Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 39.621 (2025)

Permanency determination by the court.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

39.621 Permanency determination by the court.—

(1) Time is of the essence for permanency of children in the dependency system. A permanency hearing must be held no later than 12 months after the date the child was removed from the home or within 30 days after a court determines that reasonable efforts to return a child to either parent are not required, whichever occurs first. The purpose of the permanency hearing is to determine when the child will achieve the permanency goal or whether modifying the current goal is in the best interest of the child. A permanency hearing must be held at least every 12 months for any child who continues to be supervised by the department or awaits adoption.

(2) The permanency goal of maintaining and strengthening the placement with a parent may be used in all of the following circumstances:

(a) If a child has not been removed from a parent, even if adjudication of dependency is withheld, the court may leave the child in the current placement with maintaining and strengthening the placement as a permanency option.

(b) If a child has been removed from a parent and is placed with the parent from whom the child was not removed, the court may leave the child in the placement with the parent from whom the child was not removed with maintaining and strengthening the placement as a permanency option.

(c) If a child has been removed from a parent and is subsequently reunified with that parent, the court may leave the child with that parent with maintaining and strengthening the placement as a permanency option.

(3) The permanency goals available under this chapter, listed in order of preference, are:

(a) Reunification;

(b) Adoption, if a petition for termination of parental rights has been or will be filed;

(d) Permanent placement with a fit and willing relative under s. 39.6231; or

(e) Placement in another planned permanent living arrangement under s. 39.6241.

(4)(a) At least 3 business days before the permanency hearing, the department shall file its judicial review social services report with the court and serve copies of the report on all parties. The report must include a recommended permanency goal for the child, suggest changes to the case plan, if needed, and describe why the recommended goal is in the best interest of the child.

(b) Before the permanency hearing, the department shall advise the child and the individuals with whom the child will be placed about the availability of more permanent and legally secure placements and what type of financial assistance is associated with each placement.

(5) At the permanency hearing, the court shall determine:

(a) Whether the current permanency goal for the child is appropriate or should be changed;

(b) When the child will achieve one of the permanency goals;

(d) Whether the frequency, duration, manner, and level of engagement of the parent or legal guardian’s visitation with the child meets the case plan requirements.

(6) The best interest of the child is the primary consideration in determining the permanency goal for the child. The court must also consider:

(a) The reasonable preference of the child if the court has found the child to be of sufficient intelligence, understanding, and experience to express a preference; and

(b) Any recommendation of the guardian ad litem.

(7) If a child will not be reunited with a parent, adoption, under chapter 63, is the primary permanency option. If the child is placed with a relative or with a relative of the child’s half brother or half sister as a permanency option, the court may recognize the permanency of this placement without requiring the relative to adopt the child. If the court approves a permanency goal of permanent guardianship of a dependent child, placement with a fit and willing relative, or another planned permanent living arrangement, the court shall make findings as to why this permanent placement is established without adoption of the child to follow. If the court approves a permanency goal of another planned permanent living arrangement, the court shall document the compelling reasons for choosing this goal.

(8) The findings of the court regarding reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan must be explicitly documented, made on a case-by-case basis, and stated in the court order.

(9) The case plan must list the tasks necessary to finalize the permanency placement and shall be updated at the permanency hearing if necessary. If a concurrent case plan is in place, the court may choose between the permanency goal options presented and shall approve the goal that is in the child’s best interest.

(10) The permanency placement is intended to continue until the child reaches the age of majority and may not be disturbed absent a finding by the court that the circumstances of the permanency placement are no longer in the best interest of the child.

(a) If, after a child is residing in the permanent placement approved at the permanency hearing, a parent who has not had his or her parental rights terminated makes a motion for reunification or increased contact with the child, the court shall hold a hearing to determine whether the dependency case should be reopened and whether there should be a modification of the order.

(b) At the hearing, the parent must demonstrate that the safety, well-being, and physical, mental, and emotional health of the child is not endangered by the modification.

(c) The court shall base its decision concerning any motion by a parent for reunification or increased contact with a child on the effect of the decision on the safety, well-being, and physical and emotional health of the child. Factors that must be considered and addressed in the findings of fact of the order on the motion must include:

1. The compliance or noncompliance of the parent with the case plan;

2. The circumstances which caused the child’s dependency and whether those circumstances have been resolved;

3. The stability and longevity of the child’s placement;

4. The preferences of the child, if the child is of sufficient age and understanding to express a preference;

5. The recommendation of the current custodian; and

6. Any recommendation of the guardian ad litem.

(11) Placement of a child in a permanent guardianship, with a fit and willing relative, or in another planned permanent living arrangement does not terminate the parent-child relationship, including, but not limited to:

(a) The right of the child to inherit from his or her parents;

(b) The parents’ right to consent to the child’s adoption; or

History.—s. 28, ch. 2000-139; s. 19, ch. 2006-86; s. 12, ch. 2012-178; s. 18, ch. 2017-151; s. 8, ch. 2018-103; s. 10, ch. 2019-128; s. 22, ch. 2024-70.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 63 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: S.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 202 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

S.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 202 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 10× “Section 39.621, Florida Statutes (2016), specifies that permanent guardianship shall be considered only after reunification and adoption are not available options.”

M.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 189 So. 3d 134 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 9× “§ 39.621(9), Fla. Stat. (2015). Given that the Father’s parental rights have not been terminated, nothing prohibits him from moving to modify the order to increase visitation.”

CD v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 974 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). · cites it 5× “b) The circumstances which caused the' child's dependency and whether those circumstances have been resolved; (c) The stability and longevity of the child's placement; (d) The preferences of the child, if the child is of sufficient age and understanding to express a preference;…”

A.L. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 53 So. 3d 324 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). · cites it 7× “Section 39.621, Florida Statutes, requires that permanency hearings be held at specified times.”

EI v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 979 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). · cites it 6× “On its motion for clarification, the Department asks this court to clarify its opinion by substituting section 39.621(10), Florida Statutes, as it is the controlling statute in this case as it deals with postclosure motions to reactivate.”

State, Dep't of Child. & Families v. Interest of B.D., 102 So. 3d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). · cites it 6× “(2011) (“The court shall retain jurisdiction over the case and the child shall remain in the custody of the permanent guardian unless the order creating the permanent guardianship is modified by the court.”

Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Prog. v. A.A., 171 So. 3d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). · cites it 3× “Doing so under the circumstances of this case prioritized tenuous parental contact over the children’s right to permanency, in direct conflict with section 39.621. Additionally, we find that the trial court erred by holding that it was unable to terminate Mother’s parental…”

N.a., the Mother v. Dept. of Child. & Families, 267 So. 3d 430 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). · cites it 5× “After the Circuit Court Removed the Child from the Mother, the Circuit Court Lacked Statutory Authority to Both Terminate Jurisdiction and Order the Mother to Complete a Case Plan When a court decides to place a dependent child with the non-offending parent, Chapter 39 provides…”

T.N.L. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 132 So. 3d 319 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). · cites it 8× “§ 39.621(10), Fla. Stat. (2012). These factors have been characterized as “best interest” factors.”

GV v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 985 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). · cites it 4× “§ 39.621(10), Fla. Stat. (2006); see also C.”

MI v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 45 So. 3d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). · cites it 5× “Additionally, section 39.621, Florida Statutes (2009) addresses the amendment of case plan goals at the permanency hearing: “The purpose of the permanency hearing is to determine .”

Dep't of Child. & Families & Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Prog. v. J.S., the Father & S.I., the Mother, 183 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). · cites it 2× “4th DCA 2009) (reversing and remanding for trial court to consider and address all six factors of section 39.621(10), Florida Statutes, which “mandates that [the] six factors ‘be considered and addressed in the findings of fact of the order on the motion [by a parént for…”

Show all 63 citing cases →

— 39.621(1) — 12 cases

S.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 202 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 2016). “Section 39.621, Florida Statutes (2016), specifies that permanent guardianship shall be considered only after reunification and adoption are not available options.”

State, Dep't of Child. & Families v. Interest of B.D., 102 So. 3d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). “(2011) (“The court shall retain jurisdiction over the case and the child shall remain in the custody of the permanent guardian unless the order creating the permanent guardianship is modified by the court.”

A. H. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 85 So. 3d 1213 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).

Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Prog. v. A.A., 171 So. 3d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). “Doing so under the circumstances of this case prioritized tenuous parental contact over the children’s right to permanency, in direct conflict with section 39.621. Additionally, we find that the trial court erred by holding that it was unable to terminate Mother’s parental…”

BL v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 950 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

— 39.621(10) — 19 cases

EI v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 979 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “On its motion for clarification, the Department asks this court to clarify its opinion by substituting section 39.621(10), Florida Statutes, as it is the controlling statute in this case as it deals with postclosure motions to reactivate.”

CD v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 974 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). “b) The circumstances which caused the' child's dependency and whether those circumstances have been resolved; (c) The stability and longevity of the child's placement; (d) The preferences of the child, if the child is of sufficient age and understanding to express a preference;…”

T.N.L. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 132 So. 3d 319 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). “§ 39.621(10), Fla. Stat. (2012). These factors have been characterized as “best interest” factors.”

GV v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 985 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “§ 39.621(10), Fla. Stat. (2006); see also C.”

Dep't of Child. & Families & Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Prog. v. J.S., the Father & S.I., the Mother, 183 So. 3d 1177 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). “4th DCA 2009) (reversing and remanding for trial court to consider and address all six factors of section 39.621(10), Florida Statutes, which “mandates that [the] six factors ‘be considered and addressed in the findings of fact of the order on the motion [by a parént for…”

— 39.621(10)(a) — 3 cases

S.V.-R. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 77 So. 3d 687 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011).

A.A. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 147 So. 3d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).

T.A.S., R.A.S. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families (Fla. 1st DCA 2024).

— 39.621(10)(b) — 2 cases

A.A. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 147 So. 3d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).

— 39.621(10)(c) — 1 case

L. v. Dep't of Child. & Families (Fla. 2d DCA 2026).

— 39.621(2) — 6 cases

N.a., the Mother v. Dept. of Child. & Families, 267 So. 3d 430 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019). “After the Circuit Court Removed the Child from the Mother, the Circuit Court Lacked Statutory Authority to Both Terminate Jurisdiction and Order the Mother to Complete a Case Plan When a court decides to place a dependent child with the non-offending parent, Chapter 39 provides…”

G.S. v. T.B., 969 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).

T.W. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 946 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

In Re Km, 946 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

Gs v. Tb, 969 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).

— 39.621(2)(a) — 3 cases

A.L. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 53 So. 3d 324 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). “Section 39.621, Florida Statutes, requires that permanency hearings be held at specified times.”

— 39.621(2)(b) — 2 cases

T.F. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs. & Guardian ad Litem Prog., 8 So. 3d 474 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).

In Re Tf, 8 So. 3d 474 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).

— 39.621(2)(d) — 2 cases

A.L. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 53 So. 3d 324 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). “Section 39.621, Florida Statutes, requires that permanency hearings be held at specified times.”

JM v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 969 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

— 39.621(3) — 3 cases

T.W. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 946 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

In Re Km, 946 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

D.R. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 963 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).

— 39.621(3)(a) — 4 cases

Interest of K.M. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 86 So. 3d 556 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012).

J.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 130 So. 3d 753 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).

B.R. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 106 So. 3d 512 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013).

A. R. v. Dept. of Child. & Families, 239 So. 3d 1266 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018).

— 39.621(4)(a) — 2 cases

T.m.w., the Mother v. Dep't of Child. & Families (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).

— 39.621(5) — 2 cases

MI v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 45 So. 3d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). “Additionally, section 39.621, Florida Statutes (2009) addresses the amendment of case plan goals at the permanency hearing: “The purpose of the permanency hearing is to determine .”

In Re: Amendments to the Florida Rules of Juv. Procedure - 2018 Fast-Track Report, 249 So. 3d 1175 (Fla. 2018).

— 39.621(6) — 4 cases

Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs. v. Heart of Adoptions, Inc., 947 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

In Re Jt, 947 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

Dep't of Child. & Families v. In the Interest of J.F., 959 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

M.M. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 987 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).

— 39.621(7) — 1 case

T.A.S., R.A.S. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families (Fla. 1st DCA 2024).

— 39.621(9) — 11 cases

M.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 189 So. 3d 134 (Fla. 2016). “§ 39.621(9), Fla. Stat. (2015). Given that the Father’s parental rights have not been terminated, nothing prohibits him from moving to modify the order to increase visitation.”

FE v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 1 So. 3d 305 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).

JM v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 969 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

In the Interest of Jd, 972 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.