A Guide to The Multiethnic Placement Act of
1994
As Amended by the Interethnic Adoption Provisions of 1996
Chapter 4: Checklists for Implementation of MEPA-IEP
-
What Agencies Can Do
-
Promote good child welfare practice
MEPA-IEP is consistent with good child welfare practice. Both MEPA-IEP and good practice require: individual decision making; consideration of all of the child's needs from the time the child first comes into contact with the child welfare system; consistent attention to all those needs throughout the child's relationship with the agency and in each placement decision; active recruitment of potential foster and adoptive parents from all segments of the community; development of a pool of foster and adoptive parents that respond to the needs of the children in care; eligibility criteria for foster and adoptive parents that are related to their ability to care for a child; and support and respectful treatment of all prospective parents. Good practice will improve permanence for children and decrease the chances that MEPA-IEP will be violated.
-
Decrease delays in permanence caused by other factors
A number of the controversies concerning transracial placements arise because the child has been in foster care for too long. Frequently the delay in obtaining a permanent placement for the child is due to other factors such as inadequate reunification efforts, failure to search for relatives who are willing and able to care for the child, high social worker caseloads, bureaucratic inertia, and court delays. Decreasing these delays in permanence will serve the best interests of children and will decrease the chances that the agency will be accused of delaying a child's placement for any reason including racial discrimination.
-
Review current state law and agency policies for compliance with MEPA-IEP
HHS has reviewed the statutes and policies that are readily available, but state agencies should conduct their own review of all state laws and written policies as well as informal policies and practices to ensure violations of MEPA-IEP do not occur in written policy or in practice.
Other public and private agencies are also required to comply with MEPA-IEP. All covered agencies should thoroughly review policies and practices to ensure compliance. When state statutes or policies appear to be in conflict with MEPA-IEP, agencies should seek clarification from the state child welfare agency or HHS or both.
-
Monitor agency compliance with MEPA-IEP.
To assess whether their practices comply with MEPA-IEP, agencies should consider systematically monitoring their own practices regarding all foster care and adoptive placements. Specifically, agencies should make sure that children are not moved from one foster placement to another simply in order to achieve a racial or ethnic match, that adoptive placements of minority children are not processed at much slower rates than placements ofCaucasiann children, and that transracial or interethnic placements are not arbitrarily filtered out at different stages of the placement process.
A successful outcome measure for MEPA-IEP compliance is a reduction in current disparities between rates of placement of minority and non-minority children, and an increase in permanency for all children as the pool of suitable and diverse parents expands. By contrast, evidence that transracial or interethnic placements are not occurring, or are being "filtered" out of agency practice, could raise concerns about the persistence of at least inadvertent discrimination against children as well as against prospective parents when the pool of waiting children is predominately of one race.
Except for purposes of reviewing their own compliance with MEPA-IEP, agencies should no longer follow any procedures that routinely classify or divide children awaiting placement by racial or ethnic groups. Similarly, individuals seeking approval, or already approved, as foster or prospective adoptive parents should not be routinely classified by race or ethnicity, but can be classified according to the general characteristics of the kinds of children they prefer or are willing to consider. Any "matching" of a child to a prospective parent should be responsive to the particular needs of a child and the capacities of the parent, without regard to general assumptions about the risks or benefits of same-race or transracial adoption.
To evaluate their compliance with MEPA-IEP, as well as the effects of non-discriminatory practices on the number, rate, and permanency of placements for all children, agencies should keep internal records of the racial and ethnic backgrounds of the children and foster and adoptive parents in their case files. Agencies should track the experience of children under their supervision from the time of entry into out-of-home care through the time the cases are closed. Significant differences in the experience of minority children should be recorded and efforts made to account for these differences. Was there a reluctance to seek termination of parental rights because of concerns that a same-race adoptive placement would be difficult to justify? Are children being held in long-term foster care in order to keep them in a racially-matched custodial environment, even though potential transracial adoptive placements are available? How are decisions about "adoptability" being made? Are the criteria for minority children different than the criteria used for white children? Which lists and exchanges within and outside the state were used to locate an adoptive parent? How much time elapsed until each childs permanency goals were met?
Because the central goal of MEPA-IEP is to reduce placement delays and denials based on discriminatory factors, it is important for agencies to monitor and document the rates at which minority children leave care and the kinds of placements they experience. Are minority childrens rates of adoption becoming comparable to the rates of white children? Are minority children waiting about the same time as white children?
-
Implement a comprehensive recruitment plan.
States were required to submit an appropriate comprehensive recruitment plan to HHS no later than October 31, 1995. States should take into consideration both the mechanisms they will use to reach all segments of the community and the protections they will implement to ensure compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of MEPA-IEP. For example, the state may choose to use targeted efforts to reach minority communities, but these efforts may not exclude whites who wish to become foster or adoptive parents.
Public and private agencies should assist the state in developing an appropriate recruitment plan that meets the needs of the children they serve. Agencies should ensure state plans include creative and affirmative efforts to reach communities that reflect the ethnic and racial diversity of children who need homes. The diversity and cultural competency of the recruitment staff should be reviewed as should any written or audiovisual materials used. Recruitment efforts should also address how parents are treated in the home study and placement process. Recruitment is wasted if the system does not make appropriate use of interested parents who respond, or if such efforts are not timely.
Agencies should also collaborate in developing comprehensive community services to ensure that prospective parents are not denied the opportunity to become foster or adoptive parents. Cooperation among different organizations is necessary to ensure that all individuals who are interested in foster care and adoption are encouraged and supported.
Submission of the plan does not end the responsibility of the state or the other agencies involved in recruitment. Implementation, evaluation, and appropriate adjustment are necessary to serve the best interests of children and families and to avoid violations of law. HHS has made clear that the failure to conduct adequate recruitment may be a violation of Title VI as well as a violation of the IV-B state plan requirements.
-
Issue clear policies and standards for placement.
All agencies should develop clear written policies and standards that implement MEPA-IEP. These policies and standards should define prohibited practices to the extent possible making it clear that such a list is not all inclusive. These policies and standards also should identify the areas where professional judgment is appropriate. Vague or ambiguous policies invite confusion and create barriers to implementation. Agencies can use the federal Guidance in formulating these policies. Additional assistance is available from the resource centers listed in the appendix.
-
Provide training for workers.
Training on the provisions of MEPA-IEP and discussion of how those provisions apply in individual situations is important to ensure that workers understand and implement the law properly. Appropriate training will also help protect agencies from claims they have engaged in discriminatory practices.
Training should also include practice issues that increase the competency of staff to make individualized assessments of childrens needs.
-
Develop a system for supervision and technical assistance for workers to promote compliance that meets the best interests of the children.
Ongoing attention will be necessary not only to ensure that MEPA-IEP is followed but also to ensure that misunderstandings about what MEPA-IEP requires do not interfere withfulfillingg the best interests of children. As with adequate training, appropriate supervision will help protect agencies from claims they have engaged in discriminatory patterns of practice.
-
Provide opportunities for discussion and value clarification.
Discussing the goals of the agency, of MEPA-IEP, and of child welfare services will be helpful in reducing misunderstanding of MEPA-IEP requirements and resistance to implementing them. It will also promote more child-centered decision making. Workers who understand the reasons for policies are more likely to implement them correctly and will be more confident in exercising their professional judgement.
Agencies should encourage caseworkers to meet with each other to review hypothetical and actual cases in order to improve their ability to distinguish between general or untested assumptions about childrens needs and specific, distinctive needs related to race or ethnicity. Hypothetical and actual cases should also be used to illustrate the difference between having a need related to race and ethnicity and requiring a same race/ethnic placement to address that need. Even children who have documented racial or ethnically related needs may have those needs met in a transracial as well as in a same-race placement.
-
Get good legal advice.
Given the controversial nature of these issues, agencies can anticipate litigation if difficult cases arise. However, the fear of litigation should not prevent workers from making appropriate decisions. Workers can best exercise their professional judgment if agency policies and practices have been reviewed for compliance with the law. A good review will also prepare the agency to defend their practices if litigation should occur. If the attorneys who usually work with the agency are not familiar with civil rights issues, they may wish to arrange for a consultation with experts.
-
Get help.
Assistance is available from ACF, OCR, HHS Regional Offices, and the Resource Centers. States should take advantage of the resources listed in the Appendix.
-
-
What Workers Should Do
-
Make individual decisions based on sound child welfare practice and the best interest of the child.
MEPA-IEP makes it clear that concerns about race, color, or national origin are not to be the predominant or sole basis of child placement decisions. Indeed, they are not to be taken into account in any foster care or adoptive placement decision except in those rare circumstances where the caseworker can document a specific, distinctive need of a particular child arising from the childs race or ethnicity. This does not require caseworkers to be "colorblind," but to understand the difference between acknowledging a childs race, color, or national origin as an element of that childs whole being and using general assumptions about those factors as a shortcut for preferring certain placement options over others. Caseworkers should understand that in every case, the available prospective parents should be considered, regardless of their race or ethnicity, as eligible to adopt waiting children.
Same-race placements are not required, nor are they prohibited. Similarly, transracial placements are not required, nor are they prohibited. What is required are decisions based on careful individualized assessments of the characteristics and needs of each child and non-stereotypical assessments of individuals who are potential parents of the child.
Agencies should give caseworkers the opportunity to read and discuss the social science research findings that substantiate the claims that children are not harmed by transracial adoption, and indeed, are significantly better off than being left in foster care or returned to dysfunctional biological parents.
The focus of MEPA-IEP is the best interests of children. Workers should keep in mind that the primary concern of child welfare services, including adoption, is the well-being of children. MEPA-IEP emphasizes the use of professional judgment in making individualized decisions in the best interest of each child. Workers who base their decisions on sound child welfare practice and the needs of the individual child will be unlikely to run afoul of the law.
-
If a child has specific or distinctive needs related to race or ethnicity that require consideration, address them as soon as the child comes into the child protective system.
In the great majority of cases, agencies can assume that a child has no special needs based on race, color, or national origin which should be taken into account in selecting a foster or adoptive parent. However, where such needs exist, they should be identified and assessed early in the case. These needs should then be considered in providing services and in making every placement decision. All too often these needs are not addressed until a decision has to be made about adoption or another permanent plan. Waiting this long is problematic for two reasons. First, it means the child's needs are not met for a significant period of time. Second, it creates difficulties in balancing interests at the time of adoption or other permanent placement if the child's current caregivers cannot meet the child's identified needs.
-
Consider permanence from the first contact with the child.
Early attention to permanence is especially important. All too often emergency placements or other temporary arrangements become long term. Even when race or ethnicity is not an issue, these placements can create difficulties if the foster parents are not willing to make a long term commitment to the child or are not appropriate adoptive parents. Appropriate planning and action can ensure that children do not remain in foster care drift and can reduce the controversies that arise when children are moved from one placement to another. Early identification of relatives, including absent parents, comprehensive reunification efforts, attention to all of the child's needs in making placement decisions, and other good child welfare practices will reduce the time a child waits for permanence and the chance that problems will arise in making an appropriate permanent placement for children who cannot return home.
-
Read the statute and the federal guidance.
A lot of questions can be resolved by referring to the 1995, 1997, and 1998 Guidances or the language of the Act itself. Workers should read the federal law and policy for themselves and not rely on written or oral summaries provided by others. When in doubt, workers and their supervisors should review the language of the federal law, the Guidances, and state laws and policies before making a decision. If questions remain, staff should get legal advice.
-
Review state law and agency policy and ask for clarification.
Where state law or agency policies are unclear or appear to conflict with the federal law, workers should ask for clarification. It may take some time for the states and agencies to resolve all of the issues that MEPA-IEP presents. However, workers need to be able to make decisions for children while this process is going on. Workers should insist upon clarification to the extent possible. Questions from workers can also assist the states and the agencies in identifying issues that need to be resolved.
-
Document the reasons for decisions.
MEPA-IEP emphasizes individualized decision making based on the needs of the child. Workers should document the basis for their decisions including all the factors they considered in reaching that decision. Documentation will help workers clarify for themselves the factors taken into consideration and the reasons for the decision. It will provide a record a supervisor or another worker can refer to in understanding the case, and it will provide evidence of appropriate action in the event the worker is charged with violation of the law.
-
Be honest with prospective adoption and foster parents and treat them with respect.
Good communication and respectful treatment will decrease misunderstandings and improve recruitment and retention of prospective parents. Open discussion can also help the agency learn about potential problems and ways to address them.
-
