BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1911


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  May 4, 2016


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                               Lorena Gonzalez, Chair


          AB  
          1911 (Eggman) - As Amended March 31, 2016


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Judiciary                      |Vote:|10 - 0       |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |Human Services                 |     |7 - 0        |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  NoReimbursable:  No


          SUMMARY:  This bill requires the development and implementation  
          of standardized definitions and defined goals for youth involved  
          with both the child welfare system and the juvenile justice  
          system.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Requires the Judicial Council to convene a committee of  








                                                                    AB 1911


                                                                    Page  2





            stakeholders serving the needs of dependents and wards of the  
            juvenile court, including judges, social workers, probation  
            officers, education officials, youth, attorneys and advocates  
            involved with both the child welfare and juvenile justice  
            systems, and representatives from the Department of Social  
            Services (DSS), child welfare agencies and probation agencies.  


          2)Requires the committee, by January 1, 2018, to develop and  
            report to the Legislature recommendations to facilitate and  
            enhance comprehensive data and outcome tracking for youth  
            involved in both the child welfare and juvenile justice  
            systems, as specified.





          3)Requires DSS, by January 1, 2019, to implement a function  
            within the child welfare services automation system that will  
            allow county child welfare and juvenile justice departments to  
            identify youth involved in both systems, and to issue  
            instructions to all counties on how to completely and  
            consistently track the involvement of these youth in both  
            systems.


          FISCAL EFFECT:


          1)Costs of approximately $100,000 to the Judicial Council to  
            convene a stakeholder group and to develop and report  
            recommendations to the Legislature.


          2)Minor and absorbable costs to DSS. DSS indicates they are  
            already working to implement these requirements from the State  
            Auditor's report.









                                                                    AB 1911


                                                                    Page  3






          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose.  This bill seeks to implement recommendations from  
            the State Auditor's Report issued in February 2016. According  
            to the author, "For youth involved in both the child welfare  
            and juvenile justice systems, coordination is critical in  
            order to ensure the proper services are identified and  
            delivered.  In current law, there are no standardized  
            definitions for terms relating to youth involved in both  
            systems, nor is there an integrated system to track and  
            monitor youth and outcomes.  Without standardized definitions  
            of what it means to be a youth involved in both the child  
            welfare and juvenile justice systems or identified outcomes  
            for counties to track, there is little that can be done to  
            track this population of youth.  This bill provides guidance  
            to the counties, including definitions, common identifiers,  
            and identified outcomes to better track youth involved in both  
            the child welfare system and the juvenile justice system.   
            Proper tracking systems will enable California to better serve  
            one of its most vulnerable populations."


          2)State Auditor report. At the direction of the Joint  
            Legislative Audit Committee, the California State Auditor was  
            tasked with determining how well counties are serving youth  
            involved with both the child welfare and delinquency system.   
            Because the state has not issued guidelines to the counties on  
            how to track or identify youth, the State Auditor was unable  
            to determine how county programs were performing.


            The Auditor, therefore, recommended that DSS, which is tasked  
            with operating the state case management automation system for  
            tracking youth in the child welfare system -the Child Welfare  
            Services/Case Management System- develop a function in the  
            system that will allow child welfare and juvenile justice  
            systems staff to identify and track dual status youth.  The  








                                                                    AB 1911


                                                                    Page  4





            goal of this recommendation is to ensure that California has  
            statewide consistency in its management systems that will help  
            ensure dual-status youth receive all necessary supports and  
            services.


          3)Dual status jurisdiction.  Current law authorizes counties to  
            adopt dual status protocols in order to allow for better  
            oversight and provision of services to youth who are involved  
            in both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems.  
            Counties that elect to participate in this voluntary program  
            are tasked with creating a dual status protocol to permit a  
            youth who meets specified criteria to be designated as both a  
            dependent child and a ward of the court simultaneously.
            According to Judicial Council, only 18 of California's 58  
            counties have elected to develop these protocols, but these  
            include the largest counties, Los Angeles, San Diego, Santa  
            Clara, Riverside, and San Bernardino, so most youth involved  
            with both the dependency and delinquency systems in California  
            today live in dual-status jurisdictions.


          4)Related Legislation.  AB 2813 (Bloom), 2016, prohibits a  
            probation officer from considering a minor's status as a  
            foster youth or current availability of a placement when  
            making the decision whether or not to detain, and requires a  
            probation officer to immediately release a minor to the  
            custody of the child welfare services department, a caregiver,  
            or a foster parent, unless it can be demonstrated that the  
            minor's detention is necessary. This bill is before this  
            Committee today.


          5)Prior Legislation. AB 388 (Chesbro), Chapter 760, Statutes of  
            2014, specified that a dependent ward of the juvenile court is  
            not necessarily subject to other sanctions because of his or  
            her status as a dependent of the court.










                                                                    AB 1911


                                                                    Page  5








          





          Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081