BILL NUMBER: AB 1911 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 18, 2016
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Eggman
FEBRUARY 11, 2016
An act to amend Section 241.1 repeal and
add Section 241.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code,
relating to juveniles.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 1911, as amended, 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. Existing law
requires the protocol to include a plan to collect data, and requires
the Judicial Council to collect and compile that data. Existing law
requires the Judicial Council to prepare an evaluation of
the results of the implementation of the protocol, as specified, and
to report its findings and any resulting recommendations to the
Legislature within 2 years of the date those counties first deem a
child to be a dual status child.
This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to
those provisions. require the Judicial Council to, on
or before January 31, 2017, convene a committee comprised of
stakeholders involved in serving the needs of dependents or wards of
the juvenile court, as specified. The bill would require the
committee to develop and report to the Legislature its
recommendations to facilitate and enhance comprehensive data and
outcome tracking for the state's dually involved, crossover, and dual
status youth, and would require the recommendations to
include specified information, including standardized definitions
related to the populations of youth involved in both the child
welfare system and the probation system. The bill would also
require the State Department of Social Services to, on or before
January 31, 2017, implement a function within the Child Welfare
Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS) that will enable county
child welfare agencies and county probation departments to identify
the dually involved youth residing within their counties, and to
issue guidance to all counties on the manner in which to track joint
assessment hearing information completely and consistently for dually
involved youth.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no
yes . State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 241.2 of the Welfare
and Institutions Code is repealed.
241.2. The Judicial Council shall collect and compile all of the
data to be collected pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (e) of
Section 241.1 and shall prepare an evaluation of the results of the
implementation of the protocol authorized in that subdivision for a
representative sample of the counties that create a protocol pursuant
to that provision. The Judicial Council shall report its findings
and any resulting recommendations to the Legislature within two years
of the date those counties first deem a child to be a dual status
child. The Judicial Council shall review all proposed protocols to
ensure that they provide for the collection of adequate, standardized
data to perform these evaluations. In order to assist counties with
data collection and evaluation, the Judicial Council may prepare
model data collection and evaluation provisions that a county must
include in their protocol.
SEC. 2. Section 241.2 is added to the
Welfare and Institutions Code , to read:
241.2. (a) The Judicial Council shall, on or before January 31,
2017, convene a committee comprised of stakeholders involved in
serving the needs of dependents or wards of the juvenile court,
including, but not limited to, judges, probation officers, social
workers, and representatives from the State Department of Social
Services. Within one year from the date of its first meeting, the
committee shall develop and report to the Legislature its
recommendations to facilitate and enhance comprehensive data and
outcome tracking for the state's dually involved, crossover, and dual
status youth. The committee's recommendations shall include, but not
be limited to, all of the following:
(1) A common identifier counties may use to reconcile data across
child welfare and probation data systems statewide.
(2) Standardized definitions for terms related to the populations
of youth involved in both the child welfare system and the probation
system.
(3) Identified and defined outcomes for counties to track for
dually involved, crossover, and dual status youth, such as outcomes
related to recidivism and education.
(4) Established baselines and goals for the identified and defined
outcomes specified in paragraph (3).
(5) An assessment as to the costs and benefits associated with
requiring all counties to implement the committee's recommendations.
(b) The State Department of Social Services shall, on or before
January 31, 2017, implement a function within the Child Welfare
Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS) that will enable county
child welfare agencies and county probation departments to identify
the dually involved youth residing within their counties and shall
issue guidance to all counties on how to track joint assessment
hearing information completely and consistently for dually involved
youth.
SECTION 1. Section 241.1 of the Welfare and
Institutions Code is amended to read:
241.1. (a) Whenever a minor appears to come within the
description of both Section 300 and Section 601 or 602, the county
probation department and the child welfare services department shall,
pursuant to a jointly developed written protocol described in
subdivision (b), initially determine which status will serve the best
interests of the minor and the protection of society. The
recommendations of both departments shall be presented to the
juvenile court with the petition that is filed on behalf of the
minor, and the court shall determine which status is appropriate for
the minor. Any other juvenile court having jurisdiction over the
minor shall receive notice from the court, within five calendar days,
of the presentation of the recommendations of the departments. The
notice shall include the name of the judge to whom, or the courtroom
to which, the recommendations were presented.
(b) (1) The probation department and the child welfare services
department in each county shall jointly develop a written protocol to
ensure appropriate local coordination in the assessment of a minor
described in subdivision (a), and the development of recommendations
by these departments for consideration by the juvenile court.
(2) These protocols shall require, but shall not be limited to,
consideration of the nature of the referral, the age of the minor,
the prior record of the minor's parents for child abuse, the prior
record of the minor for out-of-control or delinquent behavior, the
parents' cooperation with the minor's school, the minor's functioning
at school, the nature of the minor's home environment, and the
records of other agencies that have been involved with the minor and
his or her family. The protocols also shall contain provisions for
resolution of disagreements between the probation and child welfare
services departments regarding the need for dependency or ward status
and provisions for determining the circumstances under which filing
a new petition is required to change the minor's status.
(3) (A) These protocols may also require immediate notification of
the child welfare services department and the minor's dependency
attorney upon referral of a dependent minor to probation, procedures
for release to, and placement by, the child welfare services
department pending resolution of the determination pursuant to this
section, timelines for dependents in secure custody to ensure timely
resolution of the determination pursuant to this section for detained
dependents, and nondiscrimination provisions to ensure that
dependents are provided with any option that would otherwise be
available to a nondependent minor.
(B) If the alleged conduct that appears to bring a dependent minor
within the description of Section 601 or 602 occurs in, or under the
supervision of, a foster home, group home, or other licensed
facility that provides residential care for minors, the county
probation department and the child welfare services department may
consider whether the alleged conduct was within the scope of
behaviors to be managed or treated by the foster home or facility, as
identified in the minor's case plan, needs and services plan,
placement agreement, facility plan of operation, or facility
emergency intervention plan, in determining which status will serve
the best interests of the minor and the protection of society
pursuant to subdivision (a).
(4) The protocols shall contain all of the following processes:
(A) A process for determining which agency and court shall
supervise a child whose jurisdiction is modified from delinquency
jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to paragraph (2) of
subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 or subdivision (i) of Section 727.2.
(B) A process for determining which agency and court shall
supervise a nonminor dependent under the transition jurisdiction of
the juvenile court.
(C) A process that specifically addresses the manner in which
supervision responsibility is determined when a nonminor dependent
becomes subject to adult probation supervision.
(c) Whenever a minor who is under the jurisdiction of the juvenile
court of a county pursuant to Section 300, 601, or 602 is alleged to
come within the description of Section 300, 601, or 602 by another
county, the county probation department or child welfare services
department in the county that has jurisdiction under Section 300,
601, or 602 and the county probation department or child welfare
services department of the county alleging the minor to be within one
of those sections shall initially determine which status will best
serve the best interests of the minor and the protection of society.
The recommendations of both departments shall be presented to the
juvenile court in which the petition is filed on behalf of the minor,
and the court shall determine which status is appropriate for the
minor. In making their recommendation to the juvenile court, the
departments shall conduct an assessment consistent with the
requirements of subdivision (b). Any other juvenile court having
jurisdiction over the minor shall receive notice from the court in
which the petition is filed within five calendar days of the
presentation of the recommendations of the departments. The notice
shall include the name of the judge to whom, or the courtroom to
which, the recommendations were presented.
(d) Except as provided in subdivision (e), this section shall not
authorize the filing of a petition or petitions, or the entry of an
order by the juvenile court, to make a minor simultaneously both a
dependent child and a ward of the court.
(e) Notwithstanding subdivision (d), the probation department and
the child welfare services department, in consultation with the
presiding judge of the juvenile court, in any county may create a
jointly written protocol to allow the county probation department and
the child welfare services department to jointly assess and produce
a recommendation that the child be designated as a dual status child,
allowing the child to be simultaneously a dependent child and a ward
of the court. This protocol shall be signed by the chief probation
officer, the director of the county social services agency, and the
presiding judge of the juvenile court prior to its implementation. A
juvenile court shall not order that a child is simultaneously a
dependent child and a ward of the court pursuant to this subdivision
unless and until the required protocol has been created and entered
into. This protocol shall include all of the following:
(1) A description of the process to be used to determine whether
the child is eligible to be designated as a dual status child.
(2) A description of the procedure by which the probation
department and the child welfare services department will assess the
necessity for dual status for specified children and the process to
make joint recommendations for the court's consideration prior to
making a determination under this section. These recommendations
shall ensure a seamless transition from wardship to dependency
jurisdiction, as appropriate, so that services to the child are not
disrupted upon termination of the wardship.
(3) A provision for ensuring communication between the judges who
hear petitions concerning children for whom dependency jurisdiction
has been suspended while they are within the jurisdiction of the
juvenile court pursuant to Section 601 or 602. A judge may
communicate by providing a copy of any reports filed pursuant to
Section 727.2 concerning a ward to a court that has jurisdiction over
dependency proceedings concerning the child.
(4) A plan to collect data in order to evaluate the protocol
pursuant to Section 241.2.
(5) Counties that exercise the option provided for in this
subdivision shall adopt either an "on-hold" system as described in
subparagraph (A) or a "lead court/lead agency" system as described in
subparagraph (B). There shall not be any simultaneous or duplicative
case management or services provided by both the county probation
department and the child welfare services department. It is the
intent of the Legislature that judges, in cases in which more than
one judge is involved, shall not issue conflicting orders.
(A) In counties in which an on-hold system is adopted, the
dependency jurisdiction shall be suspended or put on hold while the
child is subject to jurisdiction as a ward of the court. When it
appears that termination of the court's jurisdiction, as established
pursuant to Section 601 or 602, is likely and that reunification of
the child with his or her parent or guardian would be detrimental to
the child, the county probation department and the child welfare
services department shall jointly assess and produce a recommendation
for the court regarding whether the court's dependency jurisdiction
shall be resumed.
(B) In counties in which a lead court/lead agency system is
adopted, the protocol shall include a method for identifying which
court or agency will be the lead court/lead agency. That court or
agency shall be responsible for case management, conducting
statutorily mandated court hearings, and submitting court reports.
(f) Whenever the court determines pursuant to this section or
Section 607.2 or 727.2 that it is necessary to modify the court's
jurisdiction over a dependent or ward who was removed from his or her
parent or guardian and placed in foster care, the court shall ensure
that all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The petition under which jurisdiction was taken at the time
the dependent or ward was originally removed is not dismissed until
the new petition has been sustained.
(2) The order modifying the court's jurisdiction contains all of
the following provisions:
(A) Reference to the original removal findings and a statement
that findings that continuation in the home is contrary to the child'
s welfare, and that reasonable efforts were made to prevent removal,
remain in effect.
(B) A statement that the child continues to be removed from the
parent or guardian from whom the child was removed under the original
petition.
(C) Identification of the agency that is responsible for placement
and care of the child based upon the modification of jurisdiction.