Concurrent planning is used increasingly in child welfare practice as one strategy to expedite permanency for children. The strategy was developed in small, private agency contexts utilizing comprehensive and intensive services; how and with what success concurrent planning concepts have been implemented by large public child welfare bureaucracies is not known. This study examines the implementation of concurrent planning in six county child welfare agencies in a large western state. Quantitative data were extracted from case files of a sample of 885 children entering out-of-home care before and after implementation of concurrent planning legislation. Interviews and focus groups with 180 individuals (including agency social workers, supervisors, and court personnel) from the same counties contextualize these findings. Results from the study help to identify factors that may facilitate or hinder successful implementation. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) of 1997 includes provisions to deny reunification services under specified conditions and gives states latitude to develop any number of additional "aggravated circumstances" in which parents need not be offered services. California legislators have developed a relatively large number of conditions enabling agencies to bypass reunification services. Based upon a case record review involving 1,055 parents, this study attempts to identify the proportion of parents eligible for a reunification bypass, the proportion recommended to the courts, and the proportion of parents who were denied reunification services, and examines the characteristics of parents associated with reunification bypass recommendations. Based upon focus groups and interviews with child welfare and judicial personnel in six counties, the study also examines the implementation of reunification bypass provisions. Implications for public policy and practice are provided.