## Facts

- In two separate Family Court proceedings, children were in the custody of the Rhode Island Department for Children and Their Families (DCF).
- The Family Court found that the mothers’ homelessness was a primary factor preventing reunification with their children.
- Relying on DCF’s statutory duty to make “reasonable efforts” to reunify families, the Family Court ordered DCF to provide housing assistance to facilitate reunification.
- DCF challenged the orders, asserting it was not a housing agency and that compelled housing assistance exceeded its statutory mission and improperly redirected resources.
- Although the disputes became moot as to the individual families, the Supreme Court addressed the issue because it was likely to recur.

## Issues

1. Whether the Family Court may order DCF to provide housing assistance as part of DCF’s statutory “reasonable efforts” duty to reunify families when homelessness prevents reunification.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court granted certiorari and decided the issue despite mootness because it was likely to arise again.
- The Court held that the Family Court may order DCF to provide housing assistance when homelessness is the primary barrier to reunification.
- The Court rejected the argument that such an order improperly transforms DCF into a housing agency or violates separation-of-powers limits, treating the order as enforcement of an existing statutory duty.

## Legal Principles

- DCF has an ongoing statutory duty to make “reasonable efforts” to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship and to reunify families before parental rights may be terminated.
- “Reasonable efforts” is assessed under the totality of the circumstances and can require services or assistance that address the concrete problems preventing reunification.
- When homelessness is identified as a primary impediment to reunification, housing assistance may fall within “reasonable efforts” because it addresses a condition preventing discharge from foster care.
- Courts may issue specific directives to ensure an agency satisfies statutory preconditions designed to protect against termination of parental rights without meaningful reunification efforts.
- Mootness does not bar review where the issue is likely to recur yet evade review in the child-welfare setting.

## Conclusion

The court construed the statutory “reasonable efforts” requirement to permit judicially ordered housing assistance when homelessness prevents reunification, confirming that family courts may compel targeted agency action to satisfy reunification duties that condition termination of parental rights.


In re Nicole G., 577 A.2d 248 (R.I. 1990)