BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1978
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1978 (Jones-Sawyer)
As Amended May 7, 2014
Majority vote
HUMAN SERVICES 5-0 APPROPRIATIONS 14-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Stone, Maienschein, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Ammiano, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Ian Calderon, Garcia | |Calderon, Campos, Eggman, |
| | | |Gomez, Holden, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | |Nays:|Donnelly, Jones, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Enacts the Child Welfare Social Worker Empowerment and
Foster Child Protection Act. Specifically, this bill :
1)Declares the following legislative findings:
a) While California foster children are in foster care,
they are uniquely dependent upon the lawful, efficient, and
competent delivery of state and local government services
and implementation of state and federal law;
b) The special and uniquely vulnerable status of foster
children warrants extending whistleblower protections for
state employees to county child welfare social workers to
ensure that each worker, without fear of retaliation, can
advocate for policies that benefit every child and publicly
participate in discussions about each child's well-being;
and
c) County child welfare social workers who implement state
and federal policy related to the delivery of services and
implementation of programs benefitting foster children
should have an avenue to suggest cost-saving efficiencies
in the delivery of services to foster children, in a
fashion that is transparent and accountable to the public.
AB 1978
Page 2
2)Requires counties, when doing self-assessments and improvement
plans in child welfare, to consult with stakeholders,
including county child welfare agencies and probation agency
staff at all levels, current and former foster children,
children's attorneys, and foster care providers.
3)Requires counties, when doing self-assessments and improvement
plans in child welfare, to consult with at least one county
child welfare worker named by the bargaining unit representing
children's social workers.
4)Requires that each county's child welfare improvement plan,
approved by the county board of supervisors, include a
separately titled provision that lists and provides the
rationale for proposed operational improvements identified
during the stakeholder process that can be implemented at a
cost savings to the county or within existing county
resources.
5)Prohibits a county child welfare agency from retaliating
against a social worker if the social worker has reasonable
cause to believe that a policy, procedure, or practice related
to the provision of child welfare services endangers the
health or well-being of a child or children and the social
worker discloses this information to a government or law
enforcement agency, an appointed or elected official, or the
public.
6)Provides that nothing in this bill authorizes a social worker
within a county child welfare agency to disclose the identity
of a child or any portion of a case file.
7)Authorizes county child welfare social workers to comment on a
child welfare case, within the scope of the information
released, once documents have been released by the custodian
of records, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, potential state costs in the range of $50,000 to
$100,000 General Fund for mandated activities on local agencies
associated with the current and future development of county
self-assessments and county improvement plans.
COMMENTS :
AB 1978
Page 3
Background: AB 636 (Steinberg), Chapter 678, Statutes of 2001,
established the California-Child and Family Services Review
System (C-CFSR), which was implemented in January 2004.
Development of the C-CFSR marked a shift from the previous
oversight system focusing on regulatory compliance to a system
focusing on measuring outcomes for children in the child welfare
services system, including recurrence of maltreatment and child
safety, number of foster home placements, length of time to
reunification with birth parents and permanency. In addition to
the federally required outcome measures, the C-CFSR includes
state-specific outcome measures for overall child and family
well-being. The Department of Social Services (DSS) reviews all
counties on a five-year cycle under the C-CFSR to determine
county performance in meeting system requirements and improving
outcomes for children.
The reviews consist of a county self-assessment, which is
influenced by local stakeholder input and identifies the
county's strengths, areas needing improvement and barriers to
improvement within the local system; a Peer Quality Case Review,
which supplements the self-assessment with input from peer
counties and outside experts; and a System Improvement Plan
(SIP), which identifies annual targets for improvement in
outcomes for children within the local child welfare services
system. The state encourages counties to use existing planning
processes and community groups to increase public participation,
and most counties work with a group of core representatives in
the development of self-assessments. Additionally, DSS approves
each county SIP, and monitors compliance using quarterly
performance reports.
Need for the bill: Stating the need for the bill, the author
writes:
With recent, sweeping budget cuts to child welfare and
foster care and re-alignment, it is more important
than ever for county social workers, boards of
supervisors, and child welfare directors to identify
and implement operational improvements that will
reduce paperwork, enhance social worker productivity
and job satisfaction, and help ensure that abused and
neglected children are well looked after.
AB 1978
Page 4
Unprecedented budget cuts and external audits from two
counties that found that bureaucracy impedes effective
social work, imperiling the lives of children, it is
apparent that social workers have not had a platform
where they feel free to advocate for common-sense
policies and procedures.
Assembly Human Services Committee staff comments: This measure
is a re-introduction of AB 921 (Jones-Sawyer) of 2013.
Initially proposed to also include civil penalties for specified
offenses committed against a social worker and a requirement for
counties to adopt an ordinance that provides social workers
specific additional authority and protections, its scope was
limited as it moved through the legislative process. The
current language in this bill is a replication of the final
version of AB 921, which was adopted by the Legislature, but
vetoed by the Governor.
In justifying his veto of AB 921, the Governor wrote:
Among its provisions, the bill would allow any social
worker to comment on any child welfare services
policy, procedure and practice, or any publicly
released child fatality case, with impunity.
While this bill has the best of intentions, it
overreaches. The judgment of social workers should
be valued, but we don't need a law to protect their
opinions, and theirs alone. Social workers, like
other public or private employees, already have
"whistleblower" protections for illegal acts they
report. Specific county policies and practices that
are legal but problematic should be resolved at the
county level, or through legislation as a last
resort, when counties cannot do it on their own.
Social workers, the state and counties all have a
duty to protect children who are abused and
neglected. We should all work together in good faith
to that end.
Analysis Prepared by : Chris Reefe / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089
AB 1978
Page 5
FN: 0003556