BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1060| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: SB 1060 Author: Leno (D), et al. Amended: 5/31/16 Vote: 21 SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 4/12/16 AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 5/27/16 AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza NOES: Bates, Nielsen SUBJECT: Postadoption contact: siblings of dependent children or wards SOURCE: California Youth Connection DIGEST: This bill requires the county placing agency, to the extent practicable, to convene a meeting with the child, the sibling of the child, the prospective adoptive parent, and a facilitator for the purpose of deciding whether to voluntarily execute a postadoption sibling contact agreement, and requires, at the time of consideration of an adoption petition, the court to inquire into the status of the development of a voluntary postadoption sibling contact agreement. ANALYSIS: Existing law: SB 1060 Page 2 1)Requires states to use "reasonable efforts" to place siblings together, unless such placement is contrary to their safety or well-being. If the siblings are not placed together, visitation between them must occur frequently, unless it is contrary to their safety or well-being. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 671(a).) 2)States the intent of the Legislature to ensure that siblings who are removed from the home will be placed in foster care together, unless the placement is contrary to the safety or well-being of any sibling, including requiring the state or county to do the following after parental rights are terminated and the court orders the dependent child to be placed for adoption: Include in training for prospective adoptive parents information about the importance of maintaining sibling relationships; Provide prospective adoptive parents with information about the child's siblings, as specified; and Encourage the prospective adoptive parents to make a plan for facilitating postadoptive contact between the child and any siblings. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 16002.) 1)Requires, when the court has ordered removal of a child from the physical custody of a parent, the court to consider whether there are any siblings under the court's jurisdiction, and the appropriateness of maintaining those sibling relationships. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.2.) 2)Requires any order placing a child in foster care to provide for visitation between a child and any siblings, unless the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that sibling interaction is contrary to the safety and well-being of either child. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 362.1.) 3)Allows a court to include in a final adoption order a SB 1060 Page 3 postadoptive sibling contact agreement. (Welf. & Inst. Code Secs. 366.26 and 366.29.) 4)Authorizes a parent to terminate a postadoptive sibling contact agreement if it is determined by the parent that sibling contact poses a threat to the health, safety, or well-being of the adopted child. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 366.26.) This bill: 1)Requires, when parental rights are terminated and the court orders a dependent child or ward to be placed for adoption, the county adoption placing agency, to the extent practicable, to convene a meeting with the child, the sibling of the child, the prospective adoptive parent, and a facilitator for the purpose of deciding whether to voluntarily execute a postadoption sibling contact agreement, as specified. 2)Requires, at the time of consideration of an adoption petition, the court to inquire into the status of the development of a voluntary postadoption sibling contact agreement. 3)Makes other conforming and technical changes. Background In October 2008, Congress passed, and President Bush signed, the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act (Act) to promote permanent families for children and youth in foster care by providing greater assistance to relative caregivers and improving incentives for adoption. The Act also extends assistance for foster children to age 21 and improves education and health care for children and youth in foster care. Further, the Act requires states to use "reasonable efforts" to place siblings together, unless such placement is contrary to SB 1060 Page 4 their safety or well-being. If the siblings are not placed together, visitation between them must occur frequently, unless the visitation is contrary to their safety or well-being. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 671(a).) Prior to passage of the Act, California was one of the first states to pass legislation promoting sibling visitation for foster children as early as 1999. (See AB 740, Chapter 805, Statutes of 1999.) Since then California has enacted several additional statutes to expand legal protections for sibling relationships. Creating another mechanism by which the court may further protect sibling relationships, SB 1099 (Steinberg, Chapter 773, Statutes of 2014) gave dependency courts the authority to order visitation between dependent and non-dependent siblings in specified circumstances. This bill seeks to further protect sibling relationships by requiring the county, as soon as parental rights are terminated and the court orders the dependent child to be placed for adoption, to convene a meeting with the relevant parties for the purpose of discussing a postadoption sibling contact agreement. This bill also, at the adoption proceeding, requires the court to inquire into the status of the postadoption sibling contact agreement. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:YesLocal: Yes According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: Team meetings: Potentially significant increase in state costs (General Fund*) for additional meetings to the extent the meetings consist of child and family team (CFT) members. Estimated costs assuming only 50 percent of the 6,400 annual dependent adoptions require a CFT meeting could cost in the range of $850,000 to over $1.7 million annually based on the average duration of 3.7 hours per CFT meeting and the attendance of one or two local agency representatives. These costs do not include any additional time CFT members may incur to identify and notify non-dependent siblings to coordinate these meetings. Actual costs could be substantially higher to the extent the proportion of dependents with siblings is SB 1060 Page 5 higher than assumed above, or more than two CFT members representing local agencies are in attendance at the meeting. Sibling visitation: Potentially significant increase in state costs (General Fund*) for local agencies to facilitate additional sibling visits for dependent siblings of adopted minors resulting from postadoptive sibling contact agreements. Annual costs would be dependent on numerous factors that are unknown at this time, including but not limited to the number of adopted children with dependent siblings for which postadoptive sibling contact agreements will be ordered, the frequency of visits provided for in the agreements, and the time involved for the social worker to provide for this sibling visitation in each case (distance and duration). Court impact: Minor workload impact and potentially future cost savings to the extent the CFT meetings result in less time spent during the court hearing on sibling visitation issues. Proposition 30*: Exempts the state from mandate reimbursement for realigned responsibilities for "public safety services" including the provision of child welfare services, however, legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for public safety services apply to local agencies only to the extent that the State provides annual funding for the cost increase. The provisions of Proposition 30 have not been interpreted through the formal court process to date, however, to the extent the local agency costs resulting from this measure are determined to be applicable under the provisions of Proposition 30 could result in additional costs to the state. SUPPORT: (Verified 5/31/16) California Youth Connection (source) Alliance for Boys and Men of Color SB 1060 Page 6 California Alliance of Child and Family Services California Court Appointed Special Advocates for Children Children Now Children's Law Center of California Families NOW Hillsides John Burton Foundation National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter Public Counsel OPPOSITION: (Verified5/31/16) None received ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the California Alliance of Child and Family Services: "Approximately 20 percent of foster youth exit to adoption each year in California. Every child deserves a permanent family that provides a safe, enriching and loving home, not just for a few months but forever. When reunification with biological parents is no longer possible, adoption by a relative or a nonrelative family gives our foster youth the chance to grow up in a loving and permanent family. Findings have found that healthy relationships with an adopted youth's biological siblings are critical to the success of the adoption being permanent. SB 1060 strengthens the efforts of continued sibling connections by requiring a facilitated meeting to create a post adoption sibling contact agreement before the adoption is finalized between the adoptive parents, the prospective adoptive child/children and the siblings who will not be living together. All parties will be allowed to decide whether to voluntarily enter into this agreement. This meeting will elevate the importance of sibling relationships within the adoption process and will improve the lives of foster youth" Prepared by:Nichole Rapier / JUD. / (916) 651-4113 5/31/16 21:31:43 SB 1060 Page 7 **** END ****