ORS 418.625
Definitions for ORS 418.625 to 418.645


As used in ORS 418.625 (Definitions for ORS 418.625 to 418.645) to 418.645 (Appeal from decision of department):

(1)

“Certificate” means a written approval to operate a foster home issued by the Department of Human Services on a form prescribed by the department that states the name of the foster parent, the address of the premises to which the certificate applies and the maximum number of children to be maintained or boarded in the foster home at any one time.

(2)

“Department” means the Department of Human Services.

(3)

“Foster home” means any home maintained by a person who has under the care of the person in the home any child under the age of 21 years unattended by the child’s parent or guardian, for the purpose of providing the child with care, food and lodging, but does not include:

(a)

Any boarding school that is essentially and primarily engaged in educational work;

(b)

Any home in which a child is provided board and room by a school board;

(c)

Any foster home under the direct supervision of a child-caring agency or institution certified by the department;

(d)

Any home under the direct supervision of a custodial parent for the purpose of providing respite care as defined by rule;

(e)

Any developmental disability child foster home as defined in ORS 443.830 (Definitions for ORS 443.830 and 443.835); or

(f)

Any home of a provider of respite services, as defined in ORS 418.205 (Definitions for ORS 418.205 to 418.327, 418.470, 418.475, 418.950 to 418.970 and 418.992 to 418.998), for parents pursuant to a properly executed power of attorney under ORS 109.056 (Delegation of certain powers by parent or guardian). [Formerly 419.402; 1971 c.401 §44; 1975 c.267 §1; 1995 c.564 §1; 1997 c.130 §9; 2001 c.686 §4; 2001 c.900 §120; 2005 c.679 §2; 2007 c.801 §2; 2010 c.60 §3; 2016 c.106 §27]

Notes of Decisions

Oregon policy of excluding relatives from state foster care payments does not deny equal protection of laws to children removed from abusive homes who are related to their potential foster parents as U.S. Supreme Court has declined to recognize close relatives as suspect or quasi-suspect class for equal protection purposes. Lipscomb by and through DeFehr v. Simmons, 962 F2d 1374 (1992)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Application of Oregon’s certification standards to off-reservation foster homes for Indian children, (1980) Vol 40, p 461

Chapter 418

Notes of Decisions

Where plaintiffs brought action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging violation of federal civil rights after defendant Children’s Services Division employees removed plaintiffs’ child from home following reports of abuse, CSD workers entitled to absolute immunity in investigation, taking child into custody and keeping plaintiffs from visiting child. Tennyson v. Children’s Services Division, 308 Or 80, 775 P2d 1365 (1989)


Source
Last accessed
May. 15, 2020