BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó


          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        AB 787|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
                                    THIRD READING

          Bill No:  AB 787
          Author:   Stone (D)
          Amended:  9/6/13 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE  :  6-0, 6/11/13
          AYES:  Yee, Berryhill, Emmerson, Evans, Liu, Wright

           SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE  :  7-0, 6/25/13
          AYES:  Evans, Walters, Anderson, Corbett, Jackson, Leno, Monning

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  7-0, 8/30/13
          AYES:  De León, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  70-0, 5/16/13 (Consent) - See last page for  

           SUBJECT :    Foster care

           SOURCE  :     Alliance for Children's Rights
                      California Alliance of Child and Family Services
                      California Welfare Directors Association
                      Children's Law Center of California
                      Judicial Council of California

           DIGEST  :    This bill makes clarifying and technical changes to  
          the California Fostering Connections to Success Act (Act) to  
          ensure the continued implementation of the Act.

           Senate Floor Amendments  of 9/6/13 delete language that  


                                                                     AB 787

          eliminated case monitoring for nonminor dependent whose  
          nonrelated guardianship was ordered in juvenile or probate  
          court.  They also add conditions under which a nonminor may  
          petition the court for re-entry into dependency, specifically  
          when a guardian, former guardian, or adoptive parent has died.   
          Additionally, they prevent chaptering conflicts with AB 346 in  
          WIC Sections 11400 and WIC 727.

           ANALYSIS  :    

          Existing law:

          1.Defines a "nonminor dependent" (NMD) as 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  

          2.Defines "nonminor former dependent or ward" as either:

             A.   A nonminor who reached 18 years of age while subject to  
               an order for foster care placement, for whom dependency,  
               delinquency, or transition jurisdiction has been  
               terminated, and who is still under the general jurisdiction  
               of the court; or

             B.   A nonminor who is over 18 years of age and while a  
               minor, was a dependent child or ward of the juvenile court  
               when the guardianship was established, as specified, and  
               the juvenile court dependency or wardship was dismissed  
               following the establishment of the guardianship. 

          1.Defines a "transition dependent" as a minor who is between 17  
            years and five months and 18 years of age, who is in foster  
            care, and subject to the court's transition jurisdiction.

          2.Establishes the Act, pursuant to AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559,  
            Statutes of 2010), which is a voluntary program for youth who  
            meet specified work and education participation criteria.  The  
            Act provides, among other things, for the extension of  
            transitional foster care benefits to eligible youth up to age  
            21, as specified.



                                                                     AB 787

          3.Provides for the voluntary continuation or reentry into foster  
            care for nonminor dependents who meet general Aid to Families  
            with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) requirements,  
            and when the nonminor youth has signed a voluntary mutual  
            agreement and one or more of the following conditions exist:

             A.   The nonminor is working toward their high school  
               education or an equivalent credential;
             B.   The nonminor is enrolled in a postsecondary institution  
               or vocational education program;

             C.   The nonminor is participating in a program or activity  
               designed to promote or remove barriers to employment;

             D.   The nonminor is employed for at least 80 hours per  
               month; and/or

             E.   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 non-minor.  
          1.Provides that nonminor former dependents are not eligible for  
            re-entry into extended foster care as nonminor dependents of  
            the juvenile court.

          This bill:

          1.Clarifies that former NMDs who reached permanency, but whose  
            guardian, relative, or adoptive parent died before their 21st  
            birthday, may re-enter extended foster care.

          2.Authorizes probation officers to place NMDs in approved  
            transitional placements, as specified. 

          3.Adds the existing definition of "transition dependent" to the  
            relevant code section which determines recipients of AFDC-FC.

          4.Clarifies how the court may terminate jurisdiction over a NMD.

          5.Makes other clarifying and technical changes.




                                                                    AB 787

           According to the Senate Human Services Committee analysis,  
          foster youth who turn 18 while in foster care, but who do not  
          sign an extended foster care agreement, or who leave foster care  
          voluntarily, are eligible to return to extended foster care  
          until they reach age 21.  This bill permits a youth who achieved  
          permanency through adoption or guardianship to return to  
          extended foster care if their nonrelated guardian, relative  
          legal guardian or adoptive parent dies before the youth turns 21  
          years of age.

          Additionally, probation foster youth who turn 18 while serving  
          their probation are also eligible for extended foster care,  
          subject to the requirements of the program.  Existing law  
          specifies numerous placement types for NMDs, however, it did not  
          make similar statutory changes for probation youth.  This has  
          meant that probation departments have faced difficulty placing  
          youth in otherwise appropriate placements such as group homes,  
          licensed family homes, transitional living programs that are  
          available to other NMDs.

           Prior Legislation
          AB 12 (Beall and Bass, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010)  
          established the California Fostering Connections to Success Act,  
          which extended transitional foster care services to eligible  
          youth between ages 18 and 21 and required California to seek  
          federal financial participation for Kin-GAP.

          AB 212 (Beall, Chapter 459, Statutes of 2011) made technical and  
          clarifying changes to the California Fostering Connections to  
          Success Act.

          AB 1712 (Beall, Chapter 846, Statutes of 2012) made technical  
          and clarifying changes to the California Fostering Connections  
          to Success Act.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  Yes

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

           Potential minor state costs for extended foster care and  
            adoption assistance benefits for former NMDs whose guardian,  
            relative, or adoptive parent passed away prior to the NMD's  



                                                                     AB 787

            21st birthday.  Annual costs in the range of $12,000 to  
            $36,000 (General Fund) per case, depending on the placement  

           Potentially significant ongoing state costs in the hundreds of  
            thousands to millions of dollars (General Fund) for NMDs  
            placed by probation officers into approved placements not  
            currently authorized under existing law.

           Increased county administrative costs of about $35,000  
            (General Fund) per year for county assessments conducted 90  
            days prior to a youth's 18th birthday.  This estimate assumes  
            a 45-minute assessment at a cost of $57 per youth for 600  
            youth turning 18 per year.
           Ongoing county cost savings of $2.3 million (2011 Local  
            Revenue Fund) for the removal of case management requirements  
            for NMD placements with Non Related Legal Guardians.  This  
            estimate assumes an average of 425 NMDs would not require case  
            management services costs of $450 per case per month.

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  9/9/13)

          Alliance for Children's Rights (co-source)
          California Alliance of Child and Family Services (co-source)
          California Welfare Directors Association (co-source)
          Children's Law Center of California (co-source)
          Judicial Council of California (co-source)
          AFSCME, AFL-CIO
          Alliance for Children's Rights
          California Coalition for Youth 
          California Police Chiefs Association
          Juvenile Court Judges of California

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author:

               In 2010 the state adopted AB 12 (Beall/Bass, Chapter 559)  
               which opted California into two provisions of the federal  
               Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions  
               Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-351).  This landmark child  
               welfare legislation was substantial, amounting to 207 pages  
               at the time of adoption. 

               Due to the complexity and fundamental improvements this act  



                                                                     AB 787

               made to the state's welfare system, follow up legislation  
               has been needed since its adoption to help ensure its  
               successful implementation.  Since its passage, the  
               Legislature has passed and the state has adopted two  
               successive measures to this effect; AB 212 (Beall, Chapter  
               459) from 2011 and AB 1712 (Beall, Chapter 846) from 2012.   
               Like its predecessors, this bill will continue the  
               Legislature's efforts to ensure that California's child  
               welfare system can continue to enhance and provide  
               necessary and integral support services to foster youth.

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  70-0, 5/16/13
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,  
            Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Ian  
            Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,  
            Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Garcia,  
            Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Hagman, Hall, Harkey,  
            Roger Hernández, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue,  
            Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Mitchell, Mullin,  
            Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea,  
            V. Manuel Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner,  
            Ting, Torres, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk,  
            Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Allen, Buchanan, Eggman, Beth Gaines, Grove,  
            Holden, Melendez, Morrell, Stone, Vacancy

          JL:ej  9/9/13   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****