BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 528
Page A
Date of Hearing: June 18, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES
Mark Stone, Chair
SB 528 (Yee) - As Amended: May 28, 2013
SENATE VOTE : 33-0
SUBJECT : Dependents: care and treatment: minor and nonminor
dependent parents
SUMMARY : This measure provides additional considerations for
foster youth in relation to the provision of child care and
access to medical care. Specifically, this bill :
1)Adds parenting minor and nonminor dependents (NMD) to the list
of families eligible for federal and state subsidized child
care.
2)For purposes of determining admission priority for an
available subsidized child care placement when two or more
families in relation to income are equally eligible, requires
that in addition to a family with a child with special needs,
a family in which one or both parents are dependents or NMDs
shall be admitted first.
3)Adds greater specificity to the types of medical care a
dependent minor may consent to for diagnosis and treatment, as
specified, and permits a social worker to inform a dependent
over the age of 12 of his or her right to consent to and
receive those health care services, as specified.
4)Permits social workers to provide dependent children with
age-appropriate, medically accurate information about sexual
development, reproductive health, and prevention of unplanned
pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections on an ongoing
basis.
5)Adds to the Foster Youth Bill of Rights the right of a minor
or nonminor in foster care to have access to age-appropriate
information about reproductive health, the prevention of
unplanned pregnancy, and the prevention and treatment of
sexually transmitted infections at 12 years of age or older.
6)States the intent of the Legislature to ensure that complete
SB 528
Page B
and accurate data on parenting minor and NMDs and their
children is collected, and that the Department of Social
Services (DSS) shall ensure that the following information is
publicly available on a quarterly basis by county about
parenting minor and nonminor dependents and their children:
total number of children, their age, their ethnic group, their
placement type, and their time in care.
7)Permits child welfare agencies (CWA) to provide dependents and
NMDs with access to social workers or resource specialists who
are trained on the needs of parenting teenagers and available
resources.
8)Encourages and permits CWAs to update a dependent's or NMD's
case plan with specified pregnant and parenting information in
collaboration with specified individuals within 60 days of
being notified that a dependent or NMD has become pregnant.
9)Permits child welfare agencies when updating the case plan, to
hold a specialized conference to assist pregnant or parenting
foster youth and non-minor dependents as specified, to inform
the case plan.
10)Requires the specialized conference to include the pregnant
or parenting minor or non-minor dependent, family members and
other supportive adults, and the specially trained social
worker or resource specialist. Permits the specialized
conference to include other individuals, as specified.
11)Clarifies that participation in the specialized conference is
voluntary on the part of the foster youth or non-minor
dependent and assistance in identifying and accessing
resources is not dependent on participation in the conference.
12)Permits child welfare agencies, local educational agencies,
and child care resource and referral agencies to make
reasonable and coordinated efforts to ensure that minor
parents and non-minor dependent parents who have not completed
high school have access to school programs that provide onsite
or coordinated child care, and that minor dependent parents
are given priority for subsidized child care.
EXISTING LAW
1)States that the purpose of foster care law is to provide
SB 528
Page C
maximum safety and protection for children who are currently
being physically, sexually, emotionally abused, neglected, or
exploited, and to ensure the safety, protection, and physical
and emotional well-being of children who are at risk of harm.
( WIC 300.2)
2)States the intent of the Legislature to preserve and
strengthen a child's family ties whenever possible and to
reunify a foster youth with his or her biological family
whenever possible, or to provide a permanent placement
alternative, such as adoption or guardianship. (WIC 300.2)
3)Allows a juvenile court to adjudge a child a ward or a
dependent of the court for specified reasons, including but
not limited to if the child has been left without any
provision for support, as specified. (WIC 300)
4)Establishes a state and local system of child welfare
services, including foster care, for children who have been
adjudged by the court to be at risk or have been abused or
neglected, as specified. (WIC 202)
5)Establishes a process for the identification and placement of
a ward or dependent of the court with a parent, relative or
extended relative or other form of guardianship. (WIC 300)
6)Establishes the California Child Development Services Act
(CCDSA) to provide a comprehensive, community-based,
coordinated, and cost-effective system of child care and
development services for children from birth to age 13 with
the purpose of enhancing the social, emotional, physical, and
intellectual development of children. (EDC 8200)
7)States the intent of the Legislature that all families have
access to child care and development services, regardless of
their demographic background, in order to help them attain
financial stability through employment, while maximizing
growth and development of their children, and enhancing their
parenting skills through participation in child care and
development programs. (EDC 8202)
8)Defines child care and development services as care and
services designed to meet a wide variety of needs of children
and their families, while their parents or guardians are
working, in training, seeking employment, incapacitated, or in
SB 528
Page D
need of respite. (EDC 8208)
9)Requires the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SSPI)
to adopt rules and regulations on eligibility, enrollment and
priority of child care and development services for eligible
children and their families. (EDC 8263)
10)Requires a social worker to acquire the consent of a parent
or permission from the court to authorize medical, surgical,
dental or other remedial care to a child who is in temporary
custody. (WIC 369(a))
11)Requires a social worker to acquire permission from the court
to authorize medical, surgical, dental or other remedial care
to a child who is in temporary custody if there is no parent
or guardian who is capable of providing consent. (WIC 369(b))
12)Permits, under specified emergency conditions, a licensed
physician to provide emergency medical, surgical, or other
remedial care to a child in temporary custody without the
consent of the parent or permission from the court. (WIC
369(d))
13)Permits a court, in ordering the provision of medical,
surgical, dental or other remedial care, to release the
information of the ordered care to a social worker, parole
officer or other qualified individual or agency that is under
court order to provide for the child's welfare. (WIC 369(e))
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
California's Child Welfare Services (CWS) System : Historically,
it has been the stated policy of California that when a child is
removed from the home, first preference should be given to
placing the child with another parent or with his or her
relatives whenever possible and appropriate. This has helped to
preserve and strengthen the social bedrock of our society, by
keeping families together and reducing society's reliance on its
social welfare system.
The purpose of the state's 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
SB 528
Page E
biological parents, when appropriate, 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 nonrelated
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 the child or his or her placement is evaluated,
reviewed and determined by the judicial system, in consultation
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 a 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 Sections 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, the assigned social worker shall develop 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.
California's Early Care and Education System : There are
generally two types of child development providers in the state;
commonly referred to as either Title 22 or Title 5 programs.
SB 528
Page F
Title 22 refers to Division 2 of Title 22 of the California Code
of Regulations (CCR), which is governed by DSS, and Title 5
refers to Divisions 19 and 19.5 of the CCR, which is governed by
the California Department of Education (CDE).
Title 22 establishes general health and safety requirements,
staff to child ratios, and basic provider training
qualifications. In order for any person to operate a child
development program, the program must first become a licensed
provider under Title 22. Title 22 providers set their own rates
and may voluntarily accept child development subsidy vouchers,
along with statutorily established family fees, provided through
the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids
(CalWORKs) program or other state-funded child care subsidy
programs. Voucher rates are set by the Regional Market Rate
(RMR), which is generally intended to reflect the true regional
cost of care in the private child care market. As established
in AB 1497 of 2012, the education budget trailer bill (Chapter
29, Statutes of 2012), the RMR is currently set at the 85th
percentile of the 2005 RMR Survey, and the license-exempt child
care providers ceiling at 60% of the Family Child Care Home
ceilings, effective July 1, 2012.
According to DSS, as of February 6, 2013, there were
approximately 47,477 child care agencies with a licensed
capacity to serve up to 1,095,672 children in California.
Title 5 governs the state's subsidized child development
programs, which are overseen by the CDE. These programs must be
licensed by DSS under Title 22 regulations and must meet higher
quality standards established under Title 5 regulations, which
include specified educational components and instruction.
It is important to note that Title 5 programs, as a condition of
being contracted with the CDE, must accept and serve needy and
eligible subsidized children. Title 5 programs are funded
through the receipt of the Standard Reimbursement Rate (SRR)
based upon the number of children enrolled and the number of
hours of care, as well as statutorily established family fees.
Whereas a Title 22 program accepting a voucher would be
reimbursed by the RMR, which is generally higher than the SRR
because of its association with the regional private provider
market, a Title 5 program is reimbursed using the SRR.
The SRR is statutorily set and is supposed to be increased
SB 528
Page G
annually with a cost of living adjustment (COLA), however, a
COLA has not been provided since the 2007-08 fiscal year. The
SRR currently stands at $34.38 for one full-day of enrolled
care, which is defined by regulation as six and one half hours
of care. There are "adjustment factors" that are applied to the
SRR to reflect the increased cost of care for the varying ages
and needs of children, i.e., infants and toddlers, special
needs, etc. However, the adjustment factors have also not
changed since they were established in AB 2311 (Chu) Chapter
435, Statutes of 2002.
Title 5 programs earn their SRR reimbursement based upon child
days of enrollment, meaning they are reimbursed at the rate of
$34.38 per day for each day the needy or eligible child receives
care. This creates challenges for Title 5 programs, as they
budget based upon the total number of days and children they
anticipate having to serve in a fiscal year. Add into this the
uncertainty of a child's regular and continuous enrollment, a
family being deemed as no longer eligible or in need of care,
and fluctuating statewide budgets, it becomes a formidable
challenge for a Title 5 program to fully earn their contract's
maximum reimbursable amount (MRA). The goal set by CDE for
Title 5 programs is to annually earn no less than 98% of their
MRA.
According to CDE, as of the 2009-10 fiscal year, there were
approximately 1,420 service contracts with nearly 770 public and
private agencies supporting and providing services to 489,200
children. Title 5 providers contract with the CDE and include
school districts, county offices of education, cities, local
park and recreation districts, county welfare departments, other
public entities, community-based organizations, and private
agencies.
Prioritizing eligibility and triaging access to child care and
development (CCD) programs : The state currently uses CCD
subsidized program funding in a number of ways, yet with one
primary purpose; to provide subsidized child care slots to
low-income needy families that enable parents to seek out and
obtain work. Without that fundamental access, it further
restricts the limited opportunities low-income families, single
parent or otherwise, have to become employed. According to the
California Budget Project, 75% of the individuals who receive
cash assistance from the California Work Opportunity and
Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, the state's
SB 528
Page H
welfare-to-work program, are children.<1> Without this
fundamental social services program, families facing the current
reality of the restructured CalWORKs program, i.e., the two-year
truncated program, have little opportunity to develop and
demonstrate the necessary workforce skills that merit
employment. Without available subsidized CCD program slots for
children, many CalWORKs families face the reality of foregoing
work opportunities to remain at home to care for their children.
Within the current structure is also the important
acknowledgement and recognition that children in the foster care
system are deserving of much needed early child care and
development access. To accommodate this access and provide, as
much as possible, the opportunity for age-eligible foster care
children to experience and benefit from CCD programs, statutory
priority is set for children who are 1) in child protective
services, 2) at-risk of neglect or abuse, or 3) provided
priority due to their families' income. Recognizing the dynamic
and pressure to balance the need to serve both populations,
low-income and CalWORKs children and eligible foster youth, the
state has sought middle ground with respect to this policy.
The state's subsidized CCD system attempts to balance the
established priority needs of needy and eligible low-income
youth with the needs of eligible foster youth through the
prioritization of access to child care. Compounded within this
approach is that the needs of both populations far outweigh the
available supply of subsidized CCD program slots. Recognizing
that the priority of the subsidized CCD system is primarily to
serve families struggling to meet CalWORKs welfare-to-work
requirements, which have been substantially reduced through the
adoption of the state's effort to realign social welfare
programs to counties, the desire to provide funding to serve
these families with available CCD slots competes with the
priority to serve children in foster care.
In an attempt to serve both populations, the state has adopted
policies that place first priority of enrollment in CCD programs
for children being served by the child protective services
system and children at risk of abuse and neglect. Remaining
---------------------------
<1> "Cuts and Consequences: Key Facts About the CalWORKS Program
in the Aftermath of the Great Recession" - Slide 16. The
California Budget Project. February 2012.
http://www.cbp.org/documents/120224_CalWORKs_KeyFacts.pdf
SB 528
Page I
child care slots are then made available based upon the
lowest-income child first. In essence, the state uses triaging
to address the substantial yet unmet need for child care.
Inherently, this is an unfair scenario; placing children of
varying needs in unfair and undesirable situations waiting for
much needed child care where it can become almost unfathomable
and immoral to decide which child deserves the care the most.
For purposes of foster youth, the state has several mechanisms
it uses to prioritize their eligibility for child care. First,
any child who is placed into child protective services, i.e., a
child in temporary custody but not yet ruled a dependent of the
court (foster care) or is deemed to be at risk of abuse and
neglect is provided first priority for placement into an
available subsidized CCD program slot. If a foster youth does
not meet this criteria, the CDE, for purposes of income
eligibility, quantifies them as a "family of one," meaning that
they have no income and therefore are placed at the top of the
"lowest income first" list.
Understanding Supply and Demand : In 1997, the state developed a
nine-county pilot program to consolidate waiting lists for
subsidized child care programs to better organize and prioritize
enrollment of eligible and needy children. This nine-county
pilot was expanded statewide and made permanent in 2005.
Referred to as the Centralized Eligibility List (CEL), it not
only became a valuable tool to help prioritize enrollment based
upon eligibility and need, it also helped to demonstrate the
need for subsidized child care and funding county-by-county and
statewide.
The state annually appropriated $7.9 million to operate all 58
county CELs and the statewide CEL. Unfortunately, due to the
ongoing budget deficit at the time, funding for CEL was
eliminated in the Budget Act of 2011 (Senate Bill 87, Chapter
33). At the time of its elimination, there were approximately
240,000 eligible and needy children waiting for a subsidized
child care slot to open up. Since then, some counties have
pursued maintaining their own CEL with existing local funds, but
it remains difficult to accurately estimate the total number of
needy and eligible families and children waiting for subsidized
child care.
Using the number of eligible and needy children who were on the
statewide CEL in 2011, and taking into account the nearly $700
SB 528
Page J
million, or 42% of subsidized child care funding that has been
cut from the budget over the past five years, it is not
unreasonable to estimate that the number of eligible and needy
children waiting for subsidized child care surpasses 300,000
children in need of care statewide.
However, current law does not provide clear priority for how
families in which one or both parents are dependents or NMDs are
prioritized for purposes of placement on a waiting list for an
available subsidized child care slot. Although a dependent or
NMD is considered a "family of one," current law is unclear as
to whether their income is taken into consideration for purposes
of the prioritization of their child on a waiting list for a
subsidized child care slot.
Need for the bill : This bill clarifies current law by adding a
child of a dependent or NMD to the list of families who are
eligible and in need of subsidized child care. Although a child
of a dependent or NMD would likely be placed at the top of the
list due to the likelihood that their parent(s) have little or
no income, this added language will help to ensure that Title 5
programs take into consideration prioritization of children of
foster youth when a subsidized child care slot becomes
available.
Recognizing that children of dependents or NMDs are, according
to the John Burton Foundation, five times more likely to enter
into foster care than their peers, and because the number of
these children is likely to be extremely low, it is not
unreasonable to provide additional priority considerations given
their great need for additional developmental support.
Pregnant and Parenting Foster Youth : Numerous studies have
demonstrated the substantial challenges children in foster care
face on a daily basis. They are more likely to suffer from
substance abuse, be victims of physical and sexual assault, lack
access to quality preventative health care, including
reproductive services, and are less likely to graduate from high
school. One study of foster youth in Chicago estimated that
approximately half of young women in foster care will be mothers
when they reach age 18 and that at least 30% of the young
mothers in foster care will experience a second pregnancy before
the age of 21.
SB 528
Page K
Additionally, the study found a strong likelihood that a
significant number of them will have 2 or more children by the
time they reach age 19. The study indicated that "school
performance among these foster youth was poor" and that the
majority of youth included in the study exited care without a
GED or diploma and identified a lack of access to reliable child
care as a barrier in need of further study. The same study
found that children of foster youth may be especially vulnerable
to abuse and neglect - 22% of mothers had been investigated for
abuse and neglect and 11% had a child in foster care<2>.
Research shows that teen mothers who stay in school are equally
as likely to graduate as teenage girls with no children; however
those who drop out before or shortly after childbirth are only
half as likely to return to school and graduate as are childless
youth who dropout. The same study also indicated that preschool
children of teen mothers tend to show some delay of cognitive
development as well as more behavior problems and more
aggressive behavior than children of older mothers, while
adolescent children of teen mothers experience high rates of
grade failure, delinquency, and early sexual activity.
(Constantine, N., and Nevarez, C.)<3>
Additionally, the study estimated that the annual net costs to
California taxpayers related to births to teen mothers was $870
million, and annual net societal costs to the state was $3.6
billion.<4>
Access to health care for foster youth : WIC Section 369 sets
forth requirements under which consent to medical, surgical,
dental or other remedial care may be acquired for a child in
temporary custody. Specifically, it requires that either
parental consent or permission of the juvenile court be provided
in order to provide any medical, surgical, dental or other
---------------------------
<2>
http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/Pregnant_Foster_You
th_final_081109.pdf
<3> http://teenbirths.phi.org
<4> Ibid.
SB 528
Page L
remedial care. It also provides specific consent authority to
the social worker, but only in cases where emergency care is
needed to address an emergency situation.
This bill would clarify that a dependent minor's right to
consent to specified medical or mental health care is not
impaired because a court or social worker has authorized the
care. This bill would also require the social worker to inform
the dependent of this right.
Writing for the need of the bill, the author states:
Currently, young parents in the foster care system face
both the challenges of being in foster care as well as the
challenges of being a young, usually single, parent.
Studies of both groups have found that they will experience
higher than average rates of poverty, unemployment and low
educational attainment. While this has long been the case,
the issue of parenting youth in foster care has become more
pressing with the implementation of extended foster care in
California.
Research from the University of Chicago suggests that
extending foster care to age 21 will roughly double the
incidence of parenting youth in foster care. Given this,
it is important that California's foster care system adapt
itself to meet the real needs of parenting youth and their
children. Doing so provides an important opportunity both
to better serve parenting foster youth and meet the needs
of their children in their first, most critical years of
life.
This bill seeks to help support foster youth who are
pregnant and parenting be successful in their situation and
help end the intergenerational cycle within the foster care
system.
PRIOR AND RELATED LEGISLATION
AB 1187 (Mansoor) from 2013
This measure would require DSS to amend the foster care state
plan to allow counties to use state subsidized child care and
development (CCD) funds and After School Education and Safety
(ASES) Program funds as part of the 50/50 match for federal
Title IV-E Foster Care child care funding. It would also align
SB 528
Page M
current requirements for counties should they choose to utilize
state subsidized CCD funds and/or ASES program funds as their
local match for federal Title IV-E Foster Care.
AB 1187 is currently a two-year bill and is in the Assembly
Human Services Committee.
SB 244 (Wright) from 2009
This measure would have granted priority for eligibility of and
enrollment for children of foster youth and adopted children
ages birth to five if enrolling in a licensed child care program
or one offered by a school district or county office of
education. SB 244 also addressed priorities for enrollment of
dependent children in the California State Preschool Program.
SB 244 passed the Assembly Human Services Committee but was not
heard by the Assembly Education Committee.
AB 769 (Torres) from 2009
This measure would have extended priority for enrollment in a
state preschool program to children who have a biological parent
who is, or who has been within the previous six months, under
the jurisdiction of the delinquency or dependency court.
AB 769 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger, whose veto message
read:
This bill results in significant Proposition 98 General
Fund costs pressures. Absent additional funding to support
this policy shift, enacting this measure would result in
denying access to state funded preschool programs to other
low income families who are currently on waiting lists for
subsidized care. Moreover, children of those under the
jurisdiction of the juvenile court system already may
access child care on a priority basis under current law, to
the extent that they are at risk of abuse or neglect.
RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS
Keeping with the intent of the bill to provide services and
protections for both minor dependents and nonminor dependents
who are parents, references to nonminor dependent parents are
needed to ensure inclusivity.
Staff recommends the following technical amendments:
SB 528
Page N
1.On page 11, line 13 delete "children" and insert "minors and
nonminors"
2.On page 13, line 24 after "minor" insert "and nonminor
dependent"
3.On page 14, line 27 after "minor" insert "and nonminor
dependent"
4.On page 14, line 35 after "minor" insert "and nonminor"
5.On page 14, line 39 delete "dependent" and after "minor"
insert "and nonminor dependent"
DOUBLE REFERRAL . This bill has been double-referred. Should
this bill pass out of this committee, it will be referred to the
Assembly Judiciary Committee.
SB 528
Page O
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
John Burton Foundation (Sponsor)
A Better Way
Abode Services
ACLU
Alameda County Office of Education
Alternative Family Services
Advancement Project
Aspiranet
Bay Area Youth Centers
Bill Wilson Center
Black Women for Wellness
California Adolescent Health Collaborative
California Alliance of Child and Family Services
California Alternative Payment Program Association
California Attorneys for Criminal Justice
California Coalition for Youth
California Federation of Teachers
California Latinas for Reproductive Justice
California Public Defenders Association
California State PTA
California Women's Law Center
Casa de Amparo
Children's Advocacy Institute
Children's Law Center of California
Citizens for Choice
Coalition For Youth (CCY)
Alameda County Court Appointed Special Advocates (ACCASA)
Covenant House California
Crittenton Services for Children and Families
Dependency Legal Group of San Diego
East Bay Children's Law Offices
EMQ Families First
Every Child Foundation
Family Care Network, INC.
Feminist Majority
First Place for Youth
Five Acres
Fred Finch Center
Gavilan College, EOPS
Goldman School of Public Policy, UC Berkeley
SB 528
Page P
Hillsides
Home Start
Housing California
Justice Policy Institute
Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program
InVision Shelter Network
Larkin Street Youth Services
League of Women Voters of California
Legal Services for Children
LIFETIME
Moorpark College
Mountain Circle Family Services
National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and
Youth
National Association of Social Workers - California Chapter
(NASW)
National Center for Youth Law
National Council of Jewish Women
National Foster Parent Association
New Alternatives, INC
NYC Children's Services, Theresa Moser, Attorney
Oakland Unified School District, Lydell K Willis
OPTIMIST Youth Homes & Family Services
Peacock Acres
Promesa Behavioral Health
Redwood Children's Services, Inc.
Seneca Family Agencies
St. Anne's
Transition Age Foster Youth (TAY), Santa Cruz County
Twigs to Trees Inc.
Urban Counties Caucus
UCSF Research Director, Janet Malvin, Ph.D.
University of Southern California School of Social Work
West Coast Children's Clinic
Western Center on Law & Poverty
Youth and Family Programs
Youth and Family Services YMCA, Santa Barbara
YWCA Santa Monica
Social Advocates for Youth
Stars Community Services
Stars Behavioral Health Group
61 Individuals
Opposition
SB 528
Page Q
California Right to Life Committee, Inc.
Analysis Prepared by : Chris Reefe / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089