BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
SB 12 (Beall) - Foster youth
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: April 22, 2015 |Policy Vote: HUMAN S. 5 - 0, |
| | JUD. 6 - 0 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: Yes |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: May 11, 2015 |Consultant: Jolie Onodera |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: SB 12 would expand eligibility for extended foster
care (FC) benefits to a nonminor who is between the age of 18
and 21, and who petitions the court to resume jurisdiction if he
or she meets any of specified conditions.
Fiscal
Impact:
Extended FC benefits : Potentially major future costs in the
tens of millions of dollars (General Fund*) annually to
provide extended FC benefits to additional probation youth
that exited foster care between the ages of 14 and 18 but were
not formally placed, and youth between the ages of 18 and 20
in secure confinement on their 18th birthday. Assuming 50
percent of the approximately 1,400 probation cases per year
resume jurisdiction under the extended FC program, grant costs
for 12 months are estimated at $16 million, cumulatively
increasing to the mid tens of millions of dollars (General
SB 12 (Beall) Page 1 of
?
Fund*) annually to reflect the provision of benefits for up to
three years. To the extent the State submits an amendment to
its Title IV-E state plan that is approved, a portion of these
costs could be eligible for federal reimbursement.
Probation administration : Potentially major increase in
non-reimbursable local probation supervision costs in the tens
of millions of dollars (General Fund*) annually to the extent
nonminors provided extended FC benefits continue under the
supervision of probation departments. The potential annual
supervision costs assuming 50 percent of the 1,400 probation
cases per year enter extended FC would cost in excess of $30
million. Potential costs would cumulatively increase as cases
remain under supervision for up to three years under extended
FC.
Court workload : Potentially significant increase in court
workload (General Fund**) for new petitions to resume
dependency jurisdiction or assume transition jurisdiction.
Proposition 30* : Exempts the State from mandate reimbursement
for realigned programs, however, legislation that has an
overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a
local agency for realigned programs including foster care and
child welfare services, apply to local agencies only to the
extent that the State provides annual funding for the cost
increase.
Criminal justice system : Unknown, but potentially major
future cost savings (General Fund) to the extent the provision
of extended FC benefits to this population of nonminors
results in improved long-term outcomes and reduced future
involvement in the criminal justice system.
**Trial Court Trust Fund
Background: As reflected in the April 14, 2015, Senate Committee on
Judiciary analysis for this measure:
"This bill seeks to address the needs of crossover youth by
allowing certain nonminors, who were at one time subject to both
dependency and delinquency jurisdiction, petition the court to
resume jurisdiction, thereby allowing them to enter extended
foster care. Under extended foster care, eligible youths are
provided up to three more years of housing and services, such as
mental health services and healthcare.
As background, when a child is removed from the physical custody
SB 12 (Beall) Page 2 of
?
of his or her parent or guardian because of abuse, neglect or
endangerment, the child becomes a dependent child and the child
welfare system steps in to assume the role of parent. If that
child commits a crime and becomes a ward of the court, the
child's status, in all but nine counties, as a dependent is
terminated. He or she becomes a delinquent, subject to
probation. If the child successfully completes probation, he or
she will normally be returned to his or her parent or guardian.
However, it may not be safe for the child to return home. In
most counties, the court is often forced to send the child home
and wait for another report of abuse or neglect to be filed with
the child welfare services department to re-initiate a
dependency proceeding.
Staff notes that the majority of dependent youth who crossover
into the delinquency system are charged with "status" offenses
such as consumption of alcohol, truancy, or running away from
home, and misdemeanor offenses. Accordingly, in practice, these
youths who have been victims of abuse, lose the important
protections and support of the dependency system when they act
out in a typical and/or understandable adolescent fashion.
Youths who have the opportunity to be "dual status," in counties
that exercise simultaneous dependency and delinquency
jurisdiction, may continue receiving dependency protections,
even while the goals of the delinquency system are carried out.
Thus, once a child completes probation, he or she is provided
the protections of the dependency system, without first being
subject to additional abuse from his or her family. Without the
ability to connect these youth with services, the court must
choose which system will take jurisdiction over the youth.
Proposed Law:
This bill would expand eligibility for extended foster care
benefits to a nonminor who is between the age of 18 and 21, and
who petitions the court to resume jurisdiction if he or she
meets any of the following conditions:
He or she exited foster care at or after the age of majority;
He or she was subject to an order for foster care placement
any time after reaching the age of 14, was adjudged a ward,
and the last custody order of the court did not return the
child to the physical custody of his or her parent; or,
He or she was subject to an order for foster care placement,
and was adjudged a ward, and was a ward at 18 years old in
SB 12 (Beall) Page 3 of
?
secure confinement.
Related Legislation: AB 885 (Lopez) 2015 would delete the
requirement that a parent or guardian no longer receive aid on
behalf of the nonminor before a juvenile court may resume
dependency jurisdiction. This bill is currently on the Suspense
File of the Assembly Committee on Appropriations.
Prior
Legislation: AB 2454 (Quirk-Silva) Chapter 769/2014 permitted a
nonminor former dependent who previously received extended
Kinship Guardianship Assistance Payment (Kin-GAP) or Adoption
Assistance Payment, but whose former guardians are no longer
providing support, to petition the court to resume dependency
under the extended foster care program.
AB 2573 (Stone) 2014 would have authorized a court to assume or
resume transition jurisdiction over a nonminor who attained 18
years of age while subject to an order for foster care placement
without consideration of whether the rehabilitative goals of the
nonminor ward, as set forth in the case plan, had been met. This
bill was held on the Suspense File of this Committee.
AB 787 (Stone) Chapter 487/2013 among other provisions, allows
re-entry into nonminor dependency for nonminor former dependents
who reached permanency and whose guardian died before their 21st
birthday.
AB 985 (Cooley) 2013 would have expanded eligibility for
extended state Kin-GAP benefits to age 21 to youth who attain 18
years of age while receiving federal or state benefits and who
entered the program prior to reaching the age of 16, subject to
specified criteria. This bill was held on the Suspense File of
this Committee.
AB 1712 (Beall) Chapter 846/2012 expanded the definition of
relative caregiver to include nonrelative extended family
members and made other technical and clarifying changes to the
California Fostering Connections to Success Act.
AB 212 (Beall) 2011 made technical and clarifying changes to the
California Fostering Connections to Success Act.
SB 12 (Beall) Page 4 of
?
AB 12 (Beall/Bass) Chapter 559/2010 established the California
Fostering Connections to Success Act, which extended
transitional foster care services to eligible youth between ages
18 and 21 and required California to seek federal financial
participation for the Kin-GAP.
AB 129 (Cohn) Chapter 468/2004 provided counties the discretion
to develop protocols in order to exercise dual jurisdiction over
crossover youths who fall within the jurisdiction of both the
dependency and delinquency systems.
Staff
Comments: The DSS has indicated that based on data from the
Child Welfare Services/Case Management System (CWS/CMS), in
calendar year 2014, there were approximately 1,400 probation
youth that exited foster care between the ages of 14 and 18
years due to various reasons (such as being placed with an
unapproved relative, moved to a secure facility, emancipated, or
missing). The number of youth between the ages of 18 and 20
years that are placed in a secure facility could also be
potentially eligible, however, this population could not be
quantified at the time of this analysis.
In addition to youth that exited foster care between the ages of
14 and 18 years and entered the probation system due to
committing an offense (cross-over youth, or youth that had a
foster care order prior to the petition for wardship being
filed), it is estimated that youth that exited foster care
between the ages of 14 and 18 years, were subject to a foster
care placement order at age 14 or older, and had been adjudged a
ward at any time could also potentially be eligible. Because the
specified provision of the bill (WIC § 303(c)(2)) regarding
eligibility does not require that a youth be subject to an order
for foster care placement at the time the petition to adjudge
him or her a ward was filed, it is estimated that the bill could
potentially extend benefits to wards who were not previously
dependents.
Assuming 50 percent of the approximately 1,400 probation cases
per year resume jurisdiction under the extended FC program,
potential costs to provide extended FC grants for 12 months are
SB 12 (Beall) Page 5 of
?
estimated at $16 million, cumulatively increasing to the mid
tens of millions of dollars (General Fund*) annually to reflect
the provision of benefits to newly eligibly cases each year and
the provision of benefits for up to three years. To the extent
the State submits an amendment to its Title IV-E state plan that
is approved, a portion of these costs could be eligible for
federal reimbursement. Staff notes, however, that counties
operating under a federal waiver (such as Los Angeles County and
Alameda County) would not be eligible for federal reimbursement
for these costs.
County probation departments would incur greater workload to
supervise the newly eligible caseload. The potential annual
supervision costs assuming 50 percent of the 1,400 probation
cases per year enter extended FC would cost in excess of $30
million. Potential costs would cumulatively increase and
decrease as cases enter and exit the program but are eligible to
remain in the program to age 21.
Proposition 30 was passed by the voters in November 2012, and
among other provisions, eliminated any potential mandate funding
liability for any new program or higher level of service
mandated on the counties related to realigned programs,
including child welfare services and foster care. Rather,
legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an
overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local
agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment
only apply to local agencies to the extent that the state
provides annual funding for the cost increase. Local agencies
are not obligated to provide programs or levels of service
required by legislation above the level for which funding has
been provided.
To the extent the provision of extended FC benefits to this
population of nonminors results in improved long-term outcomes
and reduced future involvement in the criminal justice system,
this bill could result in future cost savings of an unknown, but
potentially significant amount.
-- END -
SB 12 (Beall) Page 6 of
?