Common use of Permanency Clause in Contracts

Permanency. In order to achieve permanency for children in DHS’ custody, the department has implemented core permanency strategies for children with the goal of reunification; for children who are legally free with a goal of adoption but do not yet have a permanent family identified; for children who are legally free and have an identified permanent placement; and, for older legally free youth without an adoption goal at risk of aging out of xxxxxx care. Timeliness of Children’s Permanency, Metrics 6.2 (a-d) The four 6.2 Metrics (a, b, c and d) measure DHS’ progress to achieve timely permanency for children who entered DHS’ custody at a designated time and who achieved permanency in 12, 24, 36 or 48 months from the child’s removal from their family. As discussed in previous Commentaries, DHS has implemented Permanency Safety Consultations (PSCs) as the primary core strategy to achieve timely permanency for children with the goal of reunification. In addition, during the report period, DHS has prioritized a more proactive and systematic practice to engage birth families early and often after a child is placed in DHS custody in an effort to secure more timely permanency for children with reunification goals. For children who have a permanency plan of adoption, DHS has implemented a number of strategies described below to finalize more timely each child’s life-long connection with an adoptive family. The following summaries and tables detail the baselines, performance to date and Target Outcomes for each of the 6.2 Metrics.25 Metric 6.2a, Permanency within 12 months of removal: DHS reports that of the 2,372 children who entered xxxxxx care between April 1, 2017 and September 30, 2017, 847 children achieved permanency within 12 months of their removal date. This represents a permanency achievement rate of 35.7 percent for Metric 6.2a, which is DHS’ highest reported performance to date. 25 For this report period, the Co-Neutrals counted in the 6.2 Metrics children who in their 12th month of care entered trial reunification as having achieved permanency. Figure 19: Metric 6.2a – Permanency within 12 Months of Removal 55.0% 35.0% 31.8% 33.1% 35.0% 35.7% 28.9% 28.2% 27.2% 28.2% 30.3% 30.6% 31.4% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Source: DHS Data The vast majority of children who achieve permanency within 12 months of removal do so through reunification. This makes it critical for DHS to have in place a strong practice model to return children to their own homes as soon as safely possible in order to achieve substantial and sustained progress under Metric 6.2a. Of the 847 children in this 6.2a cohort who achieved permanency this period, 662 (78 percent) were reunified, 70 (eight percent) were adopted and 115 (14 percent) achieved permanency through guardianship or custody with a relative.

Permanency. In order to achieve permanency for children in DHS’ custody, the department has implemented core permanency strategies for children with the goal of reunification; for children who are legally free with a goal of adoption but do not yet have a permanent family identified; for children who are legally free and have an identified permanent placement; and, for older legally free youth without an adoption goal at risk of aging out of xxxxxx care. For this report period, the Co- Neutrals find that DHS has made good faith efforts to achieve substantial and sustained progress toward the Target Outcomes for nine of the ten permanency Metrics.41 For one permanency Metric, 6.2a, which measures timeliness to permanency within 12 months of a child entering care, the Co-Neutrals find, as explained further below, that DHS did not undertake good faith efforts to achieve substantial and sustained progress toward a Target Outcome. For this period, DHS reported an outcome for permanency for children within 12 months that is below the baseline performance established in 2013.42 Timeliness of Children’s Permanency, Metrics 6.2 (a-d) The four 6.2 Metrics (a, b, c and d) measure DHS’ progress to achieve timely permanency for children who entered DHS’ custody at a designated time and who achieved permanency in 12, 24, 36 or 48 months from the child’s removal from their family. It is important to note that the permanency data outcomes reported for this period for the 6.2 Metrics extend only through March 2020. As discussed in previous Commentariessuch, DHS has implemented not identified any significant impact on these permanency outcomes from COVID-19, which was declared a pandemic in mid-March 2020. National Standards for Timely Permanency Safety Consultations (PSCs) As previously reported by the Co-Neutrals, when the Target Outcomes for the 6.2 Metrics for timely permanency were established under the Pinnacle Plan in 2014, there were no similar national standards for these performance measures. DHS and the Co-Neutrals sought to establish progressive Target Outcomes for timely permanency that the department could strive to achieve for children in Oklahoma’s custody. Since that time, the Children’s Bureau, which is part of the 41 There were 11 permanency metrics originally established in the Metrics Plan. However, the measure that covers the older cohort of youth from Metric 6.1 is no longer monitored and reported as no children in this cohort remained in DHS custody as of the primary core strategy beginning of this report period. 42 Metric 6.2a, for the current period, involves 2,017 children who entered xxxxxx care between October 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019, and measures the agency’s performance through March 31, 2020. All the children in the 6.2 Metrics for this period were removed from their families prior to the leadership of the current DHS director and the current child welfare director. United States Department of Health and Human Services' Administration for Children and Families, completed Child and Family Services Reviews to assess the performance of state child welfare agencies with respect to child safety and numerous other well-being outcomes for children in states’ custody, including timeliness to permanency. Based on the results of these reviews and other normalizing factors, the Children’s Bureau published national standards that predominantly reflect the average level of performance of all reporting states, including the outcomes of the states across the nation that struggle to achieve timely permanency. As such, the national standards do not represent what may be considered the reasonably optimal permanency outcomes for children and families, but they do offer a mean against which the federal government measures and establishes a minimum standard for each state’s performance. As shown in Table 16 below, the Metric 6.2 Target Outcomes established for DHS at the start of this reform are significantly higher compared to the equivalent federal standards for timely permanency. Timeliness to permanency within 24 to 36 months (6.2c) and within 36 to 48 months (6.2d) are combined into the federal measure of timeliness to permanency for any child in care for 24 months or longer. Table 16: Comparison of Federal and Oklahoma Measures for Timely Permanency Federal Measure (Equivalent OK measure in parenthesis) Oklahoma Metric Target Outcome Oklahoma Performance Outcome this Period Federal CFSR National Standard Permanency within 12 months (6.2a) 55% 34.8% 40.5% Permanency within 12-23 months (6.2b) 75% 53.1% 43.6% Permanency for children with in care 24 months or longer (6.2 c and d combined) 6.2c - 70% (24-35 months) 6.2d - 55% (36-48 months) 6.2c – 56.3% (24-35 months) 6.2d – 51.0% (36-48 months) 30.3% A review of three of DHS’ current permanency outcomes in the goal context of reunification. In additionthe current national standards shows that DHS has made significant progress compared to states across the country, during exceeding the report periodequivalent national standards for Metrics 6.2 b, c and d. However, as noted in the comparison chart above, DHS has prioritized a more proactive and systematic practice to engage birth families early and often after a child is placed in DHS custody in an effort to secure more timely remains below the national standard for permanency for children with reunification goals. For children who have a permanency plan of adoptionwithin 12 months, DHS has implemented a number of strategies described below to finalize more timely each child’s life-long connection with an adoptive familyMetric 6.2a. The following summaries and tables detail the baselinesbaseline, performance to performance-to-date and Target Outcomes Outcome for each of the 6.2 Metrics.25 Metrics.43 Metric 6.2a, Permanency within 12 months of removal: DHS reports that of the 2,372 2,017 children who entered xxxxxx care between April October 1, 2017 2018 and September 30March 31, 20172019, 847 701 children achieved permanency within 12 months of their removal date. This represents a permanency achievement rate of 35.7 34.8 percent for Metric 6.2a, which is represents a decrease of 0.6 percent since the last period and brings DHS’ highest performance below the baseline outcome of 35 percent reported performance to date. 25 For this report period, the Co-Neutrals counted in the 6.2 Metrics children who in their 12th month of care entered trial reunification as having achieved permanency. Figure 19: Metric 6.2a – Permanency within 12 Months of Removal 55.0% 35.0% 31.8% 33.1% 35.0% 35.7% 28.9% 28.2% 27.2% 28.2% 30.3% 30.6% 31.4% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Source: DHS Data The vast majority of children who achieve permanency within 12 months of removal do so through reunification2013. This makes it critical is the second consecutive performance decline reported for this measure, and the agency’s performance has historically left too many children in state care for too long. For DHS to have performed to the federal standard, the agency would have had to secure permanency in place a strong practice model 12 months for an additional 116 children. To reach the Metric 6.2a Target Outcome, the agency would have had to return children to their own homes as soon as safely possible secure permanency in order to achieve substantial and sustained progress under Metric 6.2a. Of the 847 children in this 6.2a cohort who achieved permanency this period, 662 (78 percent) were reunified, 70 (eight percent) were adopted and 115 (14 percent) achieved permanency through guardianship or custody with a relative12 months for an additional 408 children.

Permanency. In order to To achieve permanency for children in DHS’ custody, the department has implemented core permanency strategies for children with the goal of reunification; for children who are legally free with a goal of adoption but do not yet have a permanent family identified; for children who are legally free and have an identified permanent placement; and, for older legally free youth without an adoption goal at risk of aging out of xxxxxx care. Timeliness of Children’s Permanency, Metrics 6.2 (a-d) The four 6.2 Metrics (a, b, c and d) measure DHS’ progress to achieve timely permanency for children who entered DHS’ custody at a designated time and who achieved permanency in 12, 24, 36 or 48 months from the child’s removal from their family. As discussed in previous Commentaries, DHS has implemented Permanency Safety Consultations (PSCs) as the primary core strategy to achieve timely permanency for children with the goal of reunification. In addition, during the report period, DHS has prioritized a more proactive and systematic practice to engage birth families early and often after a child is placed in DHS custody in an effort to secure more timely permanency for children with reunification goals. For children who have a permanency plan of adoption, DHS has implemented a number of strategies described below to finalize more timely each child’s life-long connection with an adoptive family. The following summaries and tables detail the baselines, performance to date and Target Outcomes for each of Because the 6.2 Metrics.25 Metric 6.2a, Permanency within 12 months of removal: DHS reports that of Metrics are Delayed Performance Area Measures under the 2,372 children who entered xxxxxx care between April 1, 2017 and September 30, 2017, 847 children achieved permanency within 12 months of their removal date. This represents a permanency achievement rate of 35.7 percent for Metric 6.2a, which is DHS’ highest reported performance to date. 25 For this report periodCovid Recovery Agreement, the Co-Neutrals counted in the 6.2 Metrics children who in their 12th month of care entered trial reunification as having achieved permanency. Figure 19: Metric 6.2a – Permanency within 12 Months of Removal 55.0% 35.0% 31.8% 33.1% 35.0% 35.7% 28.9% 28.2% 27.2% 28.2% 30.3% 30.6% 31.4% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Source: DHS Data The vast majority of children who achieve permanency within 12 months of removal do so through reunification. This makes it critical for DHS to have in place will not render a strong practice model to return children to their own homes as soon as safely possible in order judgment regarding DHS’ efforts to achieve substantial and sustained progress under Metric 6.2atoward the Target Outcomes for these measures. Of As noted above, the 847 modifications to the CSA are meant to allow time for the department, as well as its child welfare partners, including the courts, to recover from the systemic impacts of the pandemic on the timely achievement of permanency for children in DHS’ custody. Permanency is one performance area under this 6.2a cohort reform where DHS does not independently make the final decision regarding a child’s permanency outcome. Every permanency decision or recommendation the department makes must be approved by the courts and according to the courts’ schedules. As noted below, DHS found in its permanency data analysis completed last report period that a common thread among children who achieved super timely permanency within seven months was the timeliness of their court hearings and for many children this review period, their permanency was delayed as the pandemic caused court hearing backlogs and continuances across the state. As with the last report period, DHS identified children who achieved permanency within three months after the end of the period and had a COVID-19 related court continuance that delayed the child achieving permanency within this period12-month report period of April 2020 to March 2021. The number of children who experienced court delays affected by the pandemic, 662 (78 percent) were reunifiedand the resulting impact on the performance outcomes for the 6.2 measures are detailed below under each Metric. Still, 70 (eight percent) were adopted DHS reported for all 6.2 measures and 115 (14 percent) permanency exits combined an overall increase during SFY21 compared to SFY20 in the total number of children who achieved permanency through reunification (up four percent) and guardianship or custody (up two percent). Conversely, DHS reported a decrease of seven percent in the total percentage of children who exited care through adoption.54 For the same two fiscal years, SFY20 and SFY21, DHS also reviewed its child welfare data for the number of children who became legally-free for adoption and the number of children who entered trial adoption. In a child’s case plan progression to permanency through adoption, the child must first become legally- free as the result of a court ruling to terminate parental rights to the child. In Oklahoma every parent has the right to a jury trial before a petition for termination of parental rights is granted and the department reported that the state has experienced significant delays convening jury trials because of the pandemic. Further, even as the court system strives to resume a more normal, pre-pandemic schedule, DHS reported that the backlog in court hearings, as well as ongoing continuances, caused by the virus still linger prominently, consequently causing delays in DHS’ requested hearings to terminate parental rights and finalize adoptions. DHS reported that in the 12 months (April 2019 – March 2020) prior to the pandemic and prior to this data reporting period, the monthly average number of children who became legally free for adoption was 157. For the following 12 months (April 2020 – March 2021), which coincide exactly with the first full 12 months of the pandemic as well as with this data reporting period, the monthly average number of children who became legally-free decreased by 30 percent to 110 children each month. Similarly, for the same 12-month period comparison, DHS reported a relative30 percent decline (168 to 118 children) in the monthly average number of children who entered trial adoption and, consistently, records showed a 29 percent decline (165 to 117) in the number of children who achieved permanency through a finalized adoption. As detailed further below, this is the first report period in over five years that DHS’ performance outcome for measure 6.2b (permanency between 12 to 24 months) dipped below the baseline and the data clearly shows this was primarily the result of a significant decline in the percentage of children who achieved permanency through adoption. For Metric 6.2c, while DHS did not report an outcome this period below the baseline, it did show a similar, marked decline caused by a decrease in adoption exits.

Permanency. ‌ In order to achieve permanency for children in DHS’ custody, the department has implemented core permanency strategies for children with the goal of reunification; for children who are legally free with a goal of adoption but do not yet have a permanent family identified; for children who are legally free and have an identified permanent placement; and, for older legally free youth without an adoption goal at risk of aging out of xxxxxx care. For this report period, the Co- Neutrals find that DHS has made good faith efforts to achieve substantial and sustained progress toward the Target Outcomes for each of the ten permanency Metrics20. As discussed in greater detail below, for three of the permanency measures (6.2d, 6.3 and 6.7), DHS has achieved the Target Outcome for at least four consecutive report periods, and, for another two measures (6.1 younger cohort and 6.5), the department has made substantial progress and remains close to the Target Outcome. Similar to other performance areas noted in this Commentary, the Co-Neutrals have also informed DHS leadership that for several permanency measures (6.2a, b and c, 6.4 and 6.6), the department has either plateaued in its progress toward the Target Outcomes or has not made the level of progress expected at this stage in the reform. The Co-Neutrals will continue to report in this and future Commentaries the department’s efforts to assess current practice and adjust and expand upon its focus and strategies to achieve better outcomes in the permanency measures that are lagging in progress. Timeliness of Children’s Permanency, Metrics 6.2 (a-d) The four 6.2 Metrics (a, b, c and d) measure DHS’ progress to achieve timely permanency for children who entered DHS’ custody at a designated time and who achieved permanency in 12, 24, 36 or 48 months from the child’s removal from their family. As discussed in previous Commentariesdetailed below, through this period, DHS has implemented remained focused on strengthening its efforts to achieve the individual permanency goal of each child by breaking through barriers, addressing deficiencies identified in case practice and establishing permanency for children as soon as possible after entering care. National Standards for Timely Permanency Safety Consultations (PSCs) As previously reported by the Co-Neutrals, when the Target Outcomes for the 6.2 Metrics for timely permanency were established under the Pinnacle Plan in 2014, there were no similar national standards for these performance measures. DHS and the Co-Neutrals sought to establish progressive Target Outcomes for timely permanency that the department could strive to achieve for children in Oklahoma’s custody. Since that time, the Children’s Bureau, which is part of the United States Department of Health and Human Services' Administration for Children and Families, completed Child and Family Services Reviews to assess the performance of state child welfare agencies with respect to child safety and numerous other well-being outcomes for children in states’ custody, including timeliness to permanency. Based on the results of these reviews and other normalizing factors, the Children’s Bureau published national standards that predominantly reflect the average level of performance of all reporting states, including the 20 There were 11 permanency metrics originally established in the Metrics Plan, however, the measure that covers the older cohort of youth from the 6.1 metric is no longer reported as no children in this cohort remained in DHS custody as of the primary core strategy beginning of this report period. outcomes of the many states across the nation that struggle to achieve timely permanency. As such, the national standards do not represent what may be considered the reasonably optimal permanency outcomes for children and families, but they do offer a mean against which the federal government measures and establishes a minimum standard for each state’s performance. As shown in Table 13 below, the 6.2 Metric Target Outcomes established for DHS at the start of this reform are significantly higher compared to the equivalent federal standards for timely permanency. Timeliness to permanency within 24 to 36 months (6.2c) and within 36 to 48 months (6.2d) are combined into the federal measure of timeliness to permanency for any child in care for 24 months or longer. Table 13: Comparison of Federal and Oklahoma Measures for Timely Permanency Federal Measure (Equivalent OK measure in parenthesis) Oklahoma Metric Target Outcome Oklahoma Performance Outcome this Period Federal CFSR National Standard Permanency within 12 months (6.2a) 55% 35.4% 40.5% Permanency within 12-23 months (6.2b) 75% 53.1% 43.6% Permanency for children with in care 24 months or longer (6.2 c and d combined) 6.2c - 70% (24-35 months) 6.2d - 55% (36-48 months) 6.2c - 55.8% (24-35 months) 6.2d - 59.8% (36-48 months) 30.3% A review of DHS’ current permanency outcomes in the goal context of reunification. In additionthe current national average shows that DHS has made significant progress compared to states across the country and has exceeded the equivalent national standards for Metrics 6.2 b, during the report periodc and d. However, DHS has prioritized a more proactive and systematic practice remains committed to engage birth families early and often after a child is placed in DHS custody in an effort to secure more timely permanency for children with reunification goals. For children who have a permanency plan of adoption, DHS has implemented a number of strategies described below to finalize more timely each child’s life-long connection with an adoptive family. The following summaries and tables detail achieve the baselines, performance to date and Target Outcomes established for each of the 6.2 Metrics.25 Metric 6.2aMetrics, Permanency within 12 months of removal: DHS reports that of and the 2,372 children who entered xxxxxx care between April 1, 2017 and September 30, 2017, 847 children achieved permanency within 12 months of their removal date. This represents a permanency achievement rate of 35.7 percent for Metric 6.2a, which is Co- Neutrals evaluated DHS’ highest reported performance good faith efforts to date. 25 For this report period, the Co-Neutrals counted in achieve these specific Target Outcomes for the 6.2 Metrics children who in their 12th month of care entered trial reunification metrics as having achieved permanency. Figure 19: Metric 6.2a – Permanency within 12 Months of Removal 55.0% 35.0% 31.8% 33.1% 35.0% 35.7% 28.9% 28.2% 27.2% 28.2% 30.3% 30.6% 31.4% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Source: DHS Data The vast majority of children who achieve permanency within 12 months of removal do so through reunification. This makes it critical for DHS to have in place a strong practice model to return children to their own homes as soon as safely possible in order to achieve substantial and sustained progress under Metric 6.2a. Of the 847 children in this 6.2a cohort who achieved permanency this period, 662 (78 percent) were reunified, 70 (eight percent) were adopted and 115 (14 percent) achieved permanency through guardianship or custody with a relativedescribed below.