BILL ANALYSIS SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Senator Carol Liu, Chair BILL NO: AB 12 A AUTHOR: Beall and Bass B VERSION: May 27, 2010 HEARING DATE: June 10, 2010 1 FISCAL: Judiciary; Appropriations 2 CONSULTANT: Hailey SUBJECT California Fostering Connections to Success Act SUMMARY Extends transitional foster care services to eligible youth between 18 and 21 years of age, and requires California to seek federal financial participation in kinship guardianship assistance payments. ABSTRACT Current law 1)Establishes a system of child welfare services, including foster care, for children who are abused or neglected or are at risk of being abused or neglected. 2)Establishes the state's Kinship-Guardianship Assistance Payment (Kin-GAP) program to recognize that some dependent children are in long-term, stable placements with relatives and to allow those dependency cases to be dismissed. [Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) Sections 11360] Continued--- STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 2 3)Sets the rate paid for a child in a Kin-GAP placement as the same as the rate paid to foster family homes. (WIC Section 11364) 4)Authorizes the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over a child who has been adjudicated a dependent because of abuse or neglect until the ward or dependent child attains the age of 21 years. (WIC Section 303) 5)Specifies that Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) benefits and Kin-GAP assistance shall be paid on behalf of a child in foster care who is under the age of 18 or a child in a guardianship who is under the age of 18 and who meets additional eligibility criteria. (WIC Sections 11363 and 11401) 6)Exempts from this age-based requirement foster children and children in guardianships between the ages of 18 and 19 who are pursuing specified education-related goals. (WIC Section 11403) 7)Establishes the adoption assistance program with the intent to reduce the number of children in foster care and to provide stable, secure homes for children who meet specified eligibility requirements. (WIC Sections 16115.5 and 16120) 8)Specifies that the amount of adoption assistance benefit, if any, shall be negotiated based on the needs of the child and circumstances of the family and shall be included in an adoption assistance agreement. [WIC Sections 16119 (d)(1) and 16120.05] 9)Specifies as criteria for receipt of adoption assistance program benefits that the child is under the age of 18, or is under the age of 21 and has a disability that warrants the continuation of assistance. (WIC Section 16120) This bill 1)Requires the Department of Social Services (DSS) to exercise its option under federal law to enter into kinship guardianship assistance agreements with relative guardians of children who exit foster care. To create a federally funded Kin-GAP program, the bill makes STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 3 conforming changes which include, but are not limited to, the following additions or revisions to existing statutes governing California's Kin-GAP program: a) Establishes eligibility criteria, including that the child is a sibling of an eligible child or that the child: i) Has been removed from home pursuant to a voluntary placement agreement, or adjudicated as a dependent or ward of the juvenile court, and returning home would be contrary to the child's welfare; ii) Has been eligible for foster care maintenance payments while residing in the relative caregiver's home for at least six months; and, iii) Demonstrates a strong attachment to the relative, who has a strong, permanent commitment to caring for the child. b) Requires that DSS negotiate and enter into a written assistance agreement with the relative guardian, which applies regardless of the guardian's state of residence and specifies, among other information: i) The amount of aid, which shall be based on specified criteria and shall not exceed the rate paid for children in a foster family home; and, ii) Additional services and assistance for which the child and guardian are eligible and a procedure for applying for additional services, as needed. (Cf. WIC Section 11387 added by AB 12.) 2)Creates a process for converting eligible existing state-funded Kin-GAP cases to the newly established federally funded Kin-GAP with the goals of minimal disruption to the guardian and child and no break in the assistance payments. (Cf. WIC Section 11378 added by AB 12.) 3)Requires DSS to negotiate with the federal Department of STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 4 Health and Human Services on behalf of the counties participating in the Child Welfare Demonstration Capped Allocation Project to ensure that those counties receive reimbursement for the above-described kinship guardianship agreements outside of the provisions of their current waiver. (Cf. new WIC Section 11385.) 4)Maintains a state-funded Kin-GAP program to provide benefits on behalf of children who are not eligible for the federally funded Kin-GAP program described in 2) above. 5)Specifies that Kin-GAP payments shall continue after the filing of a petition pursuant to WIC Section 388 to change, modify, or set aside a court order unless and until the juvenile court orders the child removed from the home, terminates guardianship, or grants other requested relief. (Cf. WIC Section 11363.) 6)Requires that the federally funded Kin-GAP opt-in begin after the director of DSS issues a declaration that increased federal financial participation under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) or subsequent federal legislation is no longer available. (Cf. WIC Section 11217 and Article 4.7, WIC Section 11385, added by AB 12.) 7)Establishes the intent of the Legislature to exercise the option afforded states under the federal Fostering Connections Act to receive federal financial participation for current or former dependent children or wards of the juvenile court who receive support up to 21 years of age as follows: a) Effective January 1, 2012, extends foster care to eligible youth up to their 19th birthday; b) Effective January 1, 2013, extends foster care to eligible youth up to their 20th birthday; and, c) Effective January 1, 2014, extends foster care to eligible youth up to their 21st birthday. 8)Defines "nonminor dependents" as current or former dependents or wards of the juvenile court who are between STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 5 18 and 21 years of age, are in foster care, and are participating in a transitional independent living case plan pursuant to the federal Fostering Connections Act. Allows for the payment of aid, following specified procedures and due process requirements, on behalf of an otherwise eligible nonminor dependent who also meets at least one of the following five conditions: a) Is completing secondary education or an equivalent credential; b) Is enrolled in a postsecondary or vocational education institution; c) Is participating in a program designed to promote, or remove barriers to, employment; d) Is employed for at least 80 hours per month; or, e) Is incapable of doing one of the above due to a medical condition, and that incapability is supported by case plan information that is brought up-to-date regularly. 9)Changes eligibility for the adoption assistance program (AAP) and Kin-GAP assistance to also include otherwise eligible youth between the ages of 18 and 21 for whom an adoption assistance agreement was entered into or Kin-GAP aid began after the age of 16 and who meet one of the above-described five conditions. 10)Requires the county welfare, probation department, or tribe, to explain these program changes to all foster youth, including those receiving Kin-GAP and AAP, who attain 16 years of age and are under their jurisdiction. 11)Establishes that the juvenile court has within its jurisdiction any nonminor dependent. Authorizes the court to terminate dependency or delinquency jurisdiction over the nonminor between the ages of 18 and 21. Allows a nonminor under the age of 21 to petition for the court to resume its dependency jurisdiction and requires a court hearing on such a petition. (Cf. WIC Sections 391 and 388 in AB 12.) Further requires that the court resume dependency jurisdiction and order a new STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 6 transitional independent living case plan within 60 days if it finds that the nonminor is eligible for dependency jurisdiction. (Cf. WIC Section 727.2.) 12)Authorizes the placement of nonminor dependents in supervised independent living settings. Defines a "supervised independent living setting" as a setting specified in a nonminor dependent's transitional independent living case plan, pursuant to federal law. Exempts supervised independent living settings from licensure under the Community Care Facilities Act. Establishes the rate paid on behalf of youth in supervised independent living settings as equivalent to the per-child, per-month rates paid to foster family homes. (Cf. WIC Section 11400 in AB 12.) 13)Requires the court, at the last review hearing before a foster child turns 18, to ensure that the child's transitional independent living case plan includes a plan for the child to meet one of the criteria for eligibility as a nonminor dependent and that the child has been informed of the right to seek termination of dependency jurisdiction at any time after reaching the age of majority and before the age of 21. Requires the child welfare or probation department to report to the court, at the hearing closest to and before a dependent child's 18th birthday and each review hearing thereafter, whether specified information, documents and services have been provided. [Cf. WIC Sections 391 (e)(2) and 366.6 (l) in AB 12.] 14)Requires that case plans for nonminor dependents be developed with, and signed by, the nonminor and include specified information. 15)Requires that the status of a nonminor dependent be reviewed periodically, as determined by the court, but at least every six months, until dependency jurisdiction is terminated. Specifies that courts shall not order hearings to terminate parental rights of a nonminor dependent's parents. Requires the court to hold a specified hearing before terminating dependency jurisdiction for a nonminor dependent. 16)Adds nonminor dependents to existing categories of youth STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 7 who may retain specified cash resources and remain eligible to receive specified social services and to those who may receive CalWORKs while in the approved home of a relative foster caregiver. 17)Specifies that nothing in statutory provisions gives legal custody of a person who has attained the age of 18 to a county welfare or probation department or otherwise abrogates rights that a person who has reached the age of 18 has under state law. Unless otherwise specified, declares that the rights of a dependent child and responsibilities of specified departments and other entities toward them also apply to nonminor dependents. (Cf. WIC Section 303.) 18)Requires DSS, by specified dates, to revise or adopt regulations to implement these new statutory provisions. Authorizes implementation of regulatory changes via emergency regulations. 19)Makes other related changes. FISCAL IMPACT According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, extending foster care, KinGAP, and the adoption assistance program to age 21, once fully implemented, will cost between $100 million and $155 million per year ($65 million to $100 million General Fund). The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) found that, "While there would initially be increased costs to implementing AB 12, we estimate that by full program implementation [2014] the net cost of the program would be in the range of $5 million to $41 million." According to the author, the staggered extension of foster care support to age 21 over the course of three years beginning in 2012 allows time for California to recover from the recession before all the costs of the bill take effect. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 8 Opportunities in new federal law In October, 2008, the Fostering Connections Act became federal law. It offers states the opportunity to opt in to new federal funding streams if they choose to provide kinship-guardianship benefits to relative guardians or if they provide foster care to 18 to 21-year-old youth in conformity with federal law. This bill enacts the California Fostering Connections Act and enables the state to exercise both of these options. With regard to kinship-guardianship benefits, this bill would allow California to draw down federal funds for a significant part of our decade-old state-funded Kin-GAP program. According to the bill's authors, the federal Fostering Connections Act, "provides California with an unprecedented opportunity to access federal funding to improve the lives of our state's most vulnerable youth. The bill's provisions represent both fiscally and socially responsible improvements to California's foster care system. As a result, California would utilize federal funds to meet costs currently borne by the state and counties, and realize proven savings from declines in unemployment, homelessness, teen pregnancy, public assistance, and the other costly outcomes for young adults who 'age out' of foster care. These changes would also implement recommendations of the California Judicial Council's Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care." The need for the bill Young Californians who enter adulthood from foster care have fewer supports and poorer outcomes than do young adults who have not been in foster care. Each year in California, about 5,000 youth emancipate from foster care, by far the largest number of any state in the union. Over the past ten years, according to data from the state's Child Welfare Services/Case Management System, managed by the Center for Social Services Research at the University of California, Berkeley, about 52,000 Californians have emancipated from foster care (from 3,974 in 1998-99 to 5,387 in 2008-09). The immediate outcomes for these young adults are sobering: when compared to other young adults of the same age and STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 9 race, the former foster youth are less likely to complete high school, attend college, or be employed. During the three to five years after emancipation, they are twice as likely as others of their age and race to rely on government assistance, three times more likely to have a child, and five times more likely to be arrested. (These are data from a series of reports titled, Midwest Study of the Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth. There is little reason to believe that young Californians are much different from their peers in Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa.) In 2002, Barbara Needell of the University of California, Berkeley, released a study of 12,000 California adults who had aged out of foster care between 1992 and 1997. She found that only two percent had earned an A.A. degree and one percent had earned a vocational certificate. While nearly half of California's adult population (ages 25 to 45) possesses at least an A.A. degree, these former foster youth are at a significant disadvantage for economic stability. Young adults emancipating from foster care are on their own at 18 with few services or supports available. In contrast, their peers who are not former foster youth are receiving ever more increasing support from parents and extended families. According to research by Richard Settersten, published by Princeton University and the Brookings Institution, in 2000 about half of all 20-year-old single, childless men and about 35 percent of all 20-year-old single, childless women lived with their parents. These percentages were up measurably from 1970, 1980, and 1990. Corroborating these findings are those from the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health: it found in 2001-02 that about 40 percent of 21-year-old youth live with their parents. AB 12 provides some options of support to those young adults who were in foster care - those young adults who were our collective responsibility until age 18. The options of support provide by AB 12 are similar to the options that many parents provide their 18, 19, and 20 year old children. Do financial and social supports to young adults improve STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 10 outcomes? The Congressional Research Service (CRS) contacted Illinois, New York, Vermont, and Washington, D.C. - four jurisdictions that have encouraged young adults 18 through 20 to remain in foster care. In addition, CRS received data from Chafee Foster Care Independence program - grants to states permitting expenditures on room and board for adults ages 18 to 21 who were in foster care; also, CRS had access to the Urban Institute's five-year evaluation of the Chafee program. Here are some of the findings: Young adults in Illinois who stayed in foster care until age 21 were four times as likely to attend college as were their comparable peers (race, gender, and other characteristics) in Wisconsin and Iowa where supports end at 18. These young adults from Illinois were also earning more than $900 a year more than comparable young adults emancipated from foster care in other states and less likely to become pregnant between ages 17 and 19. What take-up rate can California anticipate if AB 12 becomes law? Illinois, which encourages young adults to remain in foster care until their 21st birthday, collected data on the age of 500 individuals leaving the child welfare system. Just over half stayed until they turned 21, and about 15 percent left the system in each of the three years preceding that watershed birthdate. Illinois law made no additional requirements of these young adults other than their decision to remain in foster care. As noted in item 8) on pages 3 and 4 above, AB 12 requires young adults to meet one of five criteria to be eligible for the new Fostering Connections payments and services. T he Illinois data suggest that up to 50 percent of California's 5,000 adults emancipated annually from foster care will take advantage of those payments and services for three years, once the phase-in is complete, up to 65 percent for two or more years, up to 80 percent for at least a year, and up to 95 percent for part of a year. The State of New York, which also provides foster-care support to young adults up to their 21st birthday, has data STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 11 available through 2006-07. A lower percentage of young adults there are remaining in foster care, when compared to those in Illinois. New York reports that about 60 percent of 18 year olds, 40 percent of 19 year olds, and 30 percent of 20 year olds continue to remain under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. For California, that would be about 3,000 18-year-olds, 2,000 19-year-olds, and 1,500 20-year-olds. County share of cost and workload for social workers Currently, counties and state government share the non-federal costs of foster care and other child welfare services. The state government pays 40 percent of foster care payments to providers, and counties pay 60 percent of the non-federal share. For the administrative costs of foster care, the state pays 70 percent and counties pay 30 percent - of the non-federal share. AB 12 makes no changes to those sharing ratios for the costs extending foster care to young adults. The workload for county social workers to implement this bill deserves attention. First, there will be a growth in caseload - the Illinois experience noted above suggest that roughly 4,000 18-year-olds, 3,200 19-year-olds, and 2,500 20-year-olds will avail themselves of the program when fully operational - for planning purposes, approximately 10,000 young adults. As noted above, if California's experience is closer to that of New York, the number will be closer to 6,500. Arranging or coordinating educational, housing, and support services will require skilled social workers with low-enough caseloads to achieve the program's desired outcomes of a stable entry into adulthood and economic security in those first years of independence. In addition to addressing the basic foster-care needs of these young adults, social workers will be negotiating rates for those individuals who remain in the Kin-GAP program, which is currently about 25 percent of those emancipating. While the bill does not make any changes in the ratio of clients to social workers, the Department of Social Services, counties, and the Legislature should follow closely the caseload needs of the young adults in this program. The three-year phase-in should give all concerned the opportunity to monitor appropriate caseload levels. STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 12 Assembly votes Floor 72-0 Appropriations Committee13-4 Human Services Committee 5-0 Referral to the Judiciary Committee Note: This bill is also referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. This analysis leaves an examination of court procedures to that committee. COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS Recruitment of foster parents After the phase-in is complete in three years, the number of young adults who choose to remain in foster care will probably be somewhere between 6,500 and 10,000. The committee may want to ask the author and the bill's sponsors the ramifications of these numbers on the current supply of foster parents, group homes, and relatives participating in the Kin-GAP program. Some new placements will be needed for these young adults, and new foster parents will be needed to care for younger children who might otherwise find a place in a current licensed facility where current foster children will remain after their 18th birthday. Young adults living in settings currently licensed for minors The bill is clear that the rights of current foster children will remain with those young adults who choose to stay in foster care through the provisions of the Fostering Connections Act. The bill is also clear that they will have the rights other adults have. Not only will this be a new experience for these young adults - to have adult rights as well as the rights of foster children - but it will demand different rules within the licensed foster care facility and within the family dynamics of Kin-GAP and adoptive homes. The committee may want to ask the author, the Department of Social Services, and the sponsors about the experiences of other states in accommodating these new conditions and what kinds of staff development will be in order for providers of foster care and for social workers. Does the bill sufficiently anticipate and address these STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 13 training needs? POSITIONS Support: California Alliance of Child and Family Services (sponsor) California Youth Connection (sponsor) Children's Law Center of Los Angeles (sponsor) County Welfare Directors' Association of California (sponsor) John Burton Foundation for Children Without Homes (sponsor) Judicial Council of California (sponsor) Service Employees' International Union State Council (sponsor) Youth Law Center (sponsor) Abode Services Adolescent Health Working Group Alameda County Foster Youth Alliance Alameda County Foster Youth Services Alameda County Family Justice Center Alameda County Juvenile Justice/Delinquency Prevention Commission Alameda County Office of Education, Foster Youth Services Program All Saints Church Foster Care Project Alternative Family Services American Academy of Pediatrics American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations Arriba Juntos Aspiranet Association of Community Human Service Agencies Bay Area Youth Centers Be a Mentor, Inc. Bethe Group Home Beyond Emancipation STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 14 Bienvenidos Children's Center Bill Wilson Center Booker T. Washington Community Service Center California State University, Fullerton California Coalition for Youth California Commission on Aging California Communities United Institute California Mental Health Directors Association California Peace Officers' Association California Police Chiefs Association California State Association of Counties California State Parent Teacher Association California Teachers Association Catholic Charities of the East Bay Central California Training Academy Changing the Health of Adolescents Impacting the Nation Reaction, Inc. Charis Youth Center Child Abuse Prevention Center Child Advocates of Silicon Valley, Inc. Children and Family Services of Contra Costa County Children Without Homes Children's Defense Fund -- California Children Now Chinatown Child Development Center City and County of San Francisco City of Chico Housing and Neighborhood Services Department City of Culver City Communities in Harmony Advocating for Learning and Kids Concept 7 Family Support and Treatment Centers Connect Motivate Educate Society of San Jose State University Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County Children and Family Services Corporation for Supportive Housing County of Santa Barbara Court Appointed Special Advocates STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 15 Court Appointed Special Advocates of Alameda County Court Appointed Special Advocates of Del Norte County Court Appointed Special Advocates of Monterey County Court Appointed Special Advocates of Placer County Covenant House California Crittenton Services for Children and Families Crossroads Treatment Center D and R Turning Point, Inc. David and Margaret Youth and Family Services Desert Manna Ministries, Inc. Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund Drug Policy Alliance Network Edgewood Center for Children and Families EHC LifeBuilders EMQ FamiliesFirst EOC Sanctuary Youth Services Ettie Lee Youth and Family Services Equality California Every Child Foundation FamiliesFirst, Inc. Families Uniting Families Family Care Network Family Law Section of the State Bar of California Family, Youth and Children's Services, Sonoma County Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California First Place for Youth Five Acres -- The Boys' & Girls' Aid Society of Los Angeles Foothill College's Financial Aid Outreach Fred Finch Youth Center Fresno County Economic Opportunities Commission's Sanctuary Youth Services Glendale City Employees Association Grandparents As Parents Greenhouse Family Services Half Way Ranch Inc Hathaway-Sycamores Child and Family Services STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 16 Honoring Emancipated Youth Interagency Children's Policy Council of Alameda County Japanese Community Youth Council Juma Ventures Junior League of Napa-Sonoma Board of Directors Junior League of Orange County Kids in Common Laborers' International Union of North America, Locals 777 and 792 Larkin Street Youth Services Lavender Youth Recreation and Information Center League of Women Voters of California Legal Aid Association of California Legal Advocates for Children and Youth Legal Services for Children Lincoln Child Center Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Los Angeles Universal Preschool Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford Maryvale Masonic Homes Children's Program MatchBridge Mission Focused Solutions Modoc County Department of Social Services Modoc County Office of Education Monterey County Office for Employment Training Mountain Circle Family Services, Inc. National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter National Council on Black American Affairs New Alternatives, Inc. Olive Crest Orangewood Children's Foundation Paradise Oaks Youth Services Peacock Acres Penny Lane Centers STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 17 Pivotal Point Youth Services, Inc. Phoenix House of California Placer County Foster Youth Services Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California Plumas County Independent Living Skills Program Plumas Court Appointed Special Advocates Promises2Kids Public Counsel Law Center Rebekah Children's Services Redwood Children's Services, Inc. Regional Council of Rural Counties Remi Vista Inc. Youth and Family Services Richmond YouthWORKS Richstone Family Center Riverside County Office of Education, Foster Youth Services Rosemary Children's Services Roundhouse Council, Indian Education and Family Resource Center Sacramento Children's Home St. Anne's San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors San Francisco Independent Living Skills Program San Francisco State University's Guardian Scholars Program San Francisco Youth Commission San Jose State University, CME Society Santa Ana College Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Santa Cruz Community Counseling Center Service Employees' International Union Local 1021 SIERRA Sierra Adoption Services Silicon Valley Children's Fund Silicon Valley Community Foundation Sonoma County Human Services Department Stanford Home for Children Sunny Hills Services Teen Project The Alliance for Children's Rights The Salvation Army-Railton Place STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page 18 Time for Kids, Inc. Triad Family Services TLC Child and Family Services Unique Perspective, Career and Life Planning United Friends of the Children Valley Restart Shelter Valley Teen Ranch Ventura County Board of Supervisors Village Family Services Victor Youth Services Vista Del Mar VOICES LLP Walden Family Services WestCoast Children's Clinic Westside Children's Center Wonder, Inc. Yolo County Board of Supervisors Youth and Family Programs Youth Empowerment Strategies for Success Youth for Change Youth Homes, Inc. Youth Justice Institute YWCA Santa Monica / Westside 3rd Street Youth Center and Clinic 23 individuals Oppose: California Right to Life Advocates -- END --