People in Interest of T.H. — Colorado Court of Appeals affirms termination of father’s parental rights

Case
The People of the State of Colorado, In the Interest of T.H., a Child, and Concerning J.H.
Court
Colorado Court of Appeals
Judge
Judge Schutz; Judge Dunn; Judge Navarro
Date Decided
September 10, 2026
Docket No.
26CA0167
Topics
ICWA; parental-rights termination; active efforts; dependency and neglect
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The Arapahoe County Department of Human Services filed this dependency-and-neglect case in August 2022, alleging that both parents had substance-dependence issues and that the newborn child’s umbilical cord tested positive for substances. The juvenile court adjudicated T.H. dependent and neglected and adopted treatment plans for both parents.

The Cherokee Nation determined that T.H. was eligible for membership and intervened in November 2023. Following a contested hearing in December 2025, the juvenile court terminated both parents’ rights. Only father appealed, challenging the Department’s compliance with the Indian Child Welfare Act’s active-efforts requirement.

The Court’s Holding

The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that the record supported the juvenile court’s finding that the Department made the active efforts required by ICWA to prevent the breakup of the Indian family.

The Department consulted father, the Cherokee Nation, and father’s relatives; pursued relatives father identified as possible placements; and conducted a diligent search for relatives’ contact information. The relatives contacted declined placement. The Cherokee Nation’s qualified expert testified that the Department had made active efforts and due diligence, and that the Nation approved the child’s placement as being in the child’s best interests.

The court rejected father’s argument that active efforts were inadequate because T.H. remained in a non-Indian foster home. Active efforts need not be successful and do not require an agency to continue futile placement efforts. Father did not identify additional measures that would have produced an ICWA-compliant placement.

Key Takeaways

  • ICWA active efforts are assessed under the totality of the circumstances and must be affirmative, active, thorough, timely, and tailored to the case.
  • An agency need not persist in futile efforts to locate an Indian placement after identified relatives decline placement.
  • Active efforts can satisfy ICWA even if they do not result in an Indian-home placement.

Why It Matters

The decision confirms that ICWA’s active-efforts obligation requires meaningful, case-specific work, but does not guarantee a successful preferred placement. Evidence of consultation with the tribe and family, diligent relative searches, and tribal expert testimony can support a termination court’s active-efforts finding.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top