BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 710 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 710 (Brown) As Amended June 2, 2015 Majority vote ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes | | | | | | | | | | | |----------------+------+--------------------+--------------------| |Education |5-2 |O'Donnell, McCarty, |Chávez, Kim | | | |Santiago, Thurmond, | | | | |Weber | | | | | | | | | | | | |----------------+------+--------------------+--------------------| |Appropriations |12-0 |Gomez, Bonta, | | | | |Calderon, Daly, | | | | |Eggman, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Eduardo Garcia, | | | | |Gordon, Holden, | | | | |Quirk, Rendon, | | | | |Weber, Wood | | | | | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Requires on or before July 1, 2017, "youth on probation" AB 710 Page 2 to be included in each local control and accountability plan (LCAP). FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee: 1)Minor/absorbable costs to the California Department of Education (CDE) to update the LCAP template. 2)Unknown, likely minor, Proposition 98/General Fund state mandated costs for school districts and county offices of education to include "youth on probation" in the description of annual goals required pursuant to the LCAP. 3)Minor/absorbable costs to the CDE to update the LCAP template, update CALPADS, and provide training and information to local educational agencies (LEAs) on the new data element. COMMENTS: This bill adds youth on probation to the categories of pupils that must be addressed by school district and county office of education (COE) LCAPs. Among other things, each LCAP is required to provide a description of the district's or COE's annual goals for all pupils, including pupils in each of the following numerically significant subgroups: 1)Ethnic subgroups 2)Socioeconomically disadvantaged 3)English learners AB 710 Page 3 4)Pupils with disabilities 5)Foster youth Who are youth on probation? A juvenile may be arrested for a misdemeanor or felony offense or for committing a status offense. Status offenses are acts that are offenses only when committed by a juvenile, such as curfew violations, truancy, running away, and incorrigibility. The California Department of Justice (DOJ), in its annual report, Juvenile Justice in California, reports that there were 96,937 juvenile arrests in 2013. The arrests fell into the following categories: 1)Felony arrests (30,812 or 31.8% of total) 2)Misdemeanor arrests (54,315 or 56.0% of total) 3)Status offenses (11,810 or 12.2% of total) Arrests may result in dismissal, deferred judgment or transfer, remandment to adult court, or one of three types of probation: informal probation, non-ward probation, or wardship probation. Wardship probation, which accounted for 84% of probation outcomes in 2013, is probation in which a minor is declared a ward of the juvenile court and placed on formal probation. According to the DOJ report, 37,615 juveniles were placed on wardship probation in 2013. About 52% of them were sent to their own home or a relative's home. Most juveniles on probation are of color, from a low income family, and male. Bigger challenges, lower outcomes. According to information AB 710 Page 4 provided by the author's office, probationary youth present a number of challenges, including: 1)Their academic level rarely exceeds elementary grade levels 2)Between 30% and 60% have special education needs and disabilities 3)Close to one-third have been subjected to physical/sexual abuse 4)About 20% report "wish[ing] they were dead" 5)Between 50% and 75% have diagnosable mental disorders These challenges result in lower outcomes, in large part because schools are either not willing or able to accommodate their needs. According to an April 2012 report from the Georgetown Law School Human Rights Institute Acts-Finding Mission ("Kept Out: Barriers to Meaningful Education in the School-to-Prison Pipeline"), "Schools use a variety of excuses and evade general school-access requirements in order to keep these students out." Techniques to exclude probationary students from enrollment include citing safety concerns, arguing they are too old and/or have too few credits, and transferring them to another school that is physically inaccessible. The report notes that high stakes accountability systems, such as No Child Left Behind, gives schools an incentive to deny enrollment to probationary students, because their low performance on standardized tests brings the school average down. Analysis Prepared by: Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: AB 710 Page 5 0002549