Superior Court of Washington, County of In re custody of: Children: No. Petitioner/s (person/s who started this case): Findings and Conclusions on Non-Parent Custody Petition (FNFCL) Respondents (parents and any guardian or custodian): Findings and Conclusions on Non-Parent Custody Petition Use this form together with either a Final Non-Parent Custody Order (form FL Non-Parent 431) or a Final Order Denying Non-Parent Custody (form FL Non-Parent 432). 1. Basis for findings and conclusions (check all that apply): Parties' agreement. Default Order (date): Trial for this case on (date): (check all that apply): Petitioner (name): Other Petitioner (name): Respondent (name): Other Respondent (name): Guardian ad Litem (name): Other (name and relationship to this case): . , with the following people present This person's lawyer This person's lawyer This person's lawyer This person's lawyer CR 52; 26.10.040, .100, .170 Mandatory Form (05/2016) FL Non-Parent 430 Findings and Conclusions on Non-Parent Custody Petition p. 1 of 9 American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com 2. Indian children (An Indian child is a child who is a member of an Indian tribe, or who is the biological child of an Indian tribe member and eligible for membership.) None of the children are Indian children. The state and federal Indian Child Welfare Acts do not apply to this case. The court makes this conclusion because (check all that apply): the Petitioner made a good faith effort to find out if any child in this case is an Indian child. (RCW 13.38.050.) The court has received no information showing that any child is or may be an Indian child. the Petitioner notified the tribal agent of every tribe the children may have been eligible for membership in. List tribes notified: . Each tribe responded that the children were not tribal members and not eligible for membership. other (specify): These children are Indian children: Children All children (name/s): All children (name/s): The federal and state Indian Child Welfare Acts apply to this case. Notice to tribes ­ The Petitioner provided did not provide the required Indian Child Welfare Act Notice (form FL Non-Parent 402) and a copy of the Petition to the agent for the tribe/s named above, the parents and any Indian custodian. Evidence ­ The evidentiary requirements of the Acts met as described below. (RCW 13.38.130) have have not been Tribe Active efforts ­ The following active efforts were made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family: (Active efforts means: "a documented, concerted, and good faith effort to facilitate the parent's or Indian custodian's receipt of and engagement in" those services and programs. RCW 13.38.040.) Serious emotional or physical damage ­ The court considered testimony from a qualified expert witness as defined in RCW 13.38.130. The court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the children (check one): would would not CR 52; 26.10.040, .100, .170 Mandatory Form (05/2016) FL Non-Parent 430 Findings and Conclusions on Non-Parent Custody Petition p. 2 of 9 American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com likely suffer serious emotional or physical damage if they lived with either parent or an Indian custodian. The Court makes this conclusion because: 3. Jurisdiction over Indian children Does not apply. None of the children are Indian children. This court cannot decide this case for these Indian children (names): because this court does not have jurisdiction over them. The Petition should be dismissed as to these children. This court can decide this case for the Indian children because (check one): (Children's names): are not domiciled or living on an Indian reservation, and are not wards of a tribal court. (25 USC §1911) (Children's names): are domiciled or living on an Indian reservation, or are wards of a tribal court, however (check all that apply): The children's tribe agrees to Washington State's concurrent jurisdiction. The children's tribe decided not to use its exclusive jurisdiction (expressly declined). (RCW 13.38.060) Washington State should claim emergency jurisdiction for children temporarily located off the reservation to protect the children from immediate physical damage or harm. (RCW 13.38.140) Other (specify): 4. Dependency case There is no open dependency case for these children. There is an open dependency case for these children in county under case number: . The court handling the dependency has signed an order allowing this court to proceed with this non-parent custody case. 5. Jurisdiction over the children (RCW 26.27.201 ­ .221, .231, .261, .271) This court cannot decide this case for these children (names): because this court does not have jurisdiction over them. The Petition should be dismissed as to these children. This court can decide this case for these children because (check all that apply; if a box applies to all of the children, you may write "the children" instead of listing names): CR 52; 26.10.040, .100, .170 Mandatory Form (05/2016) FL Non-Parent 430 Findings and Conclusions on Non-Parent Custody Petition p. 3 of 9 American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com Exclusive, continuing jurisdiction ­ A Washington court has already made a parenting plan, residential schedule or custody order for the children, and the court still has authority to make other orders for (children's names): . Home state jurisdiction ­ Washington is the children's home state because (check all that apply): (Children's names): lived in Washington with a parent or someone acting as a parent for at least the 6 months just before this case was filed, or if the children were less than 6 months old when the case was filed, they had lived in Washington with a parent or someone acting as a parent since birth. There were times the children were not in Washington in the 6 months just before this case was filed (or since birth if they were less than 6 months old), but those were temporary absences. (Children's names): do not live in Washington right now, but Washington was the children's home state some time in the 6 months just before this case was filed, and a parent or someone acting as a parent of the children still lives in Washington. (Children's names): do not have another home state. No home state or home state declined ­ No court of any other state (or tribe) has the jurisdiction to make decisions for (children's names): , or a court in the children's home st