What Are CPS Relative Placement Requirements?
As we will discuss further below, the Illinois Children and Family Services Act sets forth purposes and policies for the placement of children who have been removed from their homes due to unsafe or unsatisfactory parenting. One of the policies under the Act is that whenever a court removes a child from the home, within certain limits, preference is given to placing the child in a home with a relative.
CPS stands for Child Protective Services. In Illinois, the agency charged with looking into cases of abuse or neglect of children is the Department of Children and Family Services, which is often colloquially referred to as CPS .
DCFS will attempt to place children in their relative’s home, rather than in an out-of-home placement (i.e., the home of a stranger) whenever possible. For example, if one parent has been removed from the home, then preference is given to the other parent to keeping the family unit together and having the children remain with the other parent. Likewise, if a child is removed from both parents in an emergency situation, preference is given to placing the child with their grandparents, aunts, uncles or other relatives.
DCFS cannot remove a child from a home without good cause. Furthermore, DHS cannot keep children placed with non-relative foster parents if a relative can step in and provide a stable safe home.
Are you eligible for a relative placement?
Sometimes children are removed from their homes due to abuse or neglect. In these cases, children are placed into foster care. Illinois child welfare law gives priority for placement of children to relatives of the children. Illinois has a presumption in favor of relative placement. A relative is defined by statute as any individual related to the child by blood, marriage, or adoption, or to whom the child is emotionally related. The following individuals can qualify if they have a relationship with the child: grandparent, step-grandparent, aunt, uncle, great aunt, great uncle, or step-sibling.
When relatives ask to be appointed guardian of the children, it is assumed that the children will do better in the homes of their own relatives. However, being related to the child is not the only requirement for becoming a relative care provider. Relatives must meet the same general requirements as other foster care providers. These requirements include completing background check, financial stability evaluation, and home inspection.
Relatives must be fingerprinted, have a criminal clearance check through the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, participate in an Illinois State Police background check, have a medical examination, youth interview, and 20 hours of pre-service training. Because relatives are considered to provide intensive substitute care, Illinois law requires a local licensing agency to conduct a full home study and prepare a written evaluation of the home survey.
What are the benefits of a relative placement?
When a relative is able to provide a child with a home, studies have shown that it is in the best interest of the child to be placed with a relative rather than a foster family or group home, and in Illinois the law recognizes that fact.
A 1983 report conducted by the Child Welfare League of America, Inc., (CWLA) compared the experiences of children living in foster homes to the experience of children in relative care. The study concluded that in general, children in relative care exhibited more positive behaviors than those living in non-relative foster homes. A National Institutes of Health (NIH) 2007 study similarly concluded that "there was no evidence to suggest that children who lived with caregivers who were not relatives had more positive behavioral, psychological, or cognitive outcomes." The NIH study further concluded that children in relative care experienced less disruption and had better academic achievement. A 2004 study published by the Center for Social Services Research at the University of California, Berkeley, similarly found that placement in a relative home resulted in a lower recidivism rate among delinquent youth and higher levels of school participation.
Emotional and psychological stability is also a factor as children in relative care are reportedly better adjusted and more satisfied with their placements. Illinois has recognized these benefits in its child welfare laws, requiring DCFS to place a child with a relative when at all possible.
The legal process, safeguards, and factors
When it comes to custody and guardianship, the term "guardian" may be used in a legal sense or a more common sense. For purposes of this article, the term is used to refer to the care and support that a guardian offers with respect to interpersonal relationships with friends and family members. While a guardian may be the legal custodian, in most cases, this doesn’t mean there are no limitations to the relationship. Thus, while someone might have the right to seek guardianship of a minor child, they should seek legal representation, as the job isn’t an easy one.
There are numerous cases where a CPS relative placement may result in the birth parent(s) being granted some level of visitation with the child, but this isn’t always the case. This can happen when the Court has determined the parent(s) never lost their parental rights to the child. This means while the Court has placed the child with the guardian, the parent(s) are still on a path to regain their parental rights. This may sound confusing, as the law limits the parent(s)’ contact with the child, at least temporarily.
Another important legal consideration is the meaning of "temporary" placement. If CPS has a child temporarily removed, it may take back as much time as 15 months to terminate parental rights. During this time, the child will be with a relative placement for some time, generally until the Court has held a hearing to determine if parental rights should be terminated. Some children placed with CPS relative placement remain there for months or even longer. This is one reason why those who take on the role of guardian need access to an attorney for guidance. Those without legal representation could face criminal charges by simply failing to follow each rule and guideline .
This can become complicated when it’s time for the child to leave the household. The first thing is that the parent(s) can have access to the child even after what CPS refers to as "reunification." There is a potential chance of foster care placement at this point if the parent(s) don’t demonstrate the ability to cooperate, so guardians want to be aware of all options.
That being said, it’s relatively common for a given CPS case to drag on for years in the courts. Occasionally, other relatives will step forward and ask CPS to consider them for placement with the child. Even though this might not be the original intent, there was nothing preventing the relatives from filing a complaint so that their plea for support and visitation rights could be considered. At this juncture, we can see how, without an attorney, a CPS relative placement could cause additional challenges. Interviews and notification likely weren’t done of such relatives in the beginning, so it’s harder for them to show they will have a positive impact.
It’s critical to remember that any CPS involvement requires proactivity and follow-through. The fact that a child was placed with a family relative doesn’t mean this is the end of the process. While this may have been the original idea, it has to be formalized in a signed consent order or an order for temporary guardianship. The family relative must then take a compliance plan and comply with all details by the deadline. This includes a full background check and all requested documentation, including other medical forms for the child. Along the way, the guardian will also need to go through various criminal background checks by local, state, and federal authorities.
Limitations and challenges to placements
The challenges and limitations of relative placement are often overlooked in favor of the benefits, which has led to a simplistic understanding of the CPS process. Upon first glance, relative placement seems like an easy solution to the problem – after all, the child is going to be with their family, their support network, and in a familiar environment. What more could anyone want? However, this is shorthand for the real issue with relative placement – it invariably shifts the burden from CPS to the family. Thus, when a CPS caseworker suggests or mandates a relative placement, they are not truly aware of the problems they are creating. Because it places an immense burden on the family, as opposed to the State, relative placement is anything but a simple solution.
CPS takes the position that because parents cannot or will not care for the child, it is up to the family to care for and provide for said child because they abstain from interfering with parental rights in order to ensure that the State can assume responsibility for a child’s wellbeing. It sounds good in theory, but is an entirely impractical proposal. Caregiver families are unprepared to displace their own lives and obligations to take care of a child that is technically a stranger to them, and in many cases, a barely-known acquaintance at best. Such relative placements create new strains on familial bonds and power dynamics. And when you add personalities into the mix, these strains are only exacerbated. For example, many relatives expect CPS involvement to dictate how they are to raise the child and who is responsible for what. CPS imposes unreasonable expectations, and plays totalitarian ruler in the family’s life as it pertains to childrearing. No one wants this, and no one deserves it.
Additionally, while relatives may be open to taking in the children, their resources may be woefully inadequate for all parties involved. The money to support a child, pay for medical expenses, initiate a savings plan, and plan for a college fund, for example, is not feasible without a full-time job. And yet, few relative placements remain in the same basic work and household situation they were prior to the removal. So, this all boils down to two possibilities: (1) the relative costs a great deal of money in lost income, bills, and healthcare expenses; or (2) the family eats up every cent of that, along with every ounce of personal and familial time they have. Neither option is desirable, and it’s not even entirely clear if either option ever results in a permanent solution.
Thus, despite the fact that there is a county funded program that will provide work hours to take care of the child, that job is usually insufficient to cover living expenses for a new family unit, and amount paid to the gentle parent is immediately eaten up by students enrolled in daycare. That leaves the parents completely without a job or an income unless CPS staff knows of another program, foster parent class, or other option that might pay for a family to continue their current lifestyle. But, asking CPS to be responsible and accountable for securing a new life for the child AND parental units is hardly in accord with the general attitude of the department. Unfortunately, these extra expenses cannot be addressed until AFTER the placement has been made and the child is already rooting themselves into that home.
In addition to these issues, the placement of children also requires a great deal of cooperation between interdisciplinary departments. CPS, the public health department, and foster care agencies all must be mindful of the fact that this child is not a stranger or an employee that they can assign hours to, rather something they have already committed to in their life, and ought to be afforded the same respect and courtesy as any other child. Instead, stakeholders establish timelines for the placement of the child, the completion of the home study, and the court process before even knowing who will be applying. And once these home studies and timelines are made, there is no room for error. If an applicant misses their scheduled appointment, if an interview is rescheduled, or there is some unknown event that delays the process, the applicants have now doomed themselves to a fate with no recourse. Once removed, they are forced to requalify by starting over from step one. And there is a high likelihood that previous applicants can no longer be considered on the same basis. Thus, in addition to financial strain, CPS also plays the part of the bully by way of the myriad of hoops applicants must jump through to ensure the success of their relative placement process.
There are several real limitations to the idea behind CPS relative placement requirements. As a starting point, CPS should ensure that the blame that parents have been so generously assigned does not extend to the family members they are now expecting to reach out and help out. And further, that those very family members are prepared to shoulder the burden of raising a child, being judge, and jury, along with physician, nurse, and therapist. There is no question that family placement is preferable to foster care, but when relatives are forced to play a new role in a child’s life, it should not be completely at their own expense. Problematic ideas are not addressed overnight. CPS should have the means and obligation to provide monetary and emotional support for both the child and the family. Likewise, if the agency requires that children be placed in specific environments, then a simple review of the most common social structures in the County should be done to make sure all are kept informed and prepared for the incoming changes. To put the burden of these changes on the family is one thing, to give CPS the unadulterated authority to place children, and offer nothing but an attitude of superiority to those whom they are displacing, is altogether offensive to an otherwise adoring family.
Resources and support for relatives who are caregivers
Many state and local child welfare agencies recognize the need for additional support for relative caregivers. While the primary and immediate concern is for the child’s safety, agencies are increasingly acknowledging that a well-supported relative caregiver is in the best interests of the child.
Relative caregivers may be eligible for the following supports: The federal Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008, Public Law 110-351, establishes new requirements for states to provide assistance to grandparents or other relatives caring for children when a child has been removed from a parent . Under this law, states must provide assistance to relative caregivers (if the child is in licensed relative care) for room and board costs similar to amounts provided to non-related foster parents; states must allow for a kinship guardian assistance payment (comparable to a foster/adoption subsidy) if the child is not placed in foster care; and states must provide financial assistance to a child who leaves foster care to live with a relative who is neither his or her adoptive nor biological parent, among other requirements.