_________ COUNTY JUVENILE COURT FILED IN THE CLERKS OFFICE ON _____ DAY OF ______________. 20____ __________________________________ DEPUTY CLERK IN THE JUVENILE COURT OF ____________ COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA IN THE INTEREST OF: __________________________ SEX: ___ DOB: __________ CASE # ___________________ __________________________ SEX: ___ DOB: __________ CASE # ___________________ __________________________ SEX: ___ DOB: __________ CASE # ___________________ __________________________ SEX: ___ DOB: __________ CASE # ___________________ Child(ren) Under 18 Years of Age ORDER ON MOTION FOR NONREUNIFICATION (PERMANENCY PLANNING HEARING ORDER ) The above and foregoing matter came before the Court on ________________ for a Permanency Hearing pursuant to O.C.G.A. Section 15-11-58(e) and (j). An Order finding the above-named child(ren) to be deprived was entered on ___________________. On ___________________, the ___________ County Department of Family and Children Services submitted a report to the Court which does not contain a plan for reunification services. Based upon the evidence presented or stipulated, the Court makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law by clear and convincing evidence. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The child(ren) is/are of the age and sex and has/ the name(s) shown above. 2. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action and personal jurisdiction over the child(ren), the mother and the father. Venue is proper in this Court, __________ County being the residence of the child(ren). >>>> 2 3. ( ) Pursuant to O.C.G.A. 15-11-58(p), the child(ren)s custodian, foster parent(s), preadoptive parent(s), or relative(s) caring for the child(ren), was/were notified of the date and time of the Hearing. 4. Present in Court were: ( ) Mother _______________________ ( ) Attorney ___________________________ ( ) Father (Legal) ________________________ ( ) Attorney ___________________________ (Putative) ______________________ ( ) Attorney ___________________________ ( ) DFACS _______________________ ( ) SAAG _____________________________ ( ) Guardian ad Litem ___________________________ ( ) Others ________________________________________________________________________ The following part(y)(ies) was not/were not present: ____________________________________ He/She/They was/were (not) notified of the proceedings as follows: _______________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 5. In accordance with O.C.G.A. 15-11-58(p), the Court considered the oral or written testimony offered by the parent(s), the custodian, the foster parent(s), and/or any preadoptive parents or relatives providing care for the child(ren) along with all testimony and evidence presented in this case. 6. The following circumstances exist, which create a presumption that reunification services should not be provided: ( ) The parent has unjustifiably failed to comply with a previously ordered plan designed to reunite the family. ( ) A child has been removed from the homeat least two previous on occasions and reunification services were made available on those occasions. ( ) The following grounds for terminating parental rights exist: ____________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 2>>>> 3( ) The following circumstances as set out in O.C.G.A. Section 15-11-58 (a)(4) exist: ____________________________________________________________________________ 7. ( ) Other facts, if applicable: _______________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 8. In regard to the reasonable efforts requirements of O.C.G.A. Section 15-11-58: ( ) Reasonable efforts were made after removal of the child(ren) by DFACS to make it possible for the child(ren) to return safely home in that: _____________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ( ) Reasonable efforts to return the child(ren) safely homwere not ree quired under O.C.G.A. Section 15-11-58 (a)(4)(A-C) because: __________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ( ) The Department failed to make reasonable efforts to return the child(ren) safely home. The following efforts would have been reasonable to safely reunify the child(ren) with the family: _______________________________________________________________________________ 9. The specific reason(s) that the child(ren) cannot be maintained safely in the home and that continuation of the child(ren) in the home would ontrary to hbe c is/her/their welfare at this time is/are ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 10. ( ) Reasonable efforts to reun thifye child(ren) with the family will be detrimental to the child(ren) and therefore reunification services should not be provided or should be terminated because ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 3>>>> 4 ( ) The presumption that reunification serv shouices ld not be provided has been rebutted by the following facts: _________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 11. ( ) DFACS intends to petition for termination of parental rights. ( ) DFACS does not intend to petition for termination of parental rights. ( ) The Court hereby appoints the guardian ad litem to determine whether termination proceedings should be commenced. 12. The Department of Family and Children Services has provided the Court with written documentation of its search for an appropriate placement with a relative or other individual with an ongoing commitment to the child and the Court finds th this search wasat / was not reasonable. The results of said search are as follows:_______________________________________________________________ ___________________________________