BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1758
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 23, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES
Jim Beall, Jr., Chair
AB 1758 (Ammiano) - As Amended: March 10, 2010
SUBJECT : County wraparound services program
SUMMARY : Deletes the pilot program designation for county
wraparound services programs designed to keep children in their
homes with family-based support services as an alternative to
group home placement. Specifically, this bill :
1) Removes "pilot project" references for county
wrap-around services authorized and administered by the
Department of Social Services (DSS).
2) Adds nonrelative extended family members to the list of
family members and guardians eligible for wraparound
services.
3) Deletes the requirement that each participating county
complete interim and final evaluations of the pilot project
which they must submit to DSS and the Legislature.
4) Establishes that a dependent or ward categorically
eligible for Medi-Cal without a share of cost based on
receipt of Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster
Care (AFDC-FC) shall remain eligible for Medi-Cal
regardless of their placement during the wraparound
services program.
5) Requires DSS, with assistance from the County Welfare
Directors Association of California (CWDA), to determine
how to appropriately track the impact of wraparound
services programs in accordance with California Child and
Family Services Review System outcomes.
EXISTING LAW
1) Establishes the wrap-around services pilot project
administered by DSS in authorized counties that elect to
provide tailored community based support services to
families of children who would otherwise be placed in a
group home. WIC 18250.
AB 1758
Page 2
2) Defines eligible children as dependents or wards of the
juvenile court or a child who would be voluntarily placed
in a group home. WIC 18251.
3) Defines "wrap-around services" as community-based
interventions designed to emphasize the strengths of the
child and family through coordinated and individualized
services to address their needs and achieve positive
outcomes. WIC 18251.
4) Requires participating counties to evaluate cost and
treatment effectiveness including whether more restrictive
placements were avoided and the impact on academic
performance for eligible children. WIC 18253.
5) Requires reimbursement for wraparound services not to
exceed the cost of placement in a group home. WIC 18253.
6) Requires counties to establish and meet outcome measures
in the delivery of Child Welfare Services on behalf of
abused and neglected children pursuant to the federal Child
and Family Services Review (CFSR). WIC 10601.2.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : The state first administratively authorized foster
care funding for wraparound program services in Santa Clara
County in 1994. Several years later, California expanded the
use of wraparound services through participation in a federal
demonstration project which authorized use of non-federal Aid to
Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) payments.
The purpose of the wraparound services pilots in California was
to allow counties to provide family-centered service
alternatives to group homes with tailored social and other
support services designed to meet each individual family's
needs.
To be eligible for wraparound services, children must be a
dependent or ward at risk of placement in a group home with a
Rate Classification Level (RCL) of 10 to 14, or they must be
voluntarily placed in out-of-home care. Use of the wraparound
services approach has increased since it started as a one county
pilot and, according to DSS, as of October 2009, 43 counties
across California operated wraparound services programs.
AB 1758
Page 3
Wraparound services must be cost-neutral to the state by law.
According to one of the co-sponsors, the City and County of San
Francisco, "Establishing permanency for children in foster care
through reunification, adoption or legal guardianship is one of
the federally mandated outcomes measures for the child welfare
system. An appropriate intermediate goal for some children is
to step down from a high-level institutional placement to a more
home-like placement setting?state and county funds that would
otherwise have been used to pay for the more costly group home
placement are redirected to fund comprehensive and intensive
social, therapeutic, behavioral and health services."
Prior Legislation:
AB 2297 (Cuneen) Chapter 274, Statutes of 1996 established a
five-year wraparound services pilot project in Santa Clara
County.
SB 163 (Solis) Chapter 795, Statutes of 1997 expanded the
wraparound services pilot to any county with DSS approval, and
extended the sunset to 2003, for children who otherwise would be
placed in a group home with an RCL of 12-14.
AB 2706 (Cuneen) Chapter 259, Statutes of 2000 extended
wraparound to children in, or at risk of placement in,
lower-level group homes with an RCL of 10-11.
AB 429 (Aroner), Chapter 111, Statutes of 2001 was an omnibus
social services budget trailer bill wherein the sunset date for
county wraparound pilot projects was repealed.
AB 295 (Ammiano) Chapter 427, Statutes of 2009 included
provisions later amended out that were substantially similar to
those included in this bill.
Author's Amendment: The author has agreed to take the following
amendment to ensure that services are not disrupted to children
participating in a wraparound services program should a county
decide to discontinue its wraparound services program:
Section 18256.5 is added to the Welfare and Institutions
Code to read:
In order to prevent disruption to a child participating in
AB 1758
Page 4
a wraparound services program, any county that terminates
its wraparound services program shall ensure the
participating child's service needs are met without a
disruption until his or her case is closed.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Alliance of Child and Family Services (co-sponsor)
City and County of San Francisco (co-sponsor)
County Welfare Directors Association of CA (CWDA) (co-sponsor)
California Mental Health Directors Association (CMHDA)
California State Association of Counties (CSAC)
Chief Probation Officers of California
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Michelle Doty Cabrera / HUM. S. / (916)
319-2089