child a more 
serious priority than personal needs.  Similarly important is whether the 
agency made visitation and contact with the child workable, in light of the 
parent’s family situation, work schedule, and transportation requirements.  

(2)  The repeated and continued incapacity, abuse, neglect, or refusal 
of the parent has caused the child to be without essential parental 
care, control, or subsistence necessary for his physical or mental 
well-being and the conditions and causes of the incapacity, abuse, 
neglect, or refusal cannot or will not be remedied by the parent.  
When proceeding under this provision, the agency is not constrained by 
time frames.  At the same time, parental incapacity, such as substance 
abuse or involvement in the criminal justice system, does not 
automatically cause the child to be “without essential parental care, 
control, or subsistence necessary for his or her physical or mental well-
being.”  And parental rights may not be terminated solely on the basis of 
environmental factors such as inadequate housing, furnishings, income, 
clothing and medical care if found to be beyond the control of the parent.   

(3)  The parent is the presumptive but not the natural father of the 
child. 

(4)  The child is in the custody of an agency, having been found 
under such circumstances that the identity or whereabouts of the 

 

133

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

parent is unknown and cannot be ascertained by a diligent search for 
the parent which has been made and the parent does not claim the 
child within three months after the child is found. 

(5) The child has been removed from the care of the parent by the 
court or under a voluntary agreement with an agency for a period of 
at least six months, the conditions which led to the removal or 
placement of the child continue to exist, the parent cannot or will not 
remedy those conditions within a reasonable period of time, the 
services or assistance reasonably available to the parent are not 
likely to remedy the conditions which led to the removal or 
placement of the child within a reasonable period of time and 
termination of the parental rights would best serve the needs and 
welfare of the child.  The court must determine on a case-by-case basis 
whether the parent has had sufficient time to correct the problems leading 
to the child’s removal or placement, considering the number and severity 
of the problems to be corrected and the child’s best interests.  Also 
relevant is to what extent services offered were truly “available” to the 
parent, financially and geographically.  However, a parent’s current vow to 
cooperate with services offered, after a long period of uncooperativeness 
regarding the necessity or availability of services, may be rejected by the 
court as untimely or disingenuous (In the Interest of K.Z.S., 946 A.2d 753 
(Pa. Super. 2008)). 

(6)  In the case of a newborn child, the parent knows or has reason to 
know of the child’s birth, does not reside with the child, has not 
married the child’s other parent, has failed for a period of four 
months immediately preceding the filing of the petition to make 
reasonable efforts to maintain substantial and continuing contact 
with the child and has failed during the same four month period to 
provide substantial financial support for the child. 

(7)  The parent is the father of a child conceived as a result of rape or 
incest. 

(8)  The child has been removed from the care of the parent by the 
court or under a voluntary agreement with an agency, 12 months or 
more have elapsed from the date of removal or placement, the 
conditions which led to the removal or placement of the child 
continue to exist and termination of parental rights would best serve 
the needs and welfare of the child.   

(9)  The parent has been convicted of one of the following in which 
the victim was a child of the parent: 

I.  an offense under 18 Pa.C.S. Ch. 25 (relating to criminal 

homicide); 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 134

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

II.  a felony under 18 Pa.C.S.  § 2702 (relating to aggravated 

assault); 

III.  an offense in another jurisdiction equivalent to an offense 

IV. an attempt, solicitation or conspiracy to commit an offense 

in subparagraph (i) or (ii); or 

in subparagraph (i), (ii) or (iii). 

As previously mentioned, sections (a)(1),(2),(5), and (8) are the provisions 
most commonly cited when the agency moves to terminate parental rights on an 
involuntary basis.  With respect to any petition filed pursuant to subsections 
(a)(1), (6) or (8), the court shall not consider any efforts by the parent to remedy 
the conditions described in the petition if they are first initiated subsequent to the 
giving of notice of the filing of the petition (23 Pa.C.S.§ 2511(b)). 
 

While rare, there may be cases in which the court may refuse to terminate 
parental rights even if grounds to do so exist (In re:  R.L.T.M., 860 A.2d 190 (Pa. 
Super. 2004)).  The court must take into account the impact of severing close 
parental ties and the resulting pain this may cause the child when considering the 
“best interests of the child” standard (In re Adoption of K.J., 936 A.2d 1128 (Pa. 
Super. 2007)). 

2.11  Additional Considerations in Involuntary Termination 

Cases 

12.11.1 Parent-Child Bond Issues  

Once the court has reached a determination that grounds for involuntary 

termination have been met under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a), consideration of the 
parent-child bond under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(b) is required. 
 

Further, 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(b) requires a court considering terminating the 

rights of a parent to “give primary consideration to the developmental, physical 
and emotional needs and welfare of the child.”   This statutory provision does not 
use the term “bond;” however, appellate case law has established that in every 
case the Orphans’ Court must evaluate the emotional bond, if any, between the 
parent and child, as a factor in the determination of the child’s developmental, 
physical and emotional needs (In the Matter of K.K.R.-S., 958 A.2d 529 (Pa. 
Super. 2008)).  Accordingly, the record should reflect that the parties have 
presented relevant evidence not just as to the grounds for termination, but also 
as to the effect a TPR would have on the child.  Such evidence must be carefully 
evaluated by the judge, with specific findings under section 2511(b) set forth in 
the decision, as well as any opinion issued in support of TPR. 
 

The evidence typically proffered for this aspect of the TPR proceeding 

includes, in addition to any testimony by the parent and child: 
 

 

135

 
 

 

  1

 

 

 
 

 

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

-  Observations of the caseworkers or others of the interactions between 

parent and child at visits, or at other times they are in contact, such as at 
the courthouse for hearings; 

-  Testimony of kinship providers or foster parents as to the child’s behaviors 

before or after visits or telephone calls with a parent; 

-  The nature and amount of requests by a parent or child for more visits or 

contact between them; 

-  Efforts of a parent to maintain a close relationship with their child;   
-  The absence of contact or missed visits negatively affecting the child; and 
-  Expert testimony with respect to a bonding assessment, consisting of 

interviews and observations by the evaluator. 

Practice varies with respect to formal bonding assessments in 

Pennsylvania; in some counties they are rare, in others they are routine.  Neither 
the statute nor case law require the Orphans’ Court in a TPR proceeding to order 
that a formal bonding evaluation be performed by an expert (In the Matter of 
K.K.R.-S., supra).  There are certain cases where the judge may conclude that 
one should be done to aid in the final decision-making, as in In the Interest of 
K.Z.S., 946 A.2d 753 (Pa. Super. 2008) (calling this a “wise approach” but also 
recognizing it is not always needed, and that the evaluation process itself in 
some instances may be detrimental to the child).   
 

Whether a bond exists, however, is not the full extent of the inquiry; rather, 
it is whether the bond indicates a beneficial relationship that should be preserved 
(In re: C.L.G., 956 A.2d 999 (Pa. Super. 2008)) (bond stronger with foster 
parents).  The presence of some bond does not preclude a TPR, as even an 
abused child may harbor some emotional attachment to an abusive parent.  If the 
court finds there is a bond between the parent and child, a second analysis must 
determine whether the bond is worth saving and whether it can be severed 
without irreparable harm to the child (In the Interest of K.Z.S., supra at 764).  In 
the final analysis, the needs and welfare of the child are paramount.  Thus, a 
TPR under section 2511(b) is appropriate to provide a child “with the 
permanence necessary for the ‘fulfillment’ of her potential in a permanent, 
healthy and safe environment” (In Re:  C.L.G. at 1011). 
  

*Best Practice—Bond Findings* 

The trial court should always make clear findings of fact as to the nature and 

strength of the bond and relationship of the child with the parents or guardians and with 
the foster parents.  Even when not challenged on appeal, the Appellate Courts have 
made this a critical issue to be addressed in the trial court’s decision and this analysis 
should be included in the trial court’s opinion (In Re. C.L.G., 956 A.2d 999 (Pa. Super. 
2008) (en banc)).   

 

   

 

                 

 136

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

Under 23 Pa. C.S A. § 2503, the court may enter a decree terminating the 
parental rights of a putative father who (1) fails to appear at the TPR hearing for 
the purpose of objecting to termination of his parental rights, (2) fails to file a 
written objection to such termination before the hearing, and (3) has not filed an 
acknowledgment of paternity or claim of paternity. 
 

Petitioner’s counsel is tasked with meeting notice and service 

requirements in situations involving a putative or an unknown father, despite that 
parent’s anonymity (Pa.R.C.P.No.107, 430, 1018, 1018.1).   As noted earlier, 
with leave of court, and after a diligent search, the unknown parent may be 
notified by publication.   
 

12.11.3 Incarcerated Parents 

Incarcerated parents present particular issues for a judge’s consideration.  

First, it is well established that incarceration, alone, is not sufficient to support 
termination under any subsection of 23 Pa. C.S. § 2511 (a) (In re Adoption of 
C.L.G., 956 A.2d 999, 1006 (Pa. Super. 2008)).  On the other hand, a parent’s 
incarceration does not preclude termination of parental rights if the incarcerated 
parent fails to utilize given resources and to take affirmative steps to support a 
parent-child relationship (In re D.J.S., 737 A.2d 283 (Pa. Super. 1999)).  
Incarceration is but one factor the judge must consider in analyzing a parent’s 
performance.  While incarcerated, a parent is expected to utilize whatever 
resources are available to him in order to foster a continuing close relationship 
with his children (Adoption of Baby Boy A. 517 A.2d 1244, 1246 (Pa. 1986)).  
Where the parent does not exercise reasonable firmness in “declining to yield to 
obstacles” his parental rights may be forfeited (In re A.L.D., 797 A.2d 326 (Pa. 
Super 2002)). 
 

n incarcerated parent’s responsibilities are not tolled during 
incarceration.  The judge must inquire whether the parent utilized available 
resources to maintain a close relationship with the child while he or she was in 
prison (Id. at 1006).  A parent is expected to be steadfast in overcoming 
obstacles to maintaining the parent-child relationship (In re Burns, 379 A.2d 535 
(Pa. 1977)).  
 

ssessing the parent-child bond is also problematic and challenging when 

a parent is incarcerated.  Often, the child has either had minimal contact or no 
contact with the incarcerated parent.  In these circumstances, direct interaction 
between the parent and the child could be detrimental to the child.  For example, 
where the children had no contact with the mother for two years because of her 
incarceration, the judge could consider a bonding assessment that was not 
based on observation of the children interacting with their mother, because the 
expert testified that a brief reunion with the mother followed by no further contact 

  A

  A

12.11.2 Putative Fathers 

 
 

 

   

 

137

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

if termination occurred could be harmful for the children (In re K.C.F., 928 A.2d 
1046, 1052 (Pa. Super. 2007)).   

Clearly, each case of an incarcerated parent facing termination must be 
analyzed on its own facts, keeping in mind, with respect to terminations sought 
on the ground of “continued incapacity” under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511 (a)(2), that the 
child’s need for consistent parental care and stability cannot be put on hold 
simply because the parent is doing what she is supposed to be doing in prison 
(In re E.A.P., 944 A.2d 79, 84 (Pa. Super. 2008)).  

In making its determination, the court should consider the following factual 

matters:  
 

-  Participation in prison parenting programs; 
-  Completion of required programs, such as sexual offender’s 

-  Period of incarceration, earliest release date.  (Has the parent been, or 

will he/she be incarcerated much of the child’s young life?); 

-  Rehabilitation from criminal activity (In re: C.S., 761 A.2d 1197 (Pa. 

counseling; 

Super. 2000)); 

-  Whether the parent has written to the child during incarceration (In re: 

C.S., 761 A.2d 1197 (Pa. Super. 2000)); 

-  Parent’s ability to articulate a plan as to housing for the child and 

employment following release; and 

-  Whether the parent maintained communication with CYS to provide 
requested information or consents (In re D.J.S., 737 A.2d 283 (Pa. 
Super. 1999)).   

2.12  Decree of Termination of Parental Rights 

After the TPR hearing, the court may enter a decree of termination of 

parental rights.  As articulated in 23 Pa.C.S. § 2521, the effects of a decree of 
termination include: 
 

Loss of right to object to adoption.   The decree extinguishes all rights 

of the parent to object to or receive notice of adoption proceedings. 
 

Award of custody.  The decree gives custody of the child to the agency 

(or the petitioner, if the TPR was sought by a person seeking to adopt).  
 

Authority of agency or person receiving custody.   The recipient of 

custody stands in loco parentis to the child and may exercise whatever authority 
a natural parent has, including authority to consent to marriage, to enlistment in 
the armed forces, and to major medical, psychiatric and surgical treatment.  
 

 
 

   

   

  1

 

 138

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

At the time the transmittal of a decree of termination, the judge must 
advise terminated parents in writing of their continuing right to place and update 
personal and medical history information on file with the court and with the 
Department of Public Welfare (23 Pa.C.S. § 2503). 

 

 

*Best Practice—Findings and Orders* 

Making a good record from the beginning can make the writing of the Opinion easier 
in a case that is appealed.  The court can bypass the need to write an Opinion by pointing to 
the place in the record where the reasons for its decision appear (Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a)).  This 
procedure may aid in meeting the Children’s Fast Track timelines in an appeal situation (For 
more information, see Chapter 13: Appeals). 

 
 

                       

 

139

 

 

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

Sample Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights Colloquy 

The Court has been informed that you want to enter a voluntary 

relinquishment of your parental rights to (child’s name and date of birth).  In order 
to accept your voluntary relinquishment of parental rights, the court must 
complete a colloquy.  The colloquy is a series of questions that will help the court 
determine if you fully understand what voluntary relinquishment is and ensure the 
court that you are relinquishing your parental rights voluntarily, intelligently, and 
fully aware of what it means and what the possible consequences of your 
relinquishment are. 
 

1.  What is the highest grade you completed in school? 

2.  Do you read, write, and understand English? 

3.  Have you taken anything into your body today that would affect your ability to 

understand or participate in today’s proceedings? 

The court was told that you want to enter a voluntary relinquishment of your 
parental rights to (child’s name and date of birth) today.  Is that correct? 

5.  Do you understand you have the right to counsel? 

6.  Do you understand you have the right to require the agency to prove by clear 
and convincing evidence that your parental rights should be terminated? 

7.  Do you understand you have the right to have a trial where the agency could 

call witnesses? 

8.  Do you understand at that trial you could cross examine the agency’s 
witnesses, call your own witnesses, and testify on your behalf? 

9.  Do you understand if you testify on your own behalf, the agency and GAL 

could cross-examine you? 

10.  Do you understand that the GAL is here to represent your child’s best 

interest, that he/she participates in the trial and ultimately makes a 
recommendation as to whether your rights should be terminated or not? 

11.  Do you understand that if you voluntarily relinquish your rights, you give up or 

waive all those things we just discussed? 

12.  Understanding this, do you wish to voluntarily relinquish your rights to (child’s 

name and date of birth)? 

 
4. 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

140

Termination of Parental Rights 

 

13.  Do you understand that if you voluntarily relinquish your parental rights your 
rights to (child name/age) are forever ended and your child will be placed for 
adoption? 

14.  Once the court finds that you entered this voluntary relinquishment your 
parental rights to (child name/age) are forever terminated.  Do you 
understand that? 

15.  Have you had enough time to talk about this with your attorney? 

16.  Are you satisfied with your attorney’s representation? 

17.  Do you have any questions about anything your attorney told you? 

18.  Do you have any questions about anything I just explained? 

19.  Has anybody made any promises or threats to get you to voluntarily relinquish 

your parental rights? 

20.  Do you believe it is in your best interest and your child’s best interest to 

voluntarily relinquish your parental rights? 

Is there anything you might want to put on this record right now that you may 
want your child someday to know? 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
21. 

 141

 

TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS HEARING 
BENCHCARD 

Relevant Statutes and Rules 

23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(1) – (9) (grounds) and 2511 
(b) (emotional bond/needs and welfare);  

ennsylvania Orphans’ Court Rules 15.2, 15.3, 

15.4 and 15.6 
 
Divests parents’ legal status and contact.  This 
can be by a contested involuntary termination; a 
voluntary relinquishment, or a petition to confirm 
consent (see section 12.9 of this chapter). 

t is often referred to as a “death penalty” 
proceeding due to the finality of the TPR order 
which severs all ties between the child and 
parent.  
   
The federal Adoption and Safe Families Act 
(ASFA) and the Pennsylvania Juvenile Act require 
the child welfare agency to file a TPR petition 
when a child has been in foster care 15 of the 
most recent 22 months. 

he Adoption Act does not bar bringing the 

petition sooner than the ASFA requirements, so 
long as one of the nine grounds for TPR as set 
forth in 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511 are present. 
 
The formal rules of evidence in Orphans’ Court 
apply.  The burden of proof on the agency is to 
establish at least one of the statutory grounds for 
TPR by “clear and convincing evidence”.  
  
Finalization of Adoption Hearing: If an appeal is 
taken, file a statement of reasons or prepare an 
opinion as per the Fast Track Rules.   

ntil such time that the appeal is resolved, the 

adoption is finalized and dependency is 
terminated statute requires Permanency Hearings 
at a minimum of every six months.   

est practice is to conduct review hearings a 

minimum of every 3 months. 
 

  P

  I

  T

  U

  B

Purpose of Hearing 

Time Frame  

Rules of Evidence 

Next Hearing 

 

142

KEY QUESTIONS/DETERMINATIONS 
TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS HEARING  
 

Is each parent identified (paternity established)? 

  What is the explanation as to any parent not present?   

o  Was proper notice provided? (The court must put on the record that 

service or notice was delivered in a proper, timely manner.)  

•  Does each parent have proper legal representation? 

If a consent (and parent is in attendance) or voluntary relinquishment by 
parent, has there been a complete colloquy with the parent(s) as to his or 
her understanding of the rights surrendered (see sample colloquy at the 
end of this chapter)?   

  Has the Agency met its burden as to one or more of the statutory grounds 
under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)?  (The Court must identify on the record one 
or more specific grounds for termination (under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a). 

•  Has the Agency incorporated into the record all of the prior determinations 

and proceedings of the juvenile court? 

•  Have the relevant exhibits been formally admitted into evidence and made 

a part of the record? 

•  Has there been adequate evidence presented as to the consideration 

under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(b) of any emotional bond between parent and 
child? (The court must make a statement on the record regarding bond.) 

•  What effect would an order of TPR have on the child? (The court must 

make a finding that the needs and welfare of the child are met through the 
granting of TPR.) 

•  Has an adoptive home been identified (only as a consideration for needs 

and welfare)? 

• 

Is the GAL present and prepared to provide a considered 
recommendation? 

• 

 •

 

 •

 •

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

 143

Appeals    
Chapter 13 ––––Appeals
Chapter 13 
Appeals
Appeals
Chapter 13 
Chapter 13 

3.1 Overview 

In recognition of the fact that childhood is brief and final decisions in 

dependency cases must be rendered as quickly as possible to ensure 
permanency for the children involved, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has 
adopted a special set of expedited Children’s Fast Track (CFT) appellate rules.  
All appeals from orders involving dependency, termination of parental rights, 
adoptions, custody, and paternity are designated as CFT appeals (Pa.R.A.P. 
102.).  The expedited CFT rules streamline the requirements for filing appeals 
and submitting records, transcripts, and trial court opinions and speed the 
processes used by the higher courts to decide appellate issues.   

3.2 CFT Rules at a Glance 

he distinctive features of appeals under the CFT rules, which became 

effective March 16, 2009 and apply to all appeals from orders involving 
dependency, termination of parental rights, adoptions, custody and paternity, are 
noted below: 

otice of appeal and concise statement of errors: 

•  The notice of appeal shall include a statement that the appeal is a 

children’s fast track appeal (Pa.R.A.P. 904(f)).   

•  The clerk must stamp the notice of appeal with “Children’s Fast Track” 

designation in red ink (Pa.R.A.P. 905(b)). 

•  The concise statement of errors complained of on appeal must be filed 
and served with the notice of appeal required by Rule 905 (Pa.R.A.P. 
1925(a)(2)(i)). 

Opinion and record: 
 

•  Upon receipt of the notice of appeal and the concise statement, if the 
reasons for the subject order do not already appear in the record, the 
judge who entered the order must, within 30 days, file at least a brief 
opinion indicating the reasons for the order (Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a)(2)(ii)). 

(cid:3)  The late filing of a Rule 1925 statement by the Appellant will not 

lead to the automatic finding of waiver.  In In re K.T.E.L., 2009 WL 
3367060 (Pa. Super. October 21, 2009), the Superior Court 
distinguished the filing of a Rule 1925 statement under the new 
Children’s Fast Track rules from those instances where a Rule 
1925 statement was ordered by the trial court (See Commonwealth 

144

  T

  N

 

 

 

 

 

  1

 

  1

Appeals 

 

v. Lord, 555 Pa. 415, 719 A.2d 306 (1998) and Commonwealth v. 
Castillo, 585 Pa. 395, 888 A.2d 775 (2005)).  Under the new 
Children’s Fast Track rules, the failure to file a timely Rule 1925 
statement is treated as excusable under Pa.R.A.P. 902 as a 
defective notice of appeal, rather than the failure to comply with an 
order of court. 

  The record on appeal, including transcripts and exhibits necessary for 
determination of the appeal, must be transmitted to the appellate court 
within 30 days after the notice of appeal is filed (Pa.R.A.P. 1931(a)(2)). 

Dispositive motions: 
 

•  Dispositive motions must be filed within 10 days of filing the concise 
statement of errors complained of on appeal or within 10 days of trial 
court’s filing of its Rule 1925(a) opinion, whichever period expires last 
(Pa.R.A.P. 1972(b)).  

nders Briefs: 

  A

 

•  When counsel believes that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, 
counsel may file a brief with the appellate court requesting to withdraw 
from representation pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 
(1967).  Along with the Anders brief, counsel should also file a separate 
petition to withdraw from representation with the appellate court’s 
prothonotary.  See In re V.E., 611 A.2d 1267 (Pa.Super. 1992), in which 
the Superior Court extended the Anders principles to appeals involving 
the termination of parental rights.  The briefing requirements of Anders 
are appropriate and applicable in an appeal from an order terminating 
parental rights.  In re S.M.B., 856 A.2d 1235, 1237 (Pa.Super. 2004).  The 
Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently addressed the Anders briefing 
requirements for briefs filed pursuant to briefing schedules established 
after August 25, 2009.  See Commonwealth v. Santiago, (Pa. 2009).   

13.3 Trial Judge’s Role in Expediting Appeals 
 

Although the responsibility for expediting CFT appeals rests largely with 

the appellate court, all parties should seek to ensure these cases are given 
priority and heard in a timely manner.  There are several ways trial judges can 
help to ensure the expedited process runs smoothly.  

 
 

 •

 

 

 

 145

 
 

Appeals 

 

First, the judge should be sure to place on the record a comprehensive 

discussion of the reasons for the final order in the case.   When a case is 
appealed, Pennsylvania requires the trial court to write an opinion that discusses 
the reasons for its decision.  In lieu of a written opinion, however, Pa.R.A.P. 
1925(a) authorizes the court to indicate the place in the record where the 
reasons for its decision appear.  This is a useful alternative in dependency cases 
that are appealed, because the CFT rules impose a 30-day (as opposed to the 
usual 60-day) deadline for transmitting the record, including the transcript and 
exhibits necessary for the determination of the appeal, to Superior Court.   

econd, in exercising its responsibility to prepare and transmit the record 

to the appellate court, the trial court should give priority to cases involving 
termination of parental rights or adoption and make sure that processes are in 
place for speedy preparation and transmission of the record. 

inally, if an adoptive home for the child must be found, the trial court 

must ensure the search for an adopting family continues pending the decision on 
the appeal, in the same manner as if the case were not being appealed.  If an 
appropriate family is found for the child, visits and placement in the home should 
proceed while the appeal is pending.  The risk that the appeal might be granted 
is overshadowed by the detriment an extended delay would cause if the search 
were placed on hold during the appeals process and the trial court’s ruling 
upheld. 
 

  S

  F

 

146

 

 

When a child cannot be safely reunited with his or her birth family, 
adoption is generally seen as the next most permanent option, because it gives 
the child a permanent, legal family with the same legal standing and protection 
as a family created through birth.  Through adoption, all 
parental rights and responsibilities are legally and 
permanently transferred to the adoptive parent.  In 
cases where successful, safe reunification is not an 
option, adoption is the best possible alternative for 
many children, providing a sense of belonging and 
security that cannot be found in other “temporary living 
arrangements.”   
 

“When children can’t be 
reunified with their birth 
parents, adoption is a 
wonderful alternative to help 
kids connect with a family.  I 
found a woman to call my 
mom and I know she will 
love me forever.  I hope all 
children in foster care have 
the same chance.”   

The adoption hearing is typically the final step in 

  -

the process of securing a permanent family for the 
dependent child.  It is a time of happiness for both the 
child and the adoptive family.  With all the needed legal 
requirements completed and service supports in place, 
the adoption hearing is an opportunity for celebration.  This is a special day for 
everyone involved and should be so recognized.  The judge presiding over the 
hearing has an opportunity to assist in the celebration by accommodating the 
unique wishes and desires of the child and family.   

 J.W., 20, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

*Best Practice—Adoption Celebrations* 

any counties throughout the Commonwealth take extraordinary steps to 

make the day of adoption a very special one for children and their adoptive families.  
Celebrations range from formal “Adoption Days,” where numerous adoptions are 
finalized on the same day with accompanying celebration activities, to more simple 
practices that encourage adopting families to design their own adoption experiences, 
often including extended family members and friends.   

hatever the process, the judge is in a unique position to recognize the 

importance of the day and support each family’s desire for making the day a special 
one.  Pictures and video recordings are encouraged and can help memorialize the 
day.  In many courts, adoptees are encouraged to come to the judge’s bench and 
bang the gavel to end the ceremony and “symbolically” begin life in the adoptive 
family.  Other courts provide small tokens to adoptees, such as stuffed animals or 
books, to help them remember the occasion. 

  M

 

  W

14.1  Overview  
 

 

 Adoption    
Chapter 14 14 14 14 ---- Adoption
Chapter 
 Adoption
 Adoption
Chapter 
Chapter 

147

 

       

Adoption 

 

Adoption in Pennsylvania is generally governed by the Adoption Act, 23 

Pa.C.S. § 2101 et seq.  Other laws that may bear on adoptions involving 
dependent children (described more fully in Chapter 16: Summary of Major 
Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation) include the Interstate Compact on 
Placement of Children, 62 P.S. § 761, et seq.; the Adoption Opportunities Act, 62 
P.S.  § 771-74 (relating to placement of special needs children); and various 
federal laws, including the Indian Child Welfare Act, the Adoption and Safe 
Families Act of 1997, and the Fostering Connections Act of 2008.  In addition, 
various Department of Public Welfare regulations may impact the adoption 
process. 

nder 23 Pa.C.S. § 2302, adoption proceedings may be brought in the 

court of any of the following counties: 

•  Where the parent, the adoptee, or the person filing the report/notice of 

intention to adopt resides; 

•  Where the agency having custody of the adoptee is located; 
•  Where the agency that placed the adoptee is located; or 
•  With leave of the court, where the adoptee formerly resided.  

  U

As is discussed more fully in Chapter 3: Jurisdiction, under 20 Pa.C.S. § 

711, only judges with Orphans’ Court authority are permitted to preside over 
adoption hearings.  (The only exception is for Philadelphia, where 20 Pa.C.S. § 
713 entrusts these matters to the Family Court Division.)  However, in those 
judicial districts in which the jurisdiction of the Dependency Court and the 
Orphans’ Court are separated by statute (see list in Chapter 3, footnote 1), the 
judge who hears the dependency matter may be permitted to have the authority 
of an Orphans’ Court judge for the purpose of concluding the adoption through a 
local order of the President Judge (42 Pa.C.S. §6351(i)). 
 

*Best Practice—One Judge/One Family* 

14.2  Jurisdiction 
 

As in earlier stages of the dependency process, the “One Judge – One Family” is 

pertinent to the adoption phase.  When possible, having the judge who initiated the 
dependency matter preside over the adoption finalization may help add consistency and 
closure for the child and the family (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 14).   

4.3  Pre-Adoption Requirements 

The court has the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that all required pre-

hearing steps are completed.  These include: 
 

1.  Pre-adoptive Home Study & Pre-placement Report.  This report on 
the prospective adoptive parent must have been completed within 

 
 

 

 

  1

   

 148

149

Adoption 

 

three years prior to placement of the adoptee in the home and 
updated within one year prior to placement of the adoptee.  The pre-
placement report must include information regarding the fitness of the 
adoptive parents and the home environment (See 23 Pa.C.S. § 2530 
for specific elements required in the report). 

 

 

2.  Report of Intention to Adopt (also known as Notice of Intention to 
Adopt).  This report/notice must be filed by the person who has 
custody of an adoptee with the court in which the petition for adoption 
will be filed.  This report must include specific information regarding 
the person having custody of the child, the child, and the intermediary 
(23 Pa.C.S. § 2531).  It is often filed simultaneously with the 
termination of parental rights petition but can be filed later if a 
permanent resource family has yet to be identified for the child.  The 
report/notice must be filed within 30 days of receiving physical care of 
the adoptee (23 Pa.C.S. § 2532). 

3.  Report of the Intermediary.  Within 6 months after filing the Report of 

Intention to Adopt, the intermediary that arranged the adoption 
placement must make a written report to the court where the adoption 
will be filed and notify the adopting parents that the report has been 
filed.  (In dependency cases, the intermediary is the county child 
welfare agency.)  The report must contain specific information 
regarding the intermediary, the child, and the prospective adoptive 
parents (23 Pa.C.S. § 2533 (b)).  Required attachments include the 
child’s birth certificate, any consent necessary for adoption, and a 
certified decree of the termination of parental rights if the adoption is 
occurring in any county other than the county in which the termination 
occurred. 

4.  Adoption Subsidy Agreement.  This is a binding agreement that is 
negotiated between the adopting parent and the agency having 
custody of the adoptee.  It articulates ongoing financial and 
programmatic supports for the adoptee, including reimbursement for 
allowable expenses related to the adoption process.  Any agreed-upon 
monthly subsidy rate cannot exceed the amount that would have been 
provided had the adoptee remained in foster care.  The agreement 
must be completed prior to the final adoption order and terminates 
upon the child’s eighteenth birthday.   

 
 

 

 

   

 

       

 

 

Adoption 

 

*Best Practice—Adoption Subsidies and Services* 

In most counties, creation of the Adoption Subsidy Agreement is the 

responsibility of the child welfare agency, subject to the approval of the County Board 
of Commissioners, and does not involve the court.  However, it is certainly in the 
adoptee’s best interest for the court to ensure that the child’s ongoing needs have 
been addressed prior to concluding the court’s oversight.  The judge should make 
sure adoptive parents are aware of services and financial resources available prior to 
the finalization of the adoption, including the availability of post-adoption services 
should such be needed.  The judge should also work with agency administration to 
ensure a local process that accommodates the timely completion of Adoption Subsidy 
Agreements without slowing the legal adoption process.   

he Petition for Adoption is the final pleading and is filed after parental 

rights have been terminated.  The petition must include information and exhibits 
as delineated in 23 Pa.C.S. § 2701-2. 

he consent of a child of 12 or older is required for an adoption under 23 

Pa.C.S. § 2711. 

  T

  T

Notice of the adoption hearing, by personal service or registered mail, 

must be given to the child, the agency and any other persons the court directs 
(23 Pa.C.S. § 2721). 

There is no requirement that counsel be appointed or that counsel be 

present for the adoption hearing.  Adoptive parents are generally represented by 
privately retained counsel, an allowable adoption reimbursement expense.   

14.4.2 Attendance at Hearing 

The adopting parent or parents and the adoptee must attend the hearing.  

In addition, the child welfare agency generally attends the hearing.  The court 
may require testimony of anyone present. 

4.4  Adoption Hearings 

14.4.1 Preliminary Matters 

 
 

 

  1

 

 

   

   

   

   

               

 150

Adoption 

 

*Best Practice—Attendance at Adoption Hearings* 

Many courts encourage adoptive parents to invite a wide range of “guests” to 

witness the adoption, including extended family members, church congregations, 
school friends, work associates, and others.  Courts often encourage former 
caseworkers for the child/family, GALs and CASA to attend the hearing as well. 
 

Where possible, guests may be allowed to participate through direct testimony 

or by reading poetry, providing prayers, singing, decorating the courtroom, taking 
pictures/videos, or simply sharing hopes for the future of the adoptee and the new 
family.  Activities that reflect the adoptee’s and adoptive family’s values, traditions and 
beliefs should be encouraged.   
 

14.4.3 Testimony and Investigation  

While the adoption hearing can be and often is relatively short, its 
importance in the lives of children and their new families cannot be understated.  
The judge’s job is to ensure that the event is both memorable and legally sound.  
A set of questions which may assist judges are found at the end of this chapter.  
While not exhaustive, the list provides possible questions aimed at eliciting 
needed information. 
 

Prior to the conclusion of the hearing, the judge should ensure evidence 

and testimony have been provided to sufficiently answer the following questions: 
 

1.  Have all legal requirements been met? 
2.  Why is the adoption in the best interest of the child? 
3.  What is the child’s current adjustment in the home, school, and 

community? 

4.  Do the adopting parent(s) understand the rights and responsibilities of 
this newly created parent-child relationship—including the permanency 
and obligations of adoption? 

5.  Has there been full disclosure regarding the child’s medical and 

psychological background? 

6.  If over the age of 12 years, does the child consent to the adoption? 
7.  Has the adopting family signed the adoption assistance agreement and 

are there any questions regarding the agreement? 
8.  Are all necessary services and supports in place? 
9.  Is the new family aware of available services and support to meet the 

adoptee’s current and future needs, and do they know who to contact if 
they need assistance in the future? 

 
 

 

 

 

   

     

 

151

Adoption 

 

*Best Practice—Conduct of Adoption Hearings* 

The Adoption Petition provides the court with significant written information 
about the child and adoptive parents.  By reviewing this information prior to the hearing, 
the judge can glean pertinent information and craft questions that solicit the needed 
information to meet legal requirements, solidify family relationships, and ease the 
child/family’s concern about this final hearing. 

Some judges encourage the adopted children to sit with the adoptive mother or 

father on the witness stand or join the judge on the bench, asking just a few short 
questions as a means of helping the child feel included in the proceedings.   

hile the judge must take steps to finalize all legal requirements in these final 

proceedings, special steps should also be taken to ensure a tone that is neither 
adversarial nor confrontational.   
 

4.5  Adoption Orders 

nce the court is satisfied that the statements made in the petition are 

true, that the needs and welfare of the adoptee will be promoted by the adoption 
and that all legal requirements have been met, the court must enter a decree so 
finding and directing that the adoptee shall have all the rights of a child to and 
heir of the adoptive parents and be subject to the duties of a child to them (23 
Pa.C.S. § 2902).  While the court enters its decree, it is not distributed to any 
party (see 23 Pa.C.S. § 2905).  Instead, the adoptive parents receive a 
Certificate of Adoption. 

he Certificate of Adoption reciting that the court has granted the adoption 

is issued by the clerk to the adoptive parent or parents.  The certificate cannot 
disclose the name of any natural parent or the original name of the adoptee.  The 
certificate must be accepted in any legal proceedings in the Commonwealth as 
evidence of the fact that the adoption has been granted and is valid in 
Pennsylvania.   
 

Finally, while there is no standard adoption order in the AOPC’s CPCMS 

Dependency Module (as this is an Orphan’s Court proceeding), a mechanism 
should be in place to close the dependency proceedings using the CPCMS 
Dependency Order for Termination of Court Supervision form (PA Children’s 
Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p.14). 

  W

  O

  T

 
 

 

 

  1

   

 152

Adoption 

 

SAMPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE ADOPTION HEARING 

uestions for adoptive parents: 

1.  Have there been any changes since the home study was completed? 
2. 
Tell me how you feel about today. 
3.  Do you know what an adoption is? 
4.  Can you testify today that you adopted (child’s name) long before you got 

here today and today just makes it final? 

5.  Do you understand all the responsibilities and the legal obligations that 

come with the adoption?  What does that mean? 
Tell me something special about (child’s name). 

6. 
7.  How does (child’s name) fit in with the rest of your family (grandparents, 

aunts, uncles, brothers, and sisters)? 

8.  Can you introduce any family and friends here today with their relationship 
to child’s name (here court often just goes around the room allowing 
everyone to introduce themselves)? 

uestions for the younger adoptee: 

Tell me your name. 

1. 
2.  What do you like to do at home with your mom and dad? 
3.  Who’s the best cook in the family? 
4.  What do you like to do with your brothers/sisters? 

uestions for Adoptee over 12 for consent: 

Tell me your name. 

1. 
2.  Where do you live and who lives there with you? 
3.  What grade are you in and how is school? 
4.  What’s your favorite subject? 
5.  What do you like to do after school? 
6.  What do you like to do with your mom and dad? 
Tell me how you feel about your mom and dad. 
7. 
8. 
Tell me how your mom and dad feel about you. 
9.  Did you sign the consent for adoption? 

10.  Do you want to be adopted today or do you think you’ve been adopted 

long before today? 

11.  Do you wish to be known as the name that was given to the court? 

 
 

    Q

 

  Q

 

  Q

 

           

 

153

Adoption 

 

Questions for the Agency: 
 

1.  With whom are you employed (position and length of service)? 
2.  How did you become involved in the placement of this child and adoptive 

parents? 

parents? 

3.  Did your agency prepare the home study concerning the adoptive 

4.  Are there any material changes since that report was prepared? 
5.  Other than normal agency, court, or legal fees, has anything else been 

promised to be paid concerning the placement of this child? 

6.  Are you in favor of this adoption? 
7.  Why do you believe this is in the child’s best interest? 

uestions for family and friends (if not already covered above): 

1. 

Is there anybody in the courtroom who wants to say something about this 
adoption? 

2.  Please stand up, identify yourself, and tell us how you feel about today… 
3.  What hopes do you have for (child’s name) and the family? 

 
 

  Q

 

           

 

 154

 General Issues    
Chapter 15 –––– General Issues
Chapter 15 
 General Issues
 General Issues
Chapter 15 
Chapter 15 

15.1 Overview 

On a daily basis in dependency court a judge or master must address a 

variety of issues, perhaps more so than in any other court.   Many of these issues 
occur during the course of the hearing and some occur as administrative 
functions.  While most topical areas in this Benchbook address issues that occur 
as a result of a carefully considered continuum of events dictated by rule or 
legislation, some areas occur outside that order of events.  This chapter is 
dedicated to those particular events or functions of a judge or master that have 
no set start and end point and can, in fact, occur at any point in the life of a 
dependency case.   

It is important to note the areas discussed in this chapter, while as 

important as any information discussed in this Benchbook, do not fit into the 
carefully constructed sequence of events of a dependency case, but may occur 
at any point in the process.   

Some areas covered in this section are required by rule or statute, such as 

Aggravated Circumstances, documenting judicial findings and orders, and Court 
Appointed Special Advocates.  Others are administrative in nature, such as 
Common Pleas Case Management System data and statistical reports or Needs 
Based Plan and Budget; and yet others are considered best practice and 
informational such as Family Group Decision Making, Children in Court and 
Transitioning Youth.  However, all are important to the dependency court process 
and can provide invaluable support/information to a judge or master.   

The following sections are included in this chapter: 

•  15.2 – Aggravated Circumstances 
•  15.3 – Family Group Decision Making 
•  15.4 – Common Pleas Case Management System (CPCMS) 
•  15.5 – Children in the Courtroom 
•  15.6 – Transitioning Youth 
•  15.7 – Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) 
•  15.8 – Planning & Funding Services:  The Needs-Based Plan and 

Budget 

 

  

   

   

   

 

       

 

 

155

 

   

 

 
 

 

General Issues 

 

15.2 Aggravated Circumstances 

rdinarily, the child welfare agency is required to make “reasonable 
efforts” to prevent a child’s removal from the family home and, if removal is 
nevertheless necessary, to reunify the family.  However, where “aggravated 
circumstances” endangering the safety of the child are present, the agency may 
be excused from making these efforts.  A finding of aggravated circumstances 
also greatly speeds up the timetable of a dependency case, and serves to shift 
the focus away from efforts to strengthen the child’s family toward terminating 
parental rights and finding some other permanent home for the child. 
 

15.2.1“Aggravated Circumstances” Defined  

Under 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302, any of the following situations qualify as 

aggravated circumstances: 

1) The child is in the custody of a county agency and either: 

(i)  the identity or whereabouts of the parents is unknown and 
cannot be ascertained and the parent does not claim the child 
within three months of the date the child was taken into custody; or 
(ii) the identity or whereabouts of the parents is known and the 
parents have failed to maintain substantial and continuing contact 
with the child for a period of six months. 
 

(2) The child or another child of the parent has been the victim of physical 
abuse resulting in serious bodily injury, sexual violence or aggravated 
physical neglect by the parent. 

3) The parent of the child has been convicted of any of the following 
offenses where the victim was a child: 
 

(i)  criminal homicide under 18 Pa.C.S. Ch. 25 (relating to criminal 
homicide); 
(ii)  a felony under 18 Pa.C.S. § 2702 (relating to aggravated 
assault),  § 3121 (relating to rape), § 3122.1 (relating to statutory 
sexual assault), § 3123 (relating to involuntary deviate sexual 
intercourse), § 3124.1 (relating to sexual assault) or § 3125 
(relating to aggravated indecent assault). 
(iii)  a misdemeanor under 18 Pa.C.S. § 126 (relating to indecent 
assault). 
(iv)  an equivalent crime in another jurisdiction. 
 

(4) The [parent of the child has been convicted of] attempt, solicitation or 
conspiracy to commit any of the offenses set forth in paragraph (3). 
 

  O

  (

  (

 

156

General Issues 

 

(5) The parental rights of the parent have been involuntarily terminated 
with respect to a child of the parent. 

5.2.2 Procedures in Aggravated Circumstances Cases 

n allegation of aggravated circumstances may be made by the agency or 

by the child’s attorney.  It may be included as a motion in the original 
dependency petition or in a separate and subsequent written motion (42 Pa.C.S. 
§ 6334(b) and Pa.R.J.C.P. 1701).  Under Pa.R.J.C.P. 1702, the agency is 
required to file an aggravated circumstances motion within 21 days of 
determining that such circumstances exist, but no such time requirement applies 
to the child’s attorney. 

 judge or master presented with an allegation of aggravated 

circumstances must first (if it has not already done so) make a finding, based on 
clear and convincing evidence, as to dependency (42 Pa.C.S. § 6331 (c)).  If the 
judge determines (or has already determined) that the child is dependent, it must 
then make a separate finding, also on the basis of clear and convincing 
evidence, as to whether aggravated circumstances exist.  Once both of these 
findings are made, the judge proceeds to determine “whether or not reasonable 
efforts to prevent or eliminate the need for removing the child from the home or to 
preserve and reunify the family shall be made or continue to be made,” and 
schedules a permanency hearing to consider what the child’s permanency plan 
should be (42 Pa.C.S. § 6331(c.1) and 6351(e)(2)). 

5.2.3 Timing of Hearing  

rdinarily, permanency hearings are required to be held every six months 
in dependency cases.  Under 42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(e)(3)(ii) and Pa.R.J.C.P. 1607, 
however, the court must conduct a permanency hearing within 30 days in the 
following four situations: 

  1

  A

  A

  1

  O

  A

ggravated circumstances finding at time of adjudication.  If at the 
time of an adjudication of dependency the court finds (1) that aggravated 
circumstances exist and (2) that reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate 
the need to remove the child from the child’s guardian or to preserve and 
reunify the family need not be made or continue to be made, it must 
proceed to a permanency hearing within 30 days. 

Aggravated circumstances finding at permanency hearing.   If, at a 
permanency hearing for a child who has already been found dependent, 
the court determines (1) that aggravated circumstances exist, (2) that 
reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need to remove the child 
from the child’s guardian or to preserve and reunify the family need not be 
made or continue to be made and (3) the permanency plan for the child is 

 
 

 

 157

General Issues 

 

incomplete or inconsistent with the court’s determination, it must likewise 
proceed to a permanency hearing within 30 days. 

An allegation that aggravated circumstances exists regarding a 
dependent child.  Whenever the court receives an aggravated 
circumstances allegation regarding a child who has been adjudicated 
dependent, it must hold a permanency hearing within 30 days. 

Submission of other motion regarding safety or welfare of a 
dependent child.  Likewise, whenever the court receives any motion 
alleging that a hearing is necessary to protect the safety or physical, 
mental, or moral welfare of a dependent child, it must hold a permanency 
hearing within 30 days.  

15.2.4 Effect of Determination  

 

After finding aggravated circumstances, the judge must determine whether 

further agency efforts to preserve or reunify the family are necessary.  If not, the 
judge must inquire as to whether the county agency has filed or sought to join a 
petition to terminate parental rights and to identify, recruit, process and approve a 
qualified family to adopt the child (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f)(9)).  In these 
circumstances, the agency is required to terminate parental rights and pursue 
adoption except where: 

 

i) the child is being cared for by a family relative best suited to the 
physical, mental and moral welfare of  the child; 
 
(ii) the county agency has documented a compelling reason for 
determining that filing a petition to terminate parental rights would not 
serve the needs and welfare of the child; or 

iii) the child’s family has not been provided with necessary services to 
achieve the safe return to the child’s parent, guardian or custodian within 
the time frames as set forth in the permanency plan. 

 
 

 

 

 

     

  (

  (

 

 

158

 

       

 

“Family Group Decision Making 
brings the collective voice of 
children, families, and 
communities into the dependency 
courtroom in an unprecedented 
manner.  It encourages and 
supports children safely 
remaining in their own 
homes/communities and, when 
placement is needed to protect a 
child’s safety, is encourages and 
supports the use of kinship 
resources thereby reducing any 
potential emotional trauma 
associated with placement.”  

 Honorable Max Baer, 
Pennsylvania Supreme Court 
Justice 

  -

 
 

General Issues 

 

15.3  Family Group Decision-Making 
 

Family Group Decision-Making (FGDM) is a collaborative dispute 

resolution process that engages family groups in crafting and implementing plans 
that support the safety, permanence and well-being of their children.  The 
purpose of FDGM is to build alliances among the family, the child welfare 
agency, and the court, and to enhance cooperation in the process of making 
decisions about children who need protection or 
care.  At a fundamental level, FGDM is based on 
the recognition that families have the most 
information about their family, have the ability to 
make well-informed decisions, and may end up 
only resisting the intrusion if the “system” simply 
tells them what to do to fix the problem (NCJFCJ, 
2000, p. 13).   
 

In June 2007, at its inaugural meeting, the 

Pennsylvania State Roundtable unanimously 
selected FGDM as a practice to support 
throughout Pennsylvania, encouraging courts to 
take full advantage of the practice.  Since then, the 
practice shift to FGDM has been supported by the 
Pennsylvania Supreme Court as an important 
element of Pennsylvania’s dependency system 
reform.    

5.3.1 Benefits of FGDM 

  1

 

Child welfare service plans developed without family involvement are too 

often indistinguishable from one another, despite the fact that each family is 
unique.  By contrast, the FGDM process is capable of resulting in a highly 
individualized, family-developed service plan that is not only more likely to target 
the unique and individualized needs of each child and family but will be perceived 
by family members as their own plan.  A core assumption underlying FGDM is 

“Listening to FGDM participants 
discuss the worries they have for 
children, family strengths, and 
community assets, and then 
tapping their collective wisdom to 
develop and implement a plan 
makes sense.  Brining these 
“common sense” plans into the 
courtroom – plain and simple – 
works!”   -Pennsylvania 
Dependency Court Judge 

that families know themselves best and that 
involving those needing to change in the 
development of a plan for change will produce 
better results.  FGDM can assist with timely 
reunification, but it can also help the family 
understand when reunification is not possible, 
overcome resistance to severance of parental 
ties, and open the door for relative or third-party 
adoption.  Because FGDM usually results in an 
agreed plan, it helps to avoid lengthy trials and 
appeals of termination of parental rights cases 
(NCJFCJ, 2000, p. 14).    

 

159

General Issues 

 

hen properly used, FGDM can accomplish all of the following: 

•  Provide a forum in which families are able to hold each other 
accountable, often to a higher degree than formal systems. 
• 
Identify and involve the father and extended kin early in the process. 
•  Address emerging issues of younger siblings not yet involved with the 

• 

child welfare system. 
Improve communication among all parties by providing a structure in 
which strengths and concerns of a family are discussed and ultimately 
addressed by the family and their supportive resources. 

•  Save the court time by bringing the parties into court already in 

agreement.    

•  Help establish reasonable efforts in TPR. 

Research has shown that the FGDM process produces plans that are 
highly individualized, enjoy high rates of consensus, and are accepted in 95 
percent or more of cases.  Some studies also suggest that plans generated by 
FGDM provide more child and family safety (as measured by re-referrals/re-
abuse), more timely decisions, and more stability (as measured by number of 
placement changes) (Burford, 2009).  

15.3.2 The FGDM Process 

imilar to legal dispute resolution practices like mediation and facilitation, 

FGDM encourages the resolution of issues prior to entering the courtroom.  
Unique to FGDM, however, is the utilization of the family itself to identify 
concerns and potential solutions aimed at ensuring child safety, well-being, and 
permanence.   

The FGDM process begins with a referral for the meeting.  This referral 

most often comes from the caseworker; however courts are encouraged to either 

*Best Practice: Encouraging Use of FGDM* 

FGDM is a voluntary process for families.  In keeping with this core value of 

the practice, judges and masters should not order a FGDM meeting.  Instead judges 
and masters are encouraged to ask questions regarding the family’s reluctance to 
participate, further explain the benefits of participation, and order the agency to either 
make a referral for the family or provide the family with additional information to 
support their utilization of the process (PA Children’s Roundtable Initiative, p.9). 
 

Judges and masters should ask questions regarding the time frame in which a 

FGDM meeting can be held and schedule a follow up court hearing to 
review/consider adopting the resulting FGDM plan.  If safety concerns are adequately 
addressed, these plans should become a part of the Family Service Plan ordered by 
the judge or master and incorporated into the agency’s state-mandated Family 
Service Plan document. 
 

 

 

  S

 

 160

  W

 
 

 

 

161

“I recommend having this kind of 
meeting with any family having 
difficulties. It helped us get some 
things out in the open that we 
normally didn’t share and helped start 
healing some wounds. I truly believe 
it takes a village to raise a child.”  

 FGDM Family Member Participant 

  -

General Issues 

 

make the referral or order the agency to make the referral.   

he process proceeds with the identification of relatives and other persons 

who care about the child.  Participants in family meetings may include not only 
family members but people from the community, foster parents, faith 
representatives, service providers, legal professionals, and others committed to 
the well-being of the child and the family.  The caseworker or other child welfare 
agency representative must also be present to review and accept the family’s 
plan.   

he FGDM meeting begins with introductions, a discussion of strengths 

and concerns, and an explanation of community services the family may wish to 
use as they create their family plan.  Safety concerns are clearly identified 
through this process and the family is asked to 
comprehensively address these in their planning. 

  T

  T

  T

he next step in FGDM distinguishes it 

from other alternative dispute resolution 
processes: “private family time.”  During this 
phase of the meeting, family members are left 
alone (without agency or other professionals) to 
discuss concerns, develop solutions to those 
concerns and create an individualized family 
plan to address the concerns.   
 

Once the family has developed the plan it is presented to the agency 

worker for review and acceptance.  If any safety issues are not adequately 
addressed, the caseworker points them out to the family group and requests they 
continue private planning time until they are resolved.  Once all safety concerns 
are adequately addressed, the caseworker can accept the family’s proposed 
plan.   

 good plan should:   

  A

•  Be tailored to the family and meet their individual needs. 
•  Be comprehensive and cover all areas of concern. 
•  Address all issues of safety. 
•  Clearly state goals. 
• 
•  Specify consequences if the plan is not followed. 

Include timelines for completion of goals.  

Upon acceptance, the plan is presented to the court for review and final 

approval as the court-ordered Family Service Plan.  The resulting plan, in effect, 
is a stipulation by all parties.  The plan can take the format of a newly designed 
document attached to the state-mandated Family Service Plan document or can 
be embedded directly into the state-mandated Family Service Plan document.   

 
 

 

 

 

General Issues 

 

FGDM can be utilized at any phase of the dependency process.  Judges 
and masters are encouraged to begin suggesting FGDM in connection with the 
Shelter Hearing and then throughout the life of a dependency case.  The process 
outlined above can be repeated prior to any required permanency review 
hearing, whenever the family service plan is updated.   

5.3.3 The Court’s Role 

  1

*Best Practice: Expedited or Emergency FGDM* 

For many reasons, the dependency process has strict timelines related to the 

scheduling of hearings.  This is particularly evident in the initial stages of a 
dependency matter with the Shelter Review Hearing occurring within 72 hours of child 
placement.   
 

This timeframe has led to the creation of “Expedited or Emergency Family 

Group Decision Making” meetings in many counties.  These meetings follow a format 
very similar to a regular FGDM meeting; however, they can occur within hours or a 
couple of days from time of referral.  Most often, these meetings focus on issues of 
placement resources and the creation of safety plans (rather than the more 
comprehensive Family Service Plan) but can be incredibly valuable for the family, the 
court and the child welfare agency. 
 

Where possible, judges are encouraged to work with their child welfare 

agency to develop the use of “Expedited or Emergency FGDM.” 

Judges and masters should encourage families to take advantage of this 
planning process whenever an initial Family Service Plan or Family Service Plan 
Update is required and ensure agencies are prepared to provide the process.  In 
keeping with the concepts of FGDM; however, judges and masters should take 
great care not to order FGDM but rather ensure families fully understand and are 
offered the opportunity to engage in the FGDM process. 

s with any dependency system practice, court/agency collaboration is a 

key to success.  All parties need to be educated on the basic premises of the 
practice including judges, attorneys, advocates, and agency staff (administration 
and line staff).  The court should gain a true understanding of the practice, which 
can occur through meetings with agency staff, Children’s Roundtable Meetings, 
local FGDM Implementation Team Meetings and by observing a conference.  
These steps facilitate comprehensive understanding of how the family has come 
to an agreement and how the plan was developed.   

 
 

 

 

 

  A

     

 162

General Issues 

 

*Best Practice: Seeking Revisions in FGDM Plans* 

Occasionally the court may not believe the proposed plan developed by the 

family and accepted by the agency completely addresses issues of child safety, well-
being, or permanence.  When this occurs, judges and masters are encouraged to ask 
the family to reconvene in a timely manner to address the identified concerns, rather 
than simply denying the overall plan.  In addition, the judge or master may wish to 
communicate with the agency to clarify expectations and enhance the likelihood of 
future plans being approved. 
 

When this occurs, the judge or master should inquire as to the timeframe in 
which a reconvening of the family can occur and schedule a prompt follow-up court 
hearing at which the revised plan can be presented and approved. 

By fully understanding the process, judges and other legal professionals 
can ensure fidelity to the practice.  This practice fidelity is imperative and allows 
the court to not only have confidence that a plan was properly developed but also 
an added level of comfort in its decision to accept (or not accept) a family 
developed plan. 

dditional information regarding FGDM can be found in the Pennsylvania 

FGDM Implementation Toolkit accessed at the following cite:  
http://www.pacwcbt.pitt.edu/FGDM_Resources.htm  

  A

 

“Ultimately FGDM is a philosophy of hope and trust in the capacity, commitment, and 
strengths of children, families, and communities, as well as a belief in the value of 
collaborative efforts to provide for the safety, well-being, and permanence of 
children.”   

Pennsylvania Dependency Court Judge 

 
 

 

  -

 

 

163

 

     

 

General Issues 

 

15.4  Common Pleas Case Management System (CPCMS) 

Understanding dependency court data is critical to effective case and 

court management.  In 2008, the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Court’s 
Judicial Automation and Office of Children & Families in the Courts departments 
were tasked by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and State Roundtable to 
develop a case management system for dependency cases.  To this end, a 
dependency module was added to the Common Pleas Court Management 
System (CPCMS).  This module provides standardized forms for dependency 
findings and orders.  The module also produces court management listings and 
statistical reports.  These reports provide information as recommended by the 
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) on the Nine 
Performance Measures for Juvenile Dependency Court and the 17 
recommended statistical measurements.  In addition, the caseload and statistical 
reports provide county courts with information to assist in the evaluation and 
enhancement of court processes aimed at securing safe, timely permanence for 
dependent children.  The module also provides a scheduling component with 
case event tracks, which automatically calculate the required timing of hearings. 
 

The CPCMS Dependency Module provides statewide, uniformed, and 

consistent dependency court orders, as well as a means for collecting both 
county specific and statewide dependency data.  The system provides these (for 
judges and hearing masters) for all major hearings including shelter care, 
adjudication, disposition, permanency reviews, and termination of court 
supervision.  The orders have been reviewed and approved by the Juvenile 
Court Procedural Rules CPCMS Forms Subcommittee and the Department of 
Public Welfare’s Office of Children, Youth, and Families (as to funding and 
federal program requirements).  Accurate use of the CPCMS orders ensures that 
all necessary court-related language impacting federal funding has been included 
and provides consistency between judicial districts. 
 

The system has two general purposes.  First, it allows courts to track the 

flow of individual child cases.  Second, it provides a broader picture and analysis 
of the overall effectiveness of the court case flow processes in a particular county 
and on a statewide basis.  These reports can be customized to provide 
information regarding specific ages and types of cases or by judicial officer, as 
needed.   
 

In addition to the management reports compiled by the system, judges 

can access individual case information from within the system.  This function can 
be particularly beneficial if a judge needs to review the case history.  From the 
individual case screen, information can be found regarding the child’s current and 
past placements, the names of the parents and other party participants, and 
notations of the case event outcomes that include master’s recommendations 
and prior orders of the court.  Associated case information is also available for 
any sibling within the judicial district.   

 
 

   

 

164

General Issues 

 

A final feature is the chambers function.  In this secure section, judges can 

 
keep notes that are private, make them available for the judge’s chambers, or 
allow other chambers to access the notes.  Those judges who access CPCMS 
from the bench may find this a useful tool.  It should be noted that if a judge 
chooses to use this function, information is securely stored on a server at the 
AOPC and does not appear on any order or data/statistical report. 
 

15.4.1 Management Reports 

o assist courts by providing a “snapshot” of cases that are currently in 

the dependency system and the status of those cases, the following case 
management reports are available: 

ependency Case Report (AOPC 3900). This report provides a detailed 

list of all cases that are or have been recorded in CPCMS.  It shows the 
percentage of cases where the child is receiving services but has not yet 
achieved permanence, the percentage of cases where the goal is not a 
permanent option, and the number of children in foster care.  Information 
on the initiation types of cases in the system can also be found in this 
report.  

ermination of Court Supervision Report (AOPC 3901). This report 

provides a detailed list of all children who have had court supervision 
closed during the selected date range.  Information about the final 
disposition can be found on this report. 

ependency Case Processing Summary Report (AOPC 3902). This 
report provides a list of all cases filed during a selected date range and 
grouped by case category, status, event track, or processing status.  It 
documents the number of days a case took to reach adjudication and the 
number of days until the first permanency hearing. 

ssignment Inventory Report (AOPC 3903). This report provides a case 

list by assigned judge or juvenile master. 

Inventory Report (AOPC 3904). This report tracks counsel and Guardian 
Ad Litem appointments. 

ependency Daily List (AOPC 3905).  This report provides a list of 

dependency cases scheduled for the court on any requested day. 

nscheduled Active Cases (AOPC 3910) – This report displays all open 

dependency cases where there is no future event scheduled.  
 

  T

  D

  T

  D

  A

  D

  U

 
 

 

   

 165

General Issues 

 

15.4.2 Statistical Reports 

In addition to management reports, CPCMS provides various statistical 

reports.  These reports can be a useful tool for courts to gain a better 
understanding of their caseload.  The statistical reports provide information about 
how efficiently courts are processing dependency cases, as well as detailed 
demographic information. The following statistical reports are available: 
 

Active and Adjudicated Case Inventory (AOPC 3920) - This report 
provides a list of active and adjudicated dependency cases and identifies 
their classification of Abuse/Neglect or Status Offense. A summary version 
of this report is also available.  

End of Period Terminated Cases (AOPC 3921) – This report provides 
summaries of terminated cases categorized by the age of the child and 
the age of the case. Within these categories, totals are divided by foster 
care status and details are provided regarding the average number of 
days to adjudication, first placement hearing, permanent placement, and 
other key events.  

Pending Case Metrics (AOPC 3922) – This report provides statistical 
summaries, based on the child’s age, of pending cases pre and post 
adjudication and by the average age of cases within other key 
demographics. 

A general familiarity with the system and its capacity for providing case 

management and statistical reports is important.  These documents can assist in 
the overall evaluation of dependency court processes and help identify any court-
related barriers to achieving safe and timely permanence for dependent youth.  
These reports can be used internally or shared with other dependency partners 
(often done during Children’s Roundtable meetings) to identify challenges and 
strategize solutions. 

*Best Practice – Management and Statistical Reports* 

The court is encouraged to take full advantage of the CPCMS system.  

Management and statistical reports can be an invaluable tool for the local courts.  
These reports used in conjunction with the local Children’s Roundtable can aid a 
county by: 
 

•  Providing data to inform system change through the Children’s Roundtable 

Initiative;  
Informing the court on outcomes of dependency cases; 

• 
•  Creating unified methods to measure practices and outcomes; 
•  Evaluating current practices and planning for future needs; and  
•  Establishing monitoring and accountability for all system participants including 

the courts (Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 2009, p. 15).    

 
 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

166

 

   

 

 
 

15.5 Children in the Courtroom 

General Issues 

 

n Pennsylvania, it is required that children be present for all dependency 

proceedings unless excused for good cause by the court; in no case shall a 
hearing occur in the absence of a child’s attorney (Pa.R.J.C.P. 1128).  Having 
the child participate in the hearing gives the court the opportunity to learn the 
child’s wishes directly, to see how the family or caregivers interact with the child, 
and to observe whether, on the surface at least, the child appears to be well 
cared for and developmentally at an age appropriate level.   Having the child 
present also reminds all the stakeholders that this process is ultimately about the 
well-being of the child and not solely a corrective process for parents (PA 
Children’s Roundtable Initiative, p. 8). 

ttendance in court also has many benefits for the child.  Children who 

attend hearings have a better understanding of what is happening and how the 
process works.  Even if the child has competent social workers and legal 
representation to explain the process they may not fully grasp or understand 
what is happening until they see it firsthand.  A child 
who understands how the process works may be 
more likely to ask questions and express views and 
wishes.  Since all parties are expected to attend the 
hearing, the agency can use the opportunity to 
facilitate meaningful contact between the child, family, 
and siblings.  This can occur while the family is 
waiting for court to begin, but if appropriate, visitation 
may also occur after the hearing is completed. 
 

“Everyone has sides to 
their story, but no one 
can tell their story the 
way the youth can.” 

- S.R., 21, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

 

On the other hand, there may be circumstances that make it inappropriate 
or unnecessary for the child to participate in hearings.  This decision can only be 
made by the judge or master after careful consideration of all the circumstances 
of the case.  The GAL or social worker may provide insight into whether the child 
should be present, but the judge or master should not waive the child’s 
appearance just because the parent, GAL, or social worker prefers the child not 
be present.  The court should also consider the child’s wishes as some older 

children may have very strong opinions about whether they 
wish to be present at the hearing.   
 

lthough a child need not appear at every hearing, 
the judge or master should see the child in person at least 
every six months.  It is critical that the judge or master see 
the child to assess the child’s well being.  The court is the 
last defense for the child and must make every effort to 
ensure safety and well being.   

  A

 

“I wanted to be in 
the courtroom 
letting the judge 
know that I am a 
person and that I 
am trying.”   

 J.J., 21, Former 
Pennsylvania 
Foster Youth 

  -

  I

    A

 

167

 
 

General Issues 

 

Factors to be considered when determining whether or not to waive the 

child’s attendance include: 

•  The child’s wishes. 
•  The child’s age and/or developmental level. 
•  The likelihood that the child will be severely traumatized by 

attending. 

•  Whether the child’s testimony is needed. 
•  Whether the child might be afraid to see the parents in court. 
•  Whether the child has a delinquency or pending delinquency and 

needs to be at the hearing. 

•  Whether there are any significant life events for the child on the 

hearing date (i.e. school field trips, special dance, sporting event, 
last/first day of school). 

ome reasons that a court may find ARE good enough to waive a child’s 

appearance include: 

•  Child has a good reason for not wanting to attend a permanency 

hearing where there are no changes to the child’s plan and the 
case is showing progress towards permanency. 
The hearing is an aggravated circumstances hearing. 
The child is medically fragile and attending the hearing might have 
a health impact. 
A therapist’s credible recommendation is against attendance. 

ome reasons that are NOT good enough to justify waiver of attendance 

The judge or other participant (parent, GAL, agency) prefers not to 
have the child in court. 

•  Children and families are difficult to manage. 
• 
• 
• 

The GAL recommendation differs from the child’s wishes. 
The sibling group is too big to accommodate at the table easily. 
Transportation will be difficult. 

In making the decision regarding the presence of a child in court, some 
accommodations may need to be considered to meet the child’s needs.  These 
may include scheduling the hearing at a special time (such as the first or last 
hearing of the day); arranging for the child to attend the hearing by phone or 
videoconference; or having the child excluded from portions of the hearing. 

15.5.1 Talking to Children in Court 

Having the child present during hearings is most valuable when the court 

is able to elicit useful information while making it a positive experience for the 

include: 
 

 

 

  

 168

 

  S

 

  S

• 
• 

• 

• 

 
 

General Issues 

 

child.  The judge or master should be prepared for the child’s appearance, 
learning as much as possible about the child from the reports provided by the 
GAL, CASA, and the social worker, and noting what information the child may be 
able to provide that is not otherwise available.  This preparation helps convey 
that the case is being taken seriously and that the court cares about the child as 
an individual.   

ennsylvania law specifically requires judges or masters to consult with 

  -

children in the permanency planning phase of the proceeding (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6351(e)).  This is extremely important because how a child feels about a 
placement will likely impact its success.  If the child has negative feelings toward 
a placement, then it may not be suitable to place the child there, even if it meets 
all other standards and requirements of a good 
placement.  If given the opportunity, the child will 
usually tell the judge or master where he would like to 
live.  The judge or master should ask a series of 
questions about people the child spends time with, 
relatives that are close, whether the family has close 
friends, etc.  Responses to these questions may 
reveal a potential placement that was previously 
unknown to the agency but may prove to be a good 
alternative.   

“Speaking in court gave me 
my chance to stand up and 
say something for myself.  It 
made me feel important, 
knowing my voice was 
heard.”   

 D.R., 21, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

ften a new placement involves a change of 

school, so the judge or master should also question the child about how the 
child’s school life is going—from a social, as well as an academic standpoint.  Is 
the child making friends and adjusting to the new environment?  Is there anything 
the court or the agency can do to smooth the transition?   

he judge or master should also ask the child about the services the 

agency is providing.  Are they appropriate?  Are they provided at a convenient 
time and location?  Does the child find the services helpful, and if not what would 
be helpful?   

5.5.2 Children as Witnesses 

here is no minimum age below which a child is automatically disqualified 
as a witness (42 Pa.C.S. § 5911).  However, that does not mean every child is a 
competent witness or that judges and masters should not conduct competency 
examinations when legitimate questions arise about testimonial competence.   

he capacity to testify requires the ability to observe sufficient intelligence, 

adequate memory, the ability to communicate, awareness of the difference 
between truth and falsehood, and an appreciation of the obligation to tell the truth 
in court (Ventrell and Duquette, 2005, p.329).   
 

  P

  O

  T

  1

  T

  T

 

169

 
 

General Issues 

 

The authors of Child Welfare Law and Practice elaborate on each of these 

 
characteristics as they apply to children (Ventrell and Duquette, 2005, p.330-
332): 
 

Capacity to Observe:  To testify, a child must have the physical and 
mental capacity to observe.  Courts sometimes refer to this as the ability 
to receive correct impressions by the senses.  Children’s observational 
capacity develops rapidly during the first year of life and the capacity to 
observe almost never poses a barrier to testimony. 

emory:  Children have good memory capacity, and the capability to 

recall events should almost never pose a barrier to testimonial 
competence.  Whether a child’s memory for particular events is accurate 
is a matter of credibility, not testimonial competence. 

apacity to Communicate:  A child must be able to communicate so as 

to be understood.  In nearly all cases, children possess the capacity to 
communicate. 

ntelligence: To testify, a witness must possess a threshold level of 
intelligence but need not be normal intelligence.  Children below average 
intelligence may testify if they possess the ability to observe, recollect, and 
relate in a manner that assists the trier of fact. 

nderstanding the Difference Between Truth and Falsehood:  The 

child need not comprehend the finer points of truth and falsity, nor must he 
understand the concept of perjury.  The child may articulate the necessary 
understanding in childlike terms.  The fact that a child makes mistakes or 
is to some degree inconsistent does not render the child incompetent.  
When judges and attorneys use developmentally appropriate methods to 
question children, most youngsters demonstrate the necessary 
understanding. 

uty to Testify Truthfully:  Children as young as three and four 

comprehend the duty to tell the truth in court (although children this young 
are not typically interviewed).  For young children, telling the truth means 
reporting what they saw.  If the judge is concerned about a child’s 
understanding of the obligation to testify truthfully, the judge may instruct 
the child. 

  M

  C

  I

  U

  D

While children are able to be good witnesses in dependency hearings, the 
judge or master should bear in mind that testifying may be a very emotional and 
traumatic experience for a child.  The judge or master should be vigilant in 
guiding the examination of the child, particularly when it comes to examination by 
opposing counsel or by Pro Se parents.  In these circumstances the judge or 
master has the latitude to ask leading questions or allow all counsel to ask 

 

 170

General Issues 

 

leading questions. The judge, however, must balance the need to protect the 
child from a traumatic experience against the parents’ right to cross-examine.  

t may also be appropriate for the judge or master to take the child into 

chambers or clear the courtroom before conducting the examination, as long as 
the interrogation is conducted in the presence of counsel and on the record 
(Pa.R.C.P.No. 1915.11(b)). 

  I

 
 

         

 

171

 

   

 

172

General Issues 

 

very year nearly 20,000 youth age out of the foster care system 

nationally—about 1,000 of them in Pennsylvania.  There is a growing body of 
literature that demonstrates foster children who age out of the system do 
considerably poorer in transitioning to adulthood than peers who have no child 
welfare involvement.  According to the report of the Midwest Evaluation of the 
Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth: foster youth transitioning to adulthood 
(Courtney et al., 2004, p. 32-51): 
 

•  Are less likely to have completed high school and be enrolled in 

15.6 Transitioning Youth 

  E

secondary education; 

•  Are less likely to be employed; 

•  Have a substantially higher prevalence of serious physical health, 
mental health, and substance abuse problems that interfere with 
their daily functioning; 

•  By age 19, are more likely to have been pregnant or have fathered 

children; and 

•  Have considerably higher rates of homelessness, criminal 

involvement, and incarceration.  

Avoiding these kinds of outcomes calls for effective services designed to 
facilitate successful transition to adulthood.  These services should be provided 
as far in advance of the transition out of the child welfare system as possible.  
The early identification of the need for services and the provision of quality 
services can be instrumental in supporting a youth in making a successful 
transition to adulthood.   

*Best Practice – Lasting Lifelong Connections* 

In addition to “hard skills”, such as employment services and housing needs, 

the court and agency should provide for a youth’s need to be connected to 
responsible, safe adults.  These individuals are those who are not being paid by the 
agency to be part of the support system for the youth.  While these resources may 
never provide a home for the youth they can support the youth in ways above and 
beyond that of typical community services.  Often these people simply provide words 
of encouragement and advice or a place for the youth to visit on holidays.   

hese people often come in the form of extended relatives, former foster 

parents, neighbors, teachers or coaches. 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  T

 

 

General Issues 

 

In 1999 the Social Security Act was amended by the Foster Care 

Independence Act (FCIA) to create the Chafee Foster Care Independence 
Program (CFCIP), which provides states with flexible funding enabling them to 
design and conduct Independent Living programs for both older youth in foster 
care and those who have aged out (For more information, see Chapter 16: 
Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation).  

 
15.6.1 Independent Living Services for Transitioning Youth 

 FCIA and the Juvenile Act require that all youth in care who are age 16 or 

older, no matter what placement they are in and regardless of their permanency 
plan, receive independent living (IL) services (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f)(8)).  Likewise, 
youth who are adjudicated dependent and living in their own home are also 
eligible for IL services.  Youth who were discharged from placement on or after 
their 16th birthday are eligible for Aftercare IL services (discussed more fully at 
the end of this chapter in section 15.6.4).      

L is not a permanency goal, of course, and providing IL services does not 
necessarily change the child’s permanency plan.  Having every child grow up in a 
family setting is still the ideal.  But every youth in care age 16 or above should 
receive IL services designed to provide them with skills they will need in 
adulthood.  The judge or master should ensure these youth are given a written 
description of the programs and services which will help them prepare for the 
transition from foster care to independent living (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f)(8)).  These 
services may include:  
 

“I don’t think the needs 
of older youth in foster 
care have been 
addressed.  Older youth 
have needs just like the 
younger kids do.  We all 
want help.”   

 J.J., 19, Former 
Pennsylvania Foster 
Youth 

  -

•  educational training and counseling  
•  career counseling  
•  budget management skills  
•  home management skills  
•  sex education and family planning services  
•  self-advocacy skills 
• 
•  daily living skills 

individual and family counseling 

s is the case with most child welfare services in Pennsylvania, IL 

services may vary from county to county, however all counties are required to 
provide IL services to youth.  These services can come from the county agency 
or a contracted private provider.  The most common IL service includes a 
strengths and needs assessment of life skills and an associated curriculum for 
the provision of life skills.  This curriculum typically includes services such as 
money management, employment services and education assistance.  More 
information on the IL services in your county can be provided by the county 
agency.   

  I

  A

 

 
 

 
 

 173

General Issues 

 

The court, the agency, as well as the youth’s counsel or GAL all have a 

role in securing the necessary resources throughout the youth’s time in the 
system.   Therefore, it is important that judges and masters, as well as attorneys 
have substantive knowledge of what youth in care need, what they are legally 
entitled to, and what services are available to them.   

5.6.2 Transition Planning for Older Youth  

or those youth who are expected to leave the foster care system at the 

age of majority, transition planning should begin as early as possible, but not less 
than 90 days prior to the youth aging out of the system.  The Fostering 
Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 requires the 
agency to develop a “personalized and detailed transition plan” providing options 
on housing, health insurance, education, local opportunities for mentors and 
support services, and work force and employment services (42 U.S.C. § 675 
(5)(H)).     

  1

  F

*Best Practices – FGDM as Transition Planning* 

Courts should encourage the use of Family Group Decision Making (FGDM) 

as a means to develop the youth’s transition plan.  FGDM provides the opportunity for 
the youth to identify those people most important in their lives to become resources 
after their discharge from court supervision.  These people can include family, friends, 
and potential permanent connections for the child.   

Using FGDM as the transition plan allows the youth and their supports to 
develop their own plan for transition with agency and court approval.  As with any 
FGDM plan, a youth is more likely to engage and “buy-in” to a plan of their own 
design rather than one that is dictated.   

The court should encourage the agency to offer FGDM far in advance of the 
youth’s discharge date to allow for plan implementation prior to termination of court 
supervision.  

 
 

 

   

   

   

 

Effective judicial oversight will ensure that comprehensive transition plans 

are developed for youth aging out of care. While federal law does not require a 
transition plan until 90 days before a youth ages-out of the system, the judge or 
master should require plans be presented to the court for early review whenever 
possible.  This will ensure that the judge or master, the agency and the youth’s 
GAL have had time to clearly explain to a youth what will occur upon leaving the 
child welfare system and coordinate any services a youth may need in advance 
of leaving care.   
 

As the Pennsylvania Judicial Deskbook points out: “If the youth is 

requesting discharge or agreeing to a discharge, the juvenile court should 
conduct a colloquy to inquire as to the reasons for the request, and explore 
whether alternatives to discharge have been explored.  It is important to keep in 

 

174

General Issues 

 

mind that youth may ask for discharge for reasons that have nothing to do with 
their readiness to live on their own. Some youth ask to be discharged because 
multiple placements have not met their needs and they feel that there is no more 
that the system can do for them. Other youth seek discharge because they feel 
their placement is not appropriate for them. Thus, the court should inquire of 
youth what they will need to succeed. The court should give the youth's counsel 
wide latitude in making a record of his or her client's needs, of the youth’s 
experience in care, and of the youth's reason for agreeing to discharge” (Field, 
2004, p. 212). 

mong the institutional and personal supports youth generally lose when 

they exit the child welfare system are:  

  access to the courts for enforcement of orders and legal 
advocates fighting for their right to access services;   

•  consistent adults who are working for their best interest (i.e. 
foster parent, CASA, GAL, case worker, judge or master);   
•  a sense of security that may have been provided by their child 

welfare system involvement, even if youth may have resisted or 
disliked that environment; 

•  medical coverage; and 
•  housing (NCWRCYD, 2004, p. 2). 

*Best Practice – Trial Discharge* 
 

In the event that a youth chooses to leave care against the recommendations of 
the court, GAL or the agency, a “trial discharge” may be beneficial.  In a trial discharge, 
the court may terminate physical custody of the youth from the agency, while 
maintaining the order of dependency.  This puts the case on a footing equivalent to that 
of an in-home dependency case.  During the trial discharge period, the youth may 
continue to receive agency support or reenter care with the court’s authorization since 
the adjudication of dependency was never terminated.   

5.6.3 Youth Opting to Remain in Care Past Age 18 

 

Many youth are not aware of their right to remain in care past the age of 

majority.  The Juvenile Act defines a dependent child as an individual who: 
 

“was adjudicated dependent before reaching the age of 18 years 
and who, while engaged in a course of instruction or treatment 
requests the court to retain jurisdiction until the course has been 
completed, but in no event shall a child remain in a course of 
instruction or treatment past the age of 21 years” (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6302). 

  A

 •

  1

 
 

 

 

 175

176

General Issues 

 

The term “course of instruction or treatment” has widely been accepted to 
include a youth who is still completing high school or who is receiving behavioral 
health services and requires that this treatment continue.  A recent Pennsylvania 
Superior Court case has expanded the definition of course of instruction to 
include post-secondary education (In Re S.J., 906 A2d 547 (Pa. Super. 2006)). 
 

When a youth chooses to remain in care past age 18 there are many more 

services available.  Depending on the county, services may include: 

  Housing options while at college.  Youth who remain in the 
foster care system can remain in the foster home while 
attending college (if the school is in the same community).  
Additionally, youth who are residing on a campus can return to 
the foster home over holidays and between semesters.  
Financial supports can be provided to the resource families for 
these specific situations. 

  Youth living at college may receive per diems or stipends that 

would typically be provided to the foster family.   

  •

  •

•  Supervised Independent Living (SIL).  SIL and IL are sometimes 
used interchangeably, but they are two dramatically different 
types of services.  SIL is a specific placement type.  In an SIL 
placement the youth, who is adjudicated dependent and still in 
the custody of the agency with court supervision, is placed in an 
apartment alone or with roommates. The rent is paid for by the 
agency.  The youth is supervised by the agency and provided 
with IL services.  Some youth may choose SIL as Another 
Planned Permanency Living Arrangement which is acceptable 
under ASFA as long as the permanency plan provides the youth 
with supportive and family-like relationships, as well as the skills 
and competencies needed to eventually live on his own.  In fact, 
the federal regulations recognize that a dependent older youth’s 
request that independent living be his permanency plan is a 
compelling reason not to pursue reunification (45 C.F.R. 
1356.21(h)(3)(i)).   

•  Medical Coverage.  One of the most important benefits of 

remaining in care is that Medical Assistance (MA) coverage 
continues while the child is in care.  A youth who opts to leave 
the system will lose medical coverage and be forced to reapply 
individually to continue to receive MA.   Unfortunately, many 
youth who leave the system do not follow through or are not 
eligible for continued MA.   

 
 

 

 

 

 

General Issues 

 

To remain in care past age 18, a youth must “request the court to retain 
jurisdiction.”  The youth should make the request of the court, either directly or 
through the GAL.  Ultimately the youth makes the decision of whether or not to 
remain in care, but this decision should be fully informed and aided by 
information from the agency and the GAL.   

15.6.4 IL Aftercare Services 

Aftercare services are available to youth ages 16 up to age 21 who have 

left the child welfare system for any reason.  Aftercare services are simply IL 
services that are provided to the youth after their discharge from the formal child 
welfare system.  The Aftercare services available to youth are similar to IL 
services that a youth would receive while in the child welfare system.  The 
process of transitioning services for a youth receiving IL services in the child 
welfare system to Aftercare services should be seamless to the youth.   

 
 

   

 

         

 177

178 

General Issues 

 

15.7 Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) 
 

Court-Appointed Special Advocates, or CASAs, are screened and trained 

volunteers, who, once appointed, can be a valuable resource as the “eyes and 
ears” of the court, bringing forward detailed information about what is happening 
in the lives of children with whom they work, along with recommendations as to 
ways to enhance their safety, permanence, and well-being. 
 

In Pennsylvania, the appointment, qualifications, roles, and duties of Court 

Appointed Special Advocates are governed by the provisions of 42 Pa.C.S.§ 
6342 and the Standards Governing the Qualifications and Training of Court-
Appointed Special Advocates (Standards) adopted by the Juvenile Court Judges’ 
Commission in 1999 (29 Pa.B. 3633).   

 
15.7.1 CASA Appointments 

 

he judge may appoint or discharge a CASA at any time during the 

proceeding or investigation regarding dependency.  Issues judges may wish to 
consider when making a decision to appoint a CASA as a “friend of the court” 
include whether there: 

  Are complex issues in the case? 
•  Are a large number of siblings? 
• 

Is private counsel involved who could benefit from the support of a 
CASA volunteer? 
Is a need to have intensive services provided in order for the child to 
remain in the home? 
Is a need to have services move very quickly for the family? 

• 
•  Are uncooperative parents? 

ASA programs have been shown to be effective in the most complicated 
and difficult cases.  Typically the children who have a CASA volunteer appointed 
are more likely to have face-to-face contact with them and their caregivers than 
those who are represented by attorneys alone.  Also, it has been found that 
these children get more services ordered and implemented, have fewer 
placements, and are more likely to be adopted (Youngclarke, Ramos, & Granger-
Merkle, 2004, p. 121).  However, judges should be aware that CASA volunteers 
are a limited resource and should appoint based upon their availability and the 
needs of the child in a particular case. 
 

15.7.2 CASA Duties and Responsibilities  

Generally, CASAs review records, research information, and interview the 

child and everyone else involved in the case.  They prepare reports and 
recommendations for the court and monitor the case until conclusion or whatever 
time period is defined in the order of appointment.  Volunteers generally have 

  T

 •

• 

  C

 
 

 

 
 

 

General Issues 

 

only one or two cases at a time and their activities are monitored by a CASA 
case manager.  Specific powers and duties of CASAs listed below are delineated 
in 42 Pa.C.S § 6342: 
 

• 

• 

•  have full access and review all records relating to the child and 
other information unless otherwise restricted by the court; 
interview the child and other appropriate persons as necessary to 
develop recommendations; 
receive reasonable prior notice of all hearings, staff meetings, 
investigations or other proceedings related to the child; 
receive reasonable prior notice of the movement of the child from 
one placement to another, the return of the child to the home, the 
removal of the child from the home or any action that materially 
affects the treatment of the child; 

• 

•  submit written reports to the court to assist the court in determining 
the disposition best suited to the health, safety and welfare of the 
child; and 

•  submit copies of all written reports and recommendations to all 

parties and any attorney of the party. 

Understanding the specific and unique role of CASA volunteers may help 

reduce potential conflict or confusion.  As the Resource Guidelines (NCJFCJ, 
1995, p. 24) point out, role conflict or confusion may sometimes arise between 
CASAs and GALs.  The Guidelines recommend joint efforts to clarify and define 
mutual responsibilities.  Multi-disciplinary training sessions are often effective in 
clarifying roles and responsibilities and identifying potential conflicts among 
system participants.  It is important to note that while CASA volunteers should 
work cooperatively with others, their investigations and recommendations should 
be independent. 

ASA volunteers, under the supervision of their agency, create a written 

report that details the history of the case, the work they have done, and the 
results of their investigations, as well as specific recommendations for the 
children and the family to which they are assigned.  CASA reports should be 
provided in advance to all parties, as well as to the court.  The volunteer or other 
responsible person from the CASA agency should be available in the courtroom 
to testify at the request of the court or parties regarding the investigation or 
recommendations provided within the report.  If the court has appointed CASA on 
a case, the court should hear from them at some point during the hearing, 
whether that is through testimony or the presentation of their report and 
recommendations.   

  C

     

 179

General Issues 

 

15.7.3  CASA Resources 

The National CASA Association maintains a website 

[www.nationalcasa.org], which provides information for local CASA 
programs and volunteers.  In recognition that judges  play a key role in 
developing new programs, sustaining existing programs, and expanding the 
network, the website provides a link to the Association’s monthly e-
newsletter, The Judges’ Page, and maintains a Judges’ Corner Resource 
Center.  
 

The Pennsylvania CASA Association [www.pacasa.org ] is a 

statewide non-profit organization that promotes public awareness of the 
CASA concept, helps local programs develop, and generally supports local 
programs in Pennsylvania.  The website provides links to the National CASA 
Program Standards and a Judges’ Guide to CASA/GAL Program 
Development.  

 
 

 
 

   

 

180

 

     

 

181

General Issues 

 

15.8 Planning and Funding Services – The Needs Based Plan 

and Budget (NBPB) 

While funding issues should never directly influence judicial decisions, the 

court does play a role in securing federal, state and local funding for services to 
help dependent children and their families.  This role is both case-specific and 
administrative in nature.  At the case level, the court’s orders and the timing of 
those orders directly impact the local child welfare agency’s ability to receive 
funding for needed services.  On an administrative level, courts are asked to 
review and sign the annual Needs Based Plan and Budget (NBPB) created by 
the local child welfare agency.  In this role, judges can provide valuable insight 
for future service planning by identifying potential services that could help the 
children and families that come into their courtrooms.   

5.8.1 “Best Interests” and “Reasonable Efforts” Findings 

everal findings and orders made (or not made) by the court have direct 

impact on the level of federal funding available to meet a child/family’s service 
needs.  Primarily these relate to a child’s removal from the home being in the 
child’s “best interests” and to “reasonable efforts” made by the agency.  With no 
legal definition for “best interests” or “reasonable efforts,” common sense and 
judicial discretion prevail.  In most cases the “best interests” call is relatively 
easy.  “Reasonable efforts” determinations may not be as obvious.  Black’s Law 
dictionary defines “reasonable” as “fit and appropriate to the end in view” while 
Webster’s definition is “not expecting or demanding more than is possible or 
achievable; fairly good but not excellent; large enough but not excessive; 
acceptable and according to common sense or normal practices”.  Either of these 
would logically apply to the “reasonable efforts” standard found in dependency 
proceedings. 
 

Findings related to reasonable efforts must be addressed at every 

dependency proceeding, although the particular efforts being reviewed are 
different at different stages of the process.  At the shelter, adjudication, and 
disposition hearings, “reasonable efforts” findings focus on steps taken to prevent 
or eliminate the need for child removal.  At subsequent permanency hearings, 
the reasonable efforts focus is on the agency’s efforts to finalize the permanency 
plan (i.e. reunification, adoption, or other) 
 

 During the shelter, adjudication, and disposition hearings, sufficient 
information should be presented to enable the court to make a reasonable efforts 
finding.  Options include: 

  1

  S

  Reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for 

removal of the children from the home. 

•  Prevention services were not offered due to the necessity for 

emergency placement and the lack of services was reasonable under 

 
 

   

 •

 

General Issues 

 

the circumstances.  This level of effort was reasonable due to the 
emergency nature of the situation, safety considerations, and 
circumstances of the family. 

•  Reasonable efforts are underway to make it possible for the child to 
return home, the court having previously determined, pursuant to 42 
Pa.C.S. § 6332, that reasonable efforts were not made to prevent the 
initial removal of the child from the home. 

•  Reasonable efforts not applicable. 
•  No reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for 

removal of the child from the home. 

If the Court finds that reasonable efforts were not made, federal funding 

for the care/support of the child is prohibited.    
 

The “reasonable efforts” issue arises again during permanency review 

hearings.  At this point, the court must make a finding regarding whether 
reasonable efforts have been made by the agency to finalize the permanency 
goal.  Here again, a finding of no reasonable efforts results in lost federal funding 
for the child.  Reasonable efforts options at permanency proceedings include: 

  Reasonable efforts have been made to finalize the child’s permanency 

•  Reasonable efforts have NOT been made to finalize the child’s 

•  Reasonable efforts to finalize the child’s permanency plan are not 

permanency plan. 

applicable. 

plan. 

 •

*Best Practice: Communication with Agency* 

Because reasonable effort findings have such a significant impact on the 

financial resources available to assist children and their families, courts are 
encouraged to communicate clear expectations to the agency.  When possible, courts 
should ask questions to elicit the information needed to satisfy its belief that 
reasonable efforts have been provided.   
 

Courts are further encouraged to articulate their rationale when a finding of no 

reasonable efforts is made so as to inform the agency of the changes needed.   

very year the county child welfare agency is required to submit a Needs-

Based Plan and Budget (NBPB).  The NBPB covers two fiscal years of funding 
including an implementation year and a needs based year.  Each county’s NBPB 
is used in the determination of the Needs Based Plan and Budget allocations for 
all 67 counties, which is made by the Department of Public Welfare’s Office of 

  E

15.8.2 County Planning and Budgeting Process 

 
 

 

   

 

 182

General Issues 

 

Children, Youth and Families (OCYF) and submitted to the Governor’s Budget 
Office.   

The NBPB process provides the county with an opportunity to state what 
funds it will need in the upcoming budget period to cover the cost of (1) county 
child welfare and juvenile detention staff and (2) all direct and purchased child 
welfare and juvenile delinquency services.  Costs include but are not limited to 
Juvenile Act Proceedings costs (including reimbursement for GAL in dependency 
cases, assessments, etc.), county staff (excluding county court personnel and 
benefits), in-home services, foster family services, community-based and 
institutional services, detention, and secure residential services.  The statute 
provides a different reimbursement percentage amount for each service 
category, with the total reimbursement being a combination of state, federal, and 
county matching funds.   
 

The NBPB submission by each county should be a collaboration of all 

system and community partners involved with the child welfare system, including 
but not limited to the court, the juvenile probation office, the behavioral health 
and mental retardation systems, school districts, advocates, providers, and the 
public.  The NBPB must be reviewed and signed by the county children and 
youth administrator, the chief juvenile probation officer, the county 
commissioners/executive, and the judicial president/administrative judge. 

n March/April of each year, OCYF issues a draft bulletin containing the 
instructions for the NBPB.  This draft is issued to all county children and youth 
agency directors and county juvenile probation chiefs, as well as the private 
provider community.  On or about May 15, the final NBPB bulletin for the 
following fiscal year is issued.  The county NBPBs must be submitted to OCYF 
no later than August 15.   

  I

 

*Best Practice: Court/Agency Collaboration* 

Ideally the court and agency should be identifying service gaps/needs 
throughout the year and communicating with each other about them.  Local Children’s 
Roundtables are an excellent venue for these discussions, helping to identify needs 
as well as potential solutions. 
 

In some counties, courts and non-court personnel (usually agency/county 

program and fiscal personnel) meet to routinely review service delivery, costs, and 
effectiveness.  This administrative process helps to identify services that show 
positive outcomes for children and families while clarifying court expectations and 
making the most of limited funding resources.  This quality control partnership results 
in a more effective and more relevant service delivery system. 
 

Additionally, courts should be given ample time to review the NBPB prior to 

submission and provide feedback to the agency.  The reviewing judge should be 
satisfied that the best programs from the court’s experience are identified before 
executing the document. 

 
 

 

 

183

General Issues 

 

Once OCYF receives each county’s submission, OCYF regional and 
headquarter staff review the submission and request additional information 
pursuant to written questions.  OCYF then decides on an allocation for each 
county based on the past history and expenditures, trends of the county, special 
circumstances of the county, and the narrative of the county.  The Deputy 
Secretary for OCYF then certifies a total budget for all counties’ child welfare and 
delinquency allowable costs and certifies the Needs-Based Plan and Budget to 
the Governor’s Budget Director.  This certified amount is presented to the 
Legislature along with the Governor’s budget submission.      

 
 

               

 184

185 

apter 16 ---- Overview of Federal and State Child 
 Overview of Federal and State Child 
ChChChChapter 16 
 Overview of Federal and State Child 
 Overview of Federal and State Child 
apter 16 
apter 16 
Welfare Legislation    
Welfare Legislation
Welfare Legislation
Welfare Legislation

6.1 Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 

n 1980 Congress signed into law the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act 
of 1980 (AACWA).  This legislation sought to develop for the first time a comprehensive 
federal scheme to reform the foster care system.  The legislation offered funding to 
states contingent on their revamping their child welfare and foster care programs 
according to the structure provided by the federal government.  If the state undertook 
the required restructuring, the federal government would pay a portion of the state’s 
child welfare services costs.  Generally, the states had to match the funding up to 30%.   

ACWA required three major changes in the child welfare system.  First, it 

required that states make “reasonable efforts” to prevent the removal of children from 
their families by providing the necessary services.  Second, it required that the child 
welfare system make reasonable efforts to reunify the family for 18 months, after which 
the child could be moved to a permanent alternative.  Third, it offered adoption 
subsidies to families who adopted children with special needs that required additional 
financial considerations.   

16.2 Adoption and Safe Families Act 

he Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) was enacted in 1997 to correct the 
misperceptions generated by AACWA.  ASFA maintains the basic formula of AACWA 
and reaffirms the federal government’s commitment to preserving families by 
maintaining the requirement that state child welfare agencies make reasonable efforts 
to prevent the removal of children from the home.  However, ASFA makes clear that the 
intention is to put children first; it states:  “in determining reasonable efforts to be made 
with respect to a child . . . the child’s health and safety shall be of paramount concern”  
(42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(15)).  Reasonable efforts are excused where necessary to assure 
the child’s safety.  If a parent has been convicted for prior acts of child abuse or has had 
parental rights involuntarily terminated with respect to a sibling of the child, the child 
welfare agency must initiate termination of parental rights or otherwise provide a 
permanent out-of-home placement for the child.  In addition to these two elements, 
ASFA allows each state to define a set of “aggravated circumstances” which would 
excuse reasonable efforts and immediately move for termination of parental rights or 
permanent placement of the child outside the home.   

nless the court has found that reasonable efforts are not required, the child 

welfare agency must make reasonable efforts to reunite the family.  Even though ASFA 
does not define reasonable efforts, it makes it clear that every child for which 
reasonable efforts are being made must have a case plan.  A case plan is defined as a 
written document that includes at least the following (42 U.S.C. § 675(1)): 

•  A description of the type of home or institution in which a child is to be placed. 

  I

  A

 

  T

  U

 

 

  

  1

•  A plan for assuring that the child receives safe and proper care and that services 

are provided to the parents, child, and foster parents. 

•  The health and education records of the child. 
•  Where appropriate, for a child age 16 or over, a written description of the 

• 

programs and services which will help such child prepare for the transition to 
independent living. 
In the case of a child with respect to whom the permanency plan is adoption or 
placement in another permanent home, documentation of the steps the agency is 
taking to find an adoptive family.   

SFA made other changes to AACWA to more quickly move a child through the 
child welfare system.  The agency’s case plan must be judicially reviewed at least every 
six months to ensure that the plan is being followed and that the case is moving 
forward.  ASFA also requires that a permanency planning hearing be held at least every 
12 months that the child is in foster care.  If a child has been in foster care for 15 of the 
most recent 22 months then the agency must petition for the termination of parental 
rights, unless one of three specified exceptions applies: (1) the child is being cared for 
by a relative; (2) the agency has documented a compelling reason for determining that 
terminating parental rights would not be in the best interest of the child; or (3) the 
agency has not provided, consistent with the time period in the case plan, such services 
to the family as the agency deems necessary for the safe return of the child (42 U.S.C. 
§ 675(5)).  If the court has waived reasonable efforts because the reunification of the 
family is not in the best interests of the child, the agency does not need to wait 15 
months to terminate parental rights. 

  
In addition, ASFA allows the agency to pursue concurrent planning without 

financial penalties (42 U.S.C. § 671(15)(F)).   Under a concurrent plan, the agency is 
free to make reasonable efforts to reunify the family while at the same time trying to 
identify other appropriate permanent placements for the child.  That way, if reunification 
is not achieved, an alternative placement will already be identified.  ASFA expands the 
available permanency options by recognizing permanent legal guardianship as a form of 
permanency.  This allows individuals who do not want to adopt to become permanent 
guardians of a child.  Although not as secure as adoption, it does provide the child with 
a stable environment and an opportunity to maintain ties to his/her biological parents.  In 
a further effort to move children through the child welfare system, ASFA also 
encourages adoption by paying a state for every adoption that is achieved over a set 
baseline.   

  A

6.3 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act  

The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) was enacted in 1974 
and was most recently amended in 2003 as part of the Keeping Children and Families 
Safe Act.  CAPTA has three main goals: (1) to provide federal funding in support of 
states’ efforts to prevent child maltreatment and respond to reports of child abuse and 
neglect; (2) to provide funding for the training of professionals involved in preventing 

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

  1

 

 186

187

and responding to child abuse and neglect; and (3) to provide a means for 
disseminating information on abuse and neglect to the Secretary of the Department of 
Health and Human Services (DHHS), Congress, and the public.  

he statute sets forth fourteen specific areas for which funding will be granted 

through DHHS when states submit a specific plan requesting funds (42 U.S.C. § 
5106(a)).  CAPTA provides funding for state plans that mandate the reporting of 
suspected child maltreatment, implement assessment tools to determine which reports 
are valid and which lack sufficient evidence of abuse and neglect, and implement action 
plans on valid reports of abuse that are appropriate to the level of risk of harm to the 
child involved.  Funding is also available for the training of professionals involved in 
preventing and responding to child abuse and neglect (42 U.S.C. § 5106(a)(1)).  CAPTA 
requires that a GAL be appointed to every child involved in a judicial proceeding 
involving child abuse and neglect allegations (42 U.S.C. § 5106a(b)).  

CAPTA not only provides money for training GAL but also for the training of 

professional and paraprofessional personnel in the fields of medicine, law enforcement, 
judiciary, social work and child protection, education, and other relevant fields, who are 
engaged in, or intend to work in, the field of prevention, identification, and treatment of 
child abuse and neglect (42 U.S.C. § 5106(a)(1)(A)). 
 

CAPTA also establishes a National Clearinghouse for Information Relating to 

Child Abuse (42 U.S.C. § 5104).  The function of the Clearinghouse is to maintain, 
coordinate, and disseminate information on all effective programs, including private and 
community-based programs, that show promise of success with respect to the 
prevention, assessment, identification, and treatment of child abuse and neglect and 
that hold the potential for broad scale implementation and replication. 

  T

   

6.4 Foster Care Independence Act (Chafee) 

The Foster Care Independence Act (also known as “The Chafee Foster Care 

Independence Program” or “Chafee Act”) became law in 1999.  The overall purpose of 
the Act is to provide funding to the states that will assist children who are transitioning 
from foster care to independent living.  It is aimed specifically at those children who are 
likely to remain in foster care until they are 18 years old.  As previously stated, it is well 
known that adolescents face a number of problems in transitioning from foster care to 
independent living.  Challenges include: homelessness, non-marital childbearing, 
poverty, delinquent or criminal behavior, and criminal victimization.   

o address these problems the Chafee Act does five primary things.  

(1) Establishes an improved independent living program, known as the John H. 

Chafee Foster Care Independence Program (42 U.S.C. § 677). 
 

(2) Increases from $1,000 to $10,000 the amount of assets a youth may have and 
still remain eligible for foster care funded by Title IV-E (42 U.S.C. § 672(a)). 

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

  1

 

  T

 

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

(3) Requires states to train foster parents. 

(4) Authorizes increased funds for adoption incentive payments to the states to 

assist in finding permanent placements for children in foster care (42 U.S.C. § 
673b). 

(5) Allows youth who are in foster care on their eighteenth birthday to be covered by 

Medicaid between the ages of 18 and 21 (42 U.S.C. § 396(a)). 

6.5 Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act  

The Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act was 

enacted in October 2008. The stated purpose of the Act is to connect and support 
relative caregivers, improve outcomes for children in foster care, provide for tribal foster 
care and adoption access, and improve incentives for adoption. The ultimate goal is to 
move children out of foster care and into safe, permanent homes.  The Act amends 
parts B and E of Title IV of the Social Security Act to: 

find, approve, and support relative caregivers; 
increase efforts to preserve sibling ties; 

• 
• 
•  mandate coordination and improved oversight of education and health needs; 
•  encourage adoptions; 
•  provide federal assistance and protection to Native American and Alaskan native 

children; 

•  preserve educational stability and enhance education support; and 
•  support the training of lawyers and judges. 

The Act is intended to move children in foster care into homes with relatives and 

adoptive parents so they can enjoy the benefits of a safe and secure environment as 
they grow up.  To this end, the Act has specific provisions to assist relatives and 
adoptive families to connect with children in foster care.  

To encourage placement with relatives the Act provides for the following: 

•  Notice to relatives when children enter care.  The Act provides that within 30 

days after the removal of a child from parental custody, the agency must exercise 
due diligence to identify and provide notice to all adult grandparents and other 
adult relatives of the child (42 U.S.C. § 671(a)). 

•  Subsidized guardianship payments for relatives.  The Act also provides 
states with federal funds for support payments that enable children to leave 
foster care and live permanently with grandparents and other relatives when they 
cannot return home or be adopted.  Payments usually last until the child reaches 
age 18, but in certain circumstances children may continue to receive 
guardianship assistance to age 21.  The Act also clarifies that children who leave 

 

 

 

  1

 

 

 188

189

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

foster care after age 16 for kinship guardianship are eligible for independent 
living services and education and training vouchers (42 U.S.C. § 677). 

•  Licensing standards for relatives.  States may waive non-safety related 

licensing standards for relatives on a case-by-case basis.  The Department of 
Health and Human Services is required to report to Congress on the use of 
licensing waivers and on recommendations for increasing the percentage of 
relative foster family homes that are licensed (42 U.S.C. § 671(a)). 

•  Family Connection grants.  The Act increases resources for Kinship Navigator 

programs and provides grants for Family Group Decision Making, Family Finding, 
and Residential Family-Based Substance Abuse Treatment (42 U.S.C. § 627). 

  Support for keeping siblings together.  The Act requires states to make 

reasonable efforts to place brothers and sisters together when they must be 
removed from their parents’ home, provided it is in the children’s best interests.  
In the case of separated siblings, states must make reasonable efforts to provide 
for frequent visits or other interaction, unless it would be harmful to the children 
(42 U.S.C. § 671(a)). 

o encourage placement with adoptive families the Act provides for the following: 

Incentives for adoption.  The Act expands state incentives to find adoptive 
families for children in foster care, especially older youth and children with 
special needs, by increasing the payment for each adoption over the baseline.  It 
also extends the incentive program for an additional five years (42 U.S.C. § 
673(b)). 

  Adoption assistance.  The Act also allows children with special needs to 

receive federally supported adoption assistance without regard to income of the 
birth family (42 U.S.C. § 673). 

o encourage better healthcare, education and opportunities for children in foster 

  T

  T

 •

• 

 •

care the Act provides for the following: 
 

•  Extended foster care for older youth.  Federal support is provided to states 

that extend foster care services for one to three years for young people who turn 
18 without a permanent family. This significantly increases the young person’s 
opportunities to successfully transition to adulthood. 
 

•  Educational stability.  States are required to make sure children placed in foster 

care are kept in the same school where possible, or otherwise transferred 
promptly. The act also provides more federal support for school-related 
transportation costs (42 U.S.C. § 675). 

 

 

 

 

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

•  Healthcare coordination.  State child welfare and Medicaid agencies are 
required to better coordinate health care; ensure appropriate screenings, 
assessments and follow-up treatment; share critical information with appropriate 
providers; and provide oversight of prescription medications (42 § 622(b)(15)). 

The Act also expands federal support for training of people who are caring for 

and working with children in the child welfare system, including relative guardians, staff 
of private child welfare agencies, court personnel, attorneys, GALs, and CASAs (42 
U.S.C. § 674(a)(3)(B)). 

6.6 Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) 

he ICPC is a statutory law that has been passed by all 50 states, Washington 

D.C., and the U.S. Virgin Islands.  It establishes uniform legal and administrative 
procedures for placing children across state lines.  Given that a state’s jurisdiction over 
a child ends at the state line, having a legal framework for placing children in another 
jurisdiction safeguards the interest of the child and ensures that the child’s needs will be 
met even as the child leaves the jurisdiction.  Before a child from one state can be 
placed in another jurisdiction, each state’s Compact Administrator must approve the 
placement.   

 

 

  1

he Compact applies to the following kinds of placements: 

1) Placements with parents, close relatives, and non-agency guardians unless a 

parent, close relative, or non-agency guardian makes the placement; 

(2) Adoptive placements; 
(3) Foster home placements; 
(4) Child-caring facilities, including residential treatment, group homes, and 

institutions; or 

(5) Placements of adjudicated delinquents in institutions in other states. 

The safeguards provided by the Compact include the following: 

1) Provides for home studies and an evaluation of each interstate placement 

before the placement is made;  

(2) Allows the prospective receiving state to ensure all its applicable child 

placement laws and policies are followed before it approves an interstate 
placement; 

(3) Gives the prospective receiving state the opportunity to consent to or deny a 

(4) Provides for continual supervision and regular reports on each interstate 

placement before it is made; 

placement; 

(5) Guarantees the child’s legal and financial protection by fixing these 

responsibilities with the sending agency or individual; and 

  T

  T

  (

  (

 190

(6) Ensures that the sending agency or individual does not lose legal jurisdiction 

over the child once the child is moved to the receiving state. 

Under the Compact, legal and financial responsibility for the child remains with 

the sender until the placement is terminated.  The receiving state does not have to pay 
for placement; financially and legally it is as if the child remained with the sending state.   
A placement is terminated when a child reaches majority, is adopted, or returns to the 
sending state.  The sending state may also terminate the placement with the 
concurrence of the receiving state. 

he Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was enacted in 1978 in response to the 

historical discrimination experienced by Native American families and tribes when their 
children were unnecessarily removed from the home to assimilate them into the 
dominant culture.  ICWA applies to any child protective proceeding where the right to 
custody of an Indian child is at issue.   A child custody proceeding as defined by ICWA 
includes foster care placement, termination of parental rights, preadoptive placement, 
and adoptive placement proceedings.  ICWA also applies when an Indian parent wants 
to voluntarily place the child in foster care or adoption.  ICWA defines an “Indian child” 
as a child who is a member of an Indian tribe or is eligible for membership in an Indian 
tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe.  Each tribe has the 
exclusive right to set its own requirements for membership in the tribe.   

CWA gives the Indian tribe exclusive jurisdiction over child protection 

proceedings involving children domiciled on its reservation.  However, a state court may 
enter emergency orders to protect an Indian child who is domiciled on the reservation 
but found off the reservation “in order to prevent imminent physical damage or harm to 
the child” (25 U.S.C. § 1922).  The tribe then has the right to request that the case be 
transferred from the state court to the tribal court.  The state court must grant the 
transfer unless there is “good cause” or the parent objects (25 U.S.C. § 1911(b)).  Even 
if the tribe opts not to request that the case be transferred, the tribe retains the right to 
intervene at any point in the proceeding. 
 

Where the court knows or has reason to know that an Indian child is involved in a 

child custody proceeding, notice of the proceeding and the right to intervene must be 
given to the child’s parents or Indian custodian and the Indian child's tribe.  If the identity 
or location of the parent or Indian custodian and the tribe cannot be determined, notice 
must be given to the Secretary of the Interior.   No foster care placement or termination 
of parental rights proceeding can be held until at least ten days after receipt of notice by 
the parent or Indian custodian and the tribe or the Secretary of Interior.  It should be 
noted that notice to the parents and the tribe is critical, and cases (even adoptions) 
have been overturned due to a lack of notice to the tribe.  Therefore, the agency and 

ore information is available from the Association of Administrators of the 

Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children at http://icpc.aphsa.org/. 

6.7 Indian Child Welfare Act  

  1

  M

  T

  I

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

 

191

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

counsel should document their efforts to provide notice with the court.  Notice must be 
provided by registered mail, return receipt requested (25 U.S.C. § 1912(a)). 

CWA requires a higher standard of evidence for foster care placements and 
termination of the parental rights.  For foster care placement, the court must make a 
determination, supported by clear and convincing evidence, including testimony of 
qualified expert witnesses, that the continued custody of the child by the parent or 
Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child.  
For termination of parental rights proceedings, the court must make a determination, 
supported by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, including testimony of qualified 
expert witnesses, that the continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian 
custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child (25 
U.S.C. § 1912(e)-(f)).   

CWA also specifies placement preferences for both foster care placements and 

adoptive placements.  As with any foster care placement, the placement must be the 
least restrictive possible, must be in as family-like a setting as possible, and must meet 
the child’s special needs.  In addition, unless there is good cause to the contrary, the 
priority for foster care or pre-adoptive placement of an Indian child should be:  

i) a member of the Indian child's extended family; 
(ii) a foster home licensed, approved, or specified by the Indian child's tribe; 
(iii) an Indian foster home licensed or approved by an authorized non-Indian 
licensing authority; or 
(iv) an institution for children approved by an Indian tribe or operated by an 
Indian organization which has a program suitable to meet the Indian child's 
needs. 

nless there is good cause to the contrary, the priority for adoptive placement of 

an Indian child should be:  

  I

  I

  (

  U

  (

i) a member of the child's extended family; 
(ii) other members of the Indian child's tribe; or 
(iii) other Indian families. 

The Native American Rights Fund has prepared A Practical Guide to the ICWA 

which is available at http://www.narf.org/icwa/index.htm.  

6.8  The Multi-Ethnic Placement Act 

The Multi-Ethnic Placement Act of 1994, as amended by the Interethnic 
Provisions of 1996 (MEPA), is intended to remove barriers to permanency for minority 
children.  MEPA prohibits state agencies and other entities that receive federal funding 
from delaying or denying a child’s foster care or adoptive placement on account of the 
prospective parent’s race, color, or national origin, or denying anyone the opportunity to 
become a foster or adoptive parent on account of race, color, or national origin (42 

 

  1

 

 192

U.S.C. § 671(a)(18)).  MEPA also requires that states recruit foster and adoptive 
parents who reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the state’s foster care population 
(42 U.S.C. § 622(b)(8)).   

EPA does not apply to placements involving Indian children subject to the 

ICWA (42 U.S.C. § 674(d)(4)). 

ractices prohibited by MEPA include setting a specific time period during which 
the agency only searches for a racially or ethnically matching placement; establishing a 
list of placement preferences based on racial or ethnic factors; and requiring special 
justifications for trans-racial placements (Hollingeri, 2007, p. 1).  
 

The American Bar Association’s Center on Children and the Law has prepared A 
Guide to the Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 as Amended by the Interethnic Adoption 
Provisions of 1996 which is available at 
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/mepa94/index.htm  

The Pennsylvania Adoption Act, 23 Pa.C.S. § 2301 et seq., governs the 

voluntary relinquishment and involuntary termination of parental rights.  The 
Adoption Act has not been amended to incorporate the requirements of parental 
rights termination under ASFA.  Those provisions have been adopted in the 
Juvenile Act.  Except in Philadelphia, where proceedings of this nature come 
under the jurisdiction of the Family Court division, the Orphans’ Court divisions of 
the Courts of Common Pleas have jurisdiction over relinquishment and 
termination proceedings, regardless of whether they are brought under the 
Juvenile Act or the Adoption Act (23 Pa.C.S. § 2301).  In counties other than 
Philadelphia, the judge who adjudicated the child dependent or conducted 
permanency or other dependency court hearings in the matter may be assigned 
by the President Judge to preside in Orphans’ Court over these separate 
proceedings (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(i)).   

6.9  The Pennsylvania Adoption Act  

  1

 

enue is flexible, in that termination or relinquishment proceedings may take 
place where the biological parents of the child reside, or where the adopting parents 
reside.  If termination or relinquishment of parental rights is in the county where the 
natural parent or parents live, nothing in the law prevents the adoption from taking place 
where the adopting parents reside, even if their residence is in a different county.  
Venue is also appropriate in the county where the adoption agency or child welfare 
agency that placed or has custody of the child is located (23 Pa.C.S. §§ 2302-2303).  

6.9.1 Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights  

ssentially, the Adoption Act provides that a parent or parents may relinquish 

parental rights over a child (1) to an agency that will place that child for adoption or (2) 
directly to an adult or an adult couple intending to adopt the child.  Any person may be 

  M

  P

  V

  1

  E

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

 

193

adopted, regardless of age, and any individual may adopt (23 Pa.C.S.  §§ 2311-2312).    
For an adult child to be adopted, the natural parents’ consent is not necessary, nor is it 
necessary for the natural parents to relinquish their parental rights.  For the adoption of 
a minor child, relinquishment or termination of the parental rights is necessary to make 
way for the adopting parent or parents.   

 petition to voluntarily relinquish parental rights can be filed by the parent or 

parents of a child who has been in the custody of an agency for at least three days or by 
a parent or parents who have executed and delivered written notice of a present intent 
to transfer custody of the child to the agency.   A parent can also petition to relinquish 
parental rights to an adult who has filed a report of intention to adopt if the child has 
been in that adult’s exclusive care for at least three days.  The court must schedule a 
hearing for a date not less than 10 days after the petition is filed.  At least 10 days’ 
notice of the hearing must be given to the petitioner, and a copy of the notice shall be 
given to the other parent, to the putative father whose parental rights could be 
terminated if he fails to respond, and to the parents or guardian of a petitioner who has 
not reached 18 years of age (23 Pa.C.S. § 2503). 

ection 2503 requires that, prior to entering a decree of termination of parental 

rights pursuant to voluntary relinquishment, the court must ask any parent who is both in 
court and named in the decree “whether he or she has received counseling concerning 
the termination and the alternatives thereto” 23 Pa.C.S. § 2505(c)).  If the parent has 
not received counseling from a qualified agency or individual, the court may refer the 
parent for counseling with that parent’s consent.   A referral may not delay the 
completion of the hearing on the petition for more than 15 days. 

6.9.2 Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights  

 

 brief summary of the statute on involuntary termination of parental rights is 

provided here; for a more detailed discussion, see Chapter 12: Termination of Parental 
Rights.   

ection 2511 of the Adoption Act applies to situations in which a parent or 
parents refuses to give up parental rights, despite what the petitioner believes to be just 
cause.  In this situation the petitioner may be the child protective services agency; a 
natural parent seeking to end the rights of the other natural parent; an attorney 
representing a child; a GAL representing a child who has been adjudicated dependent; 
or an individual who has custody or stands in loco parentis and who has filed a Report 
of Intention to Adopt.  In evaluating the petition and the positions of the parties, 
including testimonial evidence from the hearing, the court must examine whether a 
parent’s conduct meets the statutory requirements for involuntary termination by clear 
and convincing evidence, and then, if the evidence proves the petitioner’s claim, the 
court must consider the effect of the proposed termination on the subject child or 
children and what is in their best interests.   

  A

  S

  1

  A

  S

 

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

 194

195

Grounds for involuntary termination under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a) are listed and 

discussed in Chapter 12: Termination of Parental Rights.  However, even if grounds to 
terminate exist under Section 2511(a), the court cannot terminate parental rights unless 
it is in the child’s best interest. Part (b) of Section 2511 requires the court to “give 
primary consideration to the developmental, physical and emotional needs and welfare 
of the child.”  Part (b) also seeks to assure that parental rights are not terminated solely 
on the basis of environmental factors that are beyond the parent’s control, such as 
“inadequate housing, furnishings, income, clothing and medical care” due to poverty.   

s part of an evaluation of the needs and welfare of the child, the court must 

consider the existence of a bond between the parent and child.  Section 2511(b) does 
not require a formal bonding evaluation but where even a minimal bond is found to 
exist, the court must consider the effect termination of that bond would have on the 
child.   

6.9.3 Relinquishment of Parental Rights under the Alternative Procedure  

 

  A

  1

The “alternative procedure” process under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2504 is essentially a 

hybrid of voluntary relinquishment and involuntary termination, in that it is chosen by the 
parent or parents (as in voluntary relinquishment) yet does not require their appearance 
at the court hearing (as in involuntary termination).  For further details on this option, 
see Chapter 12: Termination of Parental Rights. 

6.10 The Child Protective Services Law  

The Child Protective Services Law (CPSL), 23 Pa.C.S. § 6301 et seq., is 

primarily a reporting statute that was enacted in 1975 to encourage the reporting of 
incidents of child abuse.  The CPSL was amended in 2006 to broaden its scope by 
imposing mandatory reporting requirements on more individuals and broadening the 
definition of a perpetrator of child abuse.  The purposes of the statute are enumerated in 
Section 6302: 
 

•  Encourage complete reporting of suspected child abuse. 
• 
•  Establish in each county a child protective service capable of investigating 

Involve law enforcement agencies in responding to child abuse. 

reports swiftly and competently. 

•  Provide children with protection from further abuse. 
•  Provide rehabilitative services to the parents and child. 
•  Preserve and stabilize family life whenever appropriate and provide children with 

an alternative permanent family when family unity cannot be maintained. 

•  Ensure that each county agency establishes a program of protective services to 
assess the risk of harm to a child, respond adequately, and prioritize services to 
children most at risk. 

Because both the Juvenile Act and the CPSL were enacted to protect the safety 

and well-being of children, there is some overlap between the two laws.  However, there 

  1

 

 

 

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

are significant differences as well.  First, the CPSL sets forth an extensive list of 
individuals who must report child abuse “when the person has reasonable cause to 
suspect” that a child is a victim of child abuse (23 Pa.C.S. § 6311).  Pennsylvania has 
established a statewide hotline for the purpose of receiving reports of child abuse.  Any 
mandated reporter suspecting an instance of child abuse is required to report the 
incident.  The Juvenile Act does not require that reporters call the child abuse hotline to 
report non-abuse concerns, such as those concerning an ungovernable child.  Similarly, 
even if a court finds what may be a “founded” instance of child abuse under the CPSL, 
the court does not have to enter an adjudication of dependency. For example, although 
an isolated incident of abuse has occurred, its isolated nature may lead a court to find 
that a child nevertheless has adequate parental care. In practice, however, many courts 
will adjudicate as dependent the victim of even a single incident of abuse, even if they 
allow the birth parents to maintain physical or legal custody of the child. 

ike the Juvenile Act, the CPSL allows for the removal of a child from the home 

in cases where the safety and well-being of the child is at risk.  The CPSL allows a 
medical professional to take custody of a child if protective custody is “immediately 
necessary” to protect the child (23 Pa.C.S. § 6315).  A child may also be taken into 
custody under the provisions of Section 6324 of the Juvenile Act.  Within 24 hours of 
taking the child into custody the county agency must be notified and the county agency 
must seek a court order permitting the child to be held for a longer period of time if 
continued placement is needed.  Additionally, within 72 hours of taking a child into 
custody, a shelter care hearing must be conducted (23 Pa.C.S. § 6315(d)).  If the child 
is alleged to be without proper parental care or control or dependent, the county agency 
must file a dependency petition under the Juvenile Act within 48 hours of the hearing.  
Filing a petition of dependency invokes the procedures of the Juvenile Act. 
 

The filing of a dependency petition alleging child abuse triggers the question of 

whether aggravated circumstances exist which would allow the court to relax the 
reasonable efforts requirement of the Juvenile Act and hold a permanency hearing 
within 30 days (See discussion at section 15.1 in Chapter 15: General Issues).  The 
allegations of abuse reported under the CPSL may or may not constitute “aggravated 
circumstances” as defined in the Juvenile Act.  The first factor to examine is the 
perpetrator.  Aggravated circumstances under the Juvenile Act must be committed by a 
parent.  Under the CPSL, the reported abuse may be by a perpetrator other than the 
parent.  The CPSL defines a perpetrator as “a person who has committed child abuse 
and is a parent of a child, a person responsible for the welfare of a child, an individual 
residing in the same home as a child or a paramour of a child’s parent” (23 Pa.C.S. § 
6303).  Therefore, if the parent is not the perpetrator, aggravated circumstances do not 
exist even if the child is a victim of child abuse. 

f the parent is the perpetrator, the second factor to consider is the harm done to 
the child.  The definition of “serious bodily injury” is the same in the Juvenile Act and the 
CPSL.  Thus, any case involving “serious bodily injury” that would constitute abuse 
under the CPSL would also constitute aggravated circumstances under the Juvenile 
Act.  However, “serious bodily injury” is only a subset of the physical abuse cases 

  L

  I

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

 196

reported under the CPSL; therefore not every abuse case under the CPSL is an 
aggravated circumstance.    
 

Aggravated circumstances include incidents of “sexual violence” by the parent to 

the child or the child’s sibling.  The definition of “sexual violence” included in the 
Juvenile Act is very similar to the definition of “sexual abuse or exploitation” in the 
CPSL, with a few exceptions.  The major difference is that the definition of “sexual 
abuse or exploitation” in the CPSL includes rape, sexual assault, involuntary deviate 
sexual intercourse, aggravated indecent assault, molestation, incest, indecent 
exposure, prostitution, sexual abuse, and sexual exploitation (23 Pa.C.S. § 6303).  The 
definition of sexual violence in the Juvenile Act includes rape, indecent contact, or 
incest (42 Pa.C.S. § 6302).  With these exceptions, it seems that any other indicated or 
founded case of sexual abuse by a parent would constitute aggravated circumstances 
under the Juvenile Act. 

ggravated circumstances also include incidents of “aggravated physical 
neglect” by the parent to the child or the child’s sibling.  The Juvenile Act defines 
aggravated physical neglect as “any omission in the care of a child which results in a 
life-threatening condition or seriously impairs the child’s functioning” (42 Pa.C.S. § 
6302).  The CPSL states that serious physical neglect requires the “prolonged or 
repeated lack of supervision or the failure to provide essentials of life, including 
adequate medical care, which endangers a child’s life or development or impairs the 
child’s functioning” (23 Pa.C.S. § 6303).  A comparison of these two definitions reveals 
that the definition of “aggravated physical neglect” included in the Juvenile Act 
encompasses only the most serious of those child abuse cases that involve “serious 
physical neglect” under the CPSL.  For example, an infant diagnosed with failure to 
thrive might qualify as a victim of “serious physical neglect” under the CPSL, because 
the diagnosis necessarily includes a danger to the child’s development.  However, the 
failure to thrive diagnosis might not support a finding of aggravated circumstances 
under the Juvenile Act, because the effects on the child may not rise to the level of 
serious functional impairment.  Thus, courts and agencies should take care to avoid 
assuming that every neglect case under the CPSL will become an aggravated 
circumstances case under the Juvenile Act (Shah and Darcus, 2007, p.10). 

ust as the Juvenile Act relaxes the rules of evidence for certain purposes in 

dependency cases, evidence that would normally be excluded may be considered 
under the CPSL in three situations (23 Pa.C.S. § 6381): 

 

•  Whenever a person required to report abuse under CPSL is unavailable due to 
death or removal from the jurisdiction of the court, the written report of that 
person is admissible in evidence in any noncriminal proceeding arising out of 
child abuse.   Any hearsay contained in the reports may be given such weight as 
the court finds appropriate, but may by itself support an adjudication based on 
abuse. 

  A

  J

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

 

 

197

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

•  Privileged communications (except those between a lawyer and client or 
between a minister and penitent) may be considered as evidence in any 
proceeding regarding child abuse or the cause of child abuse. 
 

•  Evidence of child abuse of a kind that would ordinarily not occur except due to 
acts or omissions of a parent or other person responsible for a child constitutes 
prima facie evidence of child abuse on the part of that parent or responsible 
person. 

Child abuse and neglect cases in Pennsylvania are governed primarily by the 
Juvenile Act, the Child Protection Services Law (CPSL), and the Adoption Act.  The 
Juvenile Act governs both dependency and delinquency, while the CPSL deals solely 
with child protection, and the Adoption Act provides for terminations of parental rights 
and adoptions.    

ennsylvania’s Juvenile Act was originally enacted in 1972 and was amended in 
1998 to come into compliance with ASFA.  The Juvenile Act has the following declared 
purposes (42 Pa.C.S. § 6301): 

•  To preserve the unity of the family whenever possible or to provide another 

alternative permanent family when the unity of the family cannot be maintained. 

•  To provide for the care, protection, safety, and wholesome mental and physical 

development of children coming within the provisions of the Juvenile Act. 

•  To achieve the foregoing purposes in a family environment whenever possible, 
separating the child from parents only when necessary for his welfare, safety or 
health, or in the interests of public safety. 

•  To provide means through which the provisions of the Juvenile Act are executed 

and enforced and in which the parties are assured a fair hearing and their 
constitutional and other legal rights are recognized and enforced. 

he Juvenile Act is the major vehicle for state intervention in the life of a family 

when the safety and well being of a child is at stake.  It provides the statutory framework 
for providing a safe, permanent, and stable home for every child.    
 

The Juvenile Act sets out ten specific categories for finding a child dependent 

and in need of state intervention (For a listing, see Chapter 3: Jurisdiction).  Most 
commonly, a child is found dependent under the first category which states a child is 
dependent if the child “is without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education 
as required by law, or other care or control necessary for his physical, mental or 
emotional health, or morals”  (42 Pa.C.S. § 6302). 

  P

 

  T

6.11 The Pennsylvania Juvenile Act  

 

  1

 

 

 

 

 198

The Juvenile Act allows the state to remove a child from his home if 

circumstances warrant, but the court can only hold a child for 72 hours before 
commencing a shelter care hearing.  The shelter care hearing is an informal hearing to 
determine (a) whether shelter care is necessary; (b) whether allowing the child to 
remain in the home would be contrary to the welfare of the child; (c) whether reasonable 
efforts were made to prevent such placement; or (d) if, in case of emergency where 
services were not offered, whether lack of efforts were reasonable.  The shelter care 
hearing is not a substitute for the adjudicatory hearing (for more information, see 
Chapter 5: Entering the Child Welfare System/Shelter Care Hearing). 

he adjudication hearing determines whether the allegations of abuse or neglect 
for dependency jurisdiction are sustained by clear and convincing evidence and support 
state intervention (see Chapter 6: Adjudication).  In determining if the child is 
dependent, the court considers whether the child is without proper parental care and 
control and, if so, whether state intervention is required to provide such care and 
control.  If the child has been removed from the home, the adjudication hearing must be 
held within 10 days of the child’s removal.  

n many jurisdictions in Pennsylvania a disposition hearing is held immediately 

following the adjudication hearing.  However, the court has 20 days from the date of the 
adjudication hearing to commence the disposition hearing (see Chapter 8: Disposition).    
Although the adjudication hearing and the disposition hearing may be held on the same 
day, it is a best practice to ensure that they are separate proceedings held to determine 
separate issues.  The disposition hearing determines who will have custody and control 
of the child once the child is found dependent at the adjudication hearing, as well as any 
services to be provided to the child and parents.   

he Juvenile Act requires that a permanency hearing be held no later than six 
months from the date that the child is removed from the home and every six months 
thereafter (42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(e)(3)) (also see Chapter 10: Permanency Hearing).  Note 
the Pennsylvania Juvenile Procedural Rules and the Mission & Guiding Principles for 
Pennsylvania’s Dependency System strongly recommend frequent judicial review and 
oversight including a minimum of three month reviews for all dependent youth.  The 
purpose of the permanency hearing is to determine or review the permanency plan of 
the child, the date by which the goal of permanency for the child might be achieved, and 
whether placement continues to be best suited to the safety, protection, and physical, 
mental, and moral welfare of the child.    

  T

  I

  T

   

 

 Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation 

 

 

 

199

 

       

 

Resources and References    
Resources and References
Resources and References
Resources and References

.  Online Resources/Information Clearinghouses  

There are a number of national level policy and research organizations 

and government agencies that share a focus on child welfare issues and the role 
of the court system in the processing of child abuse and neglect cases.  The 
websites of these organizations and agencies are excellent sources of 
information on numerous topics and provide the latest in commentary, research, 
best practice guidelines, innovative programs and other initiatives in various 
jurisdictions.  Many also highlight training and technical assistance opportunities.  
Overviews and links to some of the more prominent and comprehensive sites are 
provided below.  Selected materials from the various web sites are also 
referenced in the Topics section of this chapter. 

.  American Bar Association’s Center on Children and the Law      

[www.abanet.org/child] 

The Center on Children and the Law is a program of the Young Lawyers 

Division and aims to improve the lives of children through advances in law, 
justice, knowledge, practice and policy.  Specific projects include:   
 

 

•  ABA Permanency Project  
•  Adolescent Health  
•  Bar-Youth/Aging Out of Foster Care 
•  Court Improvement Program (CIP) 
•  Commission on Youth at Risk  

The Center has established a Legal Center for Foster Care and 
Education [http://www.abanet.org/child/education/home.shtml] which is a 
collaboration between Casey Family Programs and the Center in conjunction 
with the Education Law Center-PA and the Juvenile Law Center.   The site 
includes publications, such as the Blueprint, and a series of guidelines on special 
education issues and the role of the court.  
 

The Center is also part of a collaborative partnership with the Casey 

Family Programs, Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Child Welfare Foundation, 
and the Steering Committee for the National Parents’ Counsel Organization in 
establishing the National Project to Improve Representation for Parents 
Involved in the Child Welfare System 
[www.abanet.org/child/parentrepresentation/home.html].  This project 
provides training and technical assistance to jurisdictions seeking to improve the 
organization and quality of legal representation for parents.      

 

    I

 

 

       

  A

 
 

 

200

Resources and References 

 

B.  American Humane  
 
 

[www.americanhumane.org] 

The Children’s Division of American Humane develops programs, policies, 

training, performs evaluation and other research, and conducts initiatives 
designed to prevent and respond to child abuse and neglect.  A quarterly journal, 
Protecting Children, covers a variety of child welfare topics, such as research 
and evaluation projects, immigration and child welfare, fatherhood, culture, and 
family group decision making.  In 1999, American Humane established the 
National Center on Family Group Decision Making (FGDM) to promote and 
support family and community involvement and leadership on decision-making 
about children who need protection or care.  The Center provides training, 
technical assistance, research, and resources to communities implementing 
FGDM, and its website has links to a series of policy briefs, FGDM FAQs, and 
articles on the history of FGDM and other related topics.  Numerous articles and 
issue briefs on FGDM are available at 
http://www.americanhumane.org/protecting-children/programs/family-
group-decision-making/free-resources/issue-briefs.html, including: 
 

Family Group Conferencing: A Message from the Bench 

The Critical Role of Leadership in Family Group Decisionmaking 

The Intersection between Family Group Decisionmaking and Systems of 
Care     

Strategies to Respond to the Research Needs of Family Group 
Decisionmaking 

Using Family Group Conferencing in the Children’s Mental Health Context 

The Children’s Bureau funded a partnership of American Humane, the 
American Bar Association’s Center on Children and the Law, and the National 
Fatherhood Initiative to create the National Quality Improvement Center on Non-
Resident Fathers and the Child Welfare System.  The purpose of the Center was 
to determine through research the impact of non-resident father involvement in 
child welfare outcomes related to safety, permanence, and well-being.  
Resources on fatherhood available on the website include: 

athers and Families: the Untapped Resource for Children Involved 

in the Child Welfare System 
[http://www.americanhumane.org/protecting-
children/programs/fatherhood/] 

Dads and Paternal Relatives:  Using Family Group Decisionmaking 
to Refocus the Child Welfare System on the Entire Family 
Constellation [http://www.americanhumane.org/protecting-

 

  F

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 201

202

Resources and References 

 

ringing Back the Dads: Engaging Non-Resident Fathers in the Child 
Welfare System, an issue of the journal Protecting Children (Vol. 24, No. 
2, 2009) dedicated to involving fathers, one free copy per customer 
available for order at [www.americanhumane.org/protecting-
children/resources/protecting-children-journal/volumes-and-sample-
articles.html]   

  B

children/programs/family-group-decision-making/free-
resources/issue-briefs.html] 

.  Casey Family Programs  

[www.casey.org] 

Casey Family Programs is the nation’s largest operating foundation 
entirely focused on foster care.  The goal of the foundation is to safely reduce the 
number of children in foster care and improve the lives of those who remain in 
care through research and policy recommendations.  The website includes a 
library of materials on foster care and child welfare issues  
[www.casey.org/Resources/Publications] which is a an excellent resource for 
research and commentary on educational issues, kinship care, racial 
disproportionality, and youth aging out of the foster care system, among other 
topics.      

How are the Children?  Inspiring Hope.  Renewing Vision.  Influencing 
Action.(2010)  
[http://www.casey.org/Resources/Publications/children/images/2010_
Casey_Report.pdf[   

.  Child Welfare Information Gateway  
[www.childwelfare.gov/index.cfm] 

This website serves as an information clearinghouse on child welfare 

issues and is sponsored by the Children’s Bureau of the Administration for 
Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  
References are categorized into the following topic areas: 
 

•  Family Centered Practice 
•  Child Abuse and Neglect  
•  Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect 
•  Responding to Child Abuse and Neglect 
•  Supporting and Preserving Families 
•  Out-of-Home Care 
•  Achieving and Maintaining Permanency 
•  Adoption  

 
 

  C

 
 

   

  D

 
 

 

   

Resources and References 

 

E.  Courts Catalyzing Change:  Achieving Equity and Fairness in Foster 

Care Initiative  
[www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/447/580] 

The Courts Catalyzing Change Initiative is directed by the National 

Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges with funding from Casey Family 
Programs and support from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention (OJJDP) of the U.S. Department of Justice.  The purpose is to bring 
together judicial officers and other system experts to set a national agenda for 
court-based training, research, and reform initiatives to reduce the 
disproportionate representation and disparate treatment of children of color in the 
dependency court system.   

The Juvenile Law Center is a public interest law firm for children in the 

United States which was founded in 1975 and based in Philadelphia.  The Center 
authored the Pennsylvania Judicial Deskbook:  A Guide to Statutes, Judicial 
Decisions and Recommended Practices for Cases Involving Dependent Children 
in Pennsylvania and published the fourth edition in 2004.  Other publications of 
interest are available at www.jlc.org/publications and include: 

romises Kept, Promises Broken:  An Analysis of Children’s’ Right to 

Counsel in Dependency Hearings in Pennsylvania (2001) 

  P

F.  Juvenile Law Center  
 
 

[www.jlc.org] 

Dependent Youth Aging Out of Foster Care: A Judicial Guide (2003) 

Solving the Data Puzzle: A How-to Guide on Collecting and Sharing 
Information to Improve Educational Outcomes for Children in Out-of-
Home Care (2008)  

Child Abuse and the Law (2007) 

.  Kempe Center for the Prevention and Treatment of Child Abuse and 

Neglect  
[www.kempe.org] 

The Kempe Center for the Prevention and Treatment of Child Abuse 

and Neglect is recognized as a world leader in child abuse treatment 
programs, and has been at the forefront in the fight against child abuse.  The 
Kempe Center provides direct services to children and adult caregivers, as 
well as training, education, and consultation to professionals throughout the 
United States who are involved in prevention and treatment programs.     

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

       

  G

 

 203

204

Resources and References 

 

H.  National Association of Counsel for Children  
 
 

[www.naccchildlaw.org] 

The mission of the National Association of Counsel for Children (NACC) is 

to strengthen the delivery of legal services for children, enhance the quality of 
legal services, and improve courts and agencies that serve children.  
Publications available through the website include: 
 

Child Welfare  Law  and  Practice:  Representing  Children,  Parents and 
State  Agencies  in  Abuse,  Neglect,  and  Dependency  Cases  (2005) 
(purchase only) 

Recommendations  for  Representation  of  Children  in  Abuse  and 
Neglect Cases (2001) 

 

 

I.   National Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) Association  
     [www.casaforchildren.org] 
 

While the National CASA website is primarily devoted to information 

for local CASA programs and volunteers, the Association recognizes that 
judges play a key role in developing new programs, sustaining existing 
programs, and expanding the network.  The website provides a link to the 
Association’s monthly e-newsletter, The Judges’ Page, 
http://www.casaforchildren.org/site/c.mtJSJ7MPIsE/b.5301323/k.C971/J
udges.htm  and maintains a Judges’ Corner Resource Center.   
 

The Pennsylvania CASA Association [www.pacasa.org] is a 

statewide non-profit organization that promotes public awareness of the 
CASA concept, helps local programs develop, and generally supports local 
programs in Pennsylvania.  The website provides links to the National CASA 
Program Standards and a Judges’ Guide to CASA/GAL Program 
Development.  

.  National Center for Juvenile Justice  

[http://www.ncjj.org] 

The National Center for Juvenile Justice (NCJJ) is the nation’s only 

non-profit research organization solely dedicated to the juvenile justice 
system.  Founded in 1973 as the research division of the National Council of 
Juvenile and Family Judges, the Center serves as a resource for 
independent and original research directly or indirectly related to delinquency 
and child abuse and neglect.  The Center provides information and analysis 
on the nature, extent, and trends in juvenile crime and victimization in the 
United States; conducts evaluations of prevention and intervention programs; 
conducts assessments of case processing; and compiles and analyzes state 
laws.  

 
 

  J

 
 

 

   

Resources and References 

 

K.  National Center for State Courts  
 
 

[www.ncsc.org] 

Through its Information and Resources division, the National Center 

provides an overview, FAQs, and links to articles and reports on dependency 
court issues.  Specific categories include: 
 

he Center also publishes a quarterly e-newsletter, Continuing 

Upward from the Summit, which highlights innovations, accomplishments, 
and events throughout the country related to family courts and child welfare. 

  T

.  National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues 

[http://www.abanet.org/child/rclji/home.html]  

This website is funded by the Children’s Bureau and is supported 

through the collaborative efforts of the American Bar Association, National 
Center for State Courts, and the National Council of Juvenile and Family 
Court Judges.  The site contains information on state Court Improvement 
Programs and includes a catalog of progress reports and examples of 
initiatives by state.  The site also provides a link 
[www.abanet.org/child/courtworks.shtml ] to the current and past issues 
of a bimonthly newsletter, Child CourtWorks, which addresses new 
developments and innovations across state court improvement programs.    
  
M.  National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges  
 
 

 [www.ncjfcj.org] 

The website contains links to the National Council of Juvenile and Family 

Court Judges’ widely referenced works on court practices in child abuse and 
neglect cases:     
 

Resource Guidelines:  Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse and 
Neglect Cases (1995) 

Adoption and Permanency Guidelines:   Improving Court Practice in 
Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (2000) 

•  Dependency court reform 
•  Dependency mediation 
•  Family drug treatment courts 
• 
Infants and toddlers 
• 
Involving children in court 
•  Performance measurement  
•  Data exchange and IT systems 
•  Racial and ethnic disproportionality 

 
 

  L

 
 

 

 

 205

206

Resources and References 

 

Back to Basics:  Fundamental Application of the Resource and 
Adoption Guidelines in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (2006) 

The Resource Guidelines:  Supporting Best Practices and Building 
Foundations for Innovation in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (2009) 

There is also information and links to publications on NCJFCJ’s Child 

Victims Act Model Courts Project, which provides technical assistance and 
training to more than 30 selected local and state jurisdictions in order to improve 
court practice and improve outcomes for children.  This program is based on the 
best practices outlined in the Resource Guidelines and Adoption and 
Permanency Guidelines.  Recent publications on the Model Courts program 
include: 
 

Model Court Status Report 2006/2007: A Snapshot of the Child 
Victims Act Model Courts Project (2008) 

The Model Court Effect: Proven Strategies in Systems’ Change (2009)        

NCJFCJ publishes The Juvenile and Family Court Journal, a quarterly 

compilation of articles on topics related to the field of juvenile justice and 
family law.  NCJFCJ has also conducted research and published reports and 
technical assistance briefs on other specific child welfare issues and 
programs which are referenced in the Topics section below. 

.  National Evaluation of the Court Improvement Program 

[www.pal-tech.com/cip/index.cfm] 

The National CIP Evaluation is a five year study that is funded by the 

Children’s Bureau and conducted by a partnership of three organizations:  
Planning and Learning Technologies (Pal-Tech), the Urban Institute, and the 
Center for Policy Research.  The project is describing the many paths 
followed by state courts to improve the oversight of foster care and adoption 
cases and analyze the outcomes achieved.  The results will provide 
information on effective models for juvenile and family court reform.  The first 
in a planned series of reports, Synthesis of 2005 Court Improvement 
Program Reform and Activities: Final Report (2007), as well as other 
information on the project is available on the website.  

.  Office of Children and Families in the Court   

[http://www.ocfcpacourts.us/]  

The Office of Children and Families in the Court (OCFC) was created 
by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to make more positive outcomes for 
children involved in child abuse, neglect, and dependency cases.  The 
OCFC’s work is guided by four principles:  protect children, promote strong 
families, promote child well-being, and provide timely permanency.  The 
website contains a link to a resource center for judges and other legal 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

  N

 
 

  O

 
 

Resources and References 

 

professionals [https://ocfcpacourts.us/judges-and-legal professionals/] 
which includes information regarding the Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 
Permanency Practice Initiative (including FGDM), three-month court reviews, 
and expedited appeals.  Additionally, the website provides specific 
information for children/youth, parents, family and community members, and 
human service professionals.  Downloads of relevant federal and state laws 
are available, as well as information on training opportunities.   

.  Pennsylvania Permanency Practice Initiative (PPI)  

[http://www.ocfcpacourts.us/permanency-practice-initiatives/overview/]  

 

 
To accomplish activities set forth by the membership of the State Roundtable 

 
the OCFC, in partnership with Department of Public Welfare’s Office of Children, 
Youth and Families (DPW/OCYF), developed the Pennsylvania Permanency 
Practice Initiative (PPI).   

 

The PPI is a collaborative effort between a variety of agencies including the 

OCFC, DPW/OCYF, FGDM Statewide Implementation Leadership Team, Family 
Development Credential Program through the Community Action Association of 
Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Child Welfare Training Program, and the Statewide 
Adoption and Permanency Network, along with local child welfare agency directors 
and local judges.   

The focus of the PPI is to provide enhanced judicial oversight with social work 

best practice in each county to increase the number of children safely maintained in 
their own homes and expedite the safe return home of children already in the foster 
care system.  Accordingly, focus is on saturation of front end services which 
empower families to safely and effectively maintain the child or youth in the home; 
identify kin or other permanent resources; while at the same time providing the 
family with the necessary services to alleviate the circumstances which caused the 
referral for services.   
 

To accomplish this focus, the PPI seeks to implement or enhance a variety of 

services prior to the child/youth coming into out-of-home care or immediately 
following the need for such placement.  These services include: 

1.  Three (3) Month Court Review Hearings (minimum) 
2.  Family Finding 
3.  Active Local Children’s Roundtable  
4.  Family Group Decision Making 
5.  Family Development Credentialing 
6.  Training regarding grief and loss for children in the child welfare system 

 
 

  P

 

   

   

 

             

 207

Resources and References 

 

Q.  The Pew Charitable Trusts – Foster Care Reform   
 
 

 [http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_detail.aspx?id=8] 

From 2003 to 2009, the Pew Commission on Foster Care worked with 

partners at the local, state and national level to ensure that more children 
were living in safe and permanent homes.  In 2004, the Commission 
released a comprehensive report, Fostering the Future:  Safety, 
Permanency, and Well-Being for Children in Foster Care, with a set of 
recommendations designed to reform the way the federal government 
supports children who are abused or neglected and to encourage greater 
judicial accountability through the implementation of better case tracking 
systems.  Other reports available for download from the Pew website include: 

trengthening Families through Guardianship (2008) 

ime for Reform:  Aging Out and On Their Own (2007) 

mproving Outcomes Together:  Court and Child Welfare Collaboration 
(2005) 
 

II. Judicial Guides, Checklists, and Tools  

hild Safety:  A Guide for Judges and Attorneys, American Bar Association 

and ACTION for Child Protection (2009) 
[http://nrccps.org/documents/2009/pdf/The_Guide.pdf]  

ealthy Beginnings, Healthy Futures: A Judge’s Guide, American Bar 

Association in collaboration with the National Council of Juvenile and Family 
Court Judges and the Zero to Three National Policy Center (2009)  
[www.abanet.org/child/baby-health/healthybeginnings.html]  

uestions Every Judges Should Ask About Infants and Toddlers in the Child 

Welfare System, National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges 
(2002) [www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/362/431] 

isitation with Infants and Toddlers in Foster Care:  What Judges and 

Attorneys Need to Know, American Bar Association and the Zero to Three 
National Policy Center (2007) 
[http://new.abanet.org/child/PublicDocuments/policy_brief2.pdf] 

ealth for Teens in Care: a Judge’s Guide, American Bar Association (2002) 

[www.abanet.org/child/adolescent-pub.shtml] 

 Judicial Checklist for Children and Youth Exposed to Violence, National 

Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (2006) 
[http://www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/356/425/] 
 

  S

  T

  I

 
 

  C

  H

  Q

  V

  H

  A

 

208

Resources and References 

 

Asking the Right Questions II:  Judicial Checklists to Meet the Educational 
Needs of Children and Youth in Foster Care,  National Council of Juvenile 
and Family Court Judges (2008) 
[www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/359/428] 

pecial Education Decision Making:  Role of the Judge, American Bar 

Association (2008) [www.abanet.org/child/education] 

ependent Youth Aging Out of Foster Care: A Judicial Guide, Juvenile Law 

Center (2003) [www.jlc.org/publications/] 

ndian Child Welfare Act Checklists for Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (2003) 
[www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/361/430/] 

Building A Better Court: Measuring and Improving Performance and Judicial 
Workload in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases, National Center for State Courts, 
ABA Center for Children and the Law, and National Council of Juvenile and 
Family Court Judges (2004).  See also Toolkit for Court Performance 
Measurement and Improvement in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (2008) 
[http://www.ncjfcj.org/content/view/603/427/] 

Drug Court Practitioner Fact Sheet: Family Dependency Treatment Court: 
Applying the Drug Court Model in Child Maltreatment Cases.   Wheeler, Meghan 
M. and Carson L. Fox, Jr., National Drug Court Institute (June 2006) 
[http://www.ndci.org/sites/default/files/ndci/FDTC_Fact_Sheet.web%5B1%5
D.pdf]   

 
 

  S

  D

  I

        

 209

210
 

Glossary and Acronyms    
Glossary and Acronyms
Glossary and Acronyms
Glossary and Acronyms

djudication Hearing – The trial stage of child dependency proceedings during 
which the court determines whether allegations of abuse, neglect, or dependency 
concerning a child are sustained by the evidence and, if so, are legally sufficient 
to support state intervention on behalf of the child (see Chapter 6: Adjudication).  

doption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (AFSA) - This Act amended titles IV-B 
and IV-E of the Social Security Act to clarify certain provisions of P.L. 96-272 and 
to speed the process of finding permanent homes for children.  AFSA imposes 
upon states the requirement to focus on the child’s need for permanency rather 
than the parent’s actions or inactions (42 U.S.C. § 671 et seq.) (see Chapter 9: 
Permanency Options).  

doption - Adoption is the legal and permanent establishment of a relationship 

between adult individual(s) who are not the biological parents and a child of 
biological parents whose parental rights have been terminated.  When a child 
cannot safely return home, adoption is the preferred legal permanency option 
under ASFA and the Juvenile Act.  Under the adoptive relationship, the child 
becomes the heir and is entitled to all other privileges belonging to a natural child 
of the adopting parent.  

doption Disruption – Termination of an adoptive placement prior to the 
finalization.  Failure of an adoption after finalization is termed “dissolution.” 

doption Hearing – Court proceeding in which a permanent parental 

relationship is legally established between adult individual(s) who are not the 
biological parents and a child of biological parents whose parental rights have 
been terminated (see Chapter 14: Adoption). 

ggravated Circumstances – Particular situations or offenses, defined by the 

Juvenile Act, where no attempts need to be made to reunite a child, who has 
been adjudicated dependent, with his or her family.  These situations arise when 
a court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, that a parent has 
subjected a child to aggravated circumstances and further determines that 
reasonable efforts need not be extended (see Chapter 15: General Issues). 

lternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) - ADR approaches provide an 

opportunity for parents to be empowered to determine their own solutions.  This 
is a shift from the traditional adversarial court approach to a more family focused, 
strength-based and solution-focused approach.  The initiation of these 
approaches requires a significant change in traditional court directed resolution 
or litigation, but its benefits far override any difficulties with implementation.  
These approaches are typically voluntary for the family, but all seek to engage 
the family in identification of needed services preferably prior to court 
intervention.  Some ADR approaches include, but are not limited to:  FGDM, 
Mediation, Facilitation and pre-trial conferences.     
 

 

  A

  A

  A

  A

  A

  A

  A

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement (APPLA) - ASFA defines 
APPLA as “any permanent living arrangement not enumerated in the statute” (42 
U.S.C. § 475(5)(C)). It is the least preferred option for ensuring permanency for a 
child.  ASFA and the Juvenile Act require the agency provide the court with a 
“compelling reason” why one of the other permanency options (reunification, 
adoption, legal custodianship, permanent placement with a fit and willing relative) 
is not available to the child.  APPLA is not to be viewed as a catchall or as long-
term foster care; the placement should be both planned and permanent (see 
Chapter 9: Permanency Options). 

hild Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) - The Child Abuse 
Prevention and Treatment Act (1974) was most recently reauthorized by the 
Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003.  The Act provides federal 
funding to states in support of assessment, prevention, prosecution, 
investigation, and treatment activities.  It also sets forth a minimum definition of 
child abuse and neglect (see Chapter 16: Overview of Federal and State Child 
Welfare Legislation). 

hildren’s Roundtable Initiative - The Children’s Roundtable Initiative, 

supported by the Office of Children and Families in the Courts (OCFC) within the 
Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC) was established by the 
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in 2006.  The Children’s Roundtable embodies a 
collaborative, cross-system statewide infrastructure that allows for effective 
administration and communication via a three-tiered system.  The first tier of the 
infrastructure is comprised of local Children’s Roundtables.  These exist in each 
judicial district, are convened by a judge and collaboratively facilitated with the 
child welfare administrator.  The intermediate level (tier 2) of the infrastructure is 
comprised of Leadership Roundtables.  There are eight Leadership Roundtables 
dividing Pennsylvania’s sixty judicial districts into groups based on size  
Membership includes the lead dependency judge, child welfare administrator and 
one additional local children’s roundtable member.  Issues are identified during 
Leadership Roundtable meetings and common themes are brought to the highest 
roundtable level (tier 3) the State Roundtable.  The State Roundtable is 
comprised of at least two members from each Leadership Roundtable and others 
with specific expertise in child dependency matters (see Chapter 1: The Charge 
for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System). 

ommon Pleas Court Management System (CPCMS) Dependency Module – 

CPCMS was developed by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Administrative 
Office of Pennsylvania Courts as a means to unify dependency court orders and 
data throughout the Commonwealth.  Forms for the CPCMS Dependency 
Module can be found on the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania website at 
http://www.pacourts.us/Forms/dependency.htm (see Chapter 15: General 
Issues).  

oncurrent Planning – A foster care case management strategy where the 
caseworker works intensively toward reunification of a child with his or her own 
family while, at the same time, develops an alternative plan for the child’s 

211

 

 

  C

  C

  C

  C

212
 

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

permanency.  The purpose is to overcome barriers and delays in securing 
permanent families for children who are in out-of-home care, by doing concurrent 
rather than sequential planning.  

ourt  Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) – A specially screened and 

trained volunteer, appointed by the court, who conducts an independent 
investigation of child abuse, neglect or other dependency matters, and submits a 
formal report(s) to the court offering advisory recommendations as to the best 
interests of the child (see Chapter 15: General Issues). 

isposition Hearing – The court proceeding which follows the adjudication 
hearing and at which the court determines the resolution of the case, such as 
whether placement of the child in out-of-home care is necessary and what 
services the child and family will need to reduce risk and address the effects of 
maltreatment (see Chapter 8: Disposition).  

acilitation – A method of Alternative Dispute resolution.  As with other ADR 
processes, facilitation is voluntary and focuses on engaging the family to help 
them identify their strengths and needs in an effort to develop solutions for their 
specific case.  This process typically involves all parties and support persons, 
who upon agreement seek a final order from the judge or master.   

amily Development Credentialing (FDC) – One of the primary elements of the 

Permanency Practice Initiative, FDC is a professional development course and 
credentialing program for frontline family workers to learn and practice skills of 
strength-based family support with families.  FDC courses are offered to frontline 
family workers from a wide range of government, private and not-for-profit 
agencies, as well as faith-based organizations, businesses and large 
corporations.  Family development trainees work with families across the life 
span including families with young children, teen parents, retired people, people 
with disabilities, and many other groups.  More information on FDC can be found 
at http://www.fdc-pa.org/index.html.  

amily Finding – A process used to identify family members (including extended 

family).  Far more than a web-based search, this process provides the skills to 
engage disconnected family members in an effort to provide permanent 
placements, supports and safe, adult connections for youth.  This process is 
particularly effective when used in conjunction with Family Group Decision 
Making.  More information on Family Finding can be found at 
http://www.cpyp.org/. 

amily Group Decision Making – A method of bringing family members 

together to reach a consensus on a recommendation to the court for a safe and 
permanent plan for a child.  Unlike traditional child welfare case conferencing, the 
family is “in-charge” of the meeting and responsible for creating the 
recommended plan.  The caseworker’s participation primarily involves the 
sharing of information/resources and acceptance of the family’s plan (if safety 

 

  C

  D

  F

  F

  F

  F

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

concerns are adequately addressed).  Unique to this practice is “private family 
time” that excludes any non-family member (see Chapter 15: General Issues). 

amily Service Plan (FSP) - A plan developed for the family by the child welfare 

agency which includes, but is not limited to, items such as:  identifying 
information on the family members, the circumstances which necessitated 
placement, the services to be provided to achieve the objectives of the plan, the 
actions to be taken by the parents, children, the county agency or other 
agencies, and the dates when these actions will be completed.   

uardian Ad Litem (GAL) – A lawyer appointed by the court to represent the 

best interests of an allegedly abused or neglected child.   A GAL differs from 
legal counsel for the child who specifically represents the child’s legal interests 
before the court.  

ndependent Living (IL) – A service added to the Social Security Act in 1985.  
The Act was further amended by the Chafee Foster Care Independence Act 
(CFCIA) in 1999.  Independent Living services must be provided to all youth in 
care who are age 16 years of age or older, no matter what placement they are in 
and regardless of their permanency plan.  Independent Living services can 
include, but are not limited to: career counseling and placement, educational 
counseling and support, instruction in budgeting and home management, family-
planning and sexual health counseling, and instruction in self-advocacy. 

ndividualized Education Program/Plan (IEP) – A written document developed 
for a child with a disability regarding the special education, related services, 
supplemental aid and services, and other accommodations that the school 
district must provide to the child.  The IEP also describes the child’s current 
educational performance and states measurable annual and short-term progress 
goals.  

nterstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) – A law designed to 
provide the legal framework for placements, including adoptive placements, in 
which more than one state is involved (see Chapter 16 - Overview of Federal and 
State Child Welfare Legislation and Chapter 3: Jurisdiction). 

ndian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) – An Act which addresses the removal of 
Indian children from their home and their placement with non-Indian families (see 
Chapter 3: Jurisdiction). 

inship Care – Care of a child by a relative.  The relative must become a 

licensed foster parent and may become the adopting parent if parental rights are 
terminated.  Pennsylvania defines a relative as someone related “within the third 
degree of consanguinity or affinity to the parent or stepparent of the child and 
who is at least 21 years of age” (Act 25 of 2003).   
 

 

  F

  G

  I

  I

  I

  I

  K

213

 

214
 

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

Mediation – A process by which a neutral mediator assists all parties in 
voluntarily reaching a consensual agreement about issues at hand and agreeing 
upon a plan of action.  

ission & Guiding Principles for Pennsylvania’s Child Dependency System 

- The foundational document created by the Pennsylvania State Roundtable, 
which identifies four fundamental mission priorities for all professionals involved 
in Pennsylvania’s child welfare system: protecting children; promoting strong 
families; promoting child well-being; and providing timely permanency.  These 
mission priorities are embedded into all aspects of this Benchbook (see Chapter 
1: The Charge for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System for a reproduction of the 
Mission and Guiding Principles document).  

ultiethnic Placement Act (MEPA) – An Act intended to remove barriers to 

interethnic adoption. 

ut-of-Home Care – Childcare, foster care, or residential care provided by a 

person, organization, or institution to children who are placed outside their 
families usually under the jurisdiction of a juvenile or family court.  

ermanency Goal - A permanency goal is selected based upon the particular 

needs and best interests of the child and is designed to provide the child 
continuity of relationships with nurturing parents or caretakers and the 
opportunity to establish lifetime family relationships. Both ASFA and the Juvenile 
Act identify the following hierarchical permanency goals for children:  (1) 
reunification, (2) adoption, (3) permanent legal custodianship, (4) permanent 
placement with a fit and willing relative, or (5) another planned permanent living 
arrangement but only when the other four goals have been rule out.  The 
permanency goal for the child should be identified as early as possible. The 
agency is required to complete a written Family Service Plan (FSP) which 
includes the permanency goal for the child within 60 days of accepting a family 
for service (see Chapter 9: Permanency Options).  

ermanency Hearing – A special type of post-dispositional proceeding designed 

to reach a decision concerning the permanent living arrangement for a child with 
a family.  The time of the hearing represents a deadline within which the final 
direction of a case is to be determined (see Chapter 10: Permanency Hearing).    

ermanency Hearing to Change Goal - A permanency hearing to change a 
goal often referred to as a “goal change hearing” initiates the permanent removal 
of a child from parents.  Most dependency cases begin with a permanency goal 
of reunification with the parents or guardians.  During the permanency review 
process, the judge or master monitors the parents’ compliance with the 
permanency plan and their progress toward remedying the circumstances that 
led to the removal of the child.  When reasonable efforts have been made to 
reunify the child with the parents but the child has remained in care and 
reunification is not viable or imminent, the court must consider changing the goal 

 

  M

  M

  O

  P

  P

  P

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

from reunification to another permanency goal (see Chapter 11: Permanency 
Hearing to Consider Change of Goal (“Goal Change Hearing”)). 

ermanency Practice Initiative (PPI) – An initiative developed by the State 

Roundtable and implemented in phases throughout Pennsylvania which 
combines a set of casework and court practice changes aimed at enhancing 
safe, timely permanence for children.  Practices include Family Group Decision 
Making, Family Finding, Family Development Credentialing, 3 month judicial 
reviews, CPCMS Dependency Module and local Children’s Roundtables. 

ermanent Legal Custodianship (PLC) - In Pennsylvania, legal custodianship 

is the equivalent of legal guardianship under ASFA (42 U.S.C. §675(7)). It is a 
formal legal arrangement which transfers custody of a minor child from the 
natural parent to a relative or other caregiver.  In the hierarchical scheme of 
permanency options outlined by ASFA and the Juvenile Act, legal custodianship 
is less desirable than reunification or adoption, but more preferred than 
permanent placement with a fit and willing relative, or another planned 
permanent living arrangement (see Chapter 9: Permanency Options). 

ermanent Placement with a Fit and Willing Relative - Both ASFA and the 
Juvenile Act provide for permanent placement with a fit and willing relative as the 
fourth alternative for permanent placement – after reunification, adoption and 
permanent legal custodianship. Placement with a relative offers many 
advantages as it allows for the continuation of family bonds and may dampen the 
traumatic impact of removal and may preserve the child’s cultural identity.  It is 
also an exception to the termination of parental rights if the child has been out of 
the home for 15 of the most recent 22 months (42 Pa.C.S. §6351(f)(9)(i)).  
However, permanent placement with a fit and willing relative is one of the least 
well-defined options provided in the statute.  Neither ASFA nor the Juvenile Act 
define “relative” or “fit and willing” nor do they create new legal authority for the 
relative (see Chapter 9: Permanency Options). 

utative Father – The alleged or supposed male parent; the person alleged to 

have biologically fathered a child whose parentage is at issue.  

easonable Efforts - Federal law requires that “reasonable efforts” be made to 
prevent or eliminate the need for removal of a dependent, neglected, or abused 
child from the home and to reunify the family if the child is removed.  The 
requirement is designed to ensure that families are provided with services to 
prevent their disruption and to respond to the problems of unnecessary disruption 
of families and foster care drift.  To enforce this provision, the court must 
determine, in each case where federal reimbursement is sought, whether the 
agency has made the required reasonable efforts. 

eunification – The return of children to the custody of their biological parents 

when they have been involved in a period of foster care after out-of-home 
placement.  
 

215

 

 

  P

  P

  P

  P

  R

  R

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

Review Hearing - Proceedings which follow disposition at which the court 
reviews the status of the case, examines progress made by the parties, provides 
for correction and revision of the case plan, and generally ensures that the case 
is progressing (see Chapter 10: Permanency Hearing).  

helter Care Hearing – The first court hearing in a child abuse or neglect case 
which occurs either immediately before or immediately after a child is removed 
from home on an emergency basis.  The purpose of the proceeding is to 
evaluate the child welfare agency’s concerns that allowing the child to remain in 
the home would be detrimental to the child (see Chapter 5: Entering the Child 
Welfare System – Shelter Hearing). 

ubsidized Permanent Legal Custodianship (SPLC) – A permanent legal 

custodianship arrangement, which includes a subsidy similar to foster care 
payments to ensure that the custodian is financially able to meet the needs of the 
child.   The subsidy ends when the child reaches the age of 18.  Therefore, SPLC 
may not be appropriate if the foster family is not willing to provide support to the 
child after the child turns 18. 

upervised Independent Living (SIL) Placements – Living situations in which 
an older youth has a greater degree of independence than would be allowed in 
group or institutional care; for example, a youth may be placed in an apartment, 
alone or with roommates.  

ermination of Parental Rights (TPR) – The extinguishment of the legal 

relationship of parent and child on the basis of abuse, neglect, abandonment or 
similar grounds (see Chapter 12: Termination of Parental Rights).    

oluntary Placement Agreement (also known as  Voluntary Agreement for 
Care or Voluntary Entrustment) – Arrangement with the child welfare agency 
for the temporary placement of a child into foster care, entered into prior to court 
involvement, and typically used in cases in which short-term placement is 
necessary for a defined purpose, such as when a parent enters into in-patient 
hospital care; a method of immediately placing a child in foster care with parental 
consent prior to initiating court involvement and thereby avoiding the need to 
petition the court for emergency removal.  

oluntary Relinquishment – A legal process through which a biological parent 
voluntarily gives up parental rights with the intent that the child will be adopted. 

he definitions are adapted from the text of this Benchbook, the Mission and Guiding 

Principles for Pennsylvania’s Dependency System and the following sources:  
Resource Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases 
(1995), NCJFCJ;  Adoption and Permanency Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in 
Child Abuse and Neglect Cases (2000), NCJFCJ; and Pennsylvania Judicial 
Deskbook:  A Guide to Statutes, Judicial Decisions and Recommended Practices for 
Cases Involving Dependent Children (2004), Juvenile Law Center. 

 

216
 

 

  S

  S

  S

  T

  V

  V

  T

 

 

 

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

ACRONYMS 

ACWA 

ADOPTION ASSISTANCE AND CHILD WELFARE ACT 

AGGRAVATED CIRCUMSTANCES 

 

 

 

ADOPTION AND SAFE FAMILIES ACT, PUBLIC LAW 105-89 

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION 

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF PENNSYLVANIA COURTS 

ANOTHER PLANNED PERMANENCY LIVING ARRANGEMENT 

CHILD ABUSE AND PREVENTION AND TREATMENT ACT 

COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES 

CHAFEE FOSTER CARE INDEPENDENCE PROGRAM 

COURT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 

CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES (COUNTY-LEVEL AGENCIES) 

CHILD PERMANENCY PLAN 

CHILDREN’S ROUNDTABLE 

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE 

EMERGENCY SHELTER CARE 

FOSTER CARE INDEPENDENCE ACT 

FAMILY GROUP DECISION MAKING 

FAMILY SERVICE PLAN 

GUARDIAN AD LITEM 

INTERSTATE COMPACT ON THE PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN 

INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT 

217

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AC 

 

AFSA  

ABA   

ADR   

AOPC  

APPLA 

CAPTA 

CASA  

CFCIP 

CIP 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CPP 

CRT 

CYS 

DPW   

ESC 

 

FCIA   

FGDM  

FSP 

GAL 

ICPC   

ICWA  

 

 

  A

CPCMS 

COMMON PLEAS CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 

Glossary and Acronyms 

 

JCJC   

JUVENILE COURT JUDGES COMMISSION 

INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PLAN 

INDEPENDENT LIVING 

JUVENILE LAW CENTER 

MEDICAL ASSISTANCE 

MULTIETHNIC PLACEMENT ACT 

NCJFCJ 

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JUDGES 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL FOR CHILDREN 

NEEDS BASED PLAN AND BUDGET 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS 

OFFICE OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES IN THE COURT 

OFFICE OF CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES 

PERMANENT LEGAL CUSTODIANSHIP 

PERMANENCY PRACTICE INITIATIVE 

RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITY 

SUPERVISED INDEPENDENT LIVING 

SUBSIDIZED PERMANENT LEGAL CUSTODIANSHIP 

TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IEP 

IL 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JLC 

MA 

MEPA  

NACC  

NBPB  

NCSC  

OCFC  

OCYF 

PLC 

PPI 

RTF 

SIL 

SPLC  

TPR 

 

     

 218

Bibliography    
Bibliography
Bibliography
Bibliography

Legislation, Statutes and Bulletins 

0 Pa.C.S § 701 et seq. Probate, Estates and Fiduciaries Code. Pub. L. 508. 1 

July 1972.  

1990.  

3 Pa.C.S. § 2101 et seq. Adoption Act. Pub. L. 934. 1 Jan. 1981.  

3 Pa.C.S. § 6301 et seq. Child Protective Services Law. Pub. L. 1240. Mar. 

5 U.S.C. §§ 1901—1963. Indian Child Welfare Act. United States Code. 

9 Pa.B. 3633. The Pennsylvania Bulletin. Standards Governing the 

Qualifications and Training of Court-Appointed Special Advocates. 
Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission. 

2 U.S.C. § 671 et seq. Adoption Safe Families Act of 1997. Pub. L. 105-89. 19 

Nov. 1997.  

2 Pa.C.S. § 951. Judicial Code, Subchapter D, Court Divisions. 

2 Pa.C.S. § 6301 et seq. Juvenile Act. Pub. L. 202. June 1978.  

5 CFR 1356. Code of Federal Regulations. Requirements Applicable to Title IV-
E.  Department of Health and Human Services.  U.S. Government Printing 
Office via GPO Access. 

5 Pa. Code § 3130. Pennsylvania Welfare Code.  Administration of County 

Children and Youth Social Services Programs. 1 Oct. 1982.  

5 Pa. Code § 3130.4.  Pennsylvania Welfare Code. Administration of County 
Children and Youth Social Services Programs. Requirements relating to 
interstate compacts. 

5 Fed. Reg. 4036.  Federal Regulations Register. Title IV-E Foster Care 

Eligibility Reviews and Child and Family Services State Plan Reviews; 
Final Rule.  Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Department of 
Health and Human Services (DHHS). 25 Jan 2000. 

07 PA. Code § 33.  Pennsylvania Welfare Code. Code of Judicial Conduct.  

Subchapter A. Cannons. 1 Jan. 1974.  

ct 25 of 2003. Public Welfare Code.  Article XIII - Kinship Care. Pub. L. 31, 

NO.21. 13 June 1967. 

 

 

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  4

  4

  4

  4

  5

  5

  6

  2

  A

   

 

219

Bibliography 

 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare, Office of 

Children, Youth and Families Bulletin # 3130-01-01, entitled “The Second 
Revised Interim Implementation Guidelines for the Adoption and Safe 
Families Act (ASFA) of 1997 (P.L. 105-89),” issued January 2, 2001.   

Pennsylvania Procedural Rules 
 

Pa.R.A.P. 101 – 5101. Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure.  

Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee 

a.R.C.P.No. 51 – 4025. Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.  Civil 

Procedural Rules Committee. 

a.R.J.C.P. 1100 – 1800. Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court Procedures – 
Dependency Matters. Feb. 2007.  Juvenile Court Procedural Rules 
Committee. 

a.O.C. Rules 1.1 – 17. Pennsylvania Orphans’ Court Rules.  Orphans’ Court 

Procedural Rules Committee. 

Publications 

merican Public Human Services Association (APHSA). Guide to the Interstate 

Compact on the Placement of Children. 2002 
[http://centerforchildwelfare.fmhi.usf.edu/kb/icpc/APHSA%20Guide%
20to%20the%20ICPC%20%282002%29.pdf] 

urford, Gale. Research & Evaluation Annotated Bibliography. 3 Feb. 2009. 

American Humane Association. 15 June 2010 
. 

hild Welfare Information Gateway. U.S. Department of Health and Human 
Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children’s 
Bureau. Placement of Children with Relatives:  Summary of State Laws. 
Washington DC, Jan. 2008. 

ommonwealth of Pennsylvania. Department of Public Welfare, Office of 

Children Youth and Families. Visitation: Promoting Positive Visitation 
Practices for Children and Their Families Through Leadership, Teamwork, 
and Collaboration. 1999. 
[http://www.pacwcbt.pitt.edu/Organizational%20Effectiveness/Visitati
on%20Handbook.pdf] 

 

 

  P

  P

  P

 

  A

  B

  C

  C

       

 220

Bibliography 

 

Courtney, Mark E, Sherri Terao, and Noel Bost. Midwest Evaluation of the Adult 

Functioning of Former Foster Youth:  Conditions of Youth Preparing to 
Leave State Care. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the 
University of Chicago, 2004. 
[http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/cs_97.pdf]  
 

Field, Alisa G. Pennsylvania Judicial Deskbook: A Guide to Statutes, Judicial 

Decisions and Recommended Practices for Cases Involving Dependent 
Children in Pennsylvania, Fourth Edition. Philadelphia, PA: Juvenile Law 
Center, 2004. 
[http://www.jlc.org/publications/7/pennsylvania-judicial-deskbook/]  
 

Fiermonte, Cecilia and Jennifer L. Renne. Making it Permanent:  Reasonable 
Efforts to Finalize Permanency Plans for Foster Children. Washington, 
DC: ABA Center on Children and the Law/National Child Welfare 
Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues, 2002. 
[http://www.abanet.org/child/rclji/making_it_permanent.pdf]  

lango, Victor E and Neal Kauder. Court Performance Measures in Child Abuse 
and Neglect Cases: Key Measures. Washington DC: U.S. Department of 
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2008. 
[http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/223567.pdf]  

licker, Barbara. Best Practices in Child Protection Courts. Washington DC: 

American Bar Association, 2005. 
[http://www.abanet.org/child/rclji/bestpractices.doc]  

ardin, Mark. Improving Courts’ Handling of Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: A 
List of Suggested Reforms. Washington DC: American Bar Association, 
National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues, a 
Service of the Children’s Bureau, ABA Center on Children and the Law, 
2002.  [http://www.abanet.org/child/rclji/samlist.pdf]  

ollinger, Joan H. Overview of the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA). 

Washington, DC: American Bar Association, Center on Children and the 
Law, 2007. 
[http://new.abanet.org/child/PublicDocuments/adoption-6.pdf] 

ational Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ). Adoption and 

Permanency Guidelines:  Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse and 
Neglect Reno, NV, 2000.  
[http://www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/369/438/]  

ational Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ). Resource 

Guidelines:  Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases. 
Reno, NV, 1995. [http://www.ncjfcj.org/content/blogcategory/369/438/]  

 

  F

  F

  H

  H

  N

  N

 

 

221

Bibliography 

 

National Resource Center for Youth Development (NRCYD). Improving 

Outcomes for Older Youth:  What Judges and Attorneys Need to Know. 
Tulsa, OK: University of Oklahoma, U.S. Children’s Bureau of the 
Department of Health and Human Services, 2004. 
[http://www.nrcyd.ou.edu/resources/publications.html] 

ennsylvania Children’s Roundtable Initiative. Mission and Guiding Principles for 
Pennsylvania’s Child Dependency System. Harrisburg, PA: Office of 
Children and Families in the Courts, 2009. 
[http://www.ocfcpacourts.us/about-ocfc/guiding-principles]  

he Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care. Fostering the Future:  Safety, 
Permanency and Well-Being for Children in Foster Care. Washington DC: 
The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2004.  
[http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_report_detail.aspx?id=22752]  

hah, Riya S., Esq. and Joanna Darcus. Child Abuse and the Law, Seventh 

Edition. Philadelphia, PA: Juvenile Law Center, 2007.  
[http://www.jlc.org/publications/2/child-abuse-and-the-law/]  

entrell, Marvin and Donald N. Duquette. ed. Child Welfare Law and Practice: 
 Representing Children, Parents, and State Agencies in Abuse, Neglect, 
and Dependency Cases. N.p.: Bradford Publishing Co., 2005.  
[http://www.naccchildlaw.org/?page=Books]  

oungclarke, Davin, Kathleen D. Ramos, and Lorraine Granger-Merkle. “A 

Systematic Review of the Impact of Court Appointed Special Advocates.” 
Journal of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts 5, (2004): 109-
126.  
(accessed June 15, 2010). 

 

 

  P

  T

  S

  V

  Y

   

 

 222