BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE HUMAN
SERVICES COMMITTEE
Senator Elaine K. Alquist, Chair
BILL NO: AB 2216
A
AUTHOR: Bass and Maze
B
VERSION: As proposed to be amended
HEARING DATE: June 27, 2006
2
FISCAL: Appropriations
2
1
CONSULTANT:
6
Flores/Hailey
SUBJECT
Child Welfare Leadership and Performance
Accountability Act of 2006
SUMMARY
Creates the California Child Welfare Council to improve
outcomes for foster youth.
ABSTRACT
Current law
1. Provides for a system of child welfare services
administered by each county with oversight by DSS for
juvenile wards of the court, foster youth, or other
children under the supervision of a county welfare
department.
2. Includes the Child Welfare System Improvement and
Accountability Act to measure and improve outcomes for
children in California's child welfare system.
3. Provides for the California child and family service
Continued---
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2216 (Bass) Page
2
review system created to review all county child welfare
systems including child protective services, foster care,
adoption, family preservation and support and independent
living.
4. Requires the State Department of Social Services (DSS)
to convene a workgroup to consider any existing program
improvement plans entered into by the state pursuant to
federal regulations.
5. Provides for the foster care ombudsperson program to
give an outlet for foster youth and advocates to report and
resolve problems and concerns.
This bill
1. Makes findings and declarations regarding foster youth.
2. Creates the California child welfare council (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.
3. Requires the council to meet at least once every
quarter, and that the meetings be open to the public. Also
requires the council issue advisory reports to the
governor, Legislature, Judicial Council, and the public at
least annually.
4. Specifies that the report shall contain recommendations
for:
The coordination of services.
Increasing effectiveness of programs.
Increasing judicial excellence.
Ensuring that all state IV-E plans, program
improvement plans and court improvement plans
demonstrate effective collaboration and increasing
coordination between courts and public agencies.
Assisting the Secretary of the California Health
and Human Services and the Chief Justice in
formulating policies for the effective administration
of the child welfare and foster care programs and
judicial processes.
Modifying program practices and court processes,
rate structures, and other system changes needed to
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2216 (Bass) Page
3
promote and support relative caregivers, family foster
parents, therapeutic placements, and other placements
for children who cannot remain in the family home.
Developing data and information sharing agreements
and protocols.
Developing systematic methods for obtaining policy
recommendations from foster youth about the
effectiveness and quality of program services and
judicial processes.
Implementing legislation in the child welfare and
foster care programs and the courts, and reporting to
the Legislature on the timeliness and consistency of
the implementation.
Monitoring the adequacy of resources necessary for
the implementation of existing programs and court
processes, and the prioritization of program and
judicial responsibilities.
Strengthening and increasing the independence and
authority of the foster care ombudsperson.
Coordinating available services for former foster
youth and improving outreach efforts to those youth
and their families.
5. Requires the council to be comprised of specified
members including the Secretary of California Health and
Human Services Agency and the Chief Justice of the
California Supreme Court who would serve as cochairs, the
Superintendent of Public Instruction, the executive
director of the State Board of Education, directors of DSS
and the departments of Mental Health, Health Services,
Alcohol and Drug Programs, Developmental Services, and the
Youth Authority; plus the administrative director of the
Judicial Council, four foster youth or former foster youth,
and the chairpersons of the Assembly and Senate committees
on human services or their leadership appointees, among
other stakeholders.
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.
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2216 (Bass) Page
4
8. Permits the cochairs to appoint committees composed of
council members, experts in specialized fields, foster
youth, program stakeholders, state and county child welfare
and foster care staff, child advocacy organizations,
members of the judiciary, foster care
public health nurses, or any combination thereof, to advise
the council on any functions of the council and the
services provided through the child welfare and foster care
programs and the courts.
9. States legislative intent to inspect other state child
welfare and foster care systems over the course of the
2007-08 legislative session to examine effective
administrative structures of leadership to determine if a
reconfigured administrative structure would provide
statewide leadership and better coordination between
departments and agencies.
10. Requires the Secretary of California Health and Human
Services Agency to ensure that all of the federal child and
family services review outcome measures and all of the
California child and family service review system outcome
indicators are clearly posted on the DSS' Web site.
11. Requires the Secretary of California Health and Human
Services Agency consult with the council and ensure that
there has been a public process for the submission of
comments and recommendations before any of the federal
goals or any of the California child and family service
review system outcome indicators are added, deleted, or
amended.
12. Requires the council, by April 1, 2008, develop
additional specified outcomes relevant for the well-being
of children and youth emancipating out of the foster care
system.
13. Requires the Judicial Council, by April 1, 2008, adopt
through rules of court, performance measures designed to
complement and promote those measures specified and
developed by the council. In adopting the performance
measures, the Judicial Council is required to consult with
the council and the Secretary and base the measures on data
that is available from current or planned data collection
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2216 (Bass) Page
5
processes and to the greatest extent possible, shall ensure
uniformity of data reporting.
FISCAL IMPACT
The bill would result in minor General Fund costs for the
Secretary of California Health and Human Services Agency
and various departments to provide support and analytical
staff. The Assembly Appropriations Committee also
estimates the bill would result in minimal costs for the
Judicial Council to develop and implement performance
measures.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
The author states that 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. In addition, the
author argues that although progress has been made with the
passage of the Child Welfare System Improvement and
Accountability Act of 2001, statewide performance on the
established performance measures varies greatly and
children are left at risk and the state subject to federal
penalties for not meeting national performance measures.
Lastly, the author notes that there are few current
performance measures that actually assess the well-being of
children and youth in the child welfare and foster care
system.
The author cites several studies that have documented these
issues. The Little Hoover Commission "decried the lack of
leadership and oversight; the Pew Commission on Children in
Foster Care similarly called upon states to improve
collaboration between agencies and the courts by creating
broad-based state commissions on children in foster care;
and the governor's 2004 California Performance Review
Report labeled foster care as a "system in crisis" in need
of empowered state leadership and improved performance
measures to address county performance.
The Child Welfare System Improvement and Accountability Act
of 2001 (AB 636, Steinberg, Chapter 678, Statutes of 2001)
required the DSS to establish the California child and
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2216 (Bass) Page
6
family service review system in order review all county
child welfare systems. The act required the California
Health and Human Services Agency to convene a specified
workgroup to establish the work plan for the child and
family service reviews. The California child and family
service review system was required to establish outcome
indicators consist with the federal review indicators and
measurements, but was also empowered to develop additional
indicators.
AB 636 required DSS to perform the county reviews beginning
on January 1, 2004. County child welfare systems that do
not meet the established compliance thresholds for the
outcome measures are to receive technical assistance from
teams made up of state and peer-county administrators.
Despite the progress counties have made on the plans, many
are not yet meeting the federal performance goals.
The Little Hoover Commission's 2003 report Still in Our
Hands: A Review of Efforts to Reform Foster Care in
California noted in its cover letter that "The Secretary of
the Health and Human Services Agency told the Commission
that the responsibility to lead reforms does not rest with
the State and it is not his job. He placed that
responsibility on the counties. But county officials
assert that without direction and new resources from the
State, they cannot or will not reform the system. With no
one in charge, the foster care system fumbles forward, and
often backward, and costs children and families their
happiness, their prosperity and even their lives."
PRIOR ACTIONS
Assembly Floor: 53 - 27(Pass)
Assembly Appropriations: 13 -- 5(Do pass as amended)
Assembly Human Services: 5 -- 2(Do pass)
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
Who should develop the additional outcome measures?
The bill specifies that the council shall develop
additional outcome measures. The bill specifies these
numerous measures such as a measurement of youth transition
to self-sufficient adulthood, educational stability,
housing, etc. A previous version of the bill specified
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 2216 (Bass) Page
7
that these measures would be developed by the workgroup
established by AB 636. The County Welfare Directors
Association supports reconvening the AB 636 workgroup to
establish these measures. The difference between the two
bodies is that the council includes the directors of many
departments, foster youth, and legislative representatives;
while the workgroup includes representatives of many of the
same departments. Should a high-level council develop the
outcome measures or instead review the measures as
developed by a workgroup?
Technical Amendment
The author has a minor technical amendment to delete a
repeating phrase on page 9, lines 36 through 39.
POSITIONS
Support: National Center for Youth Law (Co-Sponsor)
American Federation of State County and
Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO
California Association of Nonprofits
California Coalition for Youth
Children's Advocacy Institute
Inter-Agency Council on Child Abuse and
Neglect
Junior Leagues of California State Public
Affairs Committee
Oppose: None received.
-- END --