BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
595 (Adams)
Hearing Date: 07/13/2009 Amended: As introduced
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Human
Services 5-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 595 conforms state law to federal law by
requiring background checks and by prohibiting persons convicted
of specified offenses from becoming foster or adoptive parents.
Specifically, this bill:
1) Prohibits the Department of Social Services (DSS) or other
approving authority from issuing a license or certificate of
approval to any foster family home or certified family home
applicant who has not obtained both a California and an FBI
criminal record clearance or an authorized exemption.
2) Prohibits DSS from granting an exemption issuing a license or
certificate of approval
for a foster care placement in any home where the foster family
applicant or certified family home applicant, or any other
person, as specified, in those homes has a specified felony
conviction.
3) Provides that the prohibition on exemptions described above
does not apply to exemptions granted prior to the enactment of
this bill and, further, that it shall remain in effect only to
the extent required by federal law as a condition of receipt of
federal funding under Title IV-E of the Social Security Act.
This bill also repeals the January 1, 2010 sunset date on
certain DSS authority regarding children placed in the home of a
relative or any prospective guardian or other person who is not
a licensed or certified foster parent, including allowing DSS to
delegate criminal background check exemption authority to
counties so that they may continue to issue criminal records
exemptions in accordance with state and federal law.
This bill is an urgency measure, to take effect immediately, in
order to secure necessary federal foster care funding.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11
2011-11 Fund
Eliminates exemption authority $250*
$250 $250 General
Avoids non-compliance (1,600,000)
(1,600,000) (1,600,000) Federal
Eliminates placement procedure ***Substantial savings,
likely more General
sunset than
$300,000 annually ***
* DSS received an augmentation in its 2009-10 budget to conform
with the new federal Adam Walsh Protection Act, including
implementing the provisions in this bill.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Page 2
AB 595 (Adams)
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill may meet the criteria for referral to
the Suspense File.
States are required, for approval of their State Plans for Title
IV-E of the Social Security Act, to comply with federal law, and
federal funding is contingent on State Plan approvals.
California receives about $1.6 billion in Title IV-E funds
annually, which is the fiscal backbone of its foster care
system. In order to comply with the federal Adam Walsh Child
Protection Act, state law and DSS practice must be changed. In
2008, AB 2561 (Aghazarian) was enacted to bring the state into
compliance with the Adam Walsh Act. DSS was also appropriated
funds in the Budget Act specific to conforming to the new
federal law. Some of the provisions enacted in AB 2561 were
inadvertently chaptered out of the legislation, leaving
California statutorily non-compliant with federal law. This bill
is sponsored by the administration and is intended to bring
California's child welfare statute into compliance with federal
law in order to ensure that the state continues to receive full
federal funding for its child welfare services program.
In order to comply with federal law, this bill would prohibit
the currently permitted granting of exemptions to foster care
provider applicants or prospective adoptive parents if they or
other designated individuals were convicted of specified
felonies at any time or other felonies within the previous 5
years. DSS predicts that approximately 100 placements would be
denied annually under this new provision and county child
welfare agencies would be tasked with finding alternative
housing for the child involved in each case. Eliminating the DSS
exemption process would decrease DSS workload, but would require
counties to seek alternative placements. To the extent that
children had to be placed in group homes and other more
expensive facilities, the state would pay a portion of those
reimbursement costs, under existing law.
Although the bill is keyed as a state-mandated local program,
because it conforms to new federal mandates and also provides
federal funding, it is unlikely to be reimbursable by the state.
There is, however, a state financial share in foster care, and
these provisions will incur substantial new costs.
Non-compliance with federal foster care law, however, risks up
to $1.6 billion in federal foster care funding. The extent of
the penalty depends on whether the federal government denies the
state Case Plan outright for non-compliance, or simply penalizes
a portion of funding.
The degree to which the new cost created by this bill is already
being absorbed and will continue to be absorbed in the DSS
budget is unclear, but it is likely these costs are incurred
without legislation. DSS received funding in the 2009-10 Budget
for activities related to complying with the Adam Walsh Act.
Ceasing to issue the newly prohibited exemptions is among the
activities the funding was supposed to support. Thus, in this
budget year, there is no net cost to this bill. In future years,
those costs would have to be budgeted for, but it is likely the
provisions are being de facto enacted by DSS anyway, and that
the costs are being incurred. Namely, DSS knows the exemptions
are prohibited and is not going to grant them any longer. Thus,
without statute specifically prohibiting DSS from using its
discretion to grant exemptions, DSS can simply deny all
exemption requests and incur the same fiscal impact.
Page 3
AB 595 (Adams)
In addition to providing for federal compliance, this bill
eliminated a sunset date on provisions that simplify the process
for quickly placing a foster child with a relative.
Existing law allows DSS to implement specified safeguards
(monitoring, background checks, etc.) in lieu of fully licensing
relative caregivers as foster parents. These provisions in
current law allow children to be placed quickly with relatives,
instead of placing them in another foster home or shelter while
their relatives go through a full licensing process to become
foster parents (as an individual who is certified to house
foster children who are strangers). If these provisions sunset,
those relatives will have to go through a full licensing
process, which is time-consuming and more expensive, and the
social worker would have to find the child another temporary
placement during the process. Eliminating the sunset will save
state and county time and money.