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