BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2060
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 24, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
AB 2060 (Bonilla) - As Introduced: February 23, 2012
PROPOSED CONSENT (As Proposed to be Amended)
SUBJECT : FOSTER CHILDREN: EDUCATIONAL DECISIONS
KEY ISSUE : IN ORDER TO BETTER MEET THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF
FOSTER CHILDREN, SHOULD THE LAW REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF A
RESPONSIBLE ADULT TO MAKE THEIR EDUCATIONAL DECISIONS, WHEN SUCH
AUTHORITY HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THEIR PARENT, BE ENHANCED?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This bill, sponsored by Public Council, seeks to enhance laws
regarding the appointment and duties of individuals authorized
by a juvenile court to make educational decisions for foster
children when their parents' rights to make such decisions have
been removed by the court. Foster youth often have significant
difficulty in school and lack caring, responsible adults to help
them achieve educational success. This bill seeks to strengthen
and enhance educational support for these children by requiring
that courts, when the parents' rights have been terminated,
appoint an individual already involved with the child to make
educational decisions for the child, if at all possible. The
bill also requires that the appointed adult meet with the child
ongoing and make recommendations to the court on the child's
educational needs before every hearing. The bill is supported
by advocates for foster youth and has no opposition.
SUMMARY : Enhances the appointment and duties of a responsible
adult authorized to make educational decisions for a child under
the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Requires the court, at an initial petition hearing and when a
child is adjudicated a dependent or a ward of the court, where
the court limits a parent's educational rights, to determine
whether there is a responsible adult, who is a relative,
AB 2060
Page 2
non-relative extended family member or other adult known to
the child and who is willing and able to serve as the child's
educational representative, before appointing an educational
representative or surrogate who is not known to the child.
2)Provides that, if an educational representative or surrogate
is appointed for the child, the representative or surrogate
must meet with the child, investigate the child's educational
needs and whether those needs are being met, and, prior to
each review hearing, provide information and recommendations
concerning the child's educational needs to the social worker
or, for a ward, the probation officer, make written
recommendations to the court and participate in those portions
of the review hearing that concern the child's education.
3)Clarifies that the provisions in 1), above, in no way remove
the obligation to appoint surrogate parent for students with
disabilities who do not have parental representation in
special educational procedures, as required.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Gives the juvenile court the authority to limit a parent's or
guardian's right to make educational decisions on behalf of
his or her child, and to appoint an "education rights holder"
to make those decisions. If the court cannot find a
responsible adult to make educational decisions and
appointment of a surrogate parent for education is not
warranted, as defined, allows the court, with the input of
interested individuals, to make educational decisions for the
child. (Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 319, 361, 726.
Unless stated otherwise, all further references are to that
code.)
2)Limits the duration of the education rights holder order
until, among other possible scenarios, the child is placed in
a permanent living arrangement with a foster parent, relative
caretaker or nonrelative extended family member who thereafter
assumes the right to make educational decisions on behalf of
the child. (Sections 361, 726.)
3)Gives the juvenile court the authority to limit a parent's or
guardian's right to make decisions about the regional center
and other developmental services for a child with
AB 2060
Page 3
developmental disabilities, and to appoint a developmental
services decisionmaker. (Sections 319, 361, 706.5, 726, 4512
and 5328.)
4)Provides that a surrogate parent, as defined by federal law,
may represent a child with exceptional needs in matters
relating to identification, assessment, instructional planning
and reviewing and revising the individualized education
program. (Education Code Section 56050.)
5)Requires the local educational agency to appoint a surrogate
parent for a child to represent the child in educational
matters in certain circumstances, including when the child is
adjudicated a dependent or ward of the court and is referred
for special education services, when no parent for the child
can be identified, or when the local educational agency cannot
discover the location of a parent. (Government Code Section
7579.5.)
6)Grants a guardian or conservator of the person authority over
the education of the ward or conservatee, subject to
limitation by the court. (Probate Code Section 2351.)
COMMENTS : This bill, sponsored by Public Council, Children's
Rights Project, is intended to ensure the continuity and
accessibility of educational services for students involved with
the juvenile court. The juvenile court seeks to protect the
safety and wellbeing of children who are at risk of, or have
experienced abuse or neglect. This includes meeting the child's
educational needs and goals. When the parents of children under
the supervision of the juvenile court are found by the court to
be unsuitable to make educational decisions on behalf of their
children, the court may appoint a responsible adult to serve as
the child's "education rights holder." These students' parents'
rights to make educational decisions for them may be temporarily
or permanently removed. Without appointment of another adult to
make those decisions, there may be no one who has the authority
to allow the child to access appropriate educational resources.
If a court removes the parent's educational rights, the court is
directed to appoint a responsible adult to make educational
decisions. If the court cannot identify a responsible adult and
it is not appropriate to appoint an educational surrogate, then
AB 2060
Page 4
the court may make educational decisions for the child, with the
input of any interested individuals. This bill seeks to improve
that process to help ensure that children's educational needs
are better met.
Research Shows Difficulty Foster Children Have Succeeding in
School : A study by the Vera Institute of Justice shows the
difficulty foster youth have in school and the need for caring
adults to help them succeed:
A large portion of the half million children in foster care
nationwide perform poorly in school. They lag behind their
non-foster peers academically and are more likely to have
behavior and discipline problems. . . .
We found that foster children face roadblocks that other
economically disadvantaged children do not face, roadblocks
that can affect their academic performance. The children
had concerns about maintaining ties with their biological
parents and caring for siblings that often distracted them
from schoolwork. Mandated court appearances and doctors'
appointments caused them to miss school frequently.
Behavior problems-both aggression and withdrawing-which may
be rooted in pre-placement trauma, kept them from focusing
on school. And they often avoided social interactions with
peers in order to keep their foster status hidden. Yet
they blamed themselves-not foster care or the schools-for
their poor academic achievement.
The adults in these foster children's lives often lacked a
full picture of their educational needs. Foster parents
were most concerned with the children's behavior; they
rarely expressed concern with their foster children's poor
grades, and most did not regularly help with homework.
Caseworkers often were not aware of their academic
progress, focusing instead on the frequent crises that
characterize foster care. School staff usually had little
knowledge of a child's foster care background and how
bureaucratic demands of the system might explain missed
tests or assignments. No one acknowledged primary
responsibility for the educational progress of these
children.
(Marni Finkelstein, et al., What Keeps Children in Foster Care
AB 2060
Page 5
From Succeeding in School? Executive Summary (Vera Institute of
Justice 2002).)
This Bill Enhances Educational Support for Foster Children : AB
2060 enhances children's rights in two key ways. First, the
bill requires that before a court, when looking for an
educational representative for a child, can appoint a stranger
to that role, the court must first determine whether there is a
responsible adult, who is a relative, non-relative extended
family member or other adult known to the child and who is
willing and able to serve as the child's educational
representative. Supporters note that this provision should help
ensure that children have engaged adults personally familiar to
the child, rather than strangers, making critical educational
decisions for the child.
Second, the bill requires that, if an educational representative
or surrogate is appointed for the child, the representative or
surrogate must meet with the child, investigate the child's
educational needs and whether those needs are being met, and,
prior to each review hearing, provide information and
recommendations concerning the child's educational needs to the
social worker (or probation officer in the case of wards), make
written recommendations to the court and participate in those
portions of the review hearing that concern the child's
education. This is a significant increase from the current law,
which only requires, under rules of court, that the educational
representative meet with the child once and does not require
updates and progress reports to the child's social worker or
probation officer and the court. The provisions of this bill
help ensure that a caring, responsible adult is watching out for
the child's educational needs, on an ongoing basis.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters write about the educational
needs of foster youth:
Tragically, children in foster care are much less likely
than children in the general population to have an engaged
adult supporting their education. This lack of educational
support is part of the cause of the significant gap in
academic achievement between foster children and other
youth. Without an adult supporting their educational
success, many foster youth suffer delayed enrollment, are
funneled into low quality schools and remedial classes,
AB 2060
Page 6
lack meaningful representation at special education
planning meetings, and fail to access resources such as
tutors or summer school programs.
Laws addressing the appointment and involvement of
Ýeducation rights holders] should be strengthened to ensure
that children in foster care have the educational support
they need.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Public Council, Children's Rights Project (sponsor)
Abrazo Foster Family Agency
California Alliance of Child and Family Services
Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
Fresno County Foster Care Standards and Oversight Committee
National Center for Youth Law
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334