BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 342
Page A
Date of Hearing: July 2, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES
Mark Stone, Chair
SB 342 (Yee) - As Amended: May 24, 2013
SENATE VOTE : 39-0
SUBJECT : Foster youth: Social Worker and Probation Officer
Visits
SUMMARY : Allows a foster youth to request a private
conversation with his or her social worker or probation officer.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the monthly visit of a foster youth in a group home
by a social worker or probation officer to include a private
discussion with the foster youth and for the visit to occur in
the group home.
2)Requires the visit of a foster youth in a foster home by a
social worker or probation officer to occur in the foster
home.
3)Requires a social worker or probation officer to inform a
foster youth placed in a group home or foster home of their
right to have the private discussion either in or outside of
the foster home or group home.
4)Requires a social worker or probation officer to hold a
private discussion with a foster youth outside of the foster
home or group home, if requested by the foster youth.
5)Provides that a private discussion held with a foster youth
does not replace the obligation of the social worker or
probation officer to physically visit the foster home or group
home.
EXISTING LAW
1)Requires each child in foster care placed into a group home to
be visited no less than once per month by a county social
worker or probation officer and requires each visit to include
a private discussion between the foster youth and the social
worker or probation officer, which cannot be held in the
SB 342
Page B
presence or immediate vicinity of group home staff. (WIC
16516.5)
2)Requires a social worker or probation officer, at a regular
visit with a child in a foster care placement, to have a
private discussion with the foster youth, which may not be
held in the presence or immediate vicinity of the foster
parent or caregiver. (WIC 16516.6)
3)Prohibits the social worker or probation officer from
disclosing the information discussed in the private
conversation to the foster parent or caregiver, or group home
staff unless:
a) The social worker or probation officer believes that the
foster youth may be in danger of harming himself or
herself, or others;
b) The social worker or probation officer believes that
information is necessary to meet the needs of the child; or
c) The foster youth consents to the disclosure of the
information. (WIC 16515 and 16516)
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
Child Welfare Services : The purpose of California's Child
Welfare Services (CWS) system is to provide for the protection
and the health and safety of children. Within this purpose, the
desired outcome is to reunite children with their biological
parents, when appropriate, in order to help preserve and
strengthen families. However, if reunification with the
biological family is not appropriate, children are placed in the
best environment possible, whether that is with a relative,
through adoption, or with a guardian, such as a nonrelative
extended family member (NREFM).
In the case of children who are at risk of abuse, neglect or
abandonment, county juvenile courts hold legal jurisdiction, and
children are served by CWS through the appointment of a social
worker. Through this system, there are multiple stages where
the custody of a child or his or her placement is evaluated,
reviewed and determined by the judicial system, in consultation
SB 342
Page C
with the child's social worker, to help provide the best
possible services to the child.
At the time a child is identified as needing child welfare
services and is in the temporary custody of a social worker, the
social worker is required to identify whether there is a
relative or guardian to whom the child may be released, unless
the social worker believes that the child would be at risk of
abuse, neglect or abandonment if placed with that relative or
guardian. (WIC 306 and 309)
The Welfare and Institutions Code also lays out the conditions
under which a court may deem a child a dependent or ward of the
court, including when the parent has been incarcerated or
institutionalized and is unable to arrange for care for the
child, such as placement with a known relative. If the child is
deemed a dependent or ward of the court, the court may maintain
the child in his or her home, remove the child from the home but
with the goal of reunifying the child with his or her family, or
identify another form of permanent placement. Unless the child
is unable to be placed with the parent, the court is required to
give preference to a relative of the child in order to preserve
the child's association with his or her family.
Associated with the placement process, the assigned social
worker develops a case plan for the child, which outlines the
placement for the child, sets forth services necessary for the
child, and outlines the provision of reunification services, if
necessary and appropriate.
Foster care visitation : The visitation of children in foster
care on a regular basis provides numerous benefits ranging from
ensuring the health and safety of a child to helping to either
reunify the child with his or her biological parents or family,
or take the appropriate steps towards permanency, through
adoption or guardianship. It can also help to provide proactive
services that the child may need, including counseling,
educational support, mental health services, and other
supportive services that help to improve the child's quality of
life.
Social worker and probation officer foster care visitation
requirements are established in state statute and the DSS CWS
Manual of Policies and Procedures (MPP). Established pursuant
to DSS' general authority to "formulate, adopt, amend or repeal
SB 342
Page D
regulations and general policies affecting the purposes,
responsibilities, and jurisdiction of the department and which
are consistent with the law and necessary for the administration
of public social services?"<1> the CWS MPP further specifies the
frequency by which a foster youth in a licensed, certified, or
approved foster home is visited.
Although group home visitation requirements are established in
statute, foster home visitations requirements are not. Rather,
they are provided for in the CWS MPP, which requires foster
youth in foster homes to be visited once a month. However,
unlike statute, the MPP permits exceptions for foster home
visits. Specifically, it allows a social worker to have less
frequent visits, up to once every six months provided that the
following criteria are met:
The child has no severe physical or emotional problems
caused or aggravated by the placement;
The child has been in the same placement for at least
six months and the social worker has determined that the
placement is stable; and
The child is visited once each calendar month by social
worker staff of a foster family agency pursuant to the
child's case plan and is documented and reported to the
child's social worker.
Federal visitation requirements : In September 2011, the United
States Congress passed the federal Child and Family Services
Improvement and Innovation Act (P.L. 112-34), which amended part
of Title IV of the Social Security Act to extend the Child and
Family Services Program through federal fiscal year (FFY) 2016.
Among its many provisions, and in recognition of the positive
correlation between frequent caseworker visits and outcomes for
children, states are now required to take necessary steps to
ensure that caseworkers visit at least 90% of children in foster
care, rising to 95% for FFY 2015 and thereafter, each month. It
also requires that the majority of a child's monthly visits
occur in the home. If states fail to comply with these
requirements, they can face penalties for noncompliance, which
could include a reduction in federal funding.
---------------------------
<1> Section 10553(e) of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
SB 342
Page E
According to the United States Department of Health and Human
Services Administration for Children and Families, California
has steadily increased the number of foster youth receiving
visits in the home, from 63% in 2008 to 74% in 2011. However,
progress is still needed to not only ensure federal compliance,
but to help improve the lives of children in foster care.
Need for the bill : With the implementation of CWS realignment
from the state to counties, it has become increasingly important
to enhance state oversight, where necessary, to ensure
compliance with federal child welfare funding requirements and
to help meet federal outcome measures. Additionally, with the
adoption of the federal Child and Family Services Improvement
and Innovation Act, which significantly increased foster home
and group home requirements, the state has needed to take
proactive steps in ensuring greater compliance.
According to the California Youth Connection, the sponsor of
this measure, recent data from DSS demonstrates that
approximately 30% of required social worker visits do not occur
at the foster home or group home where the child lives. This
has resulted in circumstances where a particular group home or
foster home was not visited by a case worker for an extended
period of time. Not only does this raise policy concerns that a
group home or foster home is not being visited as often as it
should, it also raises concerns that the state is not complying
with federal requirements.
This bill makes sound policy sense on several fronts. First, it
would help the state meet federal foster care visitation
requirements by ensuring that visits occur in the foster home or
group home. Second, it enables children in foster care the
right to have a private discussion with their social worker in a
safe place. And third, it enhances existing foster care
visitation statute to ensure that a social worker's or probation
officer's private discussion with a foster youth does not
supplant the requirement to visit the foster youth's foster home
or group home.
Policy consideration : Even though foster home visitation
requirements are laid out in the CWS MPP, and can be considered
equally as stringent as those set forth in statute for group
homes, it lacks the force of statute.
Should the committee choose to pass this measure, it should
SB 342
Page F
consider encouraging the author to address the lack of statutory
clarity relating to the frequency of foster home visitation
requirements. Specifically, it may be of good policy benefit to
the state for foster home and group home visitation requirements
to be aligned with federal visitation requirements. This could
allow for clearer alignment in statute regarding the frequency
of foster home visits while maintaining current state group home
visitation requirements.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
All Saints Church Foster Care Project
California Youth Connection
Children Now
Children's Advocacy Institute
Children's Law Center of California (CLC)
Dependency Legal Group of San Diego
Family Law Section of the State Bar of CA
Juvenile Court Judger of CA
Legal Advocates for Children and Youth (LACY)
National Association of Social Workers, CA Chapter (NASW-CA)
State Public Affairs Committee (SPAC)
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Chris Reefe / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089