Rule-making#: / 08-5-16-1
Program: Divisions of Child Welfare and Child Care / Rule Author: Mary Griffin, Dana Andrews, and Shirley Mondragon / Phone: 303-866-3546-
STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE
Summary of the basis and purpose for the rule or rule change. (State what the rule says or does, explain why the rule or rule change is necessary and what the program hopes to accomplish through this rule.)
New rules, revisions, and technical clean-up are proposed in Sections, 7.200, 7.300, 7.500, 7.709 and 7.710. Based on recommendations in the 2007 Foster Care Performance Audit, a new rule, in Section 7.200 will provide notification to the department’s monitoring team by the county department investigating allegations of institutional child abuse and/or neglect in 24hour out-of-home facilities/home and provide timeframes for county departments of human services to prioritize the assignment of institutional abuse investigations. 19-1-128, C.R.S. provides guidance regarding visitation with children in foster care and their siblings who mutually agree they want to have visits. This legislation resulted from concern from adult siblings that they were unable to visit with younger siblings who were in out-of-home care. The guidance is outlined in Section 7.300. Section 7.500 requires technical clean up regarding background checks for adults living in certified foster and adoptive homes. In addition, guidance is provided regarding recruitment of certified foster homes. Section 7.710 requires a technical clean-up regarding revocation and denial of certificates. Section 7.709 and section 7.710 will be amended to add responsibilities of the sponsoring agency for a specialized group facility.
An emergency rule-making (which waives the initial APA noticing requirements) is necessary:
to comply with state/federal law and/orto preserve of the public health, safety and welfare
Explain:
Authority for Rule:
State Board Authority: 26-1-107, C.R.S. (2007) - State Board to promulgate rules; 26-1-109, C.R.S. (2007) - State Board rules to coordinate with federal programs; 26-1-111, C.R.S. (2007)- State Board to promulgate rules for public assistance and welfare activities.
Program Authority: (give federal and/or state cite and a summary of the language authorizing the rule-making)
19-1-128, C.R.S. (2007) - provides guidance regarding visitation between siblings, 19-3-308, C.R.S. (20007) - allows action upon report of intra-familial, institutional, or third-party abuse, 26-6-104, C.R.S (2007) - provides the requirements for certification of foster homes, 26-6-106 C.R.S. (2007) – Standards for Facilities and Agencies, and 26-6-107, C.R.S. requires background checks.
Initial Review / 08/01/2008 / Final Adoption / 09/05/2008Proposed Effective Date / 11/01/2008 / EMERGENCY Adoption / n/a
DOCUMENT 5
STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE (continued)
Yes / X / NoYes / X / No
Does the rule incorporate material by reference?
Does this rule repeat language found in statute?
If yes, please explain.
State Board Administration will send this rule-making package to CCI, OSPB and the JBC. The program has sent this rule-packet to which stakeholders?
Rule packets will be sent to the Administrative Review Division, Child Welfare Advisory Group, adoption supervisors, Colorado Association of Family and Children’s Agencies (CAFCA), Colorado Counties Inc., Colorado State Foster Parent Association, Foster Care and Adoption Agencies of Colorado (FCAAC), Foster/kin care coordinators, County department of Social/Human Services child protective services intake supervisors, child placement agencies, and Chafee caseworkers and youth groups.
Attachments:
Regulatory Analysis
Overview of Proposed Rule
Stakeholder Comment Summary
Rule-making Form SBA-3a (9/05)
Title of Proposed Rule: / Implementation of H.B. 08-1006 Regarding Sibling Visitation, Clarification of the 24 Hour Response Time for Investigations of Abuse and Neglect for the 2007 Foster Care Performance Audit, and Technical Language CleanupRule-making#: / 08-5-16-1
Program: Divisions of Child Welfare and Child Care / Rule Author: Mary Griffin, Dana Andrews, and Shirley Mondragon / Phone: 303-866-3546-
REGULATORY ANALYSIS
(complete each question; answers may take more than the space provided)
1. List of groups impacted by this rule:
Which groups of persons will benefit, bear the burdens or be adversely impacted by this rule?
Under clarified circumstances the County departments of Social/Human Services (county departments) will bear the burden of providing immediate and written notification to the Department’s 24 hour monitoring team when the county has commenced an institutional child abuse and/or neglect investigation in a 24 hour facility/home. The County departments of Social/Human Services (county departments) will also benefit from the rule in Section 7.200, which will establish prioritized timeframes for county departments for the assignment of institutional abuse cases. Currently there is a 24 hour response time for all referrals regarding allegations of abuse and neglect in all 24 hour facilities, including foster homes, specialized group facilities, and residential child care facilities, etc. Children in out-of-home care will benefit from rules in Section 7.300 regarding mutually agreed upon sibling visitation (by the siblings) because it will help them to maintain continuity in their relationships with siblings, even those they may not be residing in the same home. This includes full siblings, half siblings, and step siblings. This legislation was primarily a result of adult siblings who were unable to have visits with younger siblings who were in out-of-home care. County departments promote visitation with siblings, though in general, it is with immediate siblings who resided in the same family home. The additional burden will be in arranging visits with siblings that may not be part of the treatment plan (i.e. former stepsiblings). County departments will be required to consult with the district attorney to determine whether there are legal actions pending where either of the siblings is a witness or victim, which may negatively impact the legal case should visitation be approved. The county departments are required to document their efforts to identify whether there are protective orders in any jurisdiction, including other states. This will be challenging because county departments do not have access to federal databases, which would provide information about legal actions in other states. Technical clean-up of a rule regarding background checks required for adults who will enter and reside in a foster home will provide consistency for county departments. Two additional rules in Section 7.500 will provide guidance to county departments regarding prohibition of recruitment of foster homes certified by child placement agencies to become specialized group facilities and will specify the responsibilities when the County department is the sponsoring agency for a specialized group facility. County departments and child placement agencies will benefit from guidance in the rule. County departments and applicants who are interested in becoming specialized group facilities will benefit from guidance provided in the rule. Child Placement Agencies will benefit from the clarification in 7.709 concerning the responsibilities of the child placement agency as the sponsoring agency for a specialized group facility. Section 7.710, clarifies the requirements of the child placement agency when originally certifying, issuing a provisional certificate and renewing a certificate for a foster home. This technical clean-up will provide clarity and consistency for child placement agencies.
2. Describe the qualitative and quantitative impact:
How will this rule-making impact those groups listed above? How many people will be impacted? What are the short-term and long-term consequences of this rule?
The rules in Section 7.202.54, J, 2 , K,1 will have a positive impact on the protection of children on out-of- home care. Notification by the investigating county to the Department’s 24hour monitoring unit initiated in 2000 will provide quicker oversight and review of the facility. Currently, notification to the 24hour monitoring unit has been provided by the facility. The rules in Section 7.202.54 F will have a positive impact for county departments to prioritize timeframes for assignment of institutional abuse investigations. Currently, all assigned referrals must be initiated in 24 hours. The level of possible harm varies with each referral. In some situations a child may disclose information that occurred in the past and it must be treated with the same 24 hour response. Prioritizing assignments, will allow the 64 county departments to deploy their staff in a more efficient and effective manner to assure the safety of children. The short-term and long-term consequences are increased flexibility to assign investigations based on the level of possible harm for children in out-of-home care. For the rules regarding visitation with siblings in Section 7.301,6,D and 7.301.62,P, the major impact is for County departments to contact district attorneys to determine if there is a legal case pending where visitation between the designated siblings may impact the case. County departments will be able to access Lexis Nexis to determine if there are pending issues in Colorado; however, they will need to identify strategies to demonstrate their efforts to determine if there are protective orders in other states that would result in denial of visitation. County departments currently view sibling visits as a priority, and it is unclear how many additional siblings visits they may need to arrange and provide transportation to accommodate the wishes of the siblings. The short-term consequence is additional planning to assure that the district attorney has been contacted, and that there is a methodology to determine whether there are pending legal actions involving one or both of the siblings, as a victim or witness that may adversely impact the criminal case and that visits are not in the best interest of the child. The methodology must take in consideration, determining if there are protective orders involving one or both of the children in other jurisdictions in Colorado and other states. This will include county departments defining what reasonable efforts are necessary for compliance with the requirements. The technical clean-up in Section 7.500.2,E,2, provides consistency of rules regarding background checks of all adults residing in foster home short-term and brings the rule into compliance with federal and state legislation implemented in 2007 for the long-term. The rule revisions in Section 7.500.31,I regarding recruitment of existing foster homes certified by other county departments of child placement agencies and recruitment for specialized group facilities, will benefit child placement agencies and county departments in the short-term and long-term by providing clarity of interpretation. This will impact all the county departments that sponsor specialized group facilities and all the group centers and group homes in the State. The technical clean-up of a rule regarding denials and revocations in Section 7.710 will impact all licensed child placement agencies in the State that certify foster homes and will provide clarity in the short and long term for child placement agencies.
3. Fiscal Impact:
For each of the categories listed below explain the distribution of dollars; please identify the costs, revenues, matches or any changes in the distribution of funds even if such change has a total zero effect for any entity that falls within the category. If this rule-making requires one of the categories listed below to devote resources without receiving additional funding, please explain why the rule-making is required and what consultation has occurred with those who will need to devote resources.
State Fiscal Impact (Identify all state agencies with a fiscal impact, including any CBMS change request costs required to implement this rule change)
No impact.
County Fiscal Impact
The rule change in Section 7.300 will impact county departments of human services workloads because staff will need to take additional time contacting district attorneys, to determine whether there is a legal action pending that would impact providing mutually requested sibling visits. They will also need to develop a procedure to determine if there are protective orders in other states that may impact the sibling visitation.
REGULATORY ANALYSIS (continued)
Federal Fiscal Impact
None
Other Fiscal Impact (such as providers, local governments, etc.)
These rules will impact child placement agencies and specialized group facilities but should cause no new fiscal impact.
4. Data Description:
List and explain any data, such as studies, federal announcements, or questionnaires, you relied upon when developing this rule?
None
5. Alternatives to this Rule-making:
Describe any alternatives that were seriously considered. Are there any less costly or less intrusive ways to accomplish the purpose(s) of this rule? Explain why the program chose this rule-making rather than taking no action or using one of the listed alternatives.
There is no alternative to implementing the rules required by statute that was passed during the 2007 legislative session. The alternative that was considered for the other rules that are proposed was to take no action. This was not feasible. Some of the current rules are inconsistent, and technical clean-up will provide clarity and consistency. For new rules related to prioritizing assignment of investigations for allegations of abuse and neglect, following county input, it was determined that providing additional flexibility was positive for county departments in terms of efficiency and to assure the safety of children. New rules regarding mutually requested sibling visits, provides an opportunity for siblings who may not otherwise be allowed visits, to maintain contact and relationships. In addition, county departments need to be aware of new statutory language regarding the determination of pending legal action, which would impact the sibling visitation so that practice is consistent in all counties. Revised rules will provide more consistency in practice regarding recruitment of foster homes and specialized group facilities. This clarification has been requested by both county departments and child placement agencies.
Rule-making Form SBA-3a (9/05)
Title of Proposed Rule: / Implementation of H.B. 08-1006 Regarding Sibling Visitation, Clarification of the 24 Hour Response Time for Investigations of Abuse and Neglect for the 2007 Foster Care Performance Audit, and Technical Language CleanupRule-making#: / 08-5-16-1
Program: Divisions of Child Welfare and Child Care / Rule Author: Mary Griffin, Dana Andrews, and Shirley Mondragon / Phone: 303-866-3546
OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED RULE
Compare and/or contrast the content of the current regulation and the proposed change.
Section Numbers / Current Regulation / Proposed Change /