BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE HUMAN
SERVICES COMMITTEE
Senator Carol Liu, Chair
BILL NO: AB 12
A
AUTHOR: Beall and Bass
B
VERSION: May 27, 2010
HEARING DATE: June 10, 2010
1
FISCAL: Judiciary; Appropriations
2
CONSULTANT:
Hailey
SUBJECT
California Fostering Connections to Success Act
SUMMARY
Extends transitional foster care services to eligible youth
between 18 and 21 years of age, and requires California to
seek federal financial participation in kinship
guardianship assistance payments.
ABSTRACT
Current law
1)Establishes a system of child welfare services, including
foster care, for children who are abused or neglected or
are at risk of being abused or neglected.
2)Establishes the state's Kinship-Guardianship Assistance
Payment (Kin-GAP) program to recognize that some
dependent children are in long-term, stable placements
with relatives and to allow those dependency cases to be
dismissed. [Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) Sections
11360]
Continued---
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
2
3)Sets the rate paid for a child in a Kin-GAP placement as
the same as the rate paid to foster family homes. (WIC
Section 11364)
4)Authorizes the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over
a child who has been adjudicated a dependent because of
abuse or neglect until the ward or dependent child
attains the age of 21 years. (WIC Section 303)
5)Specifies that Aid to Families with Dependent
Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) benefits and Kin-GAP
assistance shall be paid on behalf of a child in foster
care who is under the age of 18 or a child in a
guardianship who is under the age of 18 and who meets
additional eligibility criteria. (WIC Sections 11363 and
11401)
6)Exempts from this age-based requirement foster children
and children in guardianships between the ages of 18 and
19 who are pursuing specified education-related goals.
(WIC Section 11403)
7)Establishes the adoption assistance program with the
intent to reduce the number of children in foster care
and to provide stable, secure homes for children who meet
specified eligibility requirements. (WIC Sections
16115.5 and 16120)
8)Specifies that the amount of adoption assistance benefit,
if any, shall be negotiated based on the needs of the
child and circumstances of the family and shall be
included in an adoption assistance agreement. [WIC
Sections 16119 (d)(1) and 16120.05]
9)Specifies as criteria for receipt of adoption assistance
program benefits that the child is under the age of 18,
or is under the age of 21 and has a disability that
warrants the continuation of assistance. (WIC Section
16120)
This bill
1)Requires the Department of Social Services (DSS) to
exercise its option under federal law to enter into
kinship guardianship assistance agreements with relative
guardians of children who exit foster care. To create a
federally funded Kin-GAP program, the bill makes
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
3
conforming changes which include, but are not limited to,
the following additions or revisions to existing statutes
governing California's Kin-GAP program:
a) Establishes eligibility criteria, including that
the child is a sibling of an eligible child or that
the child:
i) Has been removed from home pursuant to a
voluntary placement agreement, or adjudicated as a
dependent or ward of the juvenile court, and
returning home would be contrary to the child's
welfare;
ii) Has been eligible for foster care maintenance
payments while residing in the relative caregiver's
home for at least six months; and,
iii) Demonstrates a strong attachment to the
relative, who has a strong, permanent commitment to
caring for the child.
b) Requires that DSS negotiate and enter into a
written assistance agreement with the relative
guardian, which applies regardless of the guardian's
state of residence and specifies, among other
information:
i) The amount of aid, which shall be based on
specified criteria and shall not exceed the rate
paid for children in a foster family home; and,
ii) Additional services and assistance for which
the child and guardian are eligible and a procedure
for applying for additional services, as needed.
(Cf. WIC Section 11387 added by AB 12.)
2)Creates a process for converting eligible existing
state-funded Kin-GAP cases to the newly established
federally funded Kin-GAP with the goals of minimal
disruption to the guardian and child and no break in the
assistance payments. (Cf. WIC Section 11378 added by AB
12.)
3)Requires DSS to negotiate with the federal Department of
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
4
Health and Human Services on behalf of the counties
participating in the Child Welfare Demonstration Capped
Allocation Project to ensure that those counties receive
reimbursement for the above-described kinship
guardianship agreements outside of the provisions of
their current waiver. (Cf. new WIC Section 11385.)
4)Maintains a state-funded Kin-GAP program to provide
benefits on behalf of children who are not eligible for
the federally funded Kin-GAP program described in 2)
above.
5)Specifies that Kin-GAP payments shall continue after the
filing of a petition pursuant to WIC Section 388 to
change, modify, or set aside a court order unless and
until the juvenile court orders the child removed from
the home, terminates guardianship, or grants other
requested relief. (Cf. WIC Section 11363.)
6)Requires that the federally funded Kin-GAP opt-in begin
after the director of DSS issues a declaration that
increased federal financial participation under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) or
subsequent federal legislation is no longer available.
(Cf. WIC Section 11217 and Article 4.7, WIC Section
11385, added by AB 12.)
7)Establishes the intent of the Legislature to exercise the
option afforded states under the federal Fostering
Connections Act to receive federal financial
participation for current or former dependent children or
wards of the juvenile court who receive support up to 21
years of age as follows:
a) Effective January 1, 2012, extends foster care to
eligible youth up to their 19th birthday;
b) Effective January 1, 2013, extends foster care to
eligible youth up to their 20th birthday; and,
c) Effective January 1, 2014, extends foster care to
eligible youth up to their 21st birthday.
8)Defines "nonminor dependents" as current or former
dependents or wards of the juvenile court who are between
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
5
18 and 21 years of age, are in foster care, and are
participating in a transitional independent living case
plan pursuant to the federal Fostering Connections Act.
Allows for the payment of aid, following specified
procedures and due process requirements, on behalf of an
otherwise eligible nonminor dependent who also meets at
least one of the following five conditions:
a) Is completing secondary education or an equivalent
credential;
b) Is enrolled in a postsecondary or vocational
education institution;
c) Is participating in a program designed to promote,
or remove barriers to, employment;
d) Is employed for at least 80 hours per month; or,
e) Is incapable of doing one of the above due to a
medical condition, and that incapability is supported
by case plan information that is brought up-to-date
regularly.
9)Changes eligibility for the adoption assistance program
(AAP) and Kin-GAP assistance to also include otherwise
eligible youth between the ages of 18 and 21 for whom an
adoption assistance agreement was entered into or Kin-GAP
aid began after the age of 16 and who meet one of the
above-described five conditions.
10)Requires the county welfare, probation department, or
tribe, to explain these program changes to all foster
youth, including those receiving Kin-GAP and AAP, who
attain 16 years of age and are under their jurisdiction.
11)Establishes that the juvenile court has within its
jurisdiction any nonminor dependent. Authorizes the
court to terminate dependency or delinquency jurisdiction
over the nonminor between the ages of 18 and 21. Allows
a nonminor under the age of 21 to petition for the court
to resume its dependency jurisdiction and requires a
court hearing on such a petition. (Cf. WIC Sections 391
and 388 in AB 12.) Further requires that the court
resume dependency jurisdiction and order a new
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
6
transitional independent living case plan within 60 days
if it finds that the nonminor is eligible for dependency
jurisdiction. (Cf. WIC Section 727.2.)
12)Authorizes the placement of nonminor dependents in
supervised independent living settings. Defines a
"supervised independent living setting" as a setting
specified in a nonminor dependent's transitional
independent living case plan, pursuant to federal law.
Exempts supervised independent living settings from
licensure under the Community Care Facilities Act.
Establishes the rate paid on behalf of youth in
supervised independent living settings as equivalent to
the per-child, per-month rates paid to foster family
homes. (Cf. WIC Section 11400 in AB 12.)
13)Requires the court, at the last review hearing before a
foster child turns 18, to ensure that the child's
transitional independent living case plan includes a plan
for the child to meet one of the criteria for eligibility
as a nonminor dependent and that the child has been
informed of the right to seek termination of dependency
jurisdiction at any time after reaching the age of
majority and before the age of 21. Requires the child
welfare or probation department to report to the court,
at the hearing closest to and before a dependent child's
18th birthday and each review hearing thereafter, whether
specified information, documents and services have been
provided. [Cf. WIC Sections 391 (e)(2) and 366.6 (l) in
AB 12.]
14)Requires that case plans for nonminor dependents be
developed with, and signed by, the nonminor and include
specified information.
15)Requires that the status of a nonminor dependent be
reviewed periodically, as determined by the court, but at
least every six months, until dependency jurisdiction is
terminated. Specifies that courts shall not order
hearings to terminate parental rights of a nonminor
dependent's parents. Requires the court to hold a
specified hearing before terminating dependency
jurisdiction for a nonminor dependent.
16)Adds nonminor dependents to existing categories of youth
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
7
who may retain specified cash resources and remain
eligible to receive specified social services and to
those who may receive CalWORKs while in the approved home
of a relative foster caregiver.
17)Specifies that nothing in statutory provisions gives
legal custody of a person who has attained the age of 18
to a county welfare or probation department or otherwise
abrogates rights that a person who has reached the age of
18 has under state law. Unless otherwise specified,
declares that the rights of a dependent child and
responsibilities of specified departments and other
entities toward them also apply to nonminor dependents.
(Cf. WIC Section 303.)
18)Requires DSS, by specified dates, to revise or adopt
regulations to implement these new statutory provisions.
Authorizes implementation of regulatory changes via
emergency regulations.
19)Makes other related changes.
FISCAL IMPACT
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee,
extending foster care, KinGAP, and the adoption assistance
program to age 21, once fully implemented, will cost
between $100 million and $155 million per year ($65 million
to $100 million General Fund).
The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) found that, "While
there would initially be increased costs to implementing AB
12, we estimate that by full program implementation [2014]
the net cost of the program would be in the range of $5
million to $41 million."
According to the author, the staggered extension of foster
care support to age 21 over the course of three years
beginning in 2012 allows time for California to recover
from the recession before all the costs of the bill take
effect.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
8
Opportunities in new federal law
In October, 2008, the Fostering Connections Act became
federal law. It offers states the opportunity to opt in to
new federal funding streams if they choose to provide
kinship-guardianship benefits to relative guardians or if
they provide foster care to 18 to 21-year-old youth in
conformity with federal law. This bill enacts the
California Fostering Connections Act and enables the state
to exercise both of these options. With regard to
kinship-guardianship benefits, this bill would allow
California to draw down federal funds for a significant
part of our decade-old state-funded Kin-GAP program.
According to the bill's authors, the federal Fostering
Connections Act, "provides California with an unprecedented
opportunity to access federal funding to improve the lives
of our state's most vulnerable youth. The bill's
provisions represent both fiscally and socially responsible
improvements to California's foster care system. As a
result, California would utilize federal funds to meet
costs currently borne by the state and counties, and
realize proven savings from declines in unemployment,
homelessness, teen pregnancy, public assistance, and the
other costly outcomes for young adults who 'age out' of
foster care. These changes would also implement
recommendations of the California Judicial Council's Blue
Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care."
The need for the bill
Young Californians who enter adulthood from foster care
have fewer supports and poorer outcomes than do young
adults who have not been in foster care.
Each year in California, about 5,000 youth emancipate from
foster care, by far the largest number of any state in the
union. Over the past ten years, according to data from the
state's Child Welfare Services/Case Management System,
managed by the Center for Social Services Research at the
University of California, Berkeley, about 52,000
Californians have emancipated from foster care (from 3,974
in 1998-99 to 5,387 in 2008-09).
The immediate outcomes for these young adults are sobering:
when compared to other young adults of the same age and
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
9
race, the former foster youth are less likely to complete
high school, attend college, or be employed. During the
three to five years after emancipation, they are twice as
likely as others of their age and race to rely on
government assistance, three times more likely to have a
child, and five times more likely to be arrested. (These
are data from a series of reports titled, Midwest Study of
the Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth. There is
little reason to believe that young Californians are much
different from their peers in Illinois, Wisconsin, and
Iowa.)
In 2002, Barbara Needell of the University of California,
Berkeley, released a study of 12,000 California adults who
had aged out of foster care between 1992 and 1997. She
found that only two percent had earned an A.A. degree and
one percent had earned a vocational certificate. While
nearly half of California's adult population (ages 25 to
45) possesses at least an A.A. degree, these former foster
youth are at a significant disadvantage for economic
stability.
Young adults emancipating from foster care are on their own
at 18 with few services or supports available. In
contrast, their peers who are not former foster youth are
receiving ever more increasing support from parents and
extended families. According to research by Richard
Settersten, published by Princeton University and the
Brookings Institution, in 2000 about half of all
20-year-old single, childless men and about 35 percent of
all 20-year-old single, childless women lived with their
parents. These percentages were up measurably from 1970,
1980, and 1990. Corroborating these findings are those
from the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health:
it found in 2001-02 that about 40 percent of 21-year-old
youth live with their parents.
AB 12 provides some options of support to those young
adults who were in foster care - those young adults who
were our collective responsibility until age 18. The
options of support provide by AB 12 are similar to the
options that many parents provide their 18, 19, and 20 year
old children.
Do financial and social supports to young adults improve
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
10
outcomes?
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) contacted
Illinois, New York, Vermont, and Washington, D.C. - four
jurisdictions that have encouraged young adults 18 through
20 to remain in foster care. In addition, CRS received
data from Chafee Foster Care Independence program - grants
to states permitting expenditures on room and board for
adults ages 18 to 21 who were in foster care; also, CRS had
access to the Urban Institute's five-year evaluation of the
Chafee program.
Here are some of the findings:
Young adults in Illinois who stayed in foster care
until age 21 were four times as likely to attend
college as were their comparable peers (race, gender,
and other characteristics) in Wisconsin and Iowa where
supports end at 18.
These young adults from Illinois were also earning
more than $900 a year more than comparable young
adults emancipated from foster care in other states
and less likely to become pregnant between ages 17 and
19.
What take-up rate can California anticipate if AB 12
becomes law?
Illinois, which encourages young adults to remain in foster
care until their 21st birthday, collected data on the age
of 500 individuals leaving the child welfare system. Just
over half stayed until they turned 21, and about 15 percent
left the system in each of the three years preceding that
watershed birthdate. Illinois law made no additional
requirements of these young adults other than their
decision to remain in foster care. As noted in item 8) on
pages 3 and 4 above, AB 12 requires young adults to meet
one of five criteria to be eligible for the new Fostering
Connections payments and services. T
he Illinois data suggest that up to 50 percent of
California's 5,000 adults emancipated annually from foster
care will take advantage of those payments and services for
three years, once the phase-in is complete, up to 65
percent for two or more years, up to 80 percent for at
least a year, and up to 95 percent for part of a year.
The State of New York, which also provides foster-care
support to young adults up to their 21st birthday, has data
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
11
available through 2006-07. A lower percentage of young
adults there are remaining in foster care, when compared to
those in Illinois. New York reports that about 60 percent
of 18 year olds, 40 percent of 19 year olds, and 30 percent
of 20 year olds continue to remain under the jurisdiction
of the juvenile court. For California, that would be about
3,000 18-year-olds, 2,000 19-year-olds, and 1,500
20-year-olds.
County share of cost and workload for social workers
Currently, counties and state government share the
non-federal costs of foster care and other child welfare
services. The state government pays 40 percent of foster
care payments to providers, and counties pay 60 percent of
the non-federal share. For the administrative costs of
foster care, the state pays 70 percent and counties pay 30
percent - of the non-federal share. AB 12 makes no changes
to those sharing ratios for the costs extending foster care
to young adults.
The workload for county social workers to implement this
bill deserves attention. First, there will be a growth in
caseload - the Illinois experience noted above suggest that
roughly 4,000 18-year-olds, 3,200 19-year-olds, and 2,500
20-year-olds will avail themselves of the program when
fully operational - for planning purposes, approximately
10,000 young adults. As noted above, if California's
experience is closer to that of New York, the number will
be closer to 6,500.
Arranging or coordinating educational, housing, and support
services will require skilled social workers with
low-enough caseloads to achieve the program's desired
outcomes of a stable entry into adulthood and economic
security in those first years of independence. In addition
to addressing the basic foster-care needs of these young
adults, social workers will be negotiating rates for those
individuals who remain in the Kin-GAP program, which is
currently about 25 percent of those emancipating. While
the bill does not make any changes in the ratio of clients
to social workers, the Department of Social Services,
counties, and the Legislature should follow closely the
caseload needs of the young adults in this program. The
three-year phase-in should give all concerned the
opportunity to monitor appropriate caseload levels.
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
12
Assembly votes
Floor 72-0
Appropriations Committee13-4
Human Services Committee 5-0
Referral to the Judiciary Committee
Note: This bill is also referred to the Senate Judiciary
Committee. This analysis leaves an examination of court
procedures to that committee.
COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS
Recruitment of foster parents
After the phase-in is complete in three years, the number
of young adults who choose to remain in foster care will
probably be somewhere between 6,500 and 10,000. The
committee may want to ask the author and the bill's
sponsors the ramifications of these numbers on the current
supply of foster parents, group homes, and relatives
participating in the Kin-GAP program. Some new placements
will be needed for these young adults, and new foster
parents will be needed to care for younger children who
might otherwise find a place in a current licensed facility
where current foster children will remain after their 18th
birthday.
Young adults living in settings currently licensed for
minors
The bill is clear that the rights of current foster
children will remain with those young adults who choose to
stay in foster care through the provisions of the Fostering
Connections Act. The bill is also clear that they will
have the rights other adults have. Not only will this be a
new experience for these young adults - to have adult
rights as well as the rights of foster children - but it
will demand different rules within the licensed foster care
facility and within the family dynamics of Kin-GAP and
adoptive homes. The committee may want to ask the author,
the Department of Social Services, and the sponsors about
the experiences of other states in accommodating these new
conditions and what kinds of staff development will be in
order for providers of foster care and for social workers.
Does the bill sufficiently anticipate and address these
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
13
training needs?
POSITIONS
Support: California Alliance of Child and Family
Services (sponsor)
California Youth Connection (sponsor)
Children's Law Center of Los Angeles
(sponsor)
County Welfare Directors' Association of
California (sponsor)
John Burton Foundation for Children Without
Homes (sponsor)
Judicial Council of California (sponsor)
Service Employees' International Union State
Council (sponsor)
Youth Law Center (sponsor)
Abode Services
Adolescent Health Working Group
Alameda County Foster Youth Alliance
Alameda County Foster Youth Services
Alameda County Family Justice Center
Alameda County Juvenile Justice/Delinquency
Prevention
Commission
Alameda County Office of Education, Foster
Youth Services
Program
All Saints Church Foster Care Project
Alternative Family Services
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees
American Federation of Labor and Congress of
Industrial
Organizations
Arriba Juntos
Aspiranet
Association of Community Human Service
Agencies
Bay Area Youth Centers
Be a Mentor, Inc.
Bethe Group Home
Beyond Emancipation
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
14
Bienvenidos Children's Center
Bill Wilson Center
Booker T. Washington Community Service
Center
California State University, Fullerton
California Coalition for Youth
California Commission on Aging
California Communities United Institute
California Mental Health Directors
Association
California Peace Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
California State Association of Counties
California State Parent Teacher Association
California Teachers Association
Catholic Charities of the East Bay
Central California Training Academy
Changing the Health of Adolescents Impacting
the Nation
Reaction, Inc.
Charis Youth Center
Child Abuse Prevention Center
Child Advocates of Silicon Valley, Inc.
Children and Family Services of Contra Costa
County
Children Without Homes
Children's Defense Fund -- California
Children Now
Chinatown Child Development Center
City and County of San Francisco
City of Chico Housing and Neighborhood
Services Department
City of Culver City
Communities in Harmony Advocating for
Learning and Kids
Concept 7 Family Support and Treatment
Centers
Connect Motivate Educate Society of San Jose
State University
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County Children and Family
Services
Corporation for Supportive Housing
County of Santa Barbara
Court Appointed Special Advocates
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
15
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Alameda
County
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Del
Norte County
Court Appointed Special Advocates of
Monterey County
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Placer
County
Covenant House California
Crittenton Services for Children and
Families
Crossroads Treatment Center
D and R Turning Point, Inc.
David and Margaret Youth and Family Services
Desert Manna Ministries, Inc.
Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
Drug Policy Alliance Network
Edgewood Center for Children and Families
EHC LifeBuilders
EMQ FamiliesFirst
EOC Sanctuary Youth Services
Ettie Lee Youth and Family Services
Equality California
Every Child Foundation
FamiliesFirst, Inc.
Families Uniting Families
Family Care Network
Family Law Section of the State Bar of
California
Family, Youth and Children's Services,
Sonoma County
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California
First Place for Youth
Five Acres -- The Boys' & Girls' Aid Society
of Los Angeles
Foothill College's Financial Aid Outreach
Fred Finch Youth Center
Fresno County Economic Opportunities
Commission's Sanctuary
Youth Services
Glendale City Employees Association
Grandparents As Parents
Greenhouse Family Services
Half Way Ranch Inc
Hathaway-Sycamores Child and Family Services
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
16
Honoring Emancipated Youth
Interagency Children's Policy Council of
Alameda County
Japanese Community Youth Council
Juma Ventures
Junior League of Napa-Sonoma Board of
Directors
Junior League of Orange County
Kids in Common
Laborers' International Union of North
America,
Locals 777 and 792
Larkin Street Youth Services
Lavender Youth Recreation and Information
Center
League of Women Voters of California
Legal Aid Association of California
Legal Advocates for Children and Youth
Legal Services for Children
Lincoln Child Center
Los Angeles County Department of Children
and Family Services
Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Los Angeles Universal Preschool
Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at
Stanford
Maryvale
Masonic Homes Children's Program
MatchBridge
Mission Focused Solutions
Modoc County Department of Social Services
Modoc County Office of Education
Monterey County Office for Employment
Training
Mountain Circle Family Services, Inc.
National Association of Social Workers,
California Chapter
National Council on Black American Affairs
New Alternatives, Inc.
Olive Crest
Orangewood Children's Foundation
Paradise Oaks Youth Services
Peacock Acres
Penny Lane Centers
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
17
Pivotal Point Youth Services, Inc.
Phoenix House of California
Placer County Foster Youth Services
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Plumas County Independent Living Skills
Program
Plumas Court Appointed Special Advocates
Promises2Kids
Public Counsel Law Center
Rebekah Children's Services
Redwood Children's Services, Inc.
Regional Council of Rural Counties
Remi Vista Inc. Youth and Family Services
Richmond YouthWORKS
Richstone Family Center
Riverside County Office of Education, Foster
Youth Services
Rosemary Children's Services
Roundhouse Council, Indian Education and
Family Resource
Center
Sacramento Children's Home
St. Anne's
San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors
San Francisco Independent Living Skills
Program
San Francisco State University's Guardian
Scholars Program
San Francisco Youth Commission
San Jose State University, CME Society
Santa Ana College
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Santa Cruz Community Counseling Center
Service Employees' International Union Local
1021
SIERRA
Sierra Adoption Services
Silicon Valley Children's Fund
Silicon Valley Community Foundation
Sonoma County Human Services Department
Stanford Home for Children
Sunny Hills Services
Teen Project
The Alliance for Children's Rights
The Salvation Army-Railton Place
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 12 (Beall) Page
18
Time for Kids, Inc.
Triad Family Services
TLC Child and Family Services
Unique Perspective, Career and Life Planning
United Friends of the Children
Valley Restart Shelter
Valley Teen Ranch
Ventura County Board of Supervisors
Village Family Services
Victor Youth Services
Vista Del Mar
VOICES LLP
Walden Family Services
WestCoast Children's Clinic
Westside Children's Center
Wonder, Inc.
Yolo County Board of Supervisors
Youth and Family Programs
Youth Empowerment Strategies for Success
Youth for Change
Youth Homes, Inc.
Youth Justice Institute
YWCA Santa Monica / Westside
3rd Street Youth Center and Clinic
23 individuals
Oppose: California Right to Life Advocates
-- END --