BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2015-2016 Regular Session
SB 942 (Liu)
Version: March 31, 2016
Hearing Date: April 12, 2016
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
NR
SUBJECT
Dependency proceedings: relative caregivers
DESCRIPTION
This bill would establish additional procedures for the
temporary placement of a child with an able and willing
relative, as specified, and would require a social worker to
conduct an assessment and report the results of the assessment
to the court within seven days. This bill would also require
that a criminal records check be conducted within a specified
timeframe, and would authorize the court to conduct a hearing if
the assessment process is not complete to determine if the
county has abused its discretion.
The bill would additionally require the county, to the extent
possible, to actively assist a relative in locating and
obtaining any documents required for a criminal records
exemption.
BACKGROUND
When abused or neglected children are taken from the custody of
their parents, social workers are required to release a child
temporarily to a responsible parent, guardian, or relative,
unless a specified condition exists. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
309(a).) Social workers may also release a child into the
custody of a nonrelative extended family member (NREFM), defined
as "any adult caregiver who has established a familial or
mentoring relationship with the child," or place the child in a
licensed foster or group home. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
361.2(e).) These placements, at least initially, are temporary
while the social worker develops a case plan to present to the
court according to the following priorities: (1) maintain the
child within his or her home; (2) remove the child but with the
SB 942 (Liu)
Page 2 of ?
goal of reuniting the parent and child; or (3) find a permanent
placement for the child. Following the initial placement of a
child in a temporary home, a child is not eligible for adoption
until the court has formally terminated parental rights and
ended family reunification services. Thus, it is imperative
that the temporary placement, whether with a foster home,
relative, or NREFM, assist in the facilitation of court-ordered
family reunification services.
Existing law requires, prior to placing a child in the home of a
relative or any other prospective guardian, that the social
worker visit the home to ascertain the appropriateness of the
placement and run a criminal records check on all persons over
18 years of age living in the home, or any other person who may
have significant contact with the child, including those with a
familial or intimate relationship with any person living in the
home. (Welf. & Inst Code Sec. 361.4.) If a criminal record check
shows that a person has been convicted of a crime for which
there is an exemption, the child cannot be placed in the home
unless the county does in fact grant that exemption. An
exemption cannot be provided if the individual has been
convicted of a non-exemptible crime, such as rape, a sex
offense, murder, or fiscal malfeasance.
In cases where an applicant has been convicted of an exemptible
crime, the Department of Social Services is required to process
an exemption only if requested by the applicant. Both federal
and state laws and regulations require the state to conduct a
thorough investigation and evaluation of the applicant. This
process can be cumbersome, requiring the review of original case
documents, which can be difficult to obtain from distant
jurisdictions or in decades-old cases. During this exemption
process the child is potentially waiting in a shelter or foster
home for clearance before he or she can be placed with the
relative.
Seeking to expedite this process and thereby place children in
the homes of relatives more quickly, this bill would establish
additional procedures for the temporary placement of a child
with a relative, and would impose new timelines on social
workers for assessments and background checks. Finally, this
bill would authorize the court to conduct a hearing to determine
if the county has abused its discretion if the assessment
process is not completed within a specified timeframe, and would
SB 942 (Liu)
Page 3 of ?
additionally require the county, to the extent possible, to
actively assist a person in locating and obtaining any documents
required for a criminal records exemption.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law provides that a minor may be removed from the
physical custody of his or her parents and become a dependent of
the juvenile court for serious abuse or neglect, or risk of
serious abuse or neglect, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
300.)
Existing law requires the social worker to immediately release a
child in temporary custody to the child's parent, guardian,
responsible relative, unless specified conditions exist. (Welf.
& Inst. Code Sec. 309.)
Existing law requires at the detention hearing, that the court
take certain steps to evaluate the case, determine whether the
child can be returned home safely, and, if not, to ensure the
child is placed in an appropriate placement, with priority
consideration for family members and nonrelative extended family
members (NREFM). (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 319.)
Existing law establishes criteria for approving a relative or
NREFM home for the placement of a child, including a home visit
and the submission of fingerprints for a state and federal
criminal background check, and requires the county to prohibit
placement with anyone who has an arrest or conviction for a
serious or violent felony, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code
Sec. 361.4.)
Existing law prohibits placement of the child in a home where an
adult in the home has a criminal history until an exemption is
granted by the county. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.4 (d).)
This bill would require the court to order a social worker to
conduct an assessment of up to two willing relatives that
request temporary placement of a child, including a walkthrough
of the home, if that child is not placed with a relative at the
time of the initial detention hearing.
This bill would require that the social worker shall provide the
results of the assessment to the court, parent or guardian, the
SB 942 (Liu)
Page 4 of ?
child, and the child's attorney, within seven calendar days, and
would authorize the child or his or her parent to request a
hearing to consider the recommendations of the social worker
based on the assessment. If a hearing is requested, this bill
would require the court to hold the hearing within 10 days.
This bill would require a county, to the extent possible, to
actively assist a person requesting an exemption relating to a
criminal background check in locating and obtaining any
documents required, as specified.
This bill would require the county to complete the assessment
process, including any exemptions and waivers, within 30
calendar days and would authorize the court to set a hearing to
determine why the assessment has not been completed within 30
days.
This bill would authorize a court to conduct a hearing to
determine if the county has abused its discretion in the event
that an exemption or waiver is denied or if any administrative
process is not complete within 60 calendar days of the court
ordering the county to conduct the assessment.
This bill would provide Legislative findings and declarations
related to the benefits of placing dependent children with
relatives.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
This bill will address the long delays associated with an
inability to complete criminal exemptions for appropriate
relatives which result in foster children remaining in
shelters or foster homes. By instituting timelines for the
process of assessments and waivers, this bill provides
dependency court judges the ability to examine the facts that
have been gathered within the timeline and move the placement
forward if the placement is appropriate and in the best
interest of the child.
2.Would expedite the court's ability to safely place foster
SB 942 (Liu)
Page 5 of ?
youth in the homes of relatives
This bill is the result of stakeholder meetings and discussions
the author has conducted with interested groups over the past
several years. In these discussions, dependency judges expressed
frustration about delays in placement for children whose family
members need to obtain exemptions. Initially, this bill would
have allowed for a court to place a child in the home of a
relative prior to an exemption being granted, which, arguably
could have placed some children in dangerous situations. The
bill was amended in the Senate Human Services Committee to
instead allow courts to hold a hearing to determine whether the
county, after failing to timely complete an assessment or when
an exemption or a waiver is denied, abused its discretion.
This court oversight, combined with the shorter timelines in
which the county and court must act under this bill, ensures
that the process of approving relative homes will be expedited.
The Children's Law Center of California, sponsor, writes, "too
often we see our clients lingering in foster homes, congregate
care settings or shelters for extended periods of time, even
after an appropriate relative has requested placement." The
Juvenile Court Judges of California, also a sponsor of the bill,
argue that this bill will ensure that children who have been
removed from their parents' homes are placed expediently with
appropriate relatives by creating a timeline by which an
assessment must occur and specifying a procedure for the court
to oversee as necessary the relative assessment and placement
process. These important safeguards will help to reduce the
re-traumatization of abused and neglected children who enter the
foster care system.
3.Technical amendments to ensure counties are able to comply
with the requirements of the bill
The following amendments clarify that the duty to assist a
person obtain records for an exemption is only to the extent
possible, and would necessarily distinguish the requirements of
this bill from family finding duties found elsewhere in the
Code.
Author's amendments:
Page 7, line 1, strike "requests made by"
SB 942 (Liu)
Page 6 of ?
Page 7, line 1, after "relatives" insert "upon an order
of the court pursuant to (A)"
Page 7, lines 2-3, strike "a response by"
Page 7 lines 3-4, strike "to an additional request made
by another relative" and insert "duties pursuant to
subdivision (e) of Section 309."
Page 10, line 34, strike "actively"
Page 10, line 35, strike "including" and insert "which
may include"
Support : Advokids; Children's Advocacy Institute; Children Now;
Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the State Bar;
Foster Care Counts; John Burton Foundation for Children Without
Homes; National Association of Social Workers; Public Counsel
Children's Rights Project
Opposition : None known
HISTORY
Source : Alliance for Children's Rights; Juvenile Court Judges
of California; Children's Law Center of California
Related Pending Legislation :
SB 1201 (Mitchell, 2016) moves consideration of an exemption for
specified crimes into the resource family approval process in
the context of other elements, such as the psychosocial
assessment, among other changes.
SB 1336 (Jackson, 2016) would require the juvenile court to
consider whether the social worker exercised due diligence in
conducting his or her investigation to identify, locate, and
notify the child's relatives.
Prior Legislation :
AB 403 (Stone, Ch. 773, Stats. 2015) enacted the continuum of
care reform.
AB 1761 (Hall, Ch. 765, Stats. 2014) expanded the placement
preference language for relatives and NREFM from being a
priority prior to the detention hearing to also being a priority
after the detention hearing and prior to the dispositional
SB 942 (Liu)
Page 7 of ?
hearing.
Prior Vote :
Senate Human Services Committee (Ayes 4, Noes 0)
**************