The Use of Standardized Assessment Instruments to Determine Adoption Assistance Payments
Some Initial Questions
Sorry for the long time between posts. I have somehow gotten involved with a post adoption hearing in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is another state with a county administered child welfare system. If you think Ohio is weird. Wow! I have spent hours searching for consistent practices among Pennsylvania Counties.
Assessment Tools and Adoption Assistance
Speaking of consistency, or lack thereof, some states are using standard assessment instruments to determine a child’s level of care. Level of care assessments may be employed to establish regular and specialized family foster care payment rates. Levels of care and the resulting foster payment levels play a decisive role in arriving at adoption assistance payments. Wisconsin, for example uses CANS (Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths) assessment tools to arrive at adoption assistance payment levels.
Other states have devised assessment tools that are more directly focused on setting adoption assistance payment rates. In either case, the use of standardized assessment instruments is designed to:
Make adoption assistance payments more standardized across the state, and
Make adoption assistance payments closer to, or the same as, family foster care payments, and
Reduce the reliance on negotiation because it is so difficult to standardize or quantify.
Standardized Assessment Instruments and the Role of Negotiation in Adoption Assistance
At this particular time, the requirement to negotiate adoption assistance payments in Ohio, appears to be quite helpful to adoptive parents, if they understand federal and state policies and their right to challenge agency decisions through mediation and state hearings. On the other hand, negotiation of adoption assistance agreements is often stressful and unpleasant. Would adoptive parents be willing to place less emphasis on the negotiation of adoption assistance payments if assessment instruments result in adoption assistance payments that are:
a. More standardized across counties; and
b. Close to, or equal to, their child’s family foster care payment rate? What role negotiation might play in such a process is an open question.
The use of assessment instruments in Ohio would have the effect of standardizing adoption assistance into more uniform payment categories. That is, if family foster care payments become more standardized across Ohio counties.
The Role of Family Circumstances
Another question, one that I raised in the last post, was how to address the consideration of family circumstances in a standardized assessment instrument that applies to adoption assistance? Family circumstances is not only a federal requirement applicable to the negotiation of adoption assistance, but the consideration of the family’s individual situation bears directly on the parents’ capacity to meet the adopted child’s needs and integrate her into a permanent and supportive home.
The following elements capture Colorado’s attempt to include items related to family circumstances, as well as the child’s needs, on its new Adoption Negotiation Worksheet for determining adoption assistance payment rates. Here are the items in the “Family Circumstances” section.
Is the family living in poverty?
Is the family currently on a static income that poses barriers or obstacles to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth? Example of static income include: Fixed income, pension, Social Security, disability income.
Current expenses incurred by the family that pose barriers or obstacles to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth. Example: Current ordinary expenses
The family’s working circumstances pose barriers or obstacles to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth. Example: Reduction in work hours and income due to adoption.
The family's composition poses barriers or obstacles to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth. Example: the family has additional child/youth and/or adult dependents who require extra care and financial responsibility
The family's childcare or education circumstances pose obstacles or barriers to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth to be adopted
The family's current housing circumstances pose barriers or obstacles to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth. Example: The family’s housing situation no longer safely accommodates family with the addition of adopted child(ren).
The family's current transportation circumstances pose barriers or obstacles to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth. Example: The family vehicle can no longer transport children safely due to increase in family size
The family's childcare or education circumstances pose obstacles or barriers to providing for the ordinary care of the child/youth to be adopted. Examples: Child care is time-limited childcare until the child is in school full time. Their is a need for summer programs.
The family’s standard of living, lifestyle or future plans will change due to adopting the child/youth. Example: Will the addition of this child/youth make an unreasonable change to the family’s lifestyle or a decrease in the family’s standard of living.
This adoption was not planned by the family in advance, giving them time to prepare. Example: How long has the family had to plan?
The family is adopting more children than they initially intended to adopt per their child study at the request of the Department and that situation poses a barrier or obstacle to the ordinary care of the child/youth. Example: Are they adopting a sibling group they did not plan for?
There are factors not yet captured that pose a barrier or obstacle to providing for the ordinary needs of the child/youth.
I have not yet determined how individual state’s assessments are scored and used to determine adoption assistance payments. Nor, do I know what part negotiation still plays in those states. I will examine how these assessment tools work in the coming months as part of my participation in the Adoption Assistance Negotiation Process Work Group.