BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 19, 2005
          Counsel:                Heather Hopkins


                         ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                                  Mark Leno, Chair

                    AB 1657 (Evans) - As Amended:  April 12, 2005


           SUMMARY  :  Provides that, until July 1, 2011, counties may enter  
          into grants with the Office of Emergency Services (OES) for the  
          recovery of services associated with the provision of child  
          victim forensic evidentiary interviews.  Specifically,  this  
          bill  :

          1)Provides that a county may enter into grants for interview  
            services with OES for the recovery of costs associated with  
            the provision of child victim forensic evidentiary interviews  
            conducted by child advocacy centers, as specified, and in  
            accordance with its adopted interagency protocol agreements.

          2)Provides that the grants for interview services shall provide  
            funding for capacity building expenditures and training  
            related to conducting a forensic evidentiary interview.

          3)Provides that personnel costs of child advocacy centers  
            incurred by the representatives of the various participating  
            county departments are not eligible within the scope of the  
            grants.

          4)Defines "child victim" as a person under 18 years of age who  
            has been reported to an agency specified in Penal Code Section  
            11165.9 to be a known or suspected victim of child abuse as  
            described in Penal Code Section 11165.6.

          5)Provides that the amount of the grants shall be determined by  
            OES, in consultation with an advisory group established by  
            that office, comprised of representatives from the following  
            disciplines:  prosecutors, law enforcement, victims services,  
            pediatric medicine, and child protective services.

          6)Provides that OES shall draw funds from the Child Advocacy  
            Center Fund for purposes of entering into grants for interview  
            services.








                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  2


          7)Provides that OES shall develop grant requirements and award  
            those grants beginning on July 1, 2006.

          8)Changes how portions of monies in the State Penalty Fund are  
            allocated:

             a)   Increases the amount transferred once per month into the  
               Peace Officers' Training Fund from 23.99% to 33.49%.

             b)   Decreases the amount transferred once per month into the  
               Driver Training Penalty Assessment Fund from 25.70% to 1%.

             c)   Increase the amount transferred once per month from the  
               Victim-Witness Assistance Fund from 8.84% to 16.64%.

             d)   Provides that once per month there shall be transferred  
               into the Child Advocacy Center Fund an amount equal to 7.2%  
               of the state penalty funds deposited into the State Penalty  
               Fund during the preceding month.

          9)Provides that each county may establish child advocacy centers  
            to coordinate the activities of the various agencies involved  
            in the investigation and prosecution of alleged child abuse  
            and mitigation of family violence, including those that  
            provide medical services and follow-up treatment to victims of  
            child abuse or family violence, or both.  The purpose of these  
            centers is to protect victims of child abuse by minimizing  
            traumatizing interviews through the coordination of efforts of  
            district attorneys, child welfare social workers, law  
            enforcement, and medical personnel, among others, and to  
            assist prosecution by reducing the chances of conflicting or  
            inaccurate information by asking age-appropriate questions to  
            help procure information that is admissible in court.

          10)Provides that members of the child advocacy center shall, at  
            a minimum, consist of a representative from the district  
            attorney's office, the sheriff's department, a police  
            department, child protective services, and may include medical  
            and mental health professionals. 

          11)Provides that members of the local child advocacy center  
            shall be trained to conduct child forensic interviews.  The  
            training shall include instruction in risk assessment; the  
            dynamics of child abuse, including the abuse of children with  








                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  3

            special needs; child sexual abuse and rape of children; and  
            legally sound and age-appropriate interview and investigation  
            techniques.

          12)Creates a Child Advocacy Center Fund is for the purposes of  
            supporting county child advocacy centers. Money appropriated  
            from the fund shall be made available through OES to any  
            public or private nonprofit agency for the establishment or  
            maintenance, or both, of child advocacy centers that provide  
            comprehensive child advocacy services, as specified. 

          13)Provides that to qualify for state funding pursuant to  
            Government Code Section 13969.7, each county that establishes   
            or maintains a child advocacy  center pursuant to Penal Code  
            Section 11166.6 shall develop an interagency protocol  
            agreement for the investigation of child abuse and neglect  
            that shall be signed by appropriate persons from the office of  
            the district attorney, the sheriff's department, local police  
            departments, child protective services or an equivalent agency  
            administering child welfare, and public health and medical  
            examiners.  

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)States legislative intent that in each county, law enforcement  
            agencies and the county welfare or probation department shall  
            develop and implement cooperative arrangements in order to  
            coordinate existing duties in connection with the  
            investigation of suspected child abuse or neglect cases.   
            [Penal Code Section 11166.3(a).]

          2)Authorizes counties to establish interagency child death teams  
            and a protocol, as specified, to assist local agencies in  
            identifying and reviewing suspicious child deaths and  
            facilitating communication among persons who perform autopsies  
            and the various persons and agencies involved in child abuse  
            or neglect cases.  (Penal Code Section 11174.32.)

          3)Provides that, subject to available funding, the Attorney  
            General, working with the California Consortium of Child Abuse  
            Councils, shall develop a protocol for interagency child death  
            teams for use by counties in order to facilitate communication  
            among persons who perform autopsies and the agencies involved  
            in child abuse or neglect cases.  (Penal Code Section  
            11174.33.)








                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  4


          4)Defines "multidisciplinary personnel" as a team of three or  
            more persons, as specified, trained in the prevention of  
            prevention, identification, and treatment of child abuse and  
            neglect.  [Welfare and Institutions Code Section 18951(d).]  

          5)Declares that it is in the public interest to assist residents  
            of California in obtaining compensation for the pecuniary  
            losses they suffer as a direct result of criminal acts.   
            [Government Code Section 13950(a).]

          6)Provides for the reimbursement of victims, both direct victims  
            and specified derivative victims, of specific types of crimes  
            for certain expenses with limits on those expenses (both  
            dollar amounts and time limits on treatment).  Included are  
            expenses for medical, mental health, specified non-medical  
            care, loss of income, job retraining, residential security,  
            disability access, relocation and funeral expenses.   
            (Government Code Section 13957.)

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Author's Statement  :  According to the author, "This bill  
            allows counties to establish Child Advocacy Centers (CACs).   
            These facilities are sometimes referred to as  
            'Multidisciplinary Interview Centers' (MDICs).  This bill  
            provides that CACs may submit claims to OES to recover the  
            costs of these centers.  CACs provide a safe, child-friendly  
            place for a child to disclose sexual or physical abuse.  Child  
            advocates have long been concerned about the traumatic  
            experience of a child who must describe in exacting detail his  
            or her sexual abuse at the hands of a family member or  
            stranger, and also undergo the intensely invasive medical  
            examination necessary to protect the child from future abuse  
            and prosecute his or her abuser.  In the past, a child victim  
            would have to disclose his or her sexual abuse first to a  
            trusted adult, then to a Child Protective Services social  
            worker, then to a law enforcement officer, then to a district  
            attorney, and then once again retell this painful story  
            several times in open court.  Multiple interviews can also  
            introduce inconsistencies in courtroom evidence, complicating  
            efforts to prosecute child abusers.  To minimize this trauma  
            and create better evidence, CACs record a single interview,  








                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  5

            and gather medical evidence in some cases, for the use in  
            family and criminal courts.

          "The pressing need for CACs has prompted local government  
            agencies to join together and share the funding from their  
            operating budgets, straining the normal operations those  
            budgets were intended to support.  The use of Driver Training  
            Penalty Assessment Funds (DTPAF) will ease, but not eliminate,  
            the struggle local governments undergo to support these vital  
            facilities.  The statutory purpose of the DTPAF is to support  
            driver training efforts in public schools.  These funds are no  
            longer used for that purpose but, instead, transferred to the  
            Peace Officer Training Fund and the Victim/Witness Assistance  
            Fund.  This added support is reflected in the increased State  
            Penalty Fund sharing ratios contained in the bill.  This bill  
            allows these important activities to maintain or increase  
            their funding, as well as bring much-needed support to child  
            victims of crime."    

           2)Child Advocacy Centers  :  According to background provided by  
            the author, "State support for CACs, sometimes referred to as  
            MDICs was proposed in AB 1497 (Negrete McLeod) of 2001.  AB  
            1497 passed both houses in excess of a two-thirds margin, but  
            was vetoed.  In his veto message, Governor Davis stated that  
            he did not want Victim Restitution Fund money to support  
            programs outside of the direct out-of-pocket expenses of crime  
            victims.  AB 2294 (Wolk), of the 2003-04 Legislative Session,  
            continued in that effort.  AB 2294 died in Assembly  
            Appropriations Committee as a result of concerns over the  
            funding source. 

            "This bill draws funding from DTPAF, a fund whose statutory  
            purpose is to fund driver training.  Public schools no longer  
            offer driver training.  This bill reduces this obsolete fund  
            and creates the CAC Fund in its place, as well as increases  
            State Penalty Fund sharing ratios for those funds that have  
            received DTPAF transfers in the past, increasing their funding  
            and making it more permanent.  CACs support the needs of child  
            crime victims, specifically sexual abuse and physical abuse.   
            CACs reduce the traumatic effects of multiple sexual abuse  
            interviews on child victims, and the need to gather good  
            evidence to assist in the prosecution of child abusers."  

           3)Recent Task Force Report Includes Recommendation to Support  
            MDICs  :  AB 2442 (Keeley), Chapter 1064, Statutes of 2002,  








                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  6

            established the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act Task  
            Force to review all aspects of the Child Abuse and Neglect  
            Reporting Act (CANRA) and, more specifically, to address the  
            value of the Child Abuse Central Index in protecting children  
            and any recommended changes to CANRA.  The Task Force issued a  
            report on its conclusions in March 2004 and one of the  
            recommendations of the Investigations and Definitions  
            Subcommittee that "[p]olicy-makers should seek opportunities  
            to support creation and use of Multi-Disciplinary Interview  
            Centers (MDICs)."  The recommendation reads, in relevant part:

               The Task Force received testimony and information that  
               indicates that MDICs are effective at accomplishing  
               these goals.  However, MDICs are not available  
               statewide.  One reason for the lack of MDICs in all  
               areas of the state is the cost of developing,  
               implementing and operating the centers.  There have  
               been several attempts by the Legislature to provide  
               funding to promote the development of more MDICs;  
               however, recent state fiscal problems have prevented  
               their enactment.

           4)Arguments in Support  :  According to California Consortium of  
            Multidisciplinary Interview Centers and Teams, "In 1989, the  
            California Legislature determined that there was a continuing  
            need to improve the system for investigating child sexual  
            abuse and, in particular, the system for interviewing  
            children.  The Attorney General, through a pilot project, was  
            successful in demonstrating that Multidisciplinary CACs  
            succeed in eliminating unnecessary repetitive interview of  
            children; streamlining investigative practices; improving the  
            truth-finding process; and protecting the rights of children,  
            their families, and the accused.  Since that time, almost  
            every county in California has either successfully established  
            a multidisciplinary program to deliver these services or are  
            currently working toward such goals.  Funding for these  
            programs has been the major stumbling block for counties large  
            and small.  Without assistance, child abuse professionals  
            statewide find it extremely difficult to provide this  
            essential service to abused children and their families.  The  
            enactment of this bill would provide the support needed to  
            ensure that ALL children in California be afforded the same  
            level of service, regardless of the size or economic make-up  
            of the community in which they live."









                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  7

           5)Prior Legislation  :

             a)   AB 2294 (Wolk), of the 2003-04 Legislative Session,  
               would have allowed counties to establish MDICs and submit  
               claims to the California Victim Compensation and Government  
               Claims Board for costs incurred by the MDICs associated  
               with child victim forensic interviews.  AB 2294 was held in  
               the Assembly Appropriations Committee.  

             b)   AB 1497 (Negrete-McLeod), of the 2001-02 Legislative  
               Session, was substantially similar to AB 2294 and was  
               vetoed.  The Governor's veto message read, in relevant  
               part:

                 I am concerned that the use of the Victims  
                 Restitution Fund for purposes other than reimbursing  
                 direct and derivative victims of criminal acts for  
                 their out-of-pocket expenses would set a costly  
                 precedent and have a negative long-term fiscal  
                 impact on the Victims Restitution Fund.  In  
                 addition, counties currently provide resources to  
                 support these very important forensic evidentiary  
                 interviews, and no justification to support  
                 supplanting those funds with state resources has  
                 been offered. 

             c)   AB 1724 (Gallegos), of the 1999-2000 Legislative  
               Session, would have established the Child Abuse  
               Multidisciplinary Intervention Account, funded by the  
               General Fund, to provide support for child abuse  
               multidisciplinary teams and multidisciplinary centers.  AB  
               1724 was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. 

             d)   SB 647 (Rainey), of the 1999-2000 Legislative Session,  
               would have established an account in the General Fund for  
               local child abuse multidisciplinary teams and centers.  SB  
               647 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.


           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          California Consortium of Multidisciplinary 
            Interview Centers and Teams (Sponsor)








                                                                  AB 1657
                                                                  Page  8

          Calaveras Works and Human Services Agency
          California District Attorneys Association
          Chief of Police, City of Fresno
          Child Abuse Division, Calaveras County Officer of the District  
          Attorney
          Crime Victims United of California
          District Attorney, Alpine County
          District Attorney, Calaveras County
          District Attorney, Contra Costa County
          District Attorney, County of Yolo
          District Attorney, Imperial County
          District Attorney, Sacramento County
          District Attorney, Siskiyou County
          Imperial County Probation Department
          Multi-Disciplinary Interview Center of Yolo County
          Santa Clara County Victim Witness Assistance Center 
          Volunteer Center of Napa Valley
          3 private citizens

           Opposition 
           
          None on file
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Heather Hopkins / PUB. S. / (916)  
          319-3744