“It is critical to place children together from their initial placement forward. This requires a commitment to having foster care resources available to accommodate siblings, especially for larger sibling groups. For children entering foster care after their siblings, it means identifying children immediately as part of a group and uniting them in their first placement, unless the decision is contraindicated by the needs of any given sibling.” Wulcyzn & Zimmerman, 2005.

The Children’s Bureau encourages child welfare agencies to develop standard protocols for caseworkers to use in making decisions about when it would be contrary to a child's well-being or safety to place siblings together.  A standard decision making tool can assist social workers with guidelines in making this important decision, and address difficult situations.  The Children’s Bureau also encourages the agency to periodically reassess sibling foster care placement decisions in cases where siblings are separated to determine if a change is warranted.

In addition to the development of standard protocols to guide decision making, organizations can also use Family Group Decision Making/Family Group Conferencing (FGDM) and Team Decision-making (TDM) as strategies to engage all parties in shared making decisions regarding sibling placements. A number of states have developed other approaches to shared planning and decision making approaches with families -- approaches that blend the features of different models.

The Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Families Services uses a Sibling Placement Matrix for initial and subsequent placements. 

Idaho’s sibling placement policy identifies the following situations that may indicate that placement together is not possible: the special needs of one sibling; an abusive relationship between the sibling where therapy, with a safety plan in place, is not effective or not the appropriate intervention; a foster placement lacks the resources/capacity to care for all the children; the need to establish timely permanence for one or more siblings; one or more siblings is in residential treatment, hospitalized or in juvenile detention; or an older siblings who does not give consent to adoption.

Los Angeles County’s Procedural Guide:  Placing Sibling Groups in Out-of-Home Care provides the following assessment criteria to use in determining the possible appropriateness of separating siblings in foster care:  one child would not get his/her needs met if placed with his/her siblings; placement of one or more siblings together would be contrary to their safety or well-being; or one child is so dependent upon the other that the healthy development of one or both children is impaired. Under California law, the court must find by clear and convincing evidence that sibling interactions are contract to the safety or well-being of either child. 

Michigan’s Children’s Foster Care Manual states that all siblings who enter placement at or near the same time shall be placed together unless one of the siblings has exceptional needs that can be met only in a specialized program or facility; such placement is harmful to one or more of the siblings; or the size of the sibling group makes one placement impractical notwithstanding diligent efforts to place the siblings within the same home. 

Minnesota uses a Sibling Decision Making Matrix developed by the Northeast Ohio Adoption Services. 

New York State policy requires that decisions to separate siblings can only be made after consultation with and/or evaluation by other professional staff such as a licensed psychologist, psychiatrist, physician, or certified social worker.  Factors that may be considered are: the age differential of the siblings; the health and developmental differences among the siblings; the emotional relationship of the siblings to each other; the siblings’ individual service needs; the attachment of the individual siblings to separate families or locations; and the continuity of environment standards.  All actions taken and decisions made to place siblings must be documented in the case record. The factors used to place siblings in separate residences must be documented in case records.

Oklahoma policy states that sibling separation may be in the child's best interests when: 

(1) a sibling physically or emotionally endangers the health and well-being of another sibling and efforts to address the behaviors with counseling or therapy have failed; 

(2) adoption is the permanency plan, and the:

(A) CW specialist and an adoption specialist have thoroughly explained adoption and answered any questions the sibling may have about adoption; and
(B) the sibling of the age to consent to adoption does not wish to be adopted;

(3) siblings are placed with different relatives and a plan is in place for continued sibling contact;

(4) a licensed mental health professional has determined, and provided a signed letter or report; that movement of the sibling from the current caregiver would be detrimental to the sibling's emotional health, development, and well-being; and

(5) efforts to place the siblings together have been exhausted and fully documented in the identified case records.  

This resource explores the assessment of children in sibling groups and factors that may influence placement them for adoption together or separating them. It also deals with contact issues if sibling groups are separated once placed for adoption.

The Nottingham City Council’s policy on placement of siblings for adoption outlines the factors to be used in assessing sibling groups for adoption, indicators for separation, and considerations when a child is adopted and a subsequent child is born and enters foster care.   Its policy on Adoption Planning for Sibling Groups also addresses assessment issues and outlines considerations when siblings are placed with different adoptive families.

Other Resources

The National Resource Center for Adoption’s Adoption Competency Curriculum:  Child/Youth Assessment and Preparationspecifically addresses best practices in the adoption of sibling groups in Segment IV.

Wulcyzn, F. & Zimmerman, E. (2005).  Sibling placements in longitudinal perspective. Children and Youth Services Review, 27, 741-763.