D.  Placement Preferences and Required Findings

C.R.S. § 19-1-102(1)(a)
It is preferable that a child be placed in his or her own home.

12 C.C.R. 2509-4, § 7.301.1
Child protection workers use the Colorado Assessment Continuum to determine whether a child is in danger.

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(1)(a)
C.R.S. § 19-1-103(73)
A child needing placement out of the home should be placed in the custody of an appropriate relative, if at all possible. Custody includes the right to care, custody, and control of a child and the duty to provide food, clothing, shelter, ordinary medical care, education and discipline and, in an emergency situation, to authorize surgery or other extraordinary care.

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(1)(a)
Custody with the child’s grandparent is preferred. 

C.R.S. § 19-1-117.7
The court must find that no suitable natural or adoptive parent is available, and must consider whether there is credible evidence of past abuse by the child’s grandparent(s).

C.R.S. § 19-1-103(51.3) and (98)
A child may be placed in temporary shelter care, in foster care, or in a treatment facility. 

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(2)(b)
The agency having custody of the child must give information to the court concerning the child at any time it is requested.

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(3)(b)
C.R.S. § 24-60-1801 et seq
 A child may not be removed from the state for more than thirty days without court approval. If a child must be placed outside the state for more than thirty days, the individual or agency having custody must comply with the Interstate Compact on Placement of Children (ICPC).

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(4)(a)
A child’s placement out of the home shall be for a determined period. The court must review the placement no later than three months after it was ordered.

C.R.S. § 19-1-115.5(2)(b)
When placing children out of the home, the court should consider the setting. Preferences include the ability of the placement facility to meet the special educational needs of the child, the proximity of the proposed out-of-home placement facility to the child’s parents’ residence, and whether the proposed placement facility is in the same school district as the child’s parents’ residence.

C.R.S. § 19-3-403(3.6)(a)
1. Required Findings for Removal

Depending on the circumstances of the case, the child may be placed with:

  • DHS, if such placement is appropriate and in the child’s best interests;
  • A relative of the child who is appropriate, capable, willing, and available for care if such placement is in the best interests of the child, and if the court finds that there is no suitable birth or adoptive parent available (after due diligence was exercised in attempting to locate such a parent).
C.R.S. § 19-3-401(3)(b)
With certain exceptions, a newborn child who is not in a hospital setting shall not be taken into temporary custody for a period of longer than twenty-four hours without a court order that includes findings that an emergency situation exists, and that the newborn child is seriously endangered.

C.R.S. § 19-3-402(2)(b)
There is a presumption that siblings be placed together if DHS locates an appropriate,  capable, willing, and available placement. This presumption may be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence that joint placement is not in the child’s best interests.

C.R.S. § 19-3-402(2)
C.R.S. § 19-3-403(3.6)
Placement with a grandparent is preferred over foster care. The grandparent must be appropriate, capable, willing and available to care for the child. The placement must be in the child’s best interests. 

C.R.S. § 19-1-117.7
You must consider any credible evidence of past abuse or neglect by the grandparent.  Credible evidence includes medical, school, police, central registry, and court records.

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(6)
12 C.C.R. 2509-1, § 7.001.41
If the child is placed out of the home, it is important to begin developing ideas for concurrent permanency plans for that child right away. This will help to avoid delays later in the case, should reunification or other permanent plans fail.

Findings and orders entered by the court when placing children will dictate future funding sources for the child. Title IV-E of the Social Security Act provides federal matching funds to help pay for the cost of foster care for eligible children if the court finds reasonable efforts have been made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal, or if an emergency situation exists, such that it is reasonable not to make reasonable efforts to prevent removal.


C.R.S. § 19-1-115(4)(d)
C.R.S. § 26-5-102
The court must also order the parents to pay a fee, based upon ability to pay, to cover costs of the child’s residential care if public money is used to pay for the care.

42 U.S.C.A. § 672(a)(1) and (2)

42 U.S.C.A. § 678

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(6)

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(7)

42 U.S.C.A. § 671(a)(15)
 2. Additional Findings for Removal
  • If a court orders removal of a child, the court should find also that:
    • Continuation of the child in the home would be contrary to the child’s best interests;
    • There has been compliance with the reasonable efforts requirements regarding removal of the child from the home, as follows:
      • Reasonable efforts have been made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the child from the home; or
      • An emergency situation exists that requires the immediate temporary removal of the child from the home, and it is reasonable that preventive efforts not be provided due to the emergency situation; or
      • Reasonable efforts to prevent the child’s removal from the home are not required because:
        • The parent has subjected the child to “aggravated circumstances” as described in sections 19-3-604(1) and (2), such as when someone has abandoned, tortured, chronically abused, or sexually abused the child; or
        • The parental rights of the parent with respect to a sibling of the child have been involuntarily terminated; or
        • The parent has been convicted of any of the following crimes:
          • Murder of another child of the parent;
          • Voluntary manslaughter of another child of the parent;
          • Aiding, abetting, attempting, conspiring, or soliciting to commit the crimes of murder or voluntary manslaughter of the child or of another child of the parent;
        • Felony assault that resulted in serious bodily injury to the child or to another child of the parent.
        • Reasonable efforts have been made or will be made to reunite the child and family, or
        • Efforts to reunite the child and family have failed;

Procedural safeguards with respect to parental rights have been applied in connection with the removal of the child from the home, a change in the child’s placement out of the home, and any determination affecting parental visitation.


Suter v. Artist M., 503 U.S. 347 (1992)
These requirements do not affect the court’s authority to protect or transfer custody of a child. They do affect DHS’ ability to get federal funding for the placement.

C.R.S. § 19-3-403(3.6)
3.  Collecting Information on Relatives

At the custody hearing, the court must order the parents to provide, within fifteen days, the names, address, and telephone numbers, if known, of any relatives. These relatives may later serve as shelter care or permanent care for the child. The form and affidavit related to child placement must be completed within fifteen days after the hearing or prior to the next hearing date, whichever occurs first. The court must advise that failure to identify every relative who may be a possible placement may result in the child’s placement outside of any relative home on a permanent basis.


Suter v. Artist M., 503 U.S. 347 (1992)
The federal reasonable efforts requirement gives state courts the unique opportunity to impact DHS funding when DHS fails to use services to avert placements or reunite families. This remedy is especially important since the Supreme Court has held there is no private right of action for the state’s failure to make reasonable efforts.

42 U.S.C.A. § 671(a)(15)(A)
Under the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), specific exceptions to the requirement were adopted to clarify that the child’s safety is “the paramount concern.”

C.R.S. § 19-1-115(6)(b)
C.R.S. § 19-3-401(1.5)
Preventive services are not required in an emergency. If an emergency exists that requires immediate temporary removal of the child from the home, so that preventive services could not safely be offered, the court may find that it is reasonable not to make efforts to prevent removal. If reunification efforts would be detrimental  to the child’s best interests, they may be waived entirely.

C.R.S. § 19-2-508(3)(a)(VII)
4.  Placement of a Delinquent

Reasonable efforts are also required for placement of a delinquent. Colorado law requires the court to make a reasonable efforts determination in the detention of a delinquent. 


C.R.S. § 19-2-906.5
The court must also look at reasonable efforts when reviewing a delinquent in a community placement. 

C.R.S. § 19-1-103(24.5)
A community placement includes a foster care home, group home, residential childcare facility or residential treatment facility.
5.  Questions on “Reasonable Efforts”
  • Were services offered to the family before the child’s removal?
  • If not, was it reasonable not to offer services?
  • If services were offered:
    • Were the services relevant to the family’s problems?
    • Were they adequate to address these problems?
    • Were the services made accessible to the family?
    • Were the efforts diligently made?
    • Were multiple services well coordinated?
    • Were there other cost-effective services that should have been offered?