What's Wrong with Adoption Assistance in Ohio?; Part 2 of a Series

Adoption Assistance is Mismanaged Because ODJFS Does Not Recognize Its Unique Features

The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) does not recognize that Title IV-E adoption assistance differs from other federal entitlement programs in several important respects.

1. Eligibility for adoption assistance and determination of the amount of assistance are two related but distinct steps.

2. Once a child is determined eligible for the program; federal law provides that the amount of adoption assistance must be determined through negotiation, based upon a broad consideration of the child’s needs and circumstances of the adopting family. Federal financial participation (FFP) in adoption assistance is available up to the level a child would receive in a foster home suitable to their level of care. Negotiation of adoption assistance payments may involve disagreements between parents and agency representatives involving several hundreds of dollars per month.

Failure to create the procedure and practices for the above differences is a key to understanding the deficiencies in ODJFS's administration of adoption assistance.

In most federal assistance programs, benefits are determined at eligibility by applying an income means test based on family size and income. Negotiating with families, accordingly, is beyond the experience of most agency officials. ODJFS' attempt the administer the Title IV-E adoption assistance program with the same structures and procedures as means tested programs has far reaching consequences.

No Development or Dissemination of a Coherent Model for Negotiation of Adoption Assistance Agreements

ODJFS has not developed a coherent model for negotiating adoption assistance agreements. As a consequence, many county agencies do not negotiate adoption assistance agreements in accordance with state and federal law. ODJFS officials are aware of this problem, but have not provided training to county agencies and taken any positive steps to establish, a coherent and consistent model of negotiation.

Consequences include: Bitter conflicts between adoptive parents and county agencies over the issue of negotiating adoption assistance agreement, resulting in numerous, complex state administrative hearings. Frequent threats to remove the child or children from the adoptive parents if they persist in attempting to exercise their due process rights.

Inadequate Preparation of Hearing Officers

ODJFS' hearing officers do not receive training regarding the differences and greater complexities of the adoption assistance program. Hearing officers are trained to examine the literal language of the Ohio Administrative Code. This training works well when determining eligibility for a means tested program based on income, resources and family size. It does not prepare hearing officers for the complexities of adoption assistance, which relies on guidelines. procedures and criteria for negotiating adoption assistance. Hearing officers are also not trained to look to the federal Child Welfare Policy Manual, for the authoritative interpretations of OAC adoption assistance regulations, even though ODJFS pledges to do so in its IV-E State Plan as a condition for receiving federal funds.

Consequences include: Uninformed and inconsistent hearing decisions. ODJFS has been approached about training a group of hearing officers to specialize in adoption assistance cases, but nothing has been done.

No State Oversight of County Agencies' Compliance with Hearing Decisions

Unlike other states, Ohio does have any statewide adoption assistance payment rate schedules. Each adoption assistance negotiation is to a great extent an individual transaction between the adoptive parents and county agency. Adoptive parents have been quite successful in winning hearings involving the county agency's failure to negotiate adoption assistance agreements according to federal and state policy standards. Because Ohio has no statewide adoption assistance payment standards, however, the hearing order in nearly every case, order the county agency to resume negotiations with the adoptive parents. ODJFS has no procedures in place for assuring county compliance and that a good faith negotiation takes place. ODJFS has no procedures for ensuring that settlements are reached.

Consequences include: County agencies resort to a variety of delaying tactics because they know that there are no negative consequences. Cases drag on for months without resolution. At times, they drag on for so long that a second hearing is held. One case is now over six years old. As months go by, county agencies will sometimes threaten to remove the children, blaming the parents for the delay and accusing them of not being committed to the adoption. Suggestions for third party arbitration or some other form of intervention have been made to ODJFS, but this option has not been explored.

No Policy Expertise in Adoptive Assistance at ODJFS

As adoptive parents have become more informed advocates, various policy and practice issues have surfaced. Adoptive parents cannot contact anyone at ODJFS that can provide answers to policy questions and the standards for verifying or documenting whether a requirement has been met. Policy analysis involves more that reading the literal language in a paragraph of the OAC. Administering adoption assistance policy involves an institutional memory of how rules have been interpreted, changes in federal interpretations and consistent applications of how compliance with existing policies is determined. At this time, ODJFS is sadly lacking in such expertise, which does nothing to remedy to inconsistent and poorly informed administration of the adoption assistance program across Ohio counties.

What's Wrong with Adoption Assistance in Ohio?; The First in a Series

Through the advocacy of adoptive parents, significant improvements have been made in the federal Title IV-E Adoption Assistance program over the past two decades. Not surprisingly, the advocacy of better informed adoptive parents has exposed severe weaknesses in the operation of the adoption assistance program. The forthcoming series of blogs will profile some of the major problems and urge adoptive parents to contact administrators at the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS), legislators and the Governor's Office. Serious defects include:

• Inconsistent hearing decisions. Adoptive assistance is different and far more complicated that other assistance programs administered by ODJFS. Adoption assistance hearings account for a very small proportion of all hearings in any given month. A number of hearing officers have very little knowledge of adoption assistance and their ignorance of the program is clearly revealed in their hearing decisions. The source of the problems is not so much the individual hearing officers as the complete lack of training provided on the complexities of adoption assistance and how to address them.
  

• A large number of county agencies do not comply with federal and state criteria and procedures for the negotiation of adoption assistance agreements. Adoptive parents, are routinely and incorrectly told, for example, that adoption assistance is limited to costs associated with the treatment of a child's special needs. Expenses associated with the activities and function of families in general are not considered. This view is completely at odds with current state and federal policy and is major source of conflict between adoptive parents and agencies.

• Adoption parents frequently prevail in hearing decisions pertaining to negotiation. The hearing decision orders the county agency to negotiate and sometimes sets conditions. At this point, the parents often face a combination of passive resistance, active resistance, delays, obfuscation that stretches out the process for months. In several cases, a second hearing on the same issue is necessary. ODJFS is aware of this problem of cases dragging on and on, but has developed no ideas for resolving negotiations. Oh, I neglected to mention that during these interminable cases, adoptions are also delayed. Parents are typically blamed for the delays in finalizing the adoption.
  

• There is a lack of experience in adoption assistance at ODJFS. Administering a program involves much more than looking at isolated phrases in state rules. One must have a knowledge of the program's history, and its goals. In addition to knowing how policy issues have been interpreted, one has to know how compliance with eligibility requirements and other rules are documented or verified. At present, there is no consistent guidance on how policy issues must be implemented or documented. The ADC-Relatedness requirement for Title IV-E adoption assistance eligibility is a prime example.

We will examine these problems in greater detail in forthcoming blogs. One point has become abundantly clear. Parents called to adopt special needs children are taken for granted in Ohio. Most special needs children are adopted by their foster parents. Once an emotional bond is established, these foster parents become completely committed to the children. Unfortunately, county agencies take full advantage of this bond and use it to push for minimal amounts of adoption assistance. Throughout the process, the parents' advocacy is demeaned and the needs of the children minimized. ODJFS becomes complicit through the failure to provide effective training guidance and oversight.