BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1928
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 9, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1928 (Cook) - As Amended: April 18, 2012
Policy Committee: Human
ServicesVote:6 - 0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill clarifies conditions under which the number of foster
children residing in a specialized foster care home may be
increased from two to three. Specifically, this bill:
1)Clarifies that no more than two foster children with
specialized health care needs can reside in a foster home
unless certain exceptions are met. If the exceptions are met a
third foster child with or without specialized health care
needs may reside in the home.
2)Requires that a foster child's individualized health care
planning team consider the number of adoptive, biological and
guardianship children living in a home in their determination
of whether or not a third foster child with specialized needs
can safely be placed in a foster home.
3)Requires the Department of Social Services (DSS) to consider
all adoptive biological, foster, and guardianship children
living in the home and determine a licensed capacity for
foster children that does not cause the home to exceed a total
of six children living in the home.
4)States that this bill is declaratory of existing law.
FISCAL EFFECT
Costs associated with this legislation should be minor and
absorbable within existing resources.
COMMENTS
AB 1928
Page 2
Rationale . Existing law establishes the general rule that no
more than two foster care children may reside in a specialized
foster care home. Exceptions may be authorized to permit a
specialized foster care home to have a third child with or
without special health care needs placed in the home provided
the licensed capacity is not exceeded and provided that
specified conditions are met.
According to the author, there is confusion as to whether the
reference to child in this provision is to a foster child, or to
the adoptive, biological or guardianship children of the foster
care provider. The latter interpretation would restrict the
ability of the foster parent to care for an additional foster
child if there are also non-foster children in the home. Citing
the example of San Bernardino County, the author says that the
county's misinterpretation "has prevented several trained foster
care parents from being allowed to care for medically fragile
foster children because they have children of their own. It has
also limited the number of available beds in the county."
This bill clarifies current law by stating that the reference to
a third child is to a foster child, with or without special
health care needs. There may be additional children who are the
adoptive, biological, or guardianship children of the foster
parent, as long as the licensing capacity of the home is not
exceeded. The clarification made by this bill is consistent
with DSS' regulatory interpretation of the existing statute.
Analysis Prepared by : Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916)
319-2081