federal rulemaking

HHS Releases Proposed Rule to Collect ICWA Data through AFCARS, Comments Needed

Kate Fort

If you are reading that title and thinking, “Kate, I am pretty sure you have posted this before. Like, a lot.” you are not wrong:
https://turtletalk.blog/?s=AFCARS

In fact, titles from prior posts include “Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) Notice of Proposed Rule Making. Again.” and “Déjà vu All Over Again: AFCARS Comments Needed“

The short version of this 10 year saga is that at the end of the Obama administration, HHS promulgated a rule that would require Title IV-E agencies to collect information on ICWA. Before that could go into effect, the Trump administration withdrew it, and issued a different rule. After that happened, tribes and groups representing LGBTQ+ interests sued the feds to get the original rule back. Disclaimer, the MSU Indian Law Clinic represents the plaintiffs in that litigation along with Lambda Legal and Democracy Forward. Finally, the Biden administration has proposed a new rule that would go back to collecting ICWA data (this rule does not include sexual orientation or gender identity data elements). This means, yes, if you have worked in this area for the past 10 years, you may have submitted upwards of 5 sets of comments on this issue (I just checked, and we put our first one in 9 years ago, which was written by a 2L who is now a tribal leader).

The proposed regulation is here, as is the link to submit comments:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/02/23/2024-03373/adoption-and-foster-care-analysis-and-reporting-system

What does this mean? Well, dust off your prior comments regarding the history of ICWA, the importance of ICWA, the importance of data related to ICWA, the importance of ICWA data to the children, families, and tribes involved in the system, and review the latest proposal. The actual data reporting requirements begins on 13665. Then submit an updated version of your comments in support of collecting ICWA data before April 23, 2024.

At a very first glance, this proposed rule appears to include a lot of important data questions that would inform practice and help with compliance, and limit the data collection to “state” Title IV-E agencies. The proposed rule appears marginally more limited than the original 2016 rule, but more expansive than the 2020 rule, though I will need to compare them more closely.

Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rule Making on AFCARS (ICWA Data)

Kate Fort4 Comments

Due in parts to comments filed on the original proposed rule change for Automated Foster Care and Adoption Reporting System (our primary source of data regarding kids in care), the Administration for Children and Families has added collecting ICWA-related data to the proposed rule:

In this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM), ACF proposes to require that state title IV-E agencies collect and report additional data elements related to the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) in the AFCARS. ACF will consider the public comments on this SNPRM as well as comments already received on the February 9, 2015 NPRM and issue one final AFCARS rule.

Here is the proposed rule page, and we strongly recommend tribes and organizations file comments on the proposed changes–which are due May 9. The comments make a difference:

ACF issued the AFCARS NPRM (80 FR 7132, hereafter referred to as the February 2015 AFCARS NPRM) to amend the AFCARS regulations at 45 CFR 1355.40 and the appendices to part 1355. In it, ACF proposed to modify the requirements for title IV–E agencies to collect and report data to ACF on children in out-of-home care and who were adopted or in a legal guardianship with a title IV–E subsidized adoption or guardianship agreement. At the time the February 2015 AFCARS NPRM was issued, ACF concluded that it did not have enforcement authority regarding ICWA and, therefore, was not able to make the requested changes or additions to the AFCARS data elements regarding ICWA.

However, in the time since publication of the February 2015 AFCARS NPRM, ACF legal counsel reexamined the issue and determined it is within ACF’s existing authority to collect state-level ICWA-related data on American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/ AN) children in child welfare systems pursuant to section 479 of the Social Security Act. Such determination was informed by comments received on the February 2015 AFCARS NPRM as well as an extensive re-evaluation of the scope of ACF’s statutory and regulatory authority.

Randall Akee: “The press for Native Hawaiian federal recognition is presumptuous”

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the Hawaii Independent. A response to this news.

An excerpt:

In moving forward, what should be done? The process for Federal recognition was a knee-jerk reaction to the Rice v. Cayetano decision. Surely there are other legal strategies and plans that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and State officials can undertake to protect the OHA trust assets and Native Hawaiian entitlement programs. In the 14 years since the decision, the trust and programs have survived without a serious attack. It should be noted that political winds change all the time and there is no absolute certainty with Federal recognition either. For instance, during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s the US Federal government’s policy was to terminate the legal and political existence of some Federally recognized American Indian tribes in California, Oregon and a number of other US States. During the Civil Rights era of the 1960s and 1970s, the US Federal government made a significant change in that policy and worked to empower tribal governments. However, it is impossible to guarantee that future US Federal policies will not shift back in that direction again. 

DOI Considers Procedures to Reestablish Government-to-Government Relationship with Native Hawaiians

Kate Fort1 Comment

Press release here.

Federal Registry Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking here.

2000 DOI/DOJ Report on the Reconciliation Process here.
FAQ here.