California Legislature—2015–16 Regular Session

Assembly BillNo. 1911


Introduced by Assembly Member Eggman

February 11, 2016


An act to amend Section 241.1 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to juveniles.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 1911, as introduced, Eggman. Dual-status minors.

Existing law requires the probation department and child welfare service department in each county to jointly develop a written protocol, as specified, to ensure appropriate local coordination in the assessment of a minor who is both a dependent child and a ward of the juvenile court. Existing law requires, whenever a minor appears to be both a dependent child and a ward of the juvenile court, the county probation department and the child welfare services department, pursuant to that jointly developed written protocol, to initially determine which status will best serve the best interests of the minor and the protection of society.

This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to those provisions.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

P1    1

SECTION 1.  

Section 241.1 of the Welfare and Institutions
2Code
is amended to read:

P2    1

241.1.  

(a) Whenever a minor appears to come within the
2description of both Section 300 and Section 601 or 602, the county
3probation department and the child welfare services department
4shall, pursuant to a jointly developed written protocol described
5in subdivision (b), initially determine which status will serve the
6best interests of the minor and the protection of society. The
7recommendations of both departments shall be presented to the
8juvenile court with the petition that is filed on behalf of the minor,
9and the court shall determine which status is appropriate for the
10minor. Any other juvenile court having jurisdiction over the minor
11shall receive notice from the court, within five calendar days, of
12the presentation of the recommendations of the departments. The
13notice shall include the name of the judge to whom, or the
14courtroom to which, the recommendations were presented.

15(b) (1) The probation department and the child welfare services
16department in each county shall jointly develop a written protocol
17to ensure appropriate local coordination in the assessment of a
18minor described in subdivision (a), and the development of
19recommendations by these departments for consideration by the
20juvenile court.

21(2) These protocols shall require, butbegin insert shallend insert not be limited to,
22consideration of the nature of the referral, the age of the minor,
23the prior record of the minor’s parents for child abuse, the prior
24record of the minor for out-of-control or delinquent behavior, the
25parents’ cooperation with the minor’s school, the minor’s
26functioning at school, the nature of the minor’s home environment,
27and the records of other agencies that have been involved with the
28minor and his or her family. The protocols also shall contain
29provisions for resolution of disagreements between the probation
30and child welfare services departments regarding the need for
31dependency or ward status and provisions for determining the
32circumstances under which filing a new petition is required to
33change the minor’s status.

34(3) (A) These protocols may also require immediate notification
35of the child welfare services department and the minor’s
36dependency attorney upon referral of a dependent minor to
37probation, procedures for release to, and placement by, the child
38welfare services department pending resolution of the
39determination pursuant to this section, timelines for dependents
40in secure custody to ensure timely resolution of the determination
P3    1pursuant to this section for detained dependents, and
2nondiscrimination provisions to ensure that dependents are
3provided with any option that would otherwise be available to a
4nondependent minor.

5(B) If the alleged conduct that appears to bring a dependent
6minor within the description of Section 601 or 602 occurs in, or
7under the supervision of, a foster home, group home, or other
8licensed facility that provides residential care for minors, the county
9probation department and the child welfare services department
10may consider whether the alleged conduct was within the scope
11of behaviors to be managed or treated by the foster home or facility,
12as identified in the minor’s case plan, needs and services plan,
13placement agreement, facility plan of operation, or facility
14emergency intervention plan, in determining which status will
15serve the best interests of the minor and the protection of society
16pursuant to subdivision (a).

17(4) The protocols shall containbegin insert all ofend insert the following processes:

18(A) A process for determining which agency and court shall
19supervise a child whose jurisdiction is modified from delinquency
20jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to paragraph (2)
21of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 or subdivision (i) of Section
22727.2.

23(B) A process for determining which agency and court shall
24supervise a nonminor dependent under the transition jurisdiction
25of the juvenile court.

26(C) A process that specifically addresses the manner in which
27supervision responsibility is determined when a nonminor
28dependent becomes subject to adult probation supervision.

29(c) Whenever a minor who is under the jurisdiction of the
30juvenile court of a county pursuant to Section 300, 601, or 602 is
31alleged to come within the description of Section 300, 601, or 602
32by another county, the county probation department or child
33welfare services department in the county that has jurisdiction
34under Section 300, 601, or 602 and the county probation
35department or child welfare services department of the county
36alleging the minor to be within one of those sections shall initially
37determine which status will best serve the best interests of the
38minor and the protection of society. The recommendations of both
39departments shall be presented to the juvenile court in which the
40petition is filed on behalf of the minor, and the court shall
P4    1determine which status is appropriate for the minor. In making
2their recommendation to the juvenile court, the departments shall
3conduct an assessment consistent with the requirements of
4subdivision (b). Any other juvenile court having jurisdiction over
5the minor shall receive notice from the court in which the petition
6is filed within five calendar days of the presentation of the
7recommendations of the departments. The notice shall include the
8name of the judge to whom, or the courtroom to which, the
9recommendations were presented.

10(d) Except as provided in subdivision (e), this section shall not
11authorize the filing of a petition or petitions, or the entry of an
12order by the juvenile court, to make a minor simultaneously both
13a dependent child and a ward of the court.

14(e) Notwithstanding subdivision (d), the probation department
15and the child welfare services department, in consultation with the
16presiding judge of the juvenile court, in any county may create a
17jointly written protocol to allow the county probation department
18and the child welfare services department to jointly assess and
19produce a recommendation that the child be designated as a dual
20status child, allowing the child to be simultaneously a dependent
21child and a ward of the court. This protocol shall be signed by the
22chief probation officer, the director of the county social services
23agency, and the presiding judge of the juvenile court prior to its
24implementation. A juvenile court shall not order that a child is
25simultaneously a dependent child and a ward of the court pursuant
26to this subdivision unless and until the required protocol has been
27created and entered into. This protocol shall include all of the
28following:

29(1) A description of the process to be used to determine whether
30the child is eligible to be designated as a dual status child.

31(2) A description of the procedure by which the probation
32department and the child welfare services department will assess
33the necessity for dual status for specified children and the process
34to make joint recommendations for the court’s consideration prior
35to making a determination under this section. These
36recommendations shall ensure a seamless transition from wardship
37to dependency jurisdiction, as appropriate, so that services to the
38child are not disrupted upon termination of the wardship.

39(3) A provision for ensuring communication between the judges
40who hear petitions concerning children for whom dependency
P5    1jurisdiction has been suspended while they are within the
2jurisdiction of the juvenile court pursuant to Section 601 or 602.
3A judge may communicate by providing a copy of any reports
4filed pursuant to Section 727.2 concerning a ward to a court that
5has jurisdiction over dependency proceedings concerning the child.

6(4) A plan to collect data in order to evaluate the protocol
7pursuant to Section 241.2.

8(5) Counties that exercise the option provided for in this
9subdivision shall adopt either an “on-hold” system as described
10in subparagraph (A) or a “lead court/lead agency” system as
11described in subparagraph (B). There shall not be any simultaneous
12or duplicative case management or services provided by both the
13county probation department and the child welfare services
14department. It is the intent of the Legislature that judges, in cases
15in which more than one judge is involved, shall not issue
16conflicting orders.

17(A) In counties in which an on-hold system is adopted, the
18dependency jurisdiction shall be suspended or put on hold while
19the child is subject to jurisdiction as a ward of the court. When it
20appears that termination of the court’s jurisdiction, as established
21pursuant to Section 601 or 602, is likely and that reunification of
22the child with his or her parent or guardian would be detrimental
23to the child, the county probation department and the child welfare
24services department shall jointly assess and produce a
25recommendation for the court regarding whether the court’s
26dependency jurisdiction shall be resumed.

27(B) In counties in which a lead court/lead agency system is
28adopted, the protocol shall include a method for identifying which
29court or agency will be the lead court/lead agency. That court or
30agency shall be responsible for case management, conducting
31statutorily mandated court hearings, and submitting court reports.

32(f) Whenever the court determines pursuant to this section or
33Section 607.2 or 727.2 that it is necessary to modify the court’s
34jurisdiction over a dependent or ward who was removed from his
35or her parent or guardian and placed in foster care, the court shall
36ensure that all of the following conditions are met:

37(1) The petition under which jurisdiction was taken at the time
38the dependent or ward was originally removed is not dismissed
39until the new petition has been sustained.

P6    1(2) The order modifying the court’s jurisdiction contains all of
2the following provisions:

3(A) Reference to the original removal findings and a statement
4that findings that continuation in the home is contrary to the child’s
5welfare, and that reasonable efforts were made to prevent removal,
6remain in effect.

7(B) A statement that the child continues to be removed from
8the parent or guardian from whom the child was removed under
9the original petition.

10(C) Identification of the agency that is responsible for placement
11and care of the child based upon the modification of jurisdiction.



O

    99