Oregon Statutes 419A.116 – Findings and recommendations; judicial review
(1) After reviewing each case, the local citizen review board shall make written findings and recommendations with respect to:
Terms Used In Oregon Statutes 419A.116
- Another planned permanent living arrangement: means an out-of-home placement for a ward 16 years of age or older that is consistent with the case plan and in the best interests of the ward other than placement:
(a) By adoption;
(b) With a legal guardian; or
(c) With a fit and willing relative. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Court: means the juvenile court. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Department: means the Department of Human Services. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Indian child: has the meaning given that term in ORS § 419B. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Local citizen review board: means the board specified by ORS § 419A. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Parent: means the biological or adoptive mother and the legal parent of the child, ward, youth or adjudicated youth. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Person: includes individuals, corporations, associations, firms, partnerships, limited liability companies and joint stock companies. See Oregon Statutes 174.100
- Reasonable and prudent parent standard: means the standard, characterized by careful and sensible parental decisions that maintain the health, safety and best interests of a child or ward while encouraging the emotional and developmental growth of the child or ward, that a substitute care provider shall use when determining whether to allow a child or ward in substitute care to participate in extracurricular, enrichment, cultural and social activities. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Substitute care: means an out-of-home placement directly supervised by the department or other agency, including placement in a foster family home, group home, child-caring agency as defined in ORS § 418. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
- Ward: means a person within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court under ORS § 419B. See Oregon Statutes 419A.004
(a) Whether reasonable efforts were made prior to the placement, to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the child or ward from the home;
(b) If the case plan at the time of the review is to reunify the family, whether the Department of Human Services has made reasonable efforts to make it possible for the child or ward to safely return home and whether the parent has made sufficient progress to make it possible for the child or ward to safely return home;
(c) If the case plan at the time of the review is something other than to reunify the family, whether the department has made reasonable efforts to place the child or ward in a timely manner in accordance with the case plan, including, if appropriate, placement of the child or ward through an interstate placement, and to complete the steps necessary to finalize the permanent placement of the child or ward;
(d) The continuing need for and appropriateness of the placement;
(e) Compliance with the case plan;
(f) The progress which has been made toward alleviating the need for placement;
(g) A likely date by which the child or ward may be returned home or placed for adoption;
(h) Other problems, solutions or alternatives the board determines should be explored;
(i) Whether the court should appoint an attorney or other person as special advocate to represent or appear on behalf of the child or ward under ORS § 419B.195;
(j) For a ward 16 years of age or older with a permanency plan of another planned permanent living arrangement, the steps the department is taking to ensure that:
(A) The ward’s substitute care provider is following the reasonable and prudent parent standard; and
(B) The ward has regular, ongoing opportunities to engage in age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate activities, including consultation with the ward in an age-appropriate manner about the opportunities the ward has to participate in the activities;
(k) Whether there is reason to know, as described in ORS § 419B.636, that the child or ward is an Indian child; and
(L) If there is reason to know the child or ward is an Indian child:
(A) Whether the department made active efforts, as described in ORS § 419B.645, to prevent the breakup of the Indian family prior to the child’s removal;
(B) If the case plan at the time of the review is to reunify the family, whether the department has provided active efforts to make it possible for the child to safely return home and whether the parent has made sufficient progress to make it possible for the child to return home;
(C) If the case plan at the time of review is to reunify the family and the child or ward is placed in a home outside the placement preferences described in ORS § 419B.654, whether the department has continued to maintain the relationship of the child or ward with potential adoption preferences or whether the department has continued to search for a permanent placement that satisfies the placement preferences described in ORS § 419B.654; and
(D) If the case plan at the time of the review is something other than to reunify the family, whether the department has made active efforts to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the placement preferences under ORS § 419B.654.
(2) The local citizen review board may, if the case plan has changed during the period since the last review by a local citizen review board or court hearing, make written findings and recommendations with respect to:
(a) Whether the Department of Human Services has made reasonable efforts or, if the child is an Indian child, active efforts to make it possible for the child or ward to safely return home and whether the parent has made sufficient progress to make it possible for the child or ward to safely return home, if a plan to reunify the family was in effect for any part of the period since the last review or hearing; or
(b) Whether the department has made reasonable efforts to place the child or ward in a timely manner in accordance with the case plan, including, if appropriate, placement of the child or ward through an interstate placement, and to complete the steps necessary to finalize the permanent placement of the child or ward, if a case plan other than to reunify the family was in effect for any part of the period since the last review or hearing.
(3) In determining whether the Department of Human Services has made reasonable efforts or, if the child is an Indian child, active efforts to make it possible for the child or ward to safely return home, the local citizen review board shall consider the child or ward’s health and safety the paramount concerns.
(4) No later than 10 days after receiving the findings and recommendations of the local citizen review board, a party adversely affected by the findings and recommendations may request judicial review. [1993 c.33 § 31; 2001 c.686 § 20; 2003 c.396 § 22; 2007 c.611 § 3; 2015 c.254 § 2; 2020 s.s.1 c.14 § 52; 2021 c.398 § 53a]