BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 121
AUTHOR: Liu
AMENDED: March 17, 2011
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: April 13, 2011
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Lynn Lorber
SUBJECT : Foster youth: special education: non-public
schools.
SUMMARY
This bill clarifies the process that must be followed
before a foster youth may be placed in a non-public school,
and requires a person holding the right to make educational
decisions for a foster youth, and who places a foster youth
in an educational setting other than a public school, to
provide a written statement to the local educational agency
stating that he or she has made that decision.
BACKGROUND
Current law
1) Defines "non-public school" (NPS) as a private,
non-sectarian school that enrolls individuals with
exceptional needs pursuant to an individualized
education program (IEP) and is certified by the
California Department of Education. (Education Code §
56034)
2) Requires a pupil who is placed in a licensed
children's institution (such as a group home) or
foster family home to attend programs operated by the
local educational agency unless one of the following
applies:
a) The pupil is entitled to remain in
his or her school of origin.
b) The pupil has an IEP requiring
placement in a NPS, or in another local
SB 121
Page 2
educational agency.
c) The parent or other person holding
the right to make education decisions for the
pupil determines that it is in the best interests
of the pupil to be placed in another educational
program.
(EC § 48853)
3) Requires local educational agencies to first consider
services in programs operated by public education
agencies for individuals with exceptional needs who
reside in licensed children's institutions or foster
family homes. Special education and related services
must be provided by contract with a NPS if programs
operated by a public school are not appropriate.
Requires a local educational agency that places pupils in a
NPS to conduct an annual evaluation, in accordance
with federal law as part of the annual IEP process, of
whether the placement is the least restrictive
environment that is appropriate to meet the pupil's
needs.
Prohibits a local educational agency from referring a pupil
to a NPS unless the services required by the IEP of
the pupil can be assured.
(EC § 56157)
4) Requires a local educational agency to initiate and
conduct a meeting of the pupil's IEP team to develop
an IEP before placing an individual with exceptional
needs in, or referring an individual to, a NPS. (EC §
56342.1)
5) Requires, in all instances, educational and school
placement decisions regarding pupils in foster care
and those who are homeless to be based on the best
interests of the child and to consider, among other
factors, educational stability and the opportunity to
be educated in the least restrictive educational
setting necessary to achieve academic progress. (EC §
48850)
6) Requires a local educational agency to allow a pupil
in foster care to remain in his or her school of
SB 121
Page 3
origin for the duration of the court's jurisdiction
including in the school feeder pattern as long as it
is in the child's best interest. (EC § 48853.5)
7) Specific to foster youth, requires a court to appoint
a responsible adult to make educational decisions for
the child if the court limits the right of a parent or
guardian to make educational decisions for the child.
Requires all educational and school placement decisions to
seek to ensure that the child is in the least
restrictive educational programs and has access to the
academic resources, services, and extracurricular and
enrichment activities that are available to all
pupils. In all instances, educational and school
placement decisions must be based on the best
interests of the child. (Welfare & Institutions Code
§ 361)
ANALYSIS
This bill clarifies the process that must be followed
before a foster youth may be placed in a non-public school,
and requires a person holding the right to make educational
decisions for a foster youth, and who places a foster youth
in an educational setting other than a public school, to
provide a written statement to the local educational agency
stating that he or she has made that decision.
Specifically, this bill:
1) Prohibits an individual with exceptional needs
residing in a licensed children's institution or
foster family home from being referred to, or placed
in, a NPS unless his or her IEP specifies that the
placement is appropriate, or he or she is placed in
the NPS by the parent or other person holding the
right to make educational decisions for that pupil.
2) Requires, when the parent or other person holding the
right to make educational decisions for a pupil
decides to place the pupil in an educational program
other than the local public school, that person to
provide a written statement to the local educational
agency that he or she has made the determination that
it is in the best interests of the pupil to be placed
in another educational program.
SB 121
Page 4
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Purpose of the bill . According to the author, "Foster
youth are moved and change schools sometimes without
the knowledge of the parent or other person holding
the education rights. There have been situations
where a foster youth is placed by a group home into a
non-public school operated by the group home. Despite
current law that requires foster youth to attend a
public school unless the pupil's individualized
education program (IEP) calls for another placement,
or if the pupil's education rights holder makes that
decision, some foster youth are being placed in a
non-public school before the determination is made by
either the education rights holder or the IEP team.
This bill ensures that the actual holder of
educational rights in fact makes the decision to place
the pupil in a NPS and explicitly prohibits placements
outside of the IEP process or without the knowledge of
the education rights holder."
2) Parental placement . Current law allows a parent or
other person who holds the right to make educational
decisions for a foster youth to place the pupil in an
educational setting other than a public school,
regardless of what is specified in the pupil's IEP.
This bill requires the parent or other person holding
education rights to provide a statement to the local
educational agency that he or she in fact was the
person who made the determination that the pupil
should be placed in an educational setting other than
a public school. This purpose of this affirmation is
to ensure that the actual holder of education rights
made that decision and to deter situations where the
pupil is placed in a non-public school (NPS) without
the knowledge of the person holding the right to make
educational decisions for the pupil.
Current law provides that the local educational agency is
responsible only for the "federal proportionate share"
of funding for a parentally placed pupil. Despite
current law already allowing for parental placements,
some have raised a concern that this bill somehow
gives or expands the right of a parent to place his or
her child in a NPS. Therefore, staff recommends an
SB 121
Page 5
amendment to include a cross-reference to current
federal law to help clarify the existing rights and
responsibilities relative to parental placements.
3) Restatement . Although current law already states the
conditions under which a foster youth may be placed in
an educational setting other than a public school,
foster youth continue to be placed in non-public
schools outside of the required process. This bill
expressly states what current law implies, essentially
restating current law regarding the enrollment of
foster youth in a NPS to specifically prohibit
placements outside of the IEP process or without the
decision of the education rights holder.
4) Related legislation . AB 709 (Brownley) clarifies that
a foster youth who changes schools has the right to be
immediately enrolled in the new school even if the
medical records including immunization records are not
provided at the time of enrollment. AB 709 is pending
in the Assembly Human Services Committee.
5) Prior legislation . AB 1933 (Brownley, Chapter 563,
2010) expanded the requirement that a local
educational agency to allow a pupil in foster care to
remain in his or her school of origin for the duration
of the court's jurisdiction including in the school
feeder pattern as long as it is in the child's best
interest.
SB 1353 (Wright, Chapter 557, 2010) among other things,
provided that consideration of the best interests of a
foster child shall include educational stability and
the opportunity to be educated in the least
restrictive educational setting necessary to achieve
academic progress.
SUPPORT
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees
OPPOSITION
None on file.
SB 121
Page 6