BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
AB 212 (Beall)
As Amended June 21, 2011
Hearing Date: July 5, 2011
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: Yes
EDO
SUBJECT
California Fostering Connections to Success Act
DESCRIPTION
This bill, sponsored by a coalition of stakeholders, would make
clarifying and technical changes to the California Fostering
Connections to Success Act in order to ensure proper
implementation on January 1, 2012.
BACKGROUND
Each year in California, about 5,000 youth emancipate from
foster care, which is 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.
Studies have shown that former foster youth, when compared to
other young adults of the same age and race, are less likely to
complete high school, attend college, or be employed. They are
also at a higher risk for becoming homeless and arrested or
incarcerated. (See Foster Care in California, Public Policy
Institute of California, 2010.)
In 1998, California established the Kinship Guardianship
Assistance Payment program (the Kin-GAP program) to provide
financial assistance for children who, after being adjudged
dependent children of the juvenile court, are placed in legal
guardianship with a relative. (SB 1901, McPherson, Chapter
(more)
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 2 of ?
1055, Statutes of 1998.) The bill was a result of a study that
concluded that most relative caregivers have strong commitments
to the children in their care, but are averse to adoption as it
requires the termination of the parental rights of one of their
family members. Moreover, while most relative caregivers
supported permanency planning for a child, many did not pursue
legal guardianship for fear of losing the needed financial
support they obtained under the foster care system. To date,
Kin-GAP has been successful in reducing the number of children
in foster care. In 2009, the Kin-GAP program assisted
approximately 14,500 former foster children living with relative
guardians. However, unlike foster care or adoption assistance,
there historically have been no federal funds available for
relative guardianships. Instead, all Kin-Gap costs have been
borne by California.
In October, 2008, the federal government enacted the Fostering
Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act (Public Law
110-351) (Act). The Act 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.
Last year, AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010) enacted
the California Fostering Connections to Success Act. AB 12
allows California to draw down federal funds for a significant
part of California's decade-old state-funded Kin-GAP program.
Additionally, AB 12 authorized the juvenile courts to exercise
jurisdiction over nonminor dependents between the ages of 18 to
21 if they meet the specified criteria.
This bill would make clarifying and technical changes to the
California Fostering Connections to Success Act to ensure proper
implementation starting January 1, 2012.
This bill was heard in the Senate Committee on Human Services on
June 28, 2011 and passed out of that committee on a 7-0 vote.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
1.Existing law established the California Fostering Connections
to Success Act of 2010 which, among other things, provided for
the extension of transitional foster care to eligible youth up
to age 19 in 2012, age 20 in 2013, and upon appropriation by
the Legislature, age 21 in 2014 as a voluntary program for
youth who meet specified work and education participation
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 3 of ?
criteria. (AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010.)
Existing law defines a "nonminor dependent" as, on or after
January 1, 2012, a current or former foster child between the
ages of 18 and 21 who is in foster care under the
responsibility of the county welfare department, county
probation department, or an Indian tribe and is participating
in a transitional independent living plan. Existing law
defines, on or after January 1, 2012, a "period of trial
independence," as a period of no more than six months, unless
authorized by the juvenile court, during which the court may
terminate and subsequently resume jurisdiction and foster care
benefits to an otherwise eligible nonminor dependent. (Welf.
& Inst. Code Sec. 11400.)
This bill would delete the provisions requiring the court to
authorize this trial period and would instead allow the
nonminor to petition the court to resume the dependency
jurisdictions or to assume or resume transition jurisdiction
over a former delinquent ward.
This bill would clarify that a nonminor can remain in a group
home after the age of 18 in order to finish out the school
year.
2.Existing law requires, in certain circumstances, parents of
foster children to make child support payments upon referral
by the county child welfare department to the local child
support agency. Existing law provides for an exception to be
made when the referral to the local child support agency would
compromise the stability of the child's permanent placement
plan with a relative caregiver receiving Kin-GAP. (Fam. Code
Sec. 17552.)
This bill would clarify that a nonminor dependent who is over
the age of 19 years of age, is not a child for the purposes of
referral to the local child support agency for collection or
enforcement of child support.
3.Existing law , the California Community Care Facilities Act,
requires a placement agency to report to the appropriate
licensing agency any known or suspected incidents that would
jeopardize the health or safety of residents in a community
care facility including incidents of: (1) physical or sexual
abuse; (2) a violation of personal rights; (3) an unclean
facility; (4) a facility that has insufficient or incompetent
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 4 of ?
personnel; (5) residents experiencing mental or verbal abuse;
or (6) residents who are inadequately supervised. (Health &
Saf. Code Sec. 1536.1.)
This bill would also require the placement agency to report
incidents of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a nonminor
dependent by a licensed caregiver while the nonminor is in a
foster care placement.
4.Existing law provides that whenever a minor comes within the
jurisdictional description of both dependency and delinquency,
the county probation department and the child welfare services
department must determine what status is in the minor's best
interest, pursuant to a jointly developed protocol. (Welf. &
Inst. Code Sec. 241.1(a) and (b).)
This bill would require the jointly developed protocol to
contain a specified process, including: (1) a process for
determining which agency and court must supervise the child
whose jurisdiction is modified from delinquency to dependency;
(2) a process for determining which agency and court must
supervise a nonminor dependent under the transition
jurisdiction of the juvenile court; and (3) a process that
specifically addresses the manner in which supervision
responsibility is determined when a nonminor dependent becomes
subject to adult probation supervision.
This bill would also require that the court, whenever the
court determines that it is necessary to modify the court's
jurisdiction over a dependent or ward who was removed from his
or her parent or guardian and placed in foster care, to ensure
that: (1) the original petition is not dismissed until the new
petition has been sustained; and (2) the order modifying the
court's jurisdiction contains specified provisions.
5.Existing law provides that the court may retain jurisdiction
over any person who is a dependent of the juvenile court until
the ward or dependent child reaches the age of 21 years.
Existing provides that the court may, on or after January 1,
2012, terminate its jurisdiction of a nonminor dependent or
delinquent between the age of 18 and 21. Existing law also
provides that on or after January 1, 2012 a nonminor who has
not reached the age of 21 and who exited foster care at or
after 18 may petition the court to resume dependency or
delinquency jurisdiction. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 303.)
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 5 of ?
This bill would clarify that in addition to the court's
dependency and delinquency jurisdiction, the court may also
terminate its transition jurisdiction over the nonminor. This
bill would also provide that a nonminor who has not reached 21
and exited foster care may assume transitional jurisdictional.
6.Existing law provides that on or after January 1, 2012, the
court may continue jurisdiction of a nonminor who has a
permanent plan of long-term foster care. (Welf. & Inst. Code
Sec. 366.31.)
This bill would make clarifying technical changes to this
section by including relevant cross-references.
7.Existing law provides that in order to modify a dependency
petition or placement parties must petition the court. (Welf.
& Inst. Code Sec. 388.)
This bill would make several clarifying changes to the
modification process including that the court not having
jurisdiction can still receive the reentry petition and
transmit it to the court with jurisdiction. This bill also
clarifies that parents are only notified for nonminor
dependents when the nonminor requests that they be notified.
8.Existing law requires the Judicial Council to adopt court
rules by January 1, 2012 in order to allow a nonminor
dependent to appear telephonically in juvenile court
proceedings related to a petition to reenter foster care
following a trial period of independence. (Welf. & Inst. Code
Sec. 388 (e)(3).)
This bill would additionally require the court rule to allow
for telephonic appearances by nonminor dependents in any
proceeding in which the nonminor dependent is a party and he
or she declines to appear and elects a telephonic appearance.
9.Existing law provides that the court must not terminate
jurisdiction over a dependent youth who has reached 18 years
of age unless a hearing is conducted and a report is submitted
describing whether it is in the youth's best interest to
remain in dependency which would include a transitional
independent living case plan as well as proof that the youth
has been provided with specified documents. (Welf. & Inst.
391.)
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 6 of ?
This bill would also require the report to include that the
dependent was advised of his or her right to reenter foster
care prior to reaching 21 years of age and would require that
the youth receive "an advance health care directive form"
provided by Judicial Council.
10.Existing law provides that on and after January 1, 2012, the
status review hearing at which a recommendation to terminate
delinquency jurisdiction is being considered, must be held no
fewer than 60 days before the ward's 18th birthday, the court
shall consider whether to modify its jurisdiction and assume
jurisdiction over the child as a dependent. The probation
department shall address this issue in its report to the court
and make a recommendation as to whether dependency
jurisdiction is appropriate for the child. If the court finds
that the ward no longer requires delinquency supervision, but
is at risk of abuse or neglect and cannot be returned home
safely, the court shall set a hearing to determine whether a
modification of its jurisdiction is appropriate. (Welf. &
Inst. Code Sec. 727.2.)
This bill would provide that, under the above described
situation, the court would be required to conduct the status
review hearing no fewer than 90 days before the ward's 18th
birthday and would require the court to consider modifying its
jurisdiction to transition rather than dependency
jurisdiction. This bill would also provide that if the ward
does not meet the criteria for transition jurisdiction, to
order that a petition be filed to declare the ward a
dependent.
11.Existing law provides that the court shall order that a minor
remain in a planned permanent living arrangement if there is a
compelling reason that a plan of termination of parental
rights and adoption is not in the best interest of the minor
by providing specified documentation, including documentation
that the minor is an older teen and is specifically requesting
emancipation. (Welf. & Inst. Sec. 727.3.)
This bill would provide that a compelling reason to terminate
parental rights and deny adoption can also be provided by
documentation that the minor is 17 years of age or older and
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 7 of ?
specifically requests transition to independent living with a
caring adult to serve as a lifelong connection.
12.Existing law provides that when a minor who is a ward of the
court is placed in out-of-home care and the court orders a
hearing to consider permanently terminating parental rights to
free the minor for adoption, the court is required to direct
the agency supervising the minor and the appropriate agency
handling the adoption to prepare an assessment. (Welf. &
Inst. Sec. 727.31.)
This bill would update this section in order to be compliant
with federal requirements by revising the contents of the
requirement assessment including requiring consideration of
the effect of a relative caregiver's preference for legal
guardianship over adoption.
13.Existing law authorizes the sealing of juvenile court records
under specified procedures. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 781.)
This bill would authorize the juvenile court to access sealed
records to determine whether a nonminor petitioning to resume
dependency or delinquency jurisdiction meets the required
criteria for that petition.
14.Existing law provides that beginning January 1, 2012, Kin-GAP
aid shall be provided for any child under the age of 18 and to
any eligible youth under the age of 19, meeting specified
requirements. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 11363.)
This bill would restore provisions of law that were
inadvertently removed that allow support for a child in a
guardianship until he or she finishes high school or turns 19.
15.Existing law provides that Aid to Families with Dependent
Children-Foster Children (AFDC-FC) payments for children
placed voluntarily on and after January 1, 1981, are limited
to 180 days, and may be extended an additional 6 months, as
specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 11401.1.)
Existing law provides that a nonminor ages 18-21 shall
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 8 of ?
continue to receive foster care assistance under certain
conditions, including that the nonminor is otherwise eligible
for AFDC-FC benefits, has signed a mutual agreement, and one
or more of the following conditions exist:
the nonminor is working toward their high school
education or an equivalent credential;
the nonminor is enrolled in a postsecondary institution
or vocational education program;
The nonminor is participating in a program or activity
designed to promote or remove barriers to employment;
The nonminor is employed for at least 80 hours per
month; and/or,
The nonminor is incapable of doing any of the activities
described above, due to a medical condition, and that
incapability is supported by regularly updated information
in the case plan of the nonminor. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
11403.)
This bill would provide that on and after January 1, 2012,
AFDC-FC payments would be limited to 180 days to nonminor
dependents who reentered foster care placement.
1.Existing law provides that AFDC-FC benefits shall be paid to
an otherwise eligible child living with a nonrelated legal
guardian, provided that the legal guardian cooperates with the
county welfare department's specified requirements. (Welf. &
Inst. Code Sec. 11405.)
This bill would also provide that on or after January 1, 2012,
a child whose nonrelated guardianship was ordered in probate
court who is attending high school or the equivalent on a
full-time basis, or who is in the process of pursuing a high
school equivalency certificate prior to his or her 18th
birthday may continue to receive aid following his or her 18th
birthday as long as the child continues to reside in the
guardian's home, and meets other specified requirements.
2.Existing law provides that a child who is reported to the
county welfare departments because they are endangered by
abuse, neglect, or exploitation must be eligible for initial
intake and evaluation of risk services. (Welf. & Inst. Code
Sec. 16504.)
This bill would also give the county welfare agency the
ability to investigate a placement when it has reason to
believe that a nonminor dependent is subject to abuse.
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 9 of ?
3.Existing law provides that the State Department of Social
Services must adopt regulations to govern county transitional
housing placement programs that provide housing for 16 to 18
year olds, when specified conditions are met. (Welf. & Inst.
Code Secs. 11400, 11403.2 and 16522.)
This bill would additionally authorize transitional housing
placement programs for nonminor dependents when it is in their
best interest to remain in the facility in order to complete
high school, when specified conditions are met.
This bill would provide that aid under this section may be
suspended at the request of the nonminor or after a court
terminates dependency, delinquency or transition jurisdiction
but aid may be resumed at the request of the nonminor by
completing a voluntary reentry agreement.
This bill would provide that a child or nonminor who satisfies
specified criteria is within the transition jurisdiction of
the juvenile court.
This bill would provide that at a hearing terminating
jurisdiction over a ward the court may, as an alternative to
termination of jurisdiction, modify its order of jurisdiction
and assume transition jurisdiction over the ward.
This bill would provide that a child under 18 years of age or
a nonminor who is subject to the court's transition
jurisdiction shall not be subject to any terms or conditions
of probation, and his or her case shall be managed as a
dependent child of the court or as a nonminor dependent.
This bill would provide that each county shall modify its
protocol to include a provision to determine whether the child
welfare services department or the probation department shall
supervise youth subject to the court's transition
jurisdiction.
This bill would provide that the court shall appoint counsel
for children and nonminors subject to the court's transition
jurisdiction.
This bill would provide that the court must hold a hearing
prior to terminating transition jurisdiction over a nonminor
dependent during which termination of transition jurisdiction
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 10 of ?
over a nonminor dependent is being considered, the court shall
continue its jurisdiction to allow a nonminor dependent who is
eligible for foster care to remain in foster care.
This bill would provide that on and after January 1, 2012, the
court shall hold a hearing prior to terminating jurisdiction
over a ward who satisfies specified criteria and that the
court must take certain actions.
This bill would provide that on and after January 1, 2012, at
the hearing for a ward who is 18 years of age or older and
subject to an order for foster care placement the probation
department shall complete specified actions.
This bill would provide that on and after January 1, 2012, a
nonminor who is receiving Kin-GAP benefits and whose Kin-GAP
payments began prior to the child's 16th birthday and who is
attending high school or the equivalent level of vocational or
technical training on a full-time basis, or is in the process
of pursuing a high school equivalency certificate, prior to
his or her 18th birthday, may continue to receive aid under
those articles following his or her 18th birthday so long as
the child meets specified requirements.
This bill would also make various technical, non-substantive,
and conforming changes to the California Fostering Connections
to Success Act and related provisions.
This bill would include an urgency clause and would go into
effect immediately.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
The author writes:
ÝThis bill] provides technical and clarifying clean-up to AB
12 (Beall & Bass) Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010. Despite the
two years of work by nine sponsor organizations and two
authors, this lengthy and significant legislation invariably
included some errors and will require clarification in order
to be implemented.
ÝThis bill] is intended to serve as the clean-up bill to
address issues already identified, as well as any issues that
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 11 of ?
may surface during the process of developing regulations along
the course of this year.
A co-sponsor of the bill, California Alliance of Child and
Family Services, writes, "The supports and services that will
now be offered to 'our' children starting next year will
undoubtedly have a positive effect on many of their lives and
will reverse many of these negative trends. Compared with youth
who exit foster care at age 18, young adults who are permitted
to remain in foster care are 200% more likely to complete high
school; 300% more likely to enroll in college; and are much more
likely to become employed, have better physical and mental
health and have higher earnings. In addition, repeated studies
have found that foster youth who remain in foster care until age
21 are 65% less likely to be arrested, thereby reducing crime
and saving considerable prison costs."
In support of this bill, Judicial Council of California writes:
AB 212 is particularly important to the courts as they prepare
to implement extended foster care because it clarifies how
youth who are under the court's delinquency jurisdiction and
are eligible for extended care will be handled. Pursuant to
federal requirements, all foster youth must be afforded the
same access to extended foster care if they turn 18 while in
care. AB 12 provided delinquent youth access to extended
care, but required them to access this voluntary extension as
delinquent wards, regardless of whether these youth had
completed their rehabilitative goals. This outcome was
undesirable because delinquency jurisdiction is not
appropriate for a youth who no longer needs the rehabilitative
oversight of the delinquency court. Moreover, AB 12 required
these delinquent youth who sought to re-enter foster care to
petition the court to reinstate its delinquency jurisdiction.
This is at odds with the nature of this jurisdiction which is
based on a finding that a ward has committed a crime. AB 212
resolves this problem by creating a new jurisdictional status
for youth who need and want to remain in or re-enter foster
care, but no longer require the oversight of the court as
delinquent wards. This new status, called transition
jurisdiction, would allow these youth to access the extended
care that they are entitled in a status that is appropriate.
This new jurisdictional status was developed in conjunction
with the key stakeholders in the child welfare and juvenile
justice communities, and will allow extended foster care to be
effective for those small numbers of nonminor delinquent youth
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 12 of ?
who are in foster care at age 18, have accomplished their
rehabilitative goals, and wish to meet the eligibility
requirements to remain in foster care.
The Judicial Council supports AB 212 because it will ensure
that the council's intent in co-sponsoring AB 12 will be
carried out by enacting those technical and clarifying changes
that are required to implement the provisions contained in AB
12. AB 12 was a voluminous and complicated bill that amended
numerous sections of the Welfare and Institutions Code
regarding dependent and delinquent youth. It also contained an
implementation delay to allow for stakeholders, including the
juvenile courts, to prepare for implementation of the major
policy change in the legislation - extension of foster care to
age 21. As implementation efforts have begun, it has become
apparent that there is the need to clarify and correct
numerous provisions modified or added by AB 12 to ensure that
they can be implemented as intended. All of the provisions
currently in AB 212 are designed to fulfill that objective.
2. Bill would clarify that there is no child support liability
for nonminor dependents over the age of 19
Under existing law, parents of children in foster care are
required to make child support payments to the local child
support agency. The purpose of this requirement is to reimburse
the county for the costs associated with caring for the
dependent child while the child is in foster care. Existing law
also expressly provides that for nondependent children, child
support payments are only required of the non-custodial parent
until the child turns 18, or graduates from high school, up
until 19 years of age. Under AB 12, dependent youths will now
be eligible to stay in foster care up until the age of 21.
This bill would clarify that there is no liability for child
support for nonminor dependents once they are over the age of 19
for parents of dependent children. This is the current practice
and the intent of the law. This provision would align this code
section with the non-dependent child support provisions.
Further, one of the reasons California extended the time frame
for nonminor dependents to stay in foster care was to receive
funding from the federal Fostering Connections to Success and
Increasing Adoptions Act (Act). The Act provides states with the
ability to opt-in to federal funding streams if the states
provide foster care to 18-21 year-old youths. Requiring parents
to continue to pay child support would not only be inconsistent
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 13 of ?
with the child support provisions for non-dependent children,
but would also be unnecessary since the state would be
reimbursed for its costs under the Act.
3. Bill would update the community care licensing statute
Under existing law, the California Community Care Facilities
Act, requires a placement agency to report to the appropriate
licensing agency any known or suspected incidents that would
jeopardize the health or safety of the minor residents in a
community care facility. The placement agency must report any
incidents of: (1) physical or sexual abuse; (2) a violation of
personal rights; (3) an unclean facility; (4) a facility that
has insufficient or incompetent personnel; (5) residents
experiencing mental or verbal abuse; or (6) residents who are
inadequately supervised.
Additionally, this bill would also require the placement agency
to report incidents of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a
nonminor dependent by a licensed caregiver while the nonminor is
in a foster care placement. Due to the fact that nonminor
youths would still be eligible for placement in a community care
facility, under AB 12, this provision would clarify that
nonminors have the same rights and protections afforded to the
minors in community care facilities.
4. Bill would update delinquency sections under Kin-GAP to be
compliant with federal law
Under existing law, when a minor who is a ward of the court is
placed in out-of-home care and the court orders a hearing to
consider permanently terminating parental rights to free the
minor for adoption, the court is required to direct the agency
supervising the minor and the appropriate agency handling the
adoption to prepare an assessment.
This bill would update this section to not only be compliant
with federal Kin-GAP laws but also to be consistent with current
procedures for dependent children who are being placed in
out-of-home care. Specifically, this bill would revise the
contents of the assessment to include consideration of the
effect of a relative caregiver's preference for legal
guardianship over adoption. This update will make these
guardianships of juvenile wards eligible for federal subsidies
similar to the guardianships for dependent youth.
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 14 of ?
5. Restore provisions that allow for support that were
inadvertently removed under AB 12
Under existing law, beginning January 1, 2012, Kin-GAP aid shall
be provided for any child under the age of 18 and to any
eligible youth under the age of 19, if the youth was 16 years
old at the time the Kin-GAP aid began. According to
stakeholders, this provision inadvertently would result in
minors whose Kin-GAP funding began prior to the child's 16th
birthday being ineligible for funding if they were still in high
school, or an equivalent program, after the age of 18.
This bill would restore provisions of law that were
inadvertently removed when AB 12 was enacted that allow Kin-GAP
aid for a child in a guardianship until he or she finishes high
school or turns 19.
6. Clarify that a nonminor can remain in a group home to finish
high school
Under AB 12, nonminor dependents would be eligible to remain in
foster care, at their option, and receive services until they
reach the age of 21 if they meet one of the five
federally-created criteria related to work or school.
Specifically, the nonminor must meet one of the following
criteria: (1) be completing secondary education or a program
leading to an equivalent credential; (2) be enrolled in an
institution which provides postsecondary or vocational
education; (3) participate in a program or activity designed to
promote, or remove barriers to employment; (4) be employed for
at least 80 hours per month; or (5) be incapable of the
above-described activities due to a medical condition.
This bill would clarify that a nonminor can also remain in a
group home after the age of 18, in order to finish out the
school year. Current law imposes very strict limits on group
home placements for nonminor dependents which could result in an
unjust outcome. There may be circumstances where a youth turns
18 while residing in a group home, but has not graduated from
high school. Due to these strict limitations on group homes,
the youth may be forced out of the group home and ultimately
unable to finish high school.
7. This bill would define a voluntary reentry agreement
Under AB 12, the court was required to set a period of trial
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 15 of ?
departure for youths who had exited the dependency or
delinquency system. AB 12 provided that, on or after January 1,
2012, the court could continue jurisdiction over a nonminor
dependent who has a permanent plan of long-term foster care as a
dependent of the juvenile court or may dismiss dependency
jurisdiction. If the court terminates its dependency
jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent, it would retain
jurisdiction over the youth until he or she reaches the age of
21. AB 12 provided that the nonminor dependent would be able to
file a petition to have dependency jurisdiction resumed before
he or she turns 21. Thus, nonminor dependents who leave the
dependency system would have the option of petitioning to
re-enter dependency between the ages of 18-21. Upon receiving
the petition, the court would be required to order a hearing and
provide notice to specified parties.
According to the stakeholders, this provision is inconsistent
with federal law. This bill would alternatively allow the young
adult to reenter care by completing and filing a voluntary
reentry agreement. This bill would define a "voluntary reentry
agreement" as a document outlining the nonminors desire and
willingness to reenter foster care. This simplified process
would allow the nonminor to reestablish benefits and remain in
the system as long as they are eligible.
8. Bill would give county welfare agency ability to investigate a
placement
Under existing law, a child who has been reported to the county
welfare department because he or she is in danger of abuse,
neglect, or exploitation, must be eligible for initial intake
and evaluation of risk services.
This bill would also give the county welfare agency the ability
to investigate a placement when it has reason to believe that a
nonminor dependent is subject to abuse. This bill would also
require the county to cross-report the abuse, neglect, or
exploitation of the nonminor dependent by his or her care-giver.
Since nonminors may be continuing their dependency status up
until the age of 21 years old, they may continue to be placed in
new living arrangements. This bill would clarify that the
county welfare agency could, in addition to investigating abuse,
neglect or exploitation of minors, also conduct this type of
investigation and reporting for nonminors.
9. Create a process for delinquent youth who have achieved their
rehabilitative goals to remain in care without being a
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 16 of ?
delinquent or a dependent
AB 12 created a new status for dependent and delinquent youths
referred to as "nonminor dependents." This new status is
defined as a current or former dependent child or ward of the
juvenile court who satisfies all of the following criteria: (1)
he or she is between the ages of 18-21; (2) he or she is in
foster care; and (3) and he or she is participating in a
transitional independent living case plan pursuant to federal
law.
However, according to the stakeholders, "AB 12 set up a flawed
structure for this extension because it required the youth who
was a delinquent in foster care on his or her 18th birthday to
remain a delinquent in order to stay in foster care, and
similarly required that re-entry be as a delinquent. AB 212
addresses this by creating a new jurisdictional basis in W&I
Code Section 450 called transition jurisdiction. This would be
a route for delinquent youth who have accomplished their
rehabilitative goals and cannot be returned home safely to
remain in care without being dependents or delinquents.
Procedurally they would be treated as dependents, but they could
be supervised by either probation or child welfare."
Support : Judicial Council of California; Legal Services for
Prisoners with Children; National Association of Social Workers
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : California Alliance of Child and Family Services;
California County Welfare Director's Association; Alliance for
Children's Rights; California Youth Connection; Children's Law
Center of Los Angeles; John Burton Foundation for Children
Without Homes; Service Employees International Union (SEIU);
Youth Law Center
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010) See Background.
SB 1901 (McPherson, Chapter 1055, Statutes of 1998) See
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 17 of ?
Background.
Prior Vote :
Senate Committee on Human Services (Ayes 7, Noes 0)
Assembly Floor (Ayes 75, Noes 0)
Assembly Committee on Appropriations (Ayes 17, Noes 0)
Assembly Committee on Judiciary (Ayes 9, Noes 0)
Assembly Committee on Human Services (Ayes 6, Noes 0)
**************