BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1905
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 23, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES
Jim Beall, Jr., Chair
AB 1905 (Cook) - As Amended: March 17, 2010
SUBJECT: Foster care: funding: placement approvals
SUMMARY : Ensures continued approval and payments for foster
youth relative caregiver homes pending the annual reassessment
visit. Specifically, this bill :
1) Requires approval remain in full force and effect when
an annual reassessment visit is pending for the home of a
relative or nonrelative extended family member (NREFM).
2) Requires that payments to the relative or NREFM not be
terminated because of delays in the annual reapproval
process such as a late home visit or corrective action
plan.
3) Specifies that no appropriation shall be made pursuant
to Section 15200 of the Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC)
for the purposes of implementing this act.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW
1) Authorizes federal funding for state foster care
programs pursuant to Title IV-E of the Social Security Act
under an approved state plan.
2) Requires states to apply the same licensing standards to
all foster family homes receiving Title IV-E funding,
including relative and non-relative caregiver homes. P.L.
No. 105-89, 45 CFR 1355.20(a).
EXISTING STATE LAW
3) Provides a process for the juvenile court to remove a
child from their parent or guardian and declare dependency
on the basis of abuse or neglect. WIC 300.
4) Requires licensure of non-relative foster family homes
prior to the placement of a dependent child. WIC 11402.
AB 1905
Page 2
5) Exempts relative caregiver and NREFM homes from
licensure. Health and Safety Code (HSC) 1505 (k) and (l).
6) Clarifies that California's approval process is the same
for relative and non-relative caregivers and sets forth
standards for the licensure and approval of relative and
non-relative caregiver homes. WIC 309, WIC 362.7, CCR
Title 22, Division 6, chapter 9.5.
7) Defines a "non-relative extended family member" as any
adult caregiver who has an established familial or
mentoring relationship with the child. WIC 362.7.
8) Provides for Aid to Families with Dependent
Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) payment to eligible children
placed in the approved home of a relative or NREFM. HSC
11402.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : Federal law does not require licensure of relative
and NREFM caregiver homes receiving federal Title IV-E payments.
It does, however, require states to apply the same licensing
standards to both relative and non-relative homes. While
California explicitly exempts relative caregiver homes from
licensure, in response to the federal Adoptions and Safe
Families Act of 1997, the state conformed to federal law when it
implemented an approval process for relative homes, administered
by counties.
In 2002, the Youth Law Center filed a lawsuit, Higgins v. Saenz
(CPF-02-501937 (Cal. Supr. Crt., Los Angeles County, Oct. 24,
2002)) alleging the Department of Social Services (DSS) had not
provided adequate oversight of the approval process for relative
homes, thereby threatening the safety of foster children in
relative placements. As part of the Higgins v. Saenz
settlement, DSS implemented the Relative Approval Monitoring
Process and issued guidance to counties in the form of an All
County Letter (ACL 04-02). With this instruction, DSS required
counties to perform an initial assessment of relative caregiver
homes, followed by an annual reassessment for all relative
caregivers. The guidance provided in ACL 04-02 effectively
applied a higher standard to the approval process for relative
caregiver homes because only a portion of licensed non-relative
foster family homes are reassessed on an annual basis. DSS has
AB 1905
Page 3
also required, through this higher standard, that AFDC-FC
payments to relative caregivers be terminated if the annual
reassessment is not completed within one year of the initial
approval.
As a result of the higher standards for relative homes,
according to the author, the state and counties are needlessly
losing federal funding for relative placements. The sponsor of
this bill, the County of San Bernardino, states:
Due to high workloads at the local level and the fact that
the state underfunds the county workload for annual
reassessments, counties struggle to complete these reviews
on time. We currently have approximately 1,500 children
placed with relatives. Due to the reduction in our Child
Welfare Service allocation, processing the annual
reassessment in a timely fashion has become an extremely
daunting task?As a result of late reassessment, under state
regulations, the federal funding for these placements stop,
resulting often in an "overpayment" to that home for the
month the home was not deemed in compliance. For any
overpayment to a relative caregiver, the state must re-pay
the federal government its share and cannot recoup these
costs from either foster parents or counties based on
current law.
This bill would allow approved relative caregivers to remain
eligible for federal AFDC-FC payments pending an annual
reassessment as the state standard for relative home approval
currently exceeds federal and state licensing requirements.
Prior Legislation:
AB 2773 (Aroner) Chapter 1056, Statutes of 1998, conformed state
law to the federal Adoptions and Safe Families (AFSA) (PL
105-89).
AB 1695 (Assembly Committee on Human Services) Chapter 653,
Statutes of 2001, conformed state law with AFSA regulations
requiring the same standards for licensing and approving foster
family homes, and established the NRFM designation.
AB 1544 (Assembly Committee on Human Services) Chapter 793,
Statutes of 1997, established the priority of placing foster
children with relative caregivers and set forth requirements for
AB 1905
Page 4
relative placements.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
County of San Bernardino (Sponsor)
California State Association of Counties (CSAC)
Chief Probation Officers of California
County Welfare Directors Association of California
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Michelle Doty Cabrera / HUM. S. / (916)
319-2089