BILL ANALYSIS AB 1905 Page 1 Date of Hearing: March 23, 2010 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES Jim Beall, Jr., Chair AB 1905 (Cook) - As Amended: March 17, 2010 SUBJECT: Foster care: funding: placement approvals SUMMARY : Ensures continued approval and payments for foster youth relative caregiver homes pending the annual reassessment visit. Specifically, this bill : 1) Requires approval remain in full force and effect when an annual reassessment visit is pending for the home of a relative or nonrelative extended family member (NREFM). 2) Requires that payments to the relative or NREFM not be terminated because of delays in the annual reapproval process such as a late home visit or corrective action plan. 3) Specifies that no appropriation shall be made pursuant to Section 15200 of the Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) for the purposes of implementing this act. EXISTING FEDERAL LAW 1) Authorizes federal funding for state foster care programs pursuant to Title IV-E of the Social Security Act under an approved state plan. 2) Requires states to apply the same licensing standards to all foster family homes receiving Title IV-E funding, including relative and non-relative caregiver homes. P.L. No. 105-89, 45 CFR 1355.20(a). EXISTING STATE LAW 3) Provides a process for the juvenile court to remove a child from their parent or guardian and declare dependency on the basis of abuse or neglect. WIC 300. 4) Requires licensure of non-relative foster family homes prior to the placement of a dependent child. WIC 11402. AB 1905 Page 2 5) Exempts relative caregiver and NREFM homes from licensure. Health and Safety Code (HSC) 1505 (k) and (l). 6) Clarifies that California's approval process is the same for relative and non-relative caregivers and sets forth standards for the licensure and approval of relative and non-relative caregiver homes. WIC 309, WIC 362.7, CCR Title 22, Division 6, chapter 9.5. 7) Defines a "non-relative extended family member" as any adult caregiver who has an established familial or mentoring relationship with the child. WIC 362.7. 8) Provides for Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) payment to eligible children placed in the approved home of a relative or NREFM. HSC 11402. FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : Federal law does not require licensure of relative and NREFM caregiver homes receiving federal Title IV-E payments. It does, however, require states to apply the same licensing standards to both relative and non-relative homes. While California explicitly exempts relative caregiver homes from licensure, in response to the federal Adoptions and Safe Families Act of 1997, the state conformed to federal law when it implemented an approval process for relative homes, administered by counties. In 2002, the Youth Law Center filed a lawsuit, Higgins v. Saenz (CPF-02-501937 (Cal. Supr. Crt., Los Angeles County, Oct. 24, 2002)) alleging the Department of Social Services (DSS) had not provided adequate oversight of the approval process for relative homes, thereby threatening the safety of foster children in relative placements. As part of the Higgins v. Saenz settlement, DSS implemented the Relative Approval Monitoring Process and issued guidance to counties in the form of an All County Letter (ACL 04-02). With this instruction, DSS required counties to perform an initial assessment of relative caregiver homes, followed by an annual reassessment for all relative caregivers. The guidance provided in ACL 04-02 effectively applied a higher standard to the approval process for relative caregiver homes because only a portion of licensed non-relative foster family homes are reassessed on an annual basis. DSS has AB 1905 Page 3 also required, through this higher standard, that AFDC-FC payments to relative caregivers be terminated if the annual reassessment is not completed within one year of the initial approval. As a result of the higher standards for relative homes, according to the author, the state and counties are needlessly losing federal funding for relative placements. The sponsor of this bill, the County of San Bernardino, states: Due to high workloads at the local level and the fact that the state underfunds the county workload for annual reassessments, counties struggle to complete these reviews on time. We currently have approximately 1,500 children placed with relatives. Due to the reduction in our Child Welfare Service allocation, processing the annual reassessment in a timely fashion has become an extremely daunting task?As a result of late reassessment, under state regulations, the federal funding for these placements stop, resulting often in an "overpayment" to that home for the month the home was not deemed in compliance. For any overpayment to a relative caregiver, the state must re-pay the federal government its share and cannot recoup these costs from either foster parents or counties based on current law. This bill would allow approved relative caregivers to remain eligible for federal AFDC-FC payments pending an annual reassessment as the state standard for relative home approval currently exceeds federal and state licensing requirements. Prior Legislation: AB 2773 (Aroner) Chapter 1056, Statutes of 1998, conformed state law to the federal Adoptions and Safe Families (AFSA) (PL 105-89). AB 1695 (Assembly Committee on Human Services) Chapter 653, Statutes of 2001, conformed state law with AFSA regulations requiring the same standards for licensing and approving foster family homes, and established the NRFM designation. AB 1544 (Assembly Committee on Human Services) Chapter 793, Statutes of 1997, established the priority of placing foster children with relative caregivers and set forth requirements for AB 1905 Page 4 relative placements. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support County of San Bernardino (Sponsor) California State Association of Counties (CSAC) Chief Probation Officers of California County Welfare Directors Association of California Opposition None on file Analysis Prepared by : Michelle Doty Cabrera / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089