BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2133
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
2133 (Chu)
As Amended May 31, 2016
Majority vote
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Education |5-0 |O'Donnell, McCarty, | |
| | |Santiago, Thurmond, | |
| | |Weber | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Appropriations |14-1 |Gonzalez, Bloom, |Bigelow |
| | |Bonilla, Bonta, | |
| | |Calderon, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Eduardo | |
| | |Garcia, Roger | |
| | |Hernández, Holden, | |
| | |Quirk, Santiago, | |
| | |Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Authorizes a licensed or license-exempt child care
provider who receives payment through the alternative payment
AB 2133
Page 2
program (APP) to file a complaint, alleging that an APP has not
complied with federal or state law or regulations, through the
Uniform Complaint Procedures (UCP). Specifies that APPs are
operated by contractors reimbursed through the California
Alternative Payment Program, the CalWORKs Stage 2 Program, the
CalWORKs Stage 3 Program, and the Migrant Alternative Payment
Program. Specifies that the operation of this bill is
contingent upon the enactment of an appropriation for this
purpose in the annual Budget Act or another statute.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, unknown General Fund administrative costs to the
California Department of Education (CDE) to process complaints
under the UCP. To date, no providers have brought complaints
through the existing UCP process. This bill may highlight the
process and generate use of the UCP. The CDE indicates they
will need additional resources to review, investigate and
process appeals or complaints, perhaps in excess of $600,000,
depending on the number of complaints received.
COMMENTS: Background on child care and development programs.
The CDE administers a child care and development system,
maintaining over 1,300 service contracts with approximately 750
public and private agencies supporting and providing services to
children from birth through 12 years of age. Contractors
include school districts, county offices of education, cities,
colleges, other public entities, community-based organizations,
and private agencies. According to the Legislative Analyst's
Office, overall funding for the child care and development
programs decreased by almost $1 billion between 2008-09 and
2012-13, with the elimination of 110,000 slots. The combined
federal and state funding for child care and development
programs total $3.6 billion (state funds of $2.7 billion and
federal funds of $938 million), offering 436,185 slots.
APPs. APPs, funded with state and federal funds, offer a
AB 2133
Page 3
variety of child care arrangements for parents, including
licensed family child care homes and center-based care, and
arrange for payments to licensed-exempt providers, who are
relatives or friends of parents or guardians. The APP helps
families access child care services and makes payment for those
services directly to the child care provider selected by the
family. The APP is intended to increase parental choice and
accommodate the individual needs of the family. APPs are
reimbursed based on the number of children served and funds are
appropriated based on the fiscal reporting process and budget
estimations. In 2015-16, there were 75 APPs throughout the
state and they range from private, nonprofit organizations to
county offices of education. APPs began as pilot programs in
1977 and became permanent in 1980.
Earlier versions of this bill codified a parent appeals process
established through Title 5 California Code of Regulations and
would have established a similar appeals process for child care
providers. Amendments adopted in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee struck the contents of the bill and instead authorizes
child care providers to file complaints through the UCP.
UCP. Required by federal law, the UCP was established in 1991
as a means of creating a "uniform system of complaint
processing" for educational programs. The authority for this
process is located in regulations, not state statute.
These regulations require the adoption of the UCP by school
districts, county offices of education, charter schools
receiving federal funds, and local public or private agencies
which receive direct or indirect state funding to provide school
programs or special education or related services. The UCP is
used for complaints regarding a number of state and federal
programs, including Adult Education, After School Education and
Safety, Agricultural Vocational Education, American Indian
Education Centers and Early Childhood Education Program
AB 2133
Page 4
Assessments, Child Care and Development, Child Nutrition, Foster
Youth Services, some federal No Child Left Behind Act (2001)
programs, Regional Occupational Centers and Programs, Special
Education, State Preschool, and Tobacco-Use Prevention
Education.
Complaints made under the UCP may be filed by an individual,
public agency, or organization. The UCP process generally
involves the following steps:
1)The filing of a complaint by an individual, agency, or
organization.
2)The investigation and written response by the local
educational agency (LEA) within 60 days.
3)If elected, an appeal by the complainant to the CDE within 15
days of receiving the LEA response.
4)The response by the CDE to the appeal, with the investigation
completed with 60 days.
5)If eligible and elected, a request for reconsideration by the
complainant or LEA within 35 days of receiving CDE's response
to the appeal.
6)A response by the CDE within 35 days.
As noted, child care and development programs are already
authorized to file complaints through the UCP. It is unclear
whether language making the enactment of this bill contingent
AB 2133
Page 5
upon a budget appropriation would affect the authority already
provided through state regulations.
The sponsor, the Service Employees International Union, made
this statement about why child care providers need an avenue for
recourse, "Existing law lacks a uniform policy for resolving
disputes around child care payments. Errors in payments can
cause problems for both parents and providers and can eligible
children without care. Currently there is an ineffective
complaints procedure at the Department of Education for parents.
This is no such procedure for providers. ? AB 2133 does not
propose to penalize an alternative payment program if the
appellant's position was upheld. It is more about changing how
the alternative payment program operates and relates to
providers."
Analysis Prepared by:
Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN:
0003296