U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Effect of MEPA-IEP Legislation in Ohio: A Guide to the Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 as Amended by the Interethnic Adoption Provisions of 1996

NCJ Number
210005
Author(s)
Rachael Lord
Date Published
2005
Length
24 pages
Annotation
After reviewing the background and provisions of the Federal Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 as amended by the Interethnic Adoption Provisions of 1996 (MEPA-IEP), this bulletin discusses Ohio cases alleged to have violated these provisions.
Abstract
The MEPA-IEP has three basic mandates. First, it prohibits States and other entities involved in foster care or adoption placement, which receive Federal financial assistance under any program, from delaying or denying a child's foster care or adoptive placement on the basis of the child's or the prospective parent's race, color, or national origin. Second, it prohibits these States and entities from denying to any individual the opportunity to become a foster or adoptive parent on the basis of the prospective parent's or the child's race, color, or national origin. Third, it requires that to remain eligible for Federal assistance for child welfare programs, States must recruit foster and adoptive parents who reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the children in the State who need foster and adoptive homes. This law was occasioned by policies in States and localities that prevented the placement of a child of one race in a foster or an adoptive home with adults of another race. This practice was occurring in the face of a backlog of children awaiting permanent placements because there were not sufficient homes available with caregivers to match the child's race. A 1999 investigation of Ohio's Hamilton County Department of Human Services and the State's Department of Human Services by the Federal Office for Civil Rights determined that Hamilton County made "adoption determinations on the basis of race, rather than on the basis of the individual needs of the children." These charges are discussed, along with policy and practice revisions currently underway in Hamilton County and throughout the State.