BILL ANALYSIS Ó Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair AB 212 (Beall) Hearing Date: 08/15/2011 Amended: 08/15/2011 Consultant: Jolie Onodera Policy Vote: Human Services 7-0, Judiciary 5-0 _________________________________________________________________ ____ BILL SUMMARY: AB 212, an urgency measure, makes various clarifying and substantive changes to the California Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010 in order to ensure proper implementation on January 1, 2012. This bill also makes changes to existing state law in order to comply with various provisions of federal law. _________________________________________________________________ ____ Fiscal Impact (in thousands) Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund Reimbursement of Kin-GAP Up to $1,300 annually General non-recurring expenses Reentry agreement Unknown; potentially significant state-General provisions/written protocols reimbursable costs Restoration of high school Minor costs; approximately $16 annually General completion rule for Kin-GAP Expanded abuse/neglect Unknown; non-reimbursable local lawLocal reporting requirements enforcement costs offset to a degree by fine revenue _________________________________________________________________ ____ STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. Last year, AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559/2010) was enacted and exercised the federal option under the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (Public Law (P.L.) 110-351) of extending benefits for youth up to age 21 in the Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Kinship Guardianship AB 212 (Beall) Page 1 Assistance Payment (Kin-GAP) programs. AB 12 also aligned the state's existing Kin-GAP program with federal requirements in order to draw down federal funds. This bill, an urgency measure, makes various changes to existing law to ensure the proper implementation of the California Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010 on January 1, 2012. Under P.L. 110-351, guardianship assistance agreements are required to include a provision allowing for the reimbursement of non-recurring costs of obtaining guardianship, which could include legal fees and child care costs. Pursuant to guidance from the federal Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the State must modify the guardianship agreement and have statute in place authorizing payment for such reimbursement. For guardianships established on and after January 1, 2012, this bill requires the reimbursement of non-recurring expenses, as specified. The average monthly number of new Kin-GAP cases was 261 in 2010-11. It is unknown at this time how many cases would request reimbursement but assuming the percentage is consistent with the number of adoption cases that request non-recurring expenditure reimbursement of approximately 40 percent, potential costs assuming the maximum reimbursement of $2,000 per case would result in annual costs of up to $1.3 million General Fund. Staff notes that in the absence of this change to existing law, the state would be out of compliance with federal requirements and could be at risk of loss of federal Title IV-E funding. This bill revises the reentry provisions for nonminors established in AB 12 in response to guidance received from the ACF. In place of the period of "trial independence" established under AB 12, this bill requires a county welfare or probation department to complete a voluntary reentry agreement with a nonminor reentering care and establish a new eligibility determination based on the completed agreement. Based on a reentry rate of four percent of exiting cases to return, approximately 100 cases per month will be impacted. To the extent additional county administrative time is required to complete a new eligibility determination and assist the nonminor with completion of the voluntary reentry agreement could result in state-reimbursable costs of an unknown but potentially significant amount. Because the federal program is optional, increased workload mandated on local agencies could be considered state-reimbursable. However, if the state fails to comply with federal requirements under the optional program, the state could be at risk of loss of federal funds. As the AB 212 (Beall) Page 2 assumptions for federally eligible cases in AB 12 were based on placement type, there is no change in the estimated number of federally eligible cases under the revised reentry provisions of this bill. This bill clarifies the delinquency provisions established in AB 12. Specifically, a new "transition" jurisdiction is created, and provides for a clear process for the courts, child welfare agencies, and probation departments to follow in order to implement the policy principles envisioned in AB 12 for foster youth on probation. The Judicial Council has indicated the new provisions related to transition jurisdiction will not have a fiscal impact beyond what has been imposed on the courts under existing law pursuant to AB 12. Existing law provides that whenever a youth 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 youth's best interest pursuant to a jointly developed written protocol. This bill would require the jointly developed protocol to contain specified processes, including a process for determining which agency and court shall supervise a child whose jurisdiction is modified from delinquency to dependency or transition jurisdiction, and a process that specifically addresses the manner in which supervision responsibility is determined when a nonminor becomes subject to adult probation supervision. To the extent the requirements for the written protocols exceed those under existing law could result in increased state-reimbursable costs to county probation and child welfare departments of an unknown amount. AB 12 inadvertently deleted the high school completion rule for foster youth placed with relative caregivers prior to age 16 and for guardianships ordered in probate court. This bill provides for the continuation of benefits for a youth aged 18 who is attending high school or the equivalent and is reasonably expected to complete the program prior to his or her 19th birthday. DSS has indicated the caseload impact associated with these provisions is estimated to be only two cases annually, therefore, the fiscal impact is estimated to be minor. This bill would expand existing requirements upon placement agencies under the California Community Care Facilities Act to report incidents of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a AB 212 (Beall) Page 3 nonminor dependent by a licensed caregiver to the appropriate licensing agency. Violation of the Act is a misdemeanor. By expanding the definition of an existing crime, this provision will result in non-reimbursable local costs for enforcement. This bill also provides for changes to existing law in order to be in compliance with the federal requirements under the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, the Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) Amendments of 2001, and the Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006. The PSSF program provides grant funds to states to support child welfare services program efforts to promote stability and permanency for at-risk children within families. This bill revises statute to reflect the allowable allocation of PSSF funds among service categories within PSSF and the allowable allocation for administrative expenses. As the proposed amendments will bring statute in line with current practices, there is no fiscal impact resulting from this change. DSS receives approximately $35.5 million in PSSF funds annually. In the absence of the specified changes to current law, California could be at risk of federal penalties and loss of federal funds. This bill further amends current law to comply with federal requirements under P.L. 110-351 and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 by adding the power of attorney for health care and information regarding the advance health care directive form to the information provided to a foster youth during the 90-day period prior to emancipation. The provision of these additional documents is not estimated to result in any significant fiscal impact. Consistent with other federal compliance amendments in this bill, the state could be at risk of federal penalties or loss of federal funds in the absence of these changes to existing law. Existing law requires DSS to allocate 70 percent of the amount payable to placements of nonminors under the Transitional Housing Program (THP)-Plus Foster Care (FC) program, with the remaining 30 percent to be available to serve the caseload of youth under the THP-Plus program, as specified. This bill would direct counties that opt to participate in the THP-Plus and THP-Plus FC programs to establish a goal of allocating 70 percent under the THP-Plus FC program. However, if a county can demonstrate there is insufficient demand in either of the programs to achieve the targeted percentage allocations, the county may reallocate funds between the two programs to meet the AB 212 (Beall) Page 4 existing demand. Further, this bill requires the DSS to develop a mechanism to determine how counties opting out of the THP-Plus program are to receive funding based on the operation of THP-Plus FC only. DSS indicates there would be no net change in overall funding as a result of these changes to existing law. Prior Legislation. AB 12 (Beall) Chapter 559/2010 authorizes the state to exercise the federal option of extending benefits in the foster care, Kin-GAP, Fed-GAP, and Adoption Assistance program to age 21 for youth who meet specified criteria. AB 12 also provided for the alignment of the Kin-GAP program with federal requirements in order to receive federal financial participation.