BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2216
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 2216 (Bass)
          As Amended May 26, 2006
          Majority vote 

           HUMAN SERVICES      5-2         APPROPRIATIONS                  
                                                       (vote not  
          available)
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Evans, Berg, Bass, Coto,  |     |                          |
          |     |Nation,                   |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |Nays:|Haynes, Nakanishi         |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Creates the California Child Welfare Council (Council)  
          to improve outcomes for foster youth.  Specifically,  this bill  :

          1)Establishes the Council to serve as an advisory body  
            responsible for improving the collaboration and processes of  
            the multiple agencies and the courts which serve foster youth  
            and children in the child welfare system.

          2)Requires the Council to issue advisory reports to the  
            Governor, Legislature, Judicial Council (JC), and the public  
            at least annually.

          3)Specifies that the report shall contain, at a minimum:

             a)   Recommendations for coordinating services, increasing  
               effectiveness of programs, increasing judicial excellence,  
               ensuring that all state Title IV-E plans, Program  
               Improvement Plans and Court improvement plans demonstrate  
               effective collaboration and increasing coordination between  
               courts and county, state and federal agencies;

             b)   Information on the development of systematic methods for  
               obtaining policy recommendations from foster youth about  
               the effectiveness and quality of program services; 

             c)   Information regarding the timeliness and consistency of  
               legislative enactments in child welfare and foster care  
               programs;








                                                                  AB 2216
                                                                  Page  2



             d)   Progress on strengthening and increasing the  
               independence and authority of the foster care ombudsperson;  
               and,

             e)   Efforts to coordinate available services for former  
               foster youth and improving outreach to those youth and  
               their families. 

          4)Requires the Council to be comprised of the Secretary of the  
            California Health and Human Services Agency, the Chief Justice  
            of the California Supreme Court, the Superintendent of Public  
            Instruction, the Executive Director of the State Board of  
            Education, Directors of the Departments of Social Services,  
            Mental Health, Health Services, Alcohol and Drug Programs,  
            Developmental Services, Youth authority, the foster care  
            Ombudsperson, the administrative director of the Judicial  
            Council, three youth members of the California Youth  
            Connection and the chairperson of the Assembly Committee on  
            Human Services, among other stakeholders.

          5)Requires the Council to meet at least once every quarter, and  
            requires the meetings to be open to the public.

          6)Prohibits Council members from obtaining compensation for  
            their services, except for foster youth who shall be entitled  
            to reimbursement for all actual and necessary expenses  
            incurred in the performance of their duties.

          7)Permits the Council to access aggregated data and information  
            concerning the child welfare and foster care systems.

          8)Requires the Council to develop additional outcomes to measure  
            youth transition to self-sufficient adulthood, the rate of  
            out-of-county placements, and foster youth school attendance  
            among many other outcome measures for foster youth. 

          9)Requires the JC to adopt performance measures designed to  
            complement and promote the outcome measures and the  
            performance goals and federal outcome standards as required by  
            the federal Child and Family Services Review.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee analysis, General Fund costs in excess of $250,000 to  








                                                                  AB 2216
                                                                  Page  3


          provide analytical staff for the Council, and there are minimal  
          costs for the JC to develop and implement performance measures. 

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, "a recurrent criticism of  
          California's child welfare system is the failure to  
          effectively coordinate services administered by a vast array  
          of state and county agencies thereby leaving children subject  
          to injuries and without essential health, dental, mental  
          health, housing and educational services.  There is no single  
          point of leadership that the state, counties and the courts  
          can look to for desperately needed statewide vision,  
          direction, oversight and accountability of a badly fractured  
          state system."  

          The author maintains that "(a)lthough progress has been made with  
          the passage of the Child Welfare System Improvement and  
          Accountability Act of 2001 (AB 636, Steinberg, Chapter 678,  
          Statutes of 2001), statewide performance on the established  
          performance measures varies greatly, leaving children at risk and  
          the state subject to federal penalties for not meeting national  
          performance measures."  

          According to the outcome data gathered by the UC Berkeley Child  
          Welfare Performance Indicators Project and presented in a joint  
          hearing of the Assembly Committee on Human Services and the  
          Assembly Select Committee on Foster Care, "every one of the  
          (outcome) measures is changing in the right direction. Given the  
          short time frame, this kind of ?improvement is extremely  
          impressive?"

          Specifically, the data supports substantial increases in  
          adoptions (29.4%) within 24 months of entry into foster care and  
          in the decrease (19.4%) in the number of children entering  
          foster care who are initially placed in congregate care; and  
          more modest increases in reunification within 12 months (1.4%),  
          decreases in the rate of children entering care (3.4%) and a  
          decrease in foster are reentry (6.7%).

          However, a report by the National Center for Youth Law entitled  
          "Broken Promises:  California's Inadequate and Unequal Treatment  
          of its Abused and Neglected Children," cites concerns about both  
          state and federal performance indicator improvements.  "State  
          measures do not have standards by which to gauge performance.   
          Although this Report shows the state average in the charts for  








                                                                  AB 2216
                                                                  Page  4


          each measure, the current average is not an acceptable level of  
          performance.  For example, the four quarter state average of  
          children abused again within one year of a prior incident is  
          almost 13%."

          Further, the report states that while a "?disturbingly small  
          number of counties are meeting the federal standard for repeat  
          abuse (of foster children)?not a single large county?met this  
          standard."


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Caitlin O'Halloran / HUM. S. / (916)  
          319-2089 


                                                                FN: 0014954