BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                       AB 379


                                                                      Page  1





        ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


        AB  
        379 (Gordon)


        As Amended  May 28, 2015


        Majority vote


         -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
        |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                 |Noes                  |
        |                |      |                     |                      |
        |                |      |                     |                      |
        |----------------+------+---------------------+----------------------|
        |Education       |6-0   |O'Donnell, Chávez,   |                      |
        |                |      |Kim, McCarty,        |                      |
        |                |      |Santiago, Weber      |                      |
        |                |      |                     |                      |
        |----------------+------+---------------------+----------------------|
        |Appropriations  |17-0  |Gomez, Bigelow,      |                      |
        |                |      |Bonta, Calderon,     |                      |
        |                |      |Chang, Daly, Eggman, |                      |
        |                |      |Gallagher,           |                      |
        |                |      |                     |                      |
        |                |      |                     |                      |
        |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,      |                      |
        |                |      |Gordon, Holden,      |                      |
        |                |      |Jones, Quirk,        |                      |
        |                |      |Rendon, Wagner,      |                      |
        |                |      |Weber, Wood          |                      |
        |                |      |                     |                      |
        |                |      |                     |                      |
         -------------------------------------------------------------------- 










                                                                       AB 379


                                                                      Page  2





        SUMMARY:  Makes complaints alleging violations of certain  
        educational rights afforded to students in foster care and students  
        who are homeless subject to the Uniform Complaint Procedures (UCP),  
        and places limits on the time students can be educated in emergency  
        shelters.  Specifically, this bill:  


        1)Makes certain educational rights afforded to students in foster  
          care and students who are homeless (as noted) subject to the UCP.   
          These include:


           a)   The requirement that a student in foster care who resides in  
             a licensed children's institution attend a school operated by  
             the local educational agency (LEA) except under specified  
             circumstances.


           b)   The requirement that LEAs allow students in foster care to  
             remain enrolled in their school of origin when a placement  
             change occurs.  


           c)   The requirement that LEAs designate a staff person as the  
             educational liaison for foster children, who ensures the proper  
             educational placement and enrollment of students, assists in  
             school transfer, and coordinates with other personnel regarding  
             expulsion proceedings.


           d)   The requirement that the transfer of a student in foster  
             care and his/her records between LEAs occurs within two  
             business days of receipt of a transfer request.  


           e)   The requirement that an LEA ensure that if a student in  
             foster care is absent due to a placement change made by the  
             court or placing agency, or a court required appearance or  
             activity, the student's grades and credits will not be lowered  








                                                                       AB 379


                                                                      Page  3





             due to this absence.


           f)   The requirement that LEAs accept and award full or partial  
             credit for coursework satisfactorily completed by students in  
             foster care or students who are homeless while attending other  
             schools, even if the students do not complete an entire course.  
              The prohibition on an LEA making such a student retake some or  
             all of a course which the student satisfactorily completed in  
             another school, or from retaking an "A to G" course.  The  
             requirement that when a student is awarded partial credit, he  
             or she must be enrolled in the same course in order to complete  
             it.


           g)   The exemption of students in foster care (including those  
             whose court jurisdiction has been terminated) and students who  
             are homeless from any locally adopted graduation requirements  
             which are in excess of state graduation requirements.  


           h)   The requirement that the educational liaison transfer all  
             academic and other records within two business days of a foster  
             child's request for enrollment.  


        1)Requires, for complaints made subject to the UCP by this bill,  
          that the California Department of Education (CDE) issue a written  
          decision regarding the appeal of a complaint within 60 days, and  
          requires that if an LEA or the Superintendent of Public  
          Instruction finds merit in a complaint or an appeal, respectively,  
          the LEA to provide a remedy to the affected students.


        2)Limits the amount of time a student can be educated in an  
          emergency shelter to five days, unless the express written consent  
          of the education rights holder has been provided.  Makes  
          complaints regarding these requirements subject to the UCP.









                                                                       AB 379


                                                                      Page  4






        3)Requires that, if after an investigation either a local or state  
          agency decision finds that an LEA has violated a student's right  
          to remain in his or her school of origin pending a dispute  
          regarding school placement, and that violation has resulted in an  
          interruption in the student's school attendance, the student shall  
          be awarded "compensatory educational services."


        4)Requires that information regarding the above requirements be  
          included in the annual notification required by the UCP.


        EXISTING LAW:  


        1)Grants certain educational rights (many of which are described  
          above) to students in foster care and those who are homeless.  In  
          addition, current law deems students in foster care whose  
          residential placement has been changed, and those who are  
          homeless, to have met residency requirements for the purpose of  
          participation in interscholastic sports and other extracurricular  
          activities, grants certain rights in expulsion proceedings,  
          guarantees equal access to extracurricular activities, and  
          requires education in the least restrictive environment.  Existing  
          law also requires all LEAs to designate a staff person to be the  
          educational liaison for students in foster care.


        2)Through regulation, requires LEAs to adopt uniform complaint  
          procedures through which the public can register complaints  
          regarding educational programs and rights.  (California Code of  
          Regulations, Title 5, Section 4600).  Authorizes a modified  
          complaint process known as "Williams Complaints" through statute  
          (Education Code Section 35186) for complaints regarding  
          instructional materials, emergency or urgent facilities conditions  
          that pose a threat to the health and safety of pupils, teacher  
          vacancy or misassignment, and instructional services provided to  
          students who have not passed the High School Exit Examination. 








                                                                       AB 379


                                                                      Page  5







        FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee: 


        1)Unknown, likely minor, Proposition 98/General Fund state mandated  
          costs related to the expansion of the UCP.  The existing UCP  
          mandate is currently included in the K-12 Mandate Block Grant.  If  
          the CSM determines the requirements of this bill impose a higher  
          level of service, this could place pressure on the Legislature to  
          increase funding under the K-12 Mandate Block Grant.


        2)Unknown administrative costs to the California Department of  
          Education (CDE) to process appeals.  For illustration, when  
          complaints related to charging pupil fees was added to the UCP  
          process in 2013, 121 new claims were submitted in the first nine  
          months.  Annual claims have since leveled to around 40 claims per  
          year. CDE may need additional limited-term staff should this bill  
          result in a similar increase.


        COMMENTS:  


        The "Invisible Achievement Gap ".  A 2013 report by the Center for  
        the Future of Teaching and Learning at WestEd, titled "The Invisible  
        Achievement Gap," for the first time linked education and child  
        welfare data to identify the achievement gap for students in foster  
        care relative to their peers.  It found, based on 2009-10  
        educational data, that students in foster care represented a  
        subgroup distinct in many ways from other low-income students.   
        Among the findings in this report were that foster youth:


        1)Have among the lowest scores in English-language arts. 


        2)Have the lowest scores in mathematics of any subgroup.








                                                                       AB 379


                                                                      Page  6







        3)Have the highest dropout rate, nearly three times the rate of  
          other students.


        4)Have the lowest high school graduation rate of any subgroup.


        The report also found that students in foster care are more likely  
        to change schools during the school year, more likely to be enrolled  
        in low-performing schools, less likely to participate in state  
        assessments, and significantly more likely to be enrolled in  
        nontraditional schools. 


        The 2013 legislation establishing Local Control Funding Formula (AB  
        97 (Budget Committee), Chapter 47, Statutes of 2013) recognized  
        foster youth as a special population of students requiring more  
        attention, and required LEAs to identify ways in which they will  
        improve the educational outcomes of these students in their Local  
        Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs).  A recent report commissioned  
        by the National Youth Law Center on the implementation of these  
        requirements noted that while "LCFF has begun to shine a bright  
        light on the needs of foster youth," problems persist in the areas  
        of data sharing, the shortage of educational rights holders, and  
        compliance with the law regarding records transfer and school  
        enrollment, among others.  The report found that "on balance,  
        initial LCAPs did not recognize the needs of foster youth."


        The Uniform Complaint Procedures.  Required by federal law, the UCP  
        was established in 1991 as a means of creating a "uniform system of  
        complaint processing" for educational programs.  The authority for  
        this process is located in regulations, not state statute.


        These regulations require the adoption of the UCP by school  
        districts, county offices of education, charter schools receiving  








                                                                       AB 379


                                                                      Page  7





        federal funds, and local public or private agencies which receive  
        direct or indirect state funding to provide school programs or  
        special education or related services.  The UCP is used for  
        complaints regarding a number of state and federal programs.  In  
        addition, complaints may be filed under the UCP regarding  
        discrimination, harassment, bullying, intimidation, unlawful pupil  
        fees, certain charter school requirements, and violations of the law  
        establishing LCAPs.  A modified process for complaints was  
        established by legislation implementing part of the settlement of  
        the Eliezer Williams, et al., vs. State of California, et al. case  
        (SB 2727 (Daucher), Chapter 903, Statutes of 2004).  These  
        complaints are known as "Williams Complaints." 




        Analysis Prepared by:                                               
        Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087  FN: 0000783