BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES
Senator McGuire, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 1883
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Cooley |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|----------+-----------------------+-----------+-----------------|
|Version: |April 5, 2016 |Hearing |June 28, 2016 |
| | |Date: | |
|----------+-----------------------+-----------+-----------------|
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Mareva Brown |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Child sexual abuse: prevention pilot program
SUMMARY
This bill establishes a three-year pilot program in no more than
three counties, selected by the California Department of Social
Services (CDSS), to provide child sexual abuse prevention and
intervention services through public or private nonprofit
programs. It appropriates $50,000 annually from the General Fund
to each county and encourages priority to fund existing
prevention programs with demonstrated effectiveness in child
sexual abuse or commercial sexual exploitation, as specified. It
requires annual reporting to the state and Legislature. This
bill requires a two-thirds vote.
ABSTRACT
Existing law:
1) Under federal law, establishes the Child Abuse
Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) which provides grant
funding to applicant states to improve child protective
service systems and child abuse prevention activities.
Requires submission of a state plan. (42 U.S.C. 5106 et
seq)
2) Establishes under federal law and implements under state
law, the Community Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP)
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageB
of?
program to provide formula grant funding for community
based child abuse prevention programs. (42 U.S.C. 5116 and
WIC 18966.1)
3) Establishes the Office of Child Abuse Prevention (OCAP)
within CDSS and designates the office to apply for and
administer federal funds for child abuse prevention, as
specified. (WIC 18950 et seq.)
4) Under state law, establishes the Child Abuse Prevention,
Intervention and Treatment Program (CAPIT) to fund projects
and services related to the prevention, intervention and
treatment of child abuse in California. (WIC 18960 et seq.)
5) Establishes the State Children's Trust Fund, to fund
innovative child abuse and neglect prevention and
intervention projects and permits individuals to designate
income taxes, counties to designate a portion of birth
certificate fees, and private individuals to grant, gift
and bequeath monies to the fund. (WIC 18965 et seq, RTC
18711)
6) Under the Child Abuse Prevention Coordinating Council
Act permits the establishment of Child Abuse Prevention
Coordinating Councils, designated by the County Board of
Supervisors and funded by the State Children's Trust Fund
to coordinate each county's efforts to prevent and respond
to child abuse and neglect. (WIC 18980 et seq)
7) Establishes the State Family Preservation program,
administered by OCAP, to avoid or limit out-of-home
placement of children who have experienced child abuse or
neglect within the family. Funds have been realigned to
counties and are used to meet MOE requirements. (WIC
16500.5 et seq)
8) Establishes the California Child and Family Services
Review (C-CFSR) process to ensure that each county
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageC
of?
allocates CAPIT revenues through the use of an accountable
process that utilizes a multidisciplinary approach,
explains how funded services are coordinated with the array
of services available in the county, and ensures funded
services are based on priority unmet need. (WIC 10601.2)
This bill:
1) Establishes a pilot program entitled The Child Sexual
Abuse Prevention Program in no more than three counties to
provide child sexual abuse prevention and intervention
services through public or private nonprofit programs that
provide child sexual abuse prevention and intervention
services.
2) Appropriates $50,000 annually from the General Fund to
each county that volunteers, and is selected for the
pilot program.
3) Requires CDSS to select counties for the pilot program
from among the counties that notify the department of their
intention to participate, based on the following criteria:
a. The county has significant incidences of child
sexual abuse or commercially sexually exploited
children.
b. The county has identified a public or private
nonprofit organization with experience in child sexual
abuse issues or commercial sexual exploitation issues
that will act as the primary administrator for the
pilot program.
c. A county shall be given priority for
demonstrating that school districts within its
jurisdiction are utilizing moneys from the federal
Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants to
provide training for all school personnel on
preventing and recognizing child sexual abuse.
4) Encourages each participating county to efficiently use
these funds by giving priority to programs currently
serving the needs of at-risk children, as defined, and that
have demonstrated effectiveness in child sexual abuse
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageD
of?
prevention or intervention or commercial sexual
exploitation prevention or intervention.
5) Requires that the funds appropriated under this section
not supplant or replace any existing funding for programs
currently serving the needs of at-risk children, but may
only supplement the expansion of existing programs or the
collaboration of separate existing programs within the
county, or fund newly created programs within the county if
no current programs exist to serve the needs of children at
risk of sexual abuse or commercial sexual exploitation.
6) Requires that a county board of supervisors allocate the
pilot program funds and permits the county to delegate
administration of the pilot to the county social services
agency.
7) Establishes that public or private nonprofit agencies
shall be eligible for funding provided that evidence is
submitted as part of the application that the proposed
services are not duplicated in the community, are based on
needs of children at risk, and are supported by a local
public agency, including, the county welfare department, a
public law enforcement agency, the county probation, public
health or mental health departments, the county board of
supervisors or any school district.
8) Requires the administering local agency, with oversight
and review from the county board of supervisors, to include
and integrate the pilot program in the county system
improvement plan, county self-assessments, and the county
plan for other federal and state child abuse prevention
programs.
9) Requires that, to the extent applicable, the county
provide similar assurances, data, and outcome assessments
about the pilot programs to the state Office of Child Abuse
Prevention as are provided regarding other federal and
state child abuse prevention programs.
10) Requires each participating county to annually report to
the CDSS, the Senate and Assembly Committees on Human
Services, information including, but not limited to:
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageE
of?
a. Changing public attitudes or public opinion
polls showing increased awareness of prevention
techniques for child sexual abuse.
b. The amount of educational materials
distributed to stakeholder groups that address and
promote child sexual abuse prevention and prevention
techniques.
c. Statistics on the increase or decrease of
reports of child sexual abuse within the county.
d. Identified best practices used by the pilot
program that may be replicated and used by other
counties, including, but not limited to, community
outreach, data collection and analysis, and the
creation of educational materials.
11) Sunsets the pilot program on January 1, 2020.
FISCAL IMPACT
According to an analysis by the Assembly Committee on
Appropriations, this bill will incur annual costs of up to
$150,000 (GF) through 2019 to fund up to three pilot counties,
as well as minor administrative costs (GF) to CDSS to review
applications for county pilot selection and to review annual
reports.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Purpose of the bill:
According to the author, although the state aggressively
prosecutes child sexual predators, requires mandated reporting
for suspected abuse and has recently increased funding for
commercially sexually exploited children (CSEC), there is a lack
of focus on preventing the abuse before it occurs. The author
states funding and training are needed to teach adults about
warning signs of child sexual abuse. "By building up community
collaboration, this measure strengthens the prioritization of
stopping child abuse," the author states.
Child abuse and neglect
In 2014, there were more than 700,000 victims of abuse and
neglect nationwide, resulting in a rate of 9.4 victims per 1,000
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageF
of?
children in the population. Of that number 8.3 percent - or
roughly 60,000 children per year - were victims of sexual abuse,
according to federal child abuse and reporting data reported to
the US Administration on Families and Children.<1> Approximately
62,000 children were under the custody of California's child
welfare system as of October 2015, according to the state's
child welfare case management system.
The commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) is a form
of human trafficking in which a child younger than 18 is caused
or persuaded to engage in a sexual act for financial or other
economic reasons. Under this definition, an economic exchange
may be either for money or non-monetary things, such as food,
shelter, drugs - commonly called "survival sex."<2>
The FBI's Innocence Lost National Initiative, which was launched
in June 2003, has rescued more than 4,800 children nationwide
who were forced to engage in commercial sex activities, as well
as successfully prosecuting more than 2,000 pimps and other
adults. More than 100,000 children across the nation were
believed to be involved in sex trafficking annually. The issue
is especially acute in California, where San Francisco, Los
Angeles and San Diego have been identified by the FBI as areas
of "high intensity child prostitution."
Child Abuse Prevention Funding
Federal and state funding has been targeted to child abuse and
neglect prevention for decades. In California, prevention grants
are administered by the Office of Child Abuse Prevention (OCAP)
within CDSS. OCAP provides state oversight and administers
federal and state grants for child abuse prevention and
treatment, including grants under the Child Abuse Prevention and
---------------------------
<1> U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration
for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and
Families, Children's Bureau. (2016). Child maltreatment 2014.
<2> Estes and Weiner. "The Commercial Sexual Exploitation of
Children In the U. S., Canada and Mexico." Univ. of PA, 2002.
http://www.sp2.upenn.edu/restes/CSEC_Files/Exec_Sum_020220.pdf
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageG
of?
Treatment Act (CAPTA); Community Based Child Abuse Prevention
(CBCAP); and Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF).
Additionally, California began recently providing services to
Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC). Within the
statutorily established parameters for each grant, states have
substantial flexibility, and services provided under the grants
are required to be coordinated with other programs serving
children.
Title IV-B CWS and Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program
(PSSF)
Two key sources of federal grant funding for California provide
approximately $32 million (Title IV-B CWS program) and $33
million (PSSF) annually. The Title IV-B program, under a 75
percent federal match formula, is designed to protect and
promote the welfare of all children, prevent child abuse and
neglect, permit children to remain safely in or return safely to
their own homes and to promote the safety, permanency, and
well-being of children in foster care or adoptive families.<3>
This program includes a requirement for a state plan documenting
various aspects of the state's administration of the federal
program including protections and services offered to children,
coordination with other programs, the achievement of various
performance requirements and the operation of a statewide
information system enabling the state to monitor the wellbeing
of children in foster care.
The PSSF program encourages the development or expansion of
community-based child and family support services, family
preservation services, family reunification services, and
adoption promotion and support services. California, like most
states, spends the majority of these funds on child and family
support services. States are required to establish a five-year
Child and Family Services Plan and an annual Progress and
---------------------------
---------------------------
<3> Congressional Research Service. "Child Welfare: Funding for
Child and Family Services Authorized Under Title IV-B of the
Social Security Act"
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageH
of?
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageI
of?
Services Review,<4> which is required to integrate various state
plans.
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act and Community Based
Child Abuse Prevention
The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, or CAPTA, provides
$4.4 million in grant funding with no state match for state
improvements to the child protective services systems, to
support child abuse prevention activities, and to fund research
and demonstration projects aimed at preventing child
maltreatment. Included in this statute is a requirement for
funds to be coordinated with other child welfare programs and
funding.
Under CAPTA, the Community Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP)
grant supports local efforts to prevent child abuse and neglect
and to coordinate resources and activities to support families.
California targets its CBCAP funding to improve public awareness
and education about preventing child abuse, and to provide
supportive services to vulnerable populations and families
including mental health care, substance abuse, respite care,
housing, and transportation.
In the current year, $3.1 million in CBCAP funds are allocated
by the state Office of Child Abuse Prevention to counties that
have submitted applications. Smaller counties receive funds to
supplement County Children's Trust Fund accounts of less than
$20,000. The other applicant counties receive a base award of
$10,000, and the remainder of the money is distributed on a
population-based formula. In 2013, all counties except San
Bernardino applied to receive funds with the largest grant
awarded to Los Angeles County ($336,000). Many grants are of
size similar to that envisioned by this bill, including
---------------------------
<4> Title IV-B, Section 432(a)(2) and (5)
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageJ
of?
Sacramento County's ($60,000).<5>
State Child Abuse Prevention Services
In addition to federal grant funding, California has established
a variety of programs to prevent child abuse, and a system of
state and local agencies to coordinate efforts.
Office of Child Abuse Prevention (OCAP)
OCAP provides state oversight of the federal programs, as well
as the Child Abuse Prevention Intervention and Treatment (CAPIT)
program. It manages a variety of other state projects, such as
the Strengthening Families Initiative, the Family Development
Matrix Project, the Safe Kids California Project, the Linkages
Project and others. OCAP also oversees submission of the
county-prepared plans that address how prevention and early
intervention activities are coordinated and how services will be
provided. Such plans are a component of California's compliance
with federal reporting requirements for the administration of
federal grants.
Child Abuse Prevention Councils (CAPCs)
At the county level, the Board of Supervisors appoints Child
Abuse Prevention Councils, to coordinate the community's efforts
to prevent and respond to child abuse and neglect. Councils are
made up of representatives from county child welfare, probation,
and licensing agencies; law enforcement, the district attorney,
the courts, and coroner; medical and mental health providers,
community-based social service providers, public and private
schools; and community volunteers, civic organizations and
religious institutions.
Child Abuse Prevention Intervention and Treatment Program
(CAPIT)
The CAPIT program provides state and local funds to fulfill the
matching requirements established under the federal CBCAP
---------------------------
<5> ACIN NO. I-70-13
http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/lettersnotices/EntRes/getinfo/acin/201
3/I-70_13.pdf
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageK
of?
program. Services are targeted to children who are at high risk,
including those currently served by county welfare departments,
and children referred by legal, medical, or social service
agencies. Funding is prioritized for programs operated by
non-profit agencies that provide services to isolated families
with children aged 5 or younger, home visiting programs and
service to child victims of crime.
Under California statute (WIC 18960), CAPIT projects must be
selected using specified criteria, with priority given to
private nonprofit agencies that serve the needs of children at
risk of abuse or neglect and that have demonstrated
effectiveness in prevention or intervention.
State Children's Trust Fund
The State Children's Trust Fund supports innovative and
distinctive prevention and intervention projects on child abuse
and neglect. It is funded through county birth certificate
surcharges, state income tax designations and private donations.
These monies were not realigned and are awarded by OCAP to
counties that have submitted proposals. The purpose of the trust
fund is to research, evaluate and disseminate information to the
public, to establish public-private partnerships with
foundations and corporations and to increase public awareness
about child abuse and neglect via media campaigns.
State Family Preservation (SFP)
SFP is a state funded program in which 15 counties participate
aimed at avoiding or limiting out-of-home placement of children
who have experienced child abuse or neglect. Although funds have
been realigned to counties, the program is administered by OCAP
to meet federal requirements and to ensure funds are used to
meet the MOE requirements of the PSSF program.
Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC)
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageL
of?
Funding for prevention, intervention and treatment services for
CSEC is shared by the state and federal governments, and
mandated under the federal Preventing Sex Trafficking and
Strengthening Families Act. California has a "significant" rate
of CSEC, according to CDSS, and a number of its CSEC are either
foster children or foster care runaways. State and federal
funding for this program is approximately $14 million annually.
Related legislation:
AB 883 (Cooley, 2014) was virtually identical to this bill. It
was vetoed by the Governor.
The Governor's veto message stated, "While this bill is
undoubtedly well intentioned, it doesn't provide the criteria or
funding necessary for counties to participate or for the
Department of Social Services to conduct this pilot program. It
may also duplicate efforts that have just gotten underway with
the passage of this year's budget to combat and reduce the
growing problem of commercial sexual exploitation of children."
SB 855 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 29,
Statutes of 2014) the Human Services budget trailer bill,
establishes the Commercially Sexually Exploited Children Program
to be administered by CDSS in order to adequately serve children
who have been sexually exploited and required development of a
methodology to distribute funding for the program.
Support:
The bill's sponsor, The Child Abuse Prevention Center, writes
that child sexual abuse has devastating long-term impacts on
individual and community health, social and economic outcomes.
"Children victimized by child sexual abuse often suffer from
severe depression, developing harmful coping mechanisms or
addictions, such as smoking, substance abuse and obesity." By
funding these three pilots, the sponsor writes this bill will
create a platform for community discourse about the issue and
will begin to promote community responsibility for preventing
child sexual abuse.
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageM
of?
Opposition:
The California Department of Social Services opposes this bill
as being duplicative of existing child abuse prevention
programs, and cites concerns that the pilot programs'
effectiveness would be limited by pilot program requirements and
limited funding to carry out objectives. "Given the critical
importance of the issue raised by your legislation, the
Department would be happy to engage with your office to
determine whether the objectives of your legislation could be
met through existing avenues."
COMMENTS
This bill is virtually identical to AB 883 (Cooley, 2014) which
was vetoed by the Governor. The bill creates three pilot
projects for counties using grants of $50,000 each. Counties are
encouraged to efficiently use these funds by giving priority to
programs currently serving the needs of at-risk children that
have demonstrated effectiveness in child sexual abuse prevention
or intervention or commercial sexual exploitation prevention or
intervention. The bill authorizes counties broadly to provide
funding to public or private nonprofit entities with experience
in child sexual abuse issues or commercial sexual exploitation
issues.
In response to the Governor's request for criteria for counties
to participate in the program, the author has added the
requirement that a county shall be given priority in its
application for demonstrating that school districts within its
jurisdiction are utilizing moneys from the Student Support and
Academic Enrichment Grants created by the federal Every Student
Succeeds Act (Public Law 114-95) to provide training for all
school personnel on preventing and recognizing child sexual
abuse. According to the California Department of Education, all
designated Title 1 schools - those with high percentages of
children from low-income families - will be eligible to apply
for the Academic Enrichment Grants. Of the approximately 10,000
schools in California, more than 6,000 of them participate in
the Title I program, according to CDE. No funding has yet been
allocated through the program.
Should this bill pass this committee, staff encourages the
author to target the pilot program to specific innovations,
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageN
of?
either by identifying new populations needing prevention
activities, or by trying novel approaches to prevention and
intervention. The author may also want to work with CDSS to
explore other avenues to achieve his goals.
PRIOR VOTES
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Assembly Floor: |77 - |
| |0 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------+-----|
|Assembly Appropriations Committee: |20 - |
| |0 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------+-----|
|Assembly Human Services Committee: |7 - |
| |0 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
POSITIONS
Support:
Child Abuse Prevention Center (Sponsor)
California Family Resource Association
California Police Chiefs Association
Center for Family Strengthening
Children Now
Vision y Compromiso
The California Police Chiefs Association
National Association of Social Workers
The San Diego County Board of Supervisors
The California Association of Marriage and Family
Therapists
The American Academy of Pediatrics
Oppose:
The California Department of Social Services (CDSS)
California Right to Life Committee (CRLC)
-- END --
AB 1883 (Cooley) PageO
of?