BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 212 (Beall)
Hearing Date: 08/15/2011 Amended: 08/15/2011
Consultant: Jolie Onodera Policy Vote: Human Services 7-0,
Judiciary 5-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 212, an urgency measure, makes various
clarifying and substantive changes to the California Fostering
Connections to Success Act of 2010 in order to ensure proper
implementation on January 1, 2012. This bill also makes changes
to existing state law in order to comply with various provisions
of federal law.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Reimbursement of Kin-GAP Up to $1,300 annually
General
non-recurring expenses
Reentry agreement Unknown; potentially significant
state-General
provisions/written protocols reimbursable costs
Restoration of high school Minor costs; approximately $16
annually General
completion rule for Kin-GAP
Expanded abuse/neglect Unknown; non-reimbursable local lawLocal
reporting requirements enforcement costs offset to a degree
by fine revenue
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Last year, AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559/2010) was enacted and
exercised the federal option under the Fostering Connections to
Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (Public Law (P.L.)
110-351) of extending benefits for youth up to age 21 in the
Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Kinship Guardianship
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 1
Assistance Payment (Kin-GAP) programs. AB 12 also aligned the
state's existing Kin-GAP program with federal requirements in
order to draw down federal funds. This bill, an urgency measure,
makes various changes to existing law to ensure the proper
implementation of the California Fostering Connections to
Success Act of 2010 on January 1, 2012.
Under P.L. 110-351, guardianship assistance agreements are
required to include a provision allowing for the reimbursement
of non-recurring costs of obtaining guardianship, which could
include legal fees and child care costs. Pursuant to guidance
from the federal Administration for Children and Families (ACF),
the State must modify the guardianship agreement and have
statute in place authorizing payment for such reimbursement. For
guardianships established on and after January 1, 2012, this
bill requires the reimbursement of non-recurring expenses, as
specified. The average monthly number of new Kin-GAP cases was
261 in 2010-11. It is unknown at this time how many cases would
request reimbursement but assuming the percentage is consistent
with the number of adoption cases that request non-recurring
expenditure reimbursement of approximately 40 percent, potential
costs assuming the maximum reimbursement of $2,000 per case
would result in annual costs of up to $1.3 million General Fund.
Staff notes that in the absence of this change to existing law,
the state would be out of compliance with federal requirements
and could be at risk of loss of federal Title IV-E funding.
This bill revises the reentry provisions for nonminors
established in AB 12 in response to guidance received from the
ACF. In place of the period of "trial independence" established
under AB 12, this bill requires a county welfare or probation
department to complete a voluntary reentry agreement with a
nonminor reentering care and establish a new eligibility
determination based on the completed agreement. Based on a
reentry rate of four percent of exiting cases to return,
approximately 100 cases per month will be impacted. To the
extent additional county administrative time is required to
complete a new eligibility determination and assist the nonminor
with completion of the voluntary reentry agreement could result
in state-reimbursable costs of an unknown but potentially
significant amount. Because the federal program is optional,
increased workload mandated on local agencies could be
considered state-reimbursable. However, if the state fails to
comply with federal requirements under the optional program, the
state could be at risk of loss of federal funds. As the
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 2
assumptions for federally eligible cases in AB 12 were based on
placement type, there is no change in the estimated number of
federally eligible cases under the revised reentry provisions of
this bill.
This bill clarifies the delinquency provisions established in AB
12. Specifically, a new "transition" jurisdiction is created,
and provides for a clear process for the courts, child welfare
agencies, and probation departments to follow in order to
implement the policy principles envisioned in AB 12 for foster
youth on probation. The Judicial Council has indicated the new
provisions related to transition jurisdiction will not have a
fiscal impact beyond what has been imposed on the courts under
existing law pursuant to AB 12.
Existing law provides that whenever a youth comes within the
jurisdictional description of both dependency and delinquency,
the county probation department and the child welfare services
department must determine what status is in the youth's best
interest pursuant to a jointly developed written protocol. This
bill would require the jointly developed protocol to contain
specified processes, including a process for determining which
agency and court shall supervise a child whose jurisdiction is
modified from delinquency to dependency or transition
jurisdiction, and a process that specifically addresses the
manner in which supervision responsibility is determined when a
nonminor becomes subject to adult probation supervision. To the
extent the requirements for the written protocols exceed those
under existing law could result in increased state-reimbursable
costs to county probation and child welfare departments of an
unknown amount.
AB 12 inadvertently deleted the high school completion rule for
foster youth placed with relative caregivers prior to age 16 and
for guardianships ordered in probate court. This bill provides
for the continuation of benefits for a youth aged 18 who is
attending high school or the equivalent and is reasonably
expected to complete the program prior to his or her 19th
birthday. DSS has indicated the caseload impact associated with
these provisions is estimated to be only two cases annually,
therefore, the fiscal impact is estimated to be minor.
This bill would expand existing requirements upon placement
agencies under the California Community Care Facilities Act to
report incidents of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 3
nonminor dependent by a licensed caregiver to the appropriate
licensing agency. Violation of the Act is a misdemeanor. By
expanding the definition of an existing crime, this provision
will result in non-reimbursable local costs for enforcement.
This bill also provides for changes to existing law in order to
be in compliance with the federal requirements under the
Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, the Promoting Safe and
Stable Families (PSSF) Amendments of 2001, and the Child and
Family Services Improvement Act of 2006. The PSSF program
provides grant funds to states to support child welfare services
program efforts to promote stability and permanency for at-risk
children within families. This bill revises statute to reflect
the allowable allocation of PSSF funds among service categories
within PSSF and the allowable allocation for administrative
expenses. As the proposed amendments will bring statute in line
with current practices, there is no fiscal impact resulting from
this change. DSS receives approximately $35.5 million in PSSF
funds annually. In the absence of the specified changes to
current law, California could be at risk of federal penalties
and loss of federal funds.
This bill further amends current law to comply with federal
requirements under P.L. 110-351 and the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act of 2010 by adding the power of attorney for
health care and information regarding the advance health care
directive form to the information provided to a foster youth
during the 90-day period prior to emancipation. The provision of
these additional documents is not estimated to result in any
significant fiscal impact. Consistent with other federal
compliance amendments in this bill, the state could be at risk
of federal penalties or loss of federal funds in the absence of
these changes to existing law.
Existing law requires DSS to allocate 70 percent of the amount
payable to placements of nonminors under the Transitional
Housing Program (THP)-Plus Foster Care (FC) program, with the
remaining 30 percent to be available to serve the caseload of
youth under the THP-Plus program, as specified. This bill would
direct counties that opt to participate in the THP-Plus and
THP-Plus FC programs to establish a goal of allocating 70
percent under the THP-Plus FC program. However, if a county can
demonstrate there is insufficient demand in either of the
programs to achieve the targeted percentage allocations, the
county may reallocate funds between the two programs to meet the
AB 212 (Beall)
Page 4
existing demand. Further, this bill requires the DSS to develop
a mechanism to determine how counties opting out of the THP-Plus
program are to receive funding based on the operation of
THP-Plus FC only. DSS indicates there would be no net change in
overall funding as a result of these changes to existing law.
Prior Legislation. AB 12 (Beall) Chapter 559/2010 authorizes the
state to exercise the federal option of extending benefits in
the foster care, Kin-GAP, Fed-GAP, and Adoption Assistance
program to age 21 for youth who meet specified criteria. AB 12
also provided for the alignment of the Kin-GAP program with
federal requirements in order to receive federal financial
participation.