reasonable efforts standard in Colorado

2025Services provided in accordance with section 19-3-208 satisfy the reasonable efforts standard. § 19-1-103(114). ¶8 Among the services required under section 19-3-208 are screenings, assessments, and individual case plans for the provision of services; home-based family and crisis counseling; information and referral services to available public and private assistance resources; family time; and placement services. § 19-3- 208(2)(b). ¶9 In assessing the department’s reasonable efforts, the juvenile court should consider whether the services provided were appropriate to support the parent’s trea

2025Appropriate services provided in accordance with section 19-3-208 satisfy the reasonable efforts standard. § 19-1-103(114). ¶9 The juvenile court must consider whether the services provided were appropriate to support the parent’s treatment plan, People in Interest of S.N-V., 300 P.3d 911 , 915 (Colo. App. 2011), by “considering the totality of the circumstances and accounting for all services and resources provided to a parent to ensure the completion of the entire treatment plan.” People in Interest of My.K.M. v. V.K.L., 2022 CO 35, ¶ 33 .

2025See People in Interest of S.K., 2019 COA 36, ¶ 34 (when a parent has a qualifying disability under the ADA, the Department must account for and, if possible, make reasonable accommodations for the parent’s disability when providing rehabilitative services).

2024People in Interest of S.K. , 2019 COA 36, ¶¶ 22, 25, 34 ; see 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1) (defining “disability” under the ADA); see also 42 U.S.C. § 12131(2) (defining “qualified individual” under the ADA).

2026See People in Interest of C.Z., 2015 COA 87, ¶¶ 11-12 .

2025Reasonable efforts means the “exercise of diligence and care” for a child who is in out-of-home placement, and the reasonable efforts standard is satisfied when services are provided in accordance with section 19-3-208. ¶9 The services provided under section 19-3-208 generally must comply with the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, their related amendments, and their implementing regulations. § 19-3-208(2)(g); People in Interest of S.K., 2019 COA 3 36, ¶¶ 22, 25, 34 ; see 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (defining “disability” under the ADA). ¶ 10 Under the ADA no “qualified individual wi

2026Services provided in accordance with section 19-3-208, C.R.S. 2025, satisfy the reasonable efforts standard. § 19-1-103(114). ¶ 21 As relevant here, a department must provide family time services for parents with children in out-of-home placement if those services are determined to be necessary and appropriate by the individual case plan. § 19-3-208(1), (2)(b)(IV); People in Interest of E.D., 2025 COA 11, ¶ 14 .

2026Appropriate services provided in accordance with section 19-3-208, C.R.S. 2025, satisfy the reasonable efforts standard. § 19-1-103(114). ¶ 15 As relevant here, a department must provide family time services for parents with children or youth in out-of-home placement if those services are determined to be necessary and appropriate by the individual case plan. § 19-3-208(1), (2)(b)(IV); People in Interest of E.D., 2025 COA 11, ¶ 14 .

2022Id . ¶ 11 The reasonable efforts standard is deemed met if services a re provided in accordance with section 19-3-208. § 19 -1-103(114), C.R.S. 2021; Peop le in Interest of J.A.S. , 160 P.3d 257 , 262 (Colo. App. 2007).

2019The reasonable efforts standard is deemed met if services are provided in accordance with section 19-3-208, C.R.S. 2019. § 19-1-103(89); People in Interest of J.A.S., 160 P.3d 257 , 262 (Colo. App. 2007).

2024The reasonable efforts standard is satisfied if services are provided in accordance with section 19-3-208, C.R.S. 2024, which includes conducting family assessments, developing a treatment plan, and providing information and referrals for public and private assistance. §§ 19- 1-103(114), 19-3-208(2)(b), C.R.S. 2024; People in Interest of C.T.S., 140 P.3d 332, 335 (Colo. App. 2006). ¶8 Under section 19-3-208(2)(b), family time for parents with children in out-of-home placements must be provided as determined necessary and appropriate by a case assessment and the individual treatment plan.

2022Father’s brief cites to People in Interest of C.T.S. , 140 P.3d 332, 335 (Colo. App. 2006) to support his argument that the Department had to conduct further investigation to sati sfy the reasonable efforts requirement.

2010See In re C.A.V., 787 N.W.2d 96, 100-01 (Iowa Ct.App.2010) (applying clear and convincing evidence standard to the ICWA active efforts requirement; collecting cases applying both the clear and convincing evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt standards); see also Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 755-57 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 , 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982) (each state may determine which standard of proof to apply in termination of parental rights cases, but to satisfy the minimum requirements of procedural due process, a state must establish that the state's criteria for terminating parental rights, inclu

2010See In re C.A.V., 787 N.W.2d 96, 100-01 (Iowa Ct.App.2010) (applying clear and convincing evidence standard to the ICWA active efforts requirement; collecting cases applying both the clear and convincing evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt standards); see also Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 755-57 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 , 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982) (each state may determine which standard of proof to apply in termination of parental rights cases, but to satisfy the minimum requirements of procedural due process, a state must establish that the state's criteria for terminating parental rights, inclu

2010See In re C.A.V., TBT N.W.2d 96, 100-01 (Iowa Ct.App.2010) (applying clear and convincing evidence standard to the ICWA active efforts requirement; collecting cases applying both the clear and convincing evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt standards); see also Samtosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 755-57 , 102 S.Ct. 1888 , 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982) (each state may determine which standard of proof to apply in termination of parental rights cases, but to satisfy the minimum requirements of procedural due process, a state must establish that the state's criteria for terminating parental rights, inclu

2010See In re C.A.V., 787 N.W.2d 96, 100-01 (Iowa Ct.App.2010) (applying clear and convincing evidence standard to the ICWA active efforts requirement; collecting cases applying both the clear and convincing evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt standards); see also Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 755-57 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 , 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982) (each state may determine which standard of proof to apply in termination of parental rights cases, but to satisfy the minimum requirements of procedural due process, a state must establish that the state's criteria for terminating parental rights, inclu

2010See In re Nicole B., 410 Md. 33 , 976 A.2d 1039, 1058 (2009) ("we should examine the substance of the Department's ... actions; we should not decide the case based upon the use, or failure to use, the statutory label `active efforts'").

2010See In re Nicole B., 410 Md. 33 , 976 A.2d 1039, 1058 (2009) ("we should examine the substance of the Department's ... actions; we should not decide the case based upon the use, or failure to use, the statutory label `active efforts'").

2025Active efforts are “a more demanding standard than the reasonable efforts standard applied in non-ICWA cases.” People in Interest of My.K.M. v. V.K.L., 2022 CO 35, ¶ 31 .

2025Appropriate services provided in accordance with section 19-3-208 satisfy the reasonable efforts standard. § 19-1-103(114). ¶9 The juvenile court must consider whether the services provided were appropriate to support the parent’s treatment plan, People in Interest of S.N-V., 300 P.3d 911 , 915 (Colo. App. 2011), by “considering the totality of the circumstances and accounting for all services and resources provided to a parent to ensure the completion of the entire treatment plan.” People in Interest of My.K.M. v. V.K.L., 2022 CO 35, ¶ 33 .

2025See People in Interest of A.V., 2012 COA 210, ¶ 12 , 297 P.3d 1019, 1022 (holding that a court may consider a parent’s unwillingness to participate in treatment when determining whether a department of human services made reasonable efforts to rehabilitate the parent). ¶ 21 Moreover, the Department satisfied the reasonable efforts standard.

2025See People in Interest of A.V., 2012 COA 210, ¶ 12 , 297 P.3d 1019, 1022 (holding that a court may consider a parent’s unwillingness to participate in treatment when determining whether a department of human services made reasonable efforts to rehabilitate the parent). ¶ 21 Moreover, the Department satisfied the reasonable efforts standard.

2026Under that statute, family time is among the services that “must be available and provided” as determined necessary and appropriate by individual case plans. § 19-3-208(1), (2)(b)(IV); People in Interest of B.C., 122 P.3d 1067, 1070 (Colo. App. 2005). ¶ 11 In determining whether family time services are necessary and appropriate, the health and safety of the child are paramount.

2026See People in Interest of S.L., 2017 COA 160, ¶ 31 , 421 P.3d 1207, 1215 (holding that to satisfy the reasonable efforts requirement, the department of human services should “provide the parents with necessary and needed services”). ¶ 13 Father also contends that the Department failed to provide reasonable efforts because it offered father family time with P.S., but that father was unable to meaningfully participate in it because 5 the Department had placed P.S. at a distant location.

2026See People in Interest of S.L., 2017 COA 160, ¶ 31 , 421 P.3d 1207, 1215 (holding that to satisfy the reasonable efforts requirement, the department of human services should “provide the parents with necessary and needed services”). ¶ 13 Father also contends that the Department failed to provide reasonable efforts because it offered father family time with P.S., but that father was unable to meaningfully participate in it because 5 the Department had placed P.S. at a distant location.

2025“Reasonable efforts” means the “exercise of diligence and care” for a child who is in out-of-home placement. § 19-1- 103(114). 4 ¶ 12 Services provided in accordance with section 19-3-208 satisfy the reasonable efforts standard. § 19-1-103(114); see also People in Interest of E.S., 2021 COA 79, ¶ 19 .

2025Rather, when the impairment is the basis of the disability, the ADA requires a showing that the 2 A “qualified individual with a disability” is an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable modifications to rules, policies, or practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or transportation barriers, or the provision of auxiliary aids and services, meets the essential eligibility requirements for the receipt of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity. 42 U.S.C. § 12131 (2). 4 impairment “substantially limits one or more maj

2025Reasonable efforts means the “exercise of diligence and care” for a child who is in out-of-home placement, and the reasonable efforts standard is satisfied when services are provided in accordance with section 19-3-208. ¶9 The services provided under section 19-3-208 generally must comply with the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, their related amendments, and their implementing regulations. § 19-3-208(2)(g); People in Interest of S.K., 2019 COA 3 36, ¶¶ 22, 25, 34 ; see 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (defining “disability” under the ADA). ¶ 10 Under the ADA no “qualified individual wi

2024Compare People in Interest of D.P. , 160 P.3d 351, 355-56 (Colo. App. 2007) (holding that a parent must bring any deficiencies in a department’s provision of reasonable eff orts to the court’s attention before a termination hearing) , with S.N- V. , 300 P.3d at 916 (holding a parent’s failure to raise reasonable 6 efforts concerns before termination does not bar appe llate review of a reasonable efforts claim). ¶ 14 We need not resolve this question because, even if assume that mother preserved the issue for appellate review, we conclude that the juvenile court did not err by finding that the

2024Compare People in Interest of D.P. , 160 P.3d 351, 355-56 (Colo. App. 2007) (holding that a parent must bring any deficiencies in a department’s provision of reasonable eff orts to the court’s attention before a termination hearing) , with S.N- V. , 300 P.3d at 916 (holding a parent’s failure to raise reasonable 6 efforts concerns before termination does not bar appe llate review of a reasonable efforts claim). ¶ 14 We need not resolve this question because, even if assume that mother preserved the issue for appellate review, we conclude that the juvenile court did not err by finding that the

2024Among the services required under section 19-3-208 are screenings, assessments, and the development of individual case plans for t he provision of services; home-based family and crisis counseling; information and referral services to available public and p rivate assistance resources; family time; and placement services. § 19 -3-208(2)(b) ; see also People in Interest of A.D. , 2017 COA 61, ¶ 32 .

2024Among the services required under section 19-3-208 are screenings, assessments, and the development of individual case plans for t he provision of services; home-based family and crisis counseling; information and referral services to available public and p rivate assistance resources; family time; and placement services. § 19 -3-208(2)(b) ; see also People in Interest of A.D. , 2017 COA 61, ¶ 32 .

2022See id. at 38,782 ("States are also inconsistent as to how to demonstrate sufficient 'active efforts' to keep a family intact."); State in Int. of C.D., 200 P.3d 194, 205 (Utah Ct. App. 2008) ("The issue of exactly what constitutes 'active efforts' under the ICWA and how this standard relates to the more common reasonable efforts standard has 21 produced a split of authority among the . . . jurisdictions that have considered the issue.") . ¶28 As guidance, the 2016 federal regulations now emphasize that " [a]ctive efforts means affirmative , active , thorough , and timely efforts intended prim

2022People in Interest of T.B., 12 P.3d 1221, 1223 (Colo. App. 2000).

2020In determining unfitness, the juvenile court must consider whether reasonable efforts by child-caring agencies have been unable to rehabilitate the parents. § 19-3-604(2)(h). ¶7 When reviewing a juvenile court’s decision to terminate parental rights, appellate courts have long applied a very deferential standard, setting aside a termination only when the juvenile court’s findings are “so clearly erroneous as to find no support in the record.” C.A.K., 652 P.2d at 613.

2020See § 19-1-103(89) (deeming the services enumerated in section 19-3-208 to meet the reasonable efforts standard); cf. People in Interest of I.J.O., 2019 COA 151, ¶ 22 (“We recognize that we review a juvenile court’s finding of reasonable efforts for clear error.

2016The distinction might be relevant as to whether Lohrey qualifies as an actual possessor or occupant of the property, but we need not decide that issue because, as we have noted, the parties stipulated that Lohrey was an occupant for purposes of section 39-11-128(1)(a), C.R.S. 2016. 18 not include “diligent inquiry” qualifier for notice to occupant but, where occupant was tenant farmer who lived on adjoining property, “diligent inquiry” standard applied); cf. Dohrn v. Mooring Tax Asset Grp., L.L.C., 743 N.W.2d 857, 861 (Iowa 2008) (stating that statute did not include “diligent inquiry” standar

2012Compare People in Interest of R.L., 961 P.2d 606, 609 (Colo.App.1998) ("Because findings pursuant to 25 U.S.C. §§ 1912 (d) and 1912(f) (1978) are predicates to termination under the ICWA, we conclude that logic compels application of the same 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard of proof as to both statutory provisions."), with People in Interest of C.Z., 262 P.3d 895, 905 (Colo.App.2010) (applying "the same clear and convincing evidence standard to the active efforts requirements that we apply to the reasonable efforts requirement in non-ICWA cases").

2012Compare People in Interest of R.L., 961 P.2d 606, 609 (Colo.App.1998) ("Because findings pursuant to 25 U.S.C. §§ 1912 (d) and 1912(f) (1978) are predicates to termination under the ICWA, we conclude that logic compels application of the same 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard of proof as to both statutory provisions."), with People in Interest of C.Z., 262 P.3d 895, 905 (Colo.App.2010) (applying "the same clear and convincing evidence standard to the active efforts requirements that we apply to the reasonable efforts requirement in non-ICWA cases").

2010See In re C.A.V., 787 N.W.2d 96, 100-01 (Iowa Ct.App.2010) (applying clear and convincing evidence standard to the ICWA active efforts requirement; collecting cases applying both the clear and convincing evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt standards); see also Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 755-57 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 , 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982) (each state may determine which standard of proof to apply in termination of parental rights cases, but to satisfy the minimum requirements of procedural due process, a state must establish that the state's criteria for terminating parental rights, inclu