## Facts

- Rose Ferdinand adopted Nia, a child placed through a private agency working with Rhode Island’s child-welfare agency.
- Before the adoption was finalized, the agency provided only limited information about possible adoption subsidies; Ferdinand indicated she did not need financial assistance at that time, and no formal subsidy agreement was offered.
- After finalization, Ferdinand divorced, received no child support, and became solely responsible for supporting Nia and another child.
- In 1990, Ferdinand applied for federal adoption-assistance benefits under Title IV-E (42 U.S.C. § 673).
- The state agency denied the application, reasoning that Ferdinand’s earlier non-acceptance of a subsidy permanently waived the child’s entitlement.
- The district court initially ordered temporary relief requiring the agency to begin payments and provide related benefits, including medical insurance.
- After further proceedings, the court considered whether to make that relief permanent.

## Issues

1. Whether a state administering Title IV-E may refuse to consider a post-finalization request for adoption assistance by treating an adoptive parent’s earlier non-acceptance as an irrevocable waiver.
2. Whether such a waiver-based denial conflicts with Title IV-E’s child-focused eligibility scheme and the statutory requirement for periodic readjustment of assistance based on changed circumstances.

## Decision

- The court granted a permanent injunction requiring the agency to treat Ferdinand as qualified for Title IV-E adoption-assistance payments and related benefits, including medical insurance.
- The court rejected the agency’s waiver theory as inconsistent with Title IV-E’s structure and purpose.
- The court ordered continued payments subject to periodic readjustment under 42 U.S.C. § 673(a)(3), reflecting changed circumstances over time.
- The court adopted the operative terms of the earlier temporary order as the terms of the permanent injunction.

## Legal Principles

- Title IV-E adoption assistance under 42 U.S.C. § 673 is directed to payments on behalf of eligible children with special needs and is not properly defeated by a categorical, waiver-based administrative rule.
- A state may not bar consideration of adoption-assistance eligibility solely because an adoptive parent did not accept or negotiate assistance at the time of adoption finalization, particularly where the program was not fully explained and no formal agreement was presented.
- The statute’s requirement of periodic readjustment, 42 U.S.C. § 673(a)(3), contemplates ongoing review and adjustment of assistance in response to changing circumstances and is inconsistent with a one-time, permanent forfeiture theory.
- State administration of federally funded child-welfare programs must conform to federal statutory requirements and may not impose eligibility limitations that frustrate federal purposes.

## Conclusion

The court permanently enjoined the state agency from denying Title IV-E adoption assistance based on an alleged waiver at adoption finalization and required continued benefits, including medical coverage, with ongoing review and adjustment as circumstances change under § 673(a)(3).


Ferdinand v. Dep’t for Children & Their Fams., 768 F. Supp. 401 (D.R.I. 1991)