ARTICLE 3
DEPENDENCY PROCEEDINGS
15-11-232. Permanency planning hearing; findings.
-
At the permanency plan hearing, the court shall make written findings of fact that include the following:
-
Whether DFCS has made reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan which is in effect at the time of the hearing;
-
The continuing necessity for and the safety and appropriateness of the placement;
-
Compliance with the permanency plan by DFCS, parties, and any other service providers;
-
Efforts to involve appropriate service providers in addition to DFCS staff in planning to meet the special needs of a child adjudicated as a dependent child and his or her parent, guardian, or legal custodian;
-
Efforts to eliminate the causes for the placement of a child adjudicated as a dependent child outside of his or her home and toward returning such child safely to his or her home or obtaining a permanent placement for such child;
-
The date by which it is likely that a child adjudicated as a dependent child will be returned to his or her home, placed for adoption, or placed with a permanent guardian or in some other alternative permanent placement;
-
Whether, in the case of a child adjudicated as a dependent child placed out of state, the out-of-state placement continues to be appropriate and in the best interests of such child;
-
In the case of a child adjudicated as a dependent child who is 14 years of age or older, the services needed to assist such child to make a transition from foster care to independent living;
-
In the case of a child for whom another planned permanent living arrangement is the permanency plan:
-
Whether DFCS has documented intensive, ongoing, and, as of the date of the hearing, unsuccessful efforts to return the child to the home or to secure a placement for the child with a fit and willing relative, a legal guardian, or an adoptive parent, including through efforts that utilize search technology, including social media, to find biological family members for the children;
-
Whether DFCS has documented the steps it is taking to ensure that the child's foster family home or child care institution is following the reasonable and prudent parent standard and the child has regular, ongoing opportunities to engage in age or developmentally appropriate activities, including by consulting with the child in an age-appropriate manner about the opportunities of the child to participate in the activities; and
-
After asking the child, what his or her desired permanency outcome is; and
-
If a child has attained the age of 14 years old, whether the permanency plan developed for the child, and any revision or addition to the plan, was developed in consultation with the child and, at the option of the child, with not more than two members of the permanency planning team who were selected by the child and who are not a foster parent of or caseworker for the child in accordance with subparagraph (A) of paragraph (15) of Code Section 15-11-201.
-
The permanency plan incorporated in the court's order shall include:
-
Whether and, if applicable, when a child adjudicated as a dependent child shall be returned to his or her parent;
-
Whether and, if applicable, when a child adjudicated as a dependent child shall be referred for termination of parental rights and adoption;
-
Whether and, if applicable, when a child adjudicated as a dependent child shall be placed with a permanent guardian; or
-
In the case in which DFCS has documented a compelling reason that none of the options identified in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this subsection would be in the best interests of the child, whether, and if applicable, when such child shall be placed in another planned permanent living arrangement.
-
If the court finds, as of the date of the hearing, that another planned permanent living arrangement is in the best interests of a child who has attained the age of 16 years old, the court shall make findings of fact explaining such determination and, in its order, provide compelling reasons why it is not or continues to not be in a child's best interests to be returned to his or her parent, referred for termination of parental rights and adoption, placed with a permanent guardian, or placed with a fit and willing relative.
-
A supplemental order of the court adopting the permanency plan including all requirements of the permanency plan as provided in Code Section 15-11-231 shall be entered following the permanency hearing and in no case later than 30 days after the court has determined that reunification efforts shall not be made by DFCS. The supplemental order shall include a requirement that the DFCS case manager and staff and, as appropriate, other representatives of a child adjudicated as a dependent child provide such child with assistance and support in developing a transition plan that is personalized at the direction of such child; includes specific options on housing, health insurance, education, local opportunities for mentors and continuing support services, and work force supports and employment services; and is as detailed as such child may elect in the 90 day period immediately prior to the date on which he or she will attain 18 years of age.
(Code 1981, §15-11-232, enacted by Ga. L. 2013, p. 294, § 1-1/HB 242; Ga. L. 2015, p. 540, § 1-8/HB 361; Ga. L. 2015, p. 552, § 17/SB 138.)
The 2015 amendments.
The first 2015 amendment, effective May 5, 2015, substituted the present provisions of paragraph (b)(4) for the former provisions, which read: "Whether there is a safe and appropriate placement with a fit and willing relative of a child adjudicated as a dependent child or other persons who have demonstrated an ongoing commitment to a child or a statement as to why placement with such relative or other person is not safe or appropriate.". The second 2015 amendment, effective July 1, 2015, in subsection (a), deleted "and" at the end of paragraph (a)(7), substituted a semicolon for a period at the end of paragraph (a)(8), and added paragraphs (a)(9) and (a)(10); and substituted the present provisions of subsection (c) for the former provisions, which read: "If the court finds that there is a compelling reason that it would not be in a child's best interests to be returned to his or her parent, referred for termination of parental rights and adoption, or placed with a permanent guardian, then the court's order shall document the compelling reason and provide that such child should be placed in another planned permanent living arrangement as defined in the court's order."
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Editor's notes.
- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under pre-2000 Code Section 15-11-41 and pre-2014 Code Section 15-11-2, which were subsequently repealed by were succeeded by provisions in this Code section, are included in the annotations for this Code section. See the Editor's notes at the beginning of the chapter.
Statute of limitations.
- Since the father's petition was filed within the two-year limitation required by former subsection (d) (now subsection (c) of former O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-41 (see now O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-232)), but the hearing was not held in the juvenile court until after the expiration of that period and the mother requested and received a further continuance, the mother's appearance and participation in the hearing without proper objection before or at trial constituted a waiver of such procedural defects. Page v. Shuff, 160 Ga. App. 866, 288 S.E.2d 582 (1982) (decided under former O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-41).
Parent with schizophrenia.
- Evidence supported the finding that a child was deprived within the meaning of former O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-2(8) (see now O.C.G.A.
§§
15-11-2 and15-11-107), and that termination of the mother's parental rights was in the child's best interest, pursuant to former O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-94(a) (see now O.C.G.A.
§§
15-11-310 and15-11-2320), because the mother, who was homeless and suffering from schizophrenia, failed to maintain contact with the agency or visit with the child for more than one year, and the mother never accomplished court-ordered goals for reunification or demonstrated the ability to adequately care for the child. In the Interest of S.G., 271 Ga. App. 776, 611 S.E.2d 86 (2005) (decided under former O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-2).
Child was deprived as defined in former O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-2(8) (see now O.C.G.A.
§§
15-11-2 and15-11-107) because the mother had borderline intellectual functioning and was at a high risk of engaging in physical child abuse, the child was a special needs child with developmental disorders and physical problems who was not being properly supervised in a dirty home where there was little food, the mother needed long-term intensive psychological treatment but failed to obtain counseling and stopped taking her medications, and the mother failed to support the child or to comply with case plan goals. In the Interest of A.K., 272 Ga. App. 429, 612 S.E.2d 581 (2005) (decided under former O.C.G.A.
§
15-11-2).
