BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 557|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 557
Author: Kehoe (D), et al.
Amended: 7/7/11
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 3/29/11
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Harman, Liu, Price, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Calderon
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 5-0, 5/10/11
AYES: Evans, Harman, Blakeslee, Corbett, Leno
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 9-0, 5/26/11
AYES: Kehoe, Walters, Alquist, Emmerson, Lieu, Pavley,
Price, Runner, Steinberg
SENATE FLOOR : 39-0, 6/1/11
AYES: Alquist, Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Calderon,
Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De León, DeSaulnier, Dutton,
Evans, Fuller, Gaines, Hancock, Harman, Hernandez, Huff,
Kehoe, La Malfa, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete
McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio, Runner, Simitian,
Steinberg, Strickland, Vargas, Walters, Wolk, Wright,
Wyland, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Emmerson
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-0, 7/14/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Family Justice Centers
SOURCE : National Family Justice Center Alliance
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
2
DIGEST : This bill authorizes the City of San Diego, the
City of Anaheim, the county of Alameda and the County of
Sonoma to create a two-year pilot project for the
establishment of a family justice centers (FJCs) and allows
for the FJCs to be staffed by, among others, law
enforcement, medical, social service, and child welfare
personnel. The provisions of this bill sunset on January
1, 2014.
Assembly Amendments require the National Family Justice
Center Alliance with private funds to contract with an
independent organization to conduct an evaluation and
prepare a report on the family justice centers rather than
the centers reporting to the Office of Privacy Protection
for review and comment and allows the Alliance to submit
recommendations for statewide legislation, best practices,
and model policies and procedures on its comments to the
independent evaluation organization. They also require
each center to consult with community-based crime victim
agencies, survivors of violence and abuse, and their
advocates in the operation of the family justice center and
to develop a procedure for input, feedback, and evaluation
of the center.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, the California Constitution,
declares that the right to privacy is an inalienable right.
(California Constitution, article I, section 1)
Existing federal law, the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996 requires that medical
information be kept confidential unless authorized by the
patient. Existing law allows for disclosure to law
enforcement personnel for specified purposes. (Public Law
104-191; 45 CFR 160, 164)
The FJC model, first developed in California in 2002 in San
Diego, establishes a coordinated, single-point-of-access
center offering comprehensive services for victims of
domestic violence, thereby reducing the number of locations
a victim must visit in order to receive critical services
and improving access to those services. This bill,
sponsored by the National Family Justice Center Alliance,
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
3
authorizes, until January 1, 2014, the creation and
evaluation of four FJCs to assist victims of domestic
violence, sexual assault, stalking, cyberstalking,
cyberbullying, human trafficking, and elder or dependent
adult abuse. The required, independent evaluation is due
to the Legislature by January 1, 2013.
To address concerns that had been raised about
confidentiality of information and privacy protection, this
bill includes a number of provisions requiring informed
consent, limiting the sharing of information between FJC
partner organizations and requiring proper training of all
FJC staff and volunteers. As a result of these amendments,
there is no longer any opposition to this bill, as proposed
to be amended.
Specifically, this bill:
1. Allows, until January 1, 2014, the cities of San Diego
and Anaheim, and the counties of Alameda and Sonoma to
establish multi-agency, multi-disciplinary FJCs to
assist victims of domestic violence, officer-involved
domestic violence, sexual assault, elder or dependent
adult abuse, stalking, cyberstalking, cyberbullying, or
human trafficking, as defined and depending on the
availability of services, to ensure victims of abuse are
able to access all needed services in one location in
order to enhance victim safety, increase offender
accountability and improve services to victims.
2. Defines a "family justice center" as a multi-agency,
multi-disciplinary service center where public and
private agencies assign staff members to provide
services to victims of crime from one location in order
to reduce the number of times victims must tell their
story, reduce the number of places victims must go to
for help, and increase access to services and support
for victims and their children. Provides that staff
members may be either full-time or part-time and may be
comprised of, but are not limited to, the following:
A. Law enforcement personnel;
B. Medical personnel;
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
4
C. Victim-witness program personnel;
D. Domestic violence shelter staff;
E. Community-based rape crisis, domestic violence,
and human trafficking advocates;
F. Staff from social service agencies, child welfare
agencies and county health departments;
G. City or county welfare and public assistance
workers;
H. Nonprofit agency counseling professionals;
I. Civil legal service providers;
J. Supervised volunteers from partner agencies; and
K. Other professionals providing services
3. Provides that victims of crime shall not be required to
participate in the criminal justice system or cooperate
with law enforcement in order to receive counseling,
medical care, or other services at a FJC.
4. Provides that victims of crime shall not be denied
services on the grounds of criminal history. Provides
that no criminal history search shall be conducted of a
victim at a FJC without the victim's written consent,
unless the criminal history search is pursuant to an
active criminal investigation.
5. Requires each FJC to consult with domestic violence,
sexual assault, elder or dependent adult abuse,
stalking, cyberstalking, cyberbullying, and human
trafficking agencies in partnership with survivors of
violence and abuse and their advocates, in the
operations process of the FJC, and to establish
procedures for the ongoing input, feedback, and
evaluation of the FJC by survivors of violence and abuse
and community-based crime victim service providers and
advocates.
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
5
6. Requires each FJC to develop policies and procedures, in
collaboration with crime victim service providers and
survivors of violence or abuse, to ensure coordinated
services are provided to victims and to enhance the
safety of victims and professionals at a FJC who
participate in affiliated survivor-centered support or
advocacy groups. Requires each FJC to maintain a formal
client feedback, complaint, and input process to address
client concerns about services provided or the conduct
of any FJC professionals, agency partners, or volunteers
providing services in a FJC.
7. Requires each FJC to maintain an informed client consent
policy that must be in compliance with all state and
federal laws protecting confidentiality, as provided.
Provides that at no time shall a victim be required to
sign a client consent form to share information in order
to access services. Requires each FJC to inform the
victim that information shared with FJC staff may be
shared with law enforcement, as provided, and requires
each FJC to obtain a written acknowledgment that the
victim has been informed of this policy. Provides that
information obtained from victims in FJCs is privileged
and confidential to the extent it is protected under
state law. States that a victim's consent to share
information pursuant to a consent policy shall not be
construed as a waiver of confidentiality or any
privilege held by the victim or FJC professionals.
8. Requires the National Family Justice Center Alliance,
with private funds, to contract with an independent
organization to conduct an evaluation and prepare a
report on the four pilot centers. Requires the
independent organization conducting the evaluation to
submit the report first to the Office of Privacy
Protection and the National Family Justice Center
Alliance for review and comment, and then, by January 1,
2013, to the Assembly and Senate Judiciary and Public
Safety Committees. Allows the National Family Justice
Center Alliance to include any recommendations for
statewide legislation, best practices, and model
policies and procedures in the comments submitted to the
independent evaluation organization and the Legislature.
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
6
Requires the independent organization to consult with
specified groups in developing evaluation criteria,
which shall include, but not be limited to:
A. The number of clients served, number of children
served, reasons for seeking services at the FJC,
services utilized, and number of returning clients;
B. Filing, conviction, and dismissal rates for
misdemeanor and felony criminal cases handled at the
FJC;
C. Subjective and objective measurements of the
impacts of co-located multi-agency services for
victims and their children related to safety,
empowerment, and mental and emotional well-being and
comparison data from victims, if any, on their access
to services outside the FJC model;
D. Barriers, if any, to receiving needed services
including access to services based on immigration
status, criminal history, or substance abuse/mental
health issues and potential ways to mitigate any
identified hurdles to accessing needed services;
E. Whether privacy, immigration status, or other
barriers prevented victims from utilizing a FJC and,
if so, recommendations to improve utilization rates;
F. Compliance by the four pilot FJCs, with the
service delivery requirements set forth in #s 3-7,
above; and
G. Recommended best practices and model protocols, if
any.
9. Requires each FJC to maintain a formal training program
with mandatory training for all staff members,
volunteers, and agency professionals of not less than
eight hours per year on subjects including, but not
limited to, privileges and confidentiality, information
sharing, risk assessment, safety planning, victim
advocacy and high-risk case response.
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
7
10.Establishes a sunset date of January 1, 2014.
Comments
The FJC model was originally developed in San Diego, which
opened a center in 2002. The idea behind the FJC model is
to create a coordinated, single-point-of-access center
offering comprehensive services for victims of domestic
violence, thereby reducing the number of locations a victim
must visit in order to receive critical services. The
United States Department of Justice, through its Office on
Violence Against Women (OVW), has identified the FJC model
as a best practice in the field of domestic violence.
According to the OVW, documented and public FJC outcomes
include a reduction in the rate of homicide; increased
victim safety; improved offender prosecution; reduced fear
and anxiety for victims and their children; increased
efficiency among service providers through the provision of
collaborative victims; and increased community support for
the provision of services to victims and their children.
(Casey Gwinn and Gael Strack, Hope for Hurting Families:
Creating Family Justice Centers Across America, Volcano
Press, 2006.) There are currently fifteen FJCs in
California and over seventy centers in the United States.
This bill, sponsored by the National Family Justice Center
Alliance, authorizes, until January 1, 2014, the creation
and evaluation of four FJCs to assist victims of domestic
violence, sexual assault, stalking, cyberstalking,
cyberbullying, human trafficking, and elder or dependent
adult abuse.
In support of this bill, the author writes:
"Family Justice Centers have been identified as a 'best
practice' by the U.S. Department of Justice and involved
collaboration among public and private, non-profit
agencies providing intervention and prevention services
to address domestic violence, sexual assault, and other
forms of abuse. While the composition of Centers vary by
community, the general concept of providing all the
services for victims under one roof has been identified
as an effective approach to increase safety and offender
accountability by avoiding the need for victims to travel
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
8
from agency to agency, telling their story over and over
in order to receive help. There now have fifteen such
Centers in California and fifteen more in early stages of
planning. The Family Justice Center Alliance is the
umbrella organization for Family Justice Centers in
California and around the United States and gathers
non-identifying, aggregate data from existing Centers to
document outcomes and impacts of this multi-disciplinary
model. In order to ensure that victims receive the same
level of service and privacy protections, there need to
be statewide standards for the Family Justice Center
model."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/9/11)
National Family Justice Center Alliance (source)
Disability Rights California
Solano County Board of Supervisors
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 76-0, 7/14/11
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall,
Bill Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos,
Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson,
Donnelly, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani,
Galgiani, Gatto, Gordon, Grove, Hagman, Halderman, Hall,
Harkey, Hayashi, Roger Hernández, Hill, Huber, Hueso,
Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lara, Logue, Bonnie
Lowenthal, Ma, Mansoor, Mendoza, Miller, Monning,
Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Norby, Olsen, Pan, Perea, V.
Manuel Pérez, Portantino, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio,
Swanson, Torres, Valadao, Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams,
Yamada, John A. Pérez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Beth Gaines, Garrick, Gorell, Mitchell
RJG:do:kc 8/11/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
CONTINUED
SB 557
Page
9
**** END ****
CONTINUED