BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE HUMAN
SERVICES COMMITTEE
Senator Jim Beall, Chair
BILL NO: AB 883
A
AUTHOR: Cooley
B
VERSION: January 23, 2014
HEARING DATE: June 10, 2014
8
FISCAL: Yes
8
3
CONSULTANT: Sara Rogers
SUBJECT
Child Sexual Abuse: Prevention pilot program
SUMMARY
This bill establishes the Child Sexual Abuse Prevention
Program as a pilot program in three counties, selected by
the California Department of Social Services (CDSS), to
provide child sexual abuse prevention and intervention
services, and appropriates to each county $50,000 annually
from the General Fund for this purpose. This bill requires
a 2/3 vote.
ABSTRACT
Existing Law:
1.Under federal law, establishes Title IV-B of the Social
Security Act to provide states, tribes, and territories
with funding for the provision of child welfare-related
services to children and their families. Requires the
Continued---
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageB
submission of a state plan and provides the majority of
this funding under two grant programs including:
Stephanie Tubbs Jones Child Welfare Services
(CWS) program (Title IV-B, Subpart 1, Sections
420-425, 428)
Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF)
(Title IV-B, Subpart 2, Sections 430-437)
1.Under federal law, establishes the Child Abuse Prevention
and Treatment Act (CAPTA) which provides fully federal
grant funding to applicant states to improve child
protective service systems and for child abuse prevention
activities. Requires the submission of a state plan, as
specified, and requires services to be coordinated with
Title IV-B services. (42 U.S.C. 5106 et seq)
2.Establishes under federal law and implements under state
law, the Community Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP)
to provide formula grant funding for community based
child abuse prevention programs. (42 U.S.C. 5116 and WIC
18966.1)
3.Establishes the Office of Child Abuse Prevention (OCAP)
within CDSS and designates the office to apply for and
administer federal funds for child abuse prevention, as
specified. (WIC 18950 et seq.)
4.Under state law, establishes the Child Abuse Prevention,
Intervention and Treatment Program (CAPIT) to fund
projects and services related to the prevention,
intervention and treatment of child abuse in California.
(WIC 18960 et seq.)
5.Establishes the State Children's Trust Fund (SCTF), for
the purpose of funding innovative and distinctive child
abuse and neglect prevention and intervention projects
and permits individuals to designate income taxes,
counties to designate a portion of birth certificate
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageC
fees, and private individuals to grant, gift and bequeath
monies to the fund. (WIC 18965 et seq, RTC 18711)
6.Provides for the establishment of Child Abuse Prevention
Coordinating Councils (CAPCs) designated by the County
Board of Supervisors and funded by the State Children's
Trust Fund to coordinate the community's efforts to
prevent and respond to child abuse and neglect. (WIC
18980 et seq)
7.Establishes the State Family Preservation (SFP) program,
administered by OCAP, to avoid or limit out-of-home
placement of children who have experienced child abuse or
neglect within the family. Funds have been realigned to
counties and are used to meet the MOE requirements of the
PSSF program. (WIC 16500.5 et seq)
8.Establishes the California Child and Family Services
Review (C-CFSR) process to ensure that each county
allocates CAPIT revenues through the use of an
accountable process that utilizes a multidisciplinary
approach, explains how services funded are coordinated
with the array of services available in the county and
ensures funded services are based on priority unmet need.
(WIC 10601.2)
This bill:
1.Establishes the Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Program as
a pilot program, in no more than three counties, to
provide child sexual abuse prevention and intervention
services, as specified.
2.Appropriates $50,000 annually from the General Fund to
each county that has volunteered and been selected to
conduct a pilot program.
3.Provides that CDSS shall select three counties that have
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageD
indicated an intent to participate based on the
department's determination that the counties have
significance of child sexual abuse or sexually exploited
minors and have a public, private or nonprofit
organization with experience in child sexual abuse issues
that is designated to act as the primary administrator.
4.Encourages participating counties to efficiently use the
funds by giving priority to programs currently serving
the needs of at-risk children, as defined, and that have
demonstrated effectiveness in child sexual abuse
prevention or intervention.
5.Provides that appropriated funds shall not supplant or
replace any existing funding for programs current serving
the needs of at-risk children, and provides that such
funds may only supplement the expansion of existing
programs or the collaboration of separate existing
programs, or fund newly created programs within the
county if no current programs exist to serve the needs of
children at risk of sexual abuse.
6.Provides that a county shall allocate funds to a public,
private or non-profit agency that has applied if the
services meet the above requirements and are supported by
a county welfare department, law enforcement agency,
probation department, board of supervisors, public health
department, mental health department, or a school
district.
7.Requires participating counties to report specified
information to CDSS and to the Assembly and Senate Human
Services Committees.
8.Requires each participating county to propose a
multi-year plan that identifies how to advance child
abuse prevention objectives, as specified.
9.Provides that each pilot program shall strengthen the
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageE
capacity of schools and youth-serving organizations to
prevent sexual abuse through assessment processes,
training, screening, responding and reporting protocols,
codes of conduct, and other policies.
10.Provides that the above specified reports shall be
submitted in compliance with Government Code Section
9795, regarding the format of reports required by law to
be submitted to the Legislature.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Assembly Appropriations Committee estimates an annual
General Fund cost of $150,000 per year in addition to minor
administrative costs to CDSS to review applications and
select participating counties.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
According to the author, although the state aggressively
prosecutes child sexual predators and requires mandatory
reporting for suspected abuse, there is a lack of focus on
preventing the abuse before it occurs. The author states
that funding and training are needed to teach adults about
warning signs and that by building community collaboration
this measure strengthens the prioritization of stopping
child sexual abuse.
The author additionally cites a program created in
Massachusetts called the "Enough Abuse" campaign which
seeks to raise awareness about child sexual abuse and
prevention techniques. This program has been adopted in
greater Bay Area counties including Alameda, Contra Costa,
Marin, Monterey, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo,
Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma. The program hosts
interactive workshops designed for parents, early education
and care professionals and others who have contact with
children and/or their families.
Federal Child Abuse Prevention Services
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageF
California has a complex child welfare system incorporating
federal, state and local funds expended for the broad
purpose of child welfare, including child abuse prevention
and response. The federal Administration of Children and
Families (ACF) administers numerous federal grants
(described below) intended to assist states with child
abuse prevention and response efforts. Within the
statutorily established parameters for each grant, states
have substantial flexibility in how to apportion funds.
Additionally, services provided under the grants are
required to be coordinated with other programs serving
children.
Stephanie Tubbs Jones Child Welfare Services Program (Title
IV-B CWS)
The federal Title IV-B CWS program provides approximately
$32 million annually in federal funding to California under
a 75% federal match formula to broadly protect and promote
the welfare of all children, prevent child abuse and
neglect, permit children to remain safely in or return
safely to their own homes and to promote the safety,
permanency, and well-being of children in foster care or
adoptive families. Specifically, this program flexibly
funds the following services:<1>
Protective services intended to prevent or remedy
abuse or neglect, including investigations, caseworker
activities, counseling and emergency services;
Family preservation and crisis intervention
services intended to prevent the removal of a child
from the home;
Family support services intended to be community
based services that support the safety and wellbeing
of children, strengthening parenting skills, parent
-----------------------
<1> Congressional Research Service. "Child Welfare: Funding
for Child and Family Services Authorized Under Title IV-B
of the Social Security Act"
http://greenbook.waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/greenbook.ways
andmeans.house.gov/files/2012/documents/R41860_gb.pdf
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageG
support groups, counseling among others;
Time-limited family reunification services for
children in foster care and their families;
Foster care maintenance payments (only at the level
spent in 2005);
Adoption promotion and support services; and
Adoption subsidies.
This program also includes a requirement for a state plan
documenting various aspects of the state's administration
of the Title IV-B CWS program including protections and
services offered to children in foster care and other
children, coordination with other programs, the meeting of
various performance requirements and the operation of a
statewide information system enabling the state to monitor
the wellbeing of children in foster care.<2>
Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program (PSSF)
PSSF provides $33 million annually for counties services
aimed at developing or expanding community-based (non-state
administered) child and family support services, family
preservation services, family reunification services, and
adoption promotion and support services. Plan requirements
established for this program were recently amended to allow
counties to directly administer services, rather than
contract with outside providers, and California, like most
states, spend the majority of these funds on child and
family support services.
Pursuant to this statute, states are additionally required
to establish a five-year Child and Family Services Plan
-------------------------
-------------------------
<2> In California the system is the Child Welfare
System/Case Management System or CWS/CMS.
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageH
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageI
(CFSP) and an Annual Progress and Services Review (APSR)<3>
which is required to integrate the state plans for CWS,
PSSR as well as other programs.<4>
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA)
CAPTA provides approximately $3 million in grant funding
with no state match for the purpose of assisting with state
improvements to the child protective services systems, to
support child abuse prevention activities, and to fund
research and demonstration projects aimed at preventing
child maltreatment. Included in this statute is a
requirement for funds to be coordinated with other child
welfare programs and funding. Additionally, the statute
calls for states to report to the federal government
regarding how the funds have been expended. California
receives CAPTA funds annually.
Community Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP)
CBCAP, established under the CAPTA statute, provides grant
funding to support community-based efforts aimed at the
prevention of child abuse and neglect and the coordination
of resources and activities to support families. In
California the program is targeted at improving public
awareness and education about preventing child abuse, and
for providing supportive services to vulnerable populations
and families including mental health care, substance abuse,
respite care, housing, and transportation, among others.
Approximately $2.1 million annually in CBCAP funds are
allocated by the state Office of Child Abuse Prevention to
counties that have submitted applications, with smaller
counties receiving funds to supplement the County
Children's Trust Fund accounts of less than $20,000. The
rest of the applicant counties receive a base award of
-------------------------
<3> Title IV-B, Section 432(a)(2) and (5)
<4> 45 C.F.R. 1357.10, 1357.15, and 1357.16
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageJ
$10,000, and the remainder of the money is distributed on a
population-based formula. In 2013, all counties except San
Bernardino applied to receive funds with the largest grant
awarded to Los Angeles County ($336,000). Many grants are
of comparable size to that envisioned by this bill,
including Sacramento County's ($60,000).<5>
Outcomes and Accountability Process
The federal ACF conducts the federal Child and Family
Services Review (CFSR) and Annual Progress and Services
Report (APSR) to establish transparent performance
measures, accountability and program improvement plans for
states to foster improvement of state child welfare
systems. California's most recent CFSR in 2008 found that
the state did not achieve substantial compliance with any
of the safety, permanency or wellbeing outcomes identified
and a program improvement plan (PIP) was established.<6>
The PIP was substantially completed by 2011 and last year
ACF rescinded all penalties. A new CFSR is expected in
2016.
State Child Abuse Prevention Services
In addition to the federal grant funding described above,
California has established numerous state programs aimed at
the prevention of child abuse and has established a system
of state/local planning agencies to address this issue and
coordinate efforts among the variety public and private
agencies that are engaged in the issue and to be inclusive
of diverse family voices in the development of policy and
programming.
Office of Child Abuse Prevention (OCAP)
-------------------------
<5> ACIN NO. I-70-13
http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/lettersnotices/EntRes/getinfo/aci
n/2013/I-70_13.pdf
<6> C-CFSR 2008.
http://www.childsworld.ca.gov/res/pdf/CFSRExecSummary2008.pd
f
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageK
Within CDSS, child abuse prevention efforts are led by OCAP
which provides state oversight for the CBCAP and PSSF
programs as well as the Child Abuse Prevention Intervention
and Treatment (CAPIT) program. Additionally, OCAP manages
additional state projects including the Strengthening
Families Initiative, the Family Development Matrix Project,
the Safe Kids California Project, the Linkages Project and
the development and coordination of Parent Leadership
activities.
OCAP also oversees the submission of county-prepared plans
that address how prevention and early intervention
activities are coordinated and how services will be
provided. Such plans are a component of California's
compliance with federal reporting requirements for the
administration of federal grants and have been integrated
with California's Outcomes and Accountability System
(C-CFSR) and the related County Self Assessments (CSAs) and
System Improvement Plans (SIPs).
Child Abuse Prevention Councils (CAPCs)
At the county level, the Board of Supervisors appoints
CAPCs, also known as Child Abuse Councils, to coordinate
the community's efforts to prevent and respond to child
abuse and neglect. Councils are made up of representatives
from county child welfare, probation, and licensing
agencies; law enforcement, the district attorney, the
courts, and coroner; medical and mental health providers,
community-based social service providers, public and
private schools; and community volunteers, civic
organizations and religious institutions.
Child Abuse Prevention Intervention and Treatment Program
(CAPIT)
The CAPIT program provides state and local funds that are
used to fulfill the matching requirements established under
the federal CBCAP program. Services are targeted toward
children who are at high risk, including those currently
served by county welfare departments, children referred by
legal, medical, or social service agencies, and minority
populations. Additionally, programs operated by non-profit
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageL
agencies receive priority including programs that provide
services to isolated families with children aged 5 or
younger, home visiting programs and service to child
victims of crime. The specific services that may be funded
reflect those applying to the CBCAP program described
above. Funding for this program was realigned and counties
must demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the
program in the CSA and SIP.
State Children's Trust Fund (SCTF)
SCTF provides funding for innovative and distinctive
prevention and intervention projects on child abuse and
neglect. It is funded through county birth certificate
surcharges, state income tax designations and private
donations. These monies were not realigned and are awarded
by OCAP to counties that have submitted proposals. The
purpose of these funds is to research, evaluate and
disseminate information to the public, to establish
public-private partnerships with foundations and
corporations to increase public awareness about child abuse
and neglect via media campaigns. (Ch. 1399, Stats. 1982)
State Family Preservation (SFP)
SFP is a state funded program, in which 15 counties
participate, and it is aimed at avoiding or limiting
out-of-home placement of children who have experienced
child abuse or neglect within the family. Although funds
have been realigned to counties, the program is
administered by OCAP for the purpose of meeting federal
requirements and to ensure funds are used to meet the MOE
requirements of the PSSF program.
California Outcomes and Accountability System (C-CFSR)
In addition to the federal CFSR process, California has
established a corollary CFSR process called the Outcomes
and Accountability System (C-CFSR) which requires counties
to develop a County Self-Assessment (CSA) and System
Improvement Plan (SIP). As mentioned, this system has been
integrated with the program planning requirements that are
managed by OCAP.
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageM
Separate from the C-CFSR, each California County receiving
funding for the CAPIT, CBCAP, and PSSF programs must report
annually on their participation rates for prevention, early
intervention and treatment services, programs and
activities; changes of service providers and/or programs;
CAPC and Parent Engagement activities; coordination of
funds; collaboration and coordination efforts, and on their
quality assurance process which includes data on service or
program effectiveness.<7>
COMMENTS
1.This bill requires participating counties to report
specified information to the California Department of
Social Services and to the Assembly and Senate Human
Services Committees including, but not limited to,
changing public opinions or public opinion polls, the
amount of educational materials distributed to
stakeholder groups, statistics on changes in incidence of
child sexual abuse, identified best practices used by the
pilot program which may be replicated, and a complete and
accurate accounting of all funds received and spent.
As noted in an earlier Assembly Committee analysis, such
reporting requirements may themselves comprise the
majority of the appropriated funds, thus diminishing the
efficacy of the program. Staff notes that the existing
C-CFSR process, the related county self-assessments and
program improvement plans, as well as additional
programing plans required pursuant to federal law,
already require counties to document much of the
information required under this bill. Staff recommends
the bill be amended to require counties to report on the
outcomes of this program and the expenditure of funds
within the existing county assessment and planning
documents.
2.While numerous existing child abuse prevention programs
-------------------------
<7>
http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/cfsweb//res/TitleIV-B/APSR2013.pd
f
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageN
exist aimed at similar objectives as those descried in
this bill, none are specifically targeted toward the
prevention of child sexual abuse and in most cases funds
are additionally targeted towards the provision of
services to children who are already involved in the
child welfare system.
Specifically, staff recommends the following amendments:
1.Page 3, Line 5-7:
(a) The Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Program is hereby
established as a pilot program in no more than three
counties to provide child sexual abuse prevention and
intervention services through public , or private, or
nonprofit programs that provide child sexual abuse
prevention and intervention services.
2.Page 3, Line 13-35:
(c) The State Department of Social Services shall select
counties to participate in the Child Sexual Abuse
Prevention Program, from among the counties that notify
the department of their intention to participate, based
on the agency's determination that the counties have
significant incidences of child sexual abuse or
commercially sexually exploited children and have a
public , or private, or organization with experience in
child sexual abuse or commercial sexual exploitation
issues that is designated to act as the primary
administrator for the pilot program.
(d) Each participating county is encouraged to
efficiently use these funds by giving priority to
programs currently serving the needs of at-risk children
that meet the criteria in Section 18974.1 and that have
demonstrated effectiveness in child sexual abuse or
commercial sexual exploitation prevention or
intervention. The funds appropriated under this section
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageO
shall not supplant or replace any existing funding for
programs currently serving the needs of at-risk children,
but may only supplement the expansion of existing
programs or the collaboration of separate existing
programs within the county, or fund newly created
programs within the county if no current programs exist
to serve the needs of children at risk of sexual abuse.
3.Page 4, Lines 1-7:
(b) Public , or private nonprofit, or agencies shall be
eligible for funding provided that evidence is submitted
as part of the application to the county that the
proposed services are not duplicated in the community,
are based on needs of children at risk, and are supported
by a local public agency, including, but not limited to,
one of the following:
4.Page 4, Lines 15-17:
(c) The administering local agency shall, with oversight
and review from the county board of supervisors, include
and integrate the pilot program in the county system
improvement plan and self-assessment, and the county plan
for other federal and state child abuse prevention
programs. To the extent applicable, the county shall
provide similar assurances, data and outcomes assessments
to the Office of Child Abuse Prevention as are provided
regarding other federal and state child abuse prevention
programs. compile and collect data on the efficacy of the
pilot program .
5.Strike Page 5 and 6 inclusive.
PRIOR VOTES
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 883 (Cooley)
PageP
Assembly Floor 77 - 0
Assembly Appropriations 16 - 0
Assembly Human Services 5 - 0
POSITIONS
Support: The Child Abuse Prevention Center (Sponsor)
Alliance for Children's Rights
California Catholic Conference, Inc.
California Council of Nonprofit
Organizations
Oppose: None received.
-- END --