BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       SB 1336|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520    Fax: (916)      |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


                                UNFINISHED BUSINESS 


          Bill No:  SB 1336
          Author:   Jackson (D) 
          Amended:  8/25/16  
          Vote:     21 

           SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:  4-0, 4/12/16
           AYES:  McGuire, Berryhill, Hancock, Liu
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Nguyen

           SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE:  6-0, 5/3/16
           AYES:  Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Hertzberg

           SENATE FLOOR:  38-1, 5/31/16
           AYES:  Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block,  
            Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall,  
            Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson,  
            Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning,  
            Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak,  
            Wieckowski, Wolk
           NOES:  Nielsen
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Runner

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  76-0, 8/30/16 - See last page for vote
           
           SUBJECT:   Dependent children:  placement with relatives


          SOURCE:    Author


          DIGEST:  This bill requires the juvenile court to make a finding  
          as to whether the social worker exercised due diligence in  
          conducting his or her investigation to identify, locate, and  
          notify the child's relatives, including whether specific actions  








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 2



          were taken.


          Assembly Amendments strike amendments to statute which would  
          have removed the requirement to evaluate a relative for foster  
          placement only when a child's placement needed to be changed,  
          this requiring an evaluation of relatives' for placement at any  
          time a relative came forward.


          ANALYSIS:   


          Existing law:


          1)Places the care of a child who has been removed from his or  
            her parents or guardian under the jurisdiction of the juvenile  
            court and defines abuse and neglect criteria for such removal.  
            (WIC 300, et seq.)


          2)Requires a social worker to immediately release a child in  
            temporary custody to the child's parent or guardian.  Defines  
            the steps and timelines a county must take after detaining a  
            child, including specific steps and timelines to search for  
            relatives.  Requires assessment of relatives or nonrelated  
            extended family members (NREFMs) who seek placement of the  
            child.  (WIC 309; Cal. Rule Ct. 5.695 (f), (g).)


          3)Defines the steps and timelines a county must take after  
            detaining a child, including creating a preference for the  
            child to be placed temporarily with a relative or NREFM. (WIC  
            309)


          4)Requires the court, at the detention hearing, to 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 relatives, as specified.  (WIC 319)








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 3





          5)Requires the court to read and consider the social study of  
            the child made by the social worker, and other relevant  
            evidence, as specified, prior to deciding the disposition of  
            the case. This may include the willingness of the caregiver to  
            provide legal permanency if reunification is unsuccessful.  
            (WIC 358 (b))


          6)Creates preferential consideration for a request by a relative  
            of a child for placement, and requires, in determining whether  
            the placement is appropriate, the county social worker and the  
            court to consider a number of factors including the best  
            interests of the child, the wishes of the parent, placement of  
            siblings, and the nature of the relationship between the child  
            and the relative.  Requires that whenever a new placement of  
            the child must be made, consideration shall again be to  
            relatives who have not been found to be unsuitable and who  
            will fulfill the child's reunification or permanent plan  
            requirements.  (WIC 361.3)


          7)Defines "relative" to mean an adult who is related to the  
            child by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree  
            of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all  
            relatives whose status is preceded by the words "great,"  
            "great-great," or "grand," or the spouse of any of these  
            persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or  
            dissolution. Requires that the only relatives to be given  
            preferential consideration for the placement of the child are  
            an adult who is a grandparent, aunt, uncle, or sibling. (WIC  
            361.3 (c)(2))


          8)Requires that when the sudden availability of a foster  
            caregiver requires a change in placement on an emergency basis  
            for a foster child, if an able and willing relative or NREFM  
            is available and requests temporary placement of the child  
            pending resolution of the emergency situation, the county  
            welfare department shall assess the suitability of the  
            relative or NREFM. Upon completion of this assessment, the  








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 4



            child may be placed in the home.  (WIC 361.45)


          This bill:


          1)Requires that whenever a child is removed from a parent's or  
            guardian's custody, the court shall make a finding as to  
            whether the social worker has exercised due diligence in  
            conducting the investigation, as specified, to identify,  
            locate, and notify the child's relatives, including both  
            maternal and paternal relatives.


          2)Permits the court, when making the determination, to consider,  
            among other examples of due diligence, the extent to which the  
            social worker has made an effort to locate the child's  
            relatives, as specified, and has done any of the following:


             a)   Asked the child, in an age-appropriate manner and  
               consistent with the child's best interest, about his or her  
               relatives.


             b)   Obtained information regarding the location of the  
               child's relatives.


             c)   Reviewed the child's case file for any information  
               regarding the child's relatives.


             d)   Telephoned, emailed, or visited all identified  
               relatives.


             e)   Asked located relatives for the names and locations of  
               other relatives.


             f)   Used Internet search tools to locate relatives  








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 5



               identified as supports.

          Background


          California's county-based child welfare system protects children  
          at risk of child abuse and neglect or exploitation by providing  
          intensive services to families to allow children to remain in  
          their homes, or by arranging temporary or permanent placement of  
          the child in the safest and least restrictive environment  
          possible. It is the legal "parent" for children in the foster  
          care system. As of October 1, 2015, approximately 62,600  
          children were in the child welfare system in California. 


          Court process. The process for determining the path through a  
          child welfare case is prescribed by a series of dependency court  
          hearings. When a child is first detained, the judge reviews the  
          facts and decides whether to remove the child from his or her  
          parents, or to return the child home, typically with  
          instructions that parents participate in services. At this  
          hearing, the court will also try to identify any suitable  
          relatives who may be able to care for the child while the case  
          is pending. The second hearing is a "jurisdictional hearing," in  
          which the merits of the case are decided, this may include a  
          trial on the facts. If the court decides that the allegations  
          are true, there will be a subsequent dispositional hearing,  
          where the judge will decide whether to return the child home or  
          to remove the child from parental custody. Subsequent hearings  
          evaluate the status of the parents' attempts to reunify with the  
          child, as well as the child's well-being. 


          Outcomes of children in foster care. Numerous national studies  
          have documented the poor outcomes of children and youth who are  
          removed from their homes into the child welfare system. Children  
          have increased rates of chronic health problems, developmental  
          delays and disabilities, mental health needs, and substance  
          abuse problems. Many youth have experienced traumatic events  
          that lead to symptoms such as depression, behavior problems,  
          hypersensitivity, and emotional difficulties. Twenty-five  
          percent of youth who age-out of care experience Post-Traumatic  








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 6



          Stress Disorder-double the rate of U.S. war veterans. Studies  
          have shown that being removed from one's home is, in itself, a  
          traumatic event, leading to the separation from family, friends,  
          and neighbors. 


          Placement with relatives.  State and federal statutes state a  
          preference to place children in out-of-home care with relatives.  
          State law provides an expedited approval process for family  
          members and NREFMs who step forward when the child is detained  
          in order to quickly place the child in a familiar home. 


          Studies have demonstrated significant benefit to children in the  
          child welfare system who are placed with relatives rather than  
          with strangers in foster homes or in group care. A 2008 study in  
          the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine found that  
          children placed into kinship care had fewer behavioral problems  
          three years after placement than children who were placed into  
          foster care. Researchers also found that children placed with  
          relatives were more likely to remain in their same neighborhood,  
          be placed with siblings, and have consistent contact with their  
          birth parents than children in foster care.


          Recent efforts to encourage relatives to care for children in  
          the foster care system have resulted in several initiatives. The  
          Resource Family Approval Program (WIC 16519.5) was established  
          in 2012 as a five-county pilot project and designed to be a  
          unified, family friendly, child centered single process to  
          approve foster family homes, relative homes for foster care and  
          to approve families for legal guardianship or adoption. It  
          replaces multiple processes for licensing and approving homes of  
          relative and nonrelative caregivers. The 2015 passage of the  
          Continuum of Care Reform package, AB 403 (Stone, Chapter 773,  
          Statutes of 2015), made the pilot statewide. 


          The Approved Relative Caregiver funding program (SB 855, Senate  
          Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, Chapter 29, Statutes of  
          2014) was established, initially as a county option, to provide  
          funding to family caregivers in an amount equal to the basic  








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 7



          foster care rate. The program, which was made mandatory by the  
          passage of AB 403, remedies a rate inequity that left many low  
          income relatives with support payments from the CalWORKs program  
          only, which are significantly less than the basic foster care  
          rate. 


          Continuum of Care Reform. The California Department of Social  
          Services is in the midst of a significant reform effort focused  
          on diminishing the number of foster children in long-term  
          congregate care, such as group homes. A 2015 report,  
          "California's Child Welfare Continuum of Care Reform," outlines  
          a comprehensive reform of services including new models of care  
          for foster youth, more intensive services, and providing needed  
          treatment and services in homes rather than in group care. AB  
          403 began enacting these reforms. 


          Related/Prior Legislation


          AB 381 (Calderon, 2015) would have deleted the provision that  
          consideration for placement with a relative after a disposition  
          hearing be triggered by a new placement for the foster child.  
          The bill died in the Assembly Human Services Committee.


          AB 2391 (Calderon, 2014) would have required that consideration  
          for placement with a relative subsequent to the disposition  
          hearing be given without regard to whether a new placement of a  
          child must be made. The bill died in the Senate Judiciary  
          Committee.


          FISCAL EFFECT:   Appropriation:    No          Fiscal  
          Com.:NoLocal:    No


          According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, to the  
          extent that some counties are not interpreting current law in  
          the manner described in this bill, those counties may incur  
          additional county social workers costs for the determinations  








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 8



          and assessments that may result from this bill. The extent of  
          these costs is unknown.




          SUPPORT:   (Verified  8/29/16)




          Alliance for Children's Rights


          Children's Advocacy Institute
          Children's Law Center of California
          Dependency Legal Services
          East Bay Children's Law Offices
          Families NOW
          Juvenile Court Judges of California
          National Association of Social Workers


          OPPOSITION:   (Verified8/29/16)




          None received




          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:     The Children's Law Center of  
          California writes that "research has regularly demonstrated -  
          and we have seen firsthand in our practice - that when children  
          are placed with relatives, it increases the chances of being  
          reunified with parents, or for permanency with a relative if  
          reunification is unsuccessful.


          "In order to ensure that relatives are considered, current law  








                                                                    SB 1336  
                                                                     Page 9



          requires a social worker to locate kin to determine whether they  
          are willing to temporarily care for the child. However, this is  
          not always done. Practice varies county to county and dependency  
          court judges apply differing levels of scrutiny when determining  
          whether the social worker exercised 'due diligence' in the  
          search for relatives. Without some level of uniformity of what  
          is considered 'due diligence,' the identification and  
          recruitment of relatives will vary widely by county."

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR:  76-0, 8/30/16
           AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,  
            Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,  
            Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley,  
            Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier,  
            Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson,  
            Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Roger Hernández,  
            Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine,  
            Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty,  
            Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell,  
            Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth,  
            Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk,  
            Williams, Wood, Rendon
           NO VOTE RECORDED:  Beth Gaines, Harper, Olsen, Patterson

          Prepared by:Mareva Brown / HUMAN S. / (916) 651-1524
          8/30/16 20:00:19


                                    **** END ****