BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE HUMAN
SERVICES COMMITTEE
Senator Carol Liu, Chair
BILL NO: SB 1432
S
AUTHOR: Steinberg
B
VERSION: April 16, 2012
HEARING DATE: April 24, 2012
1
FISCAL: Yes
4
3
CONSULTANT: Sara Rogers
2
SUBJECT
Child and family welfare
SUMMARY
Requires the California Child and Family Service Review
System workgroup to determine whether additional outcome
indicators, additional analysis of existing indicators, or
both, are necessary to determine the impact of the
realignment of child welfare programs and services, as
specified. Requires the California Department of Social
Services (DSS) to provide information annually to the
legislature regarding the impact of the realignment of
child welfare programs on child safety, as specified.
Requires DSS to initiate authorized compliance actions if
any county child welfare system does not meet established
compliance thresholds after receiving technical assistance
for at least six months but not more than one year.
ABSTRACT
Current law
Continued---
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageB
1.Establishes the California Department of Social Services
(DSS) as the single state agency required by Title IVB
and IVE of the federal Social Security Act to distribute
federal funds and supervise Californias
county-administered child welfare system which includes
child prote2.ctive services, foster care placement
services, and adoptions services.
3.Requires DSS to establish the California Child and Family
Service Review System in order to review all county child
welfare systems and maximize compliance with federal
regulations and state plan requirements.
4.Requires the California Health and Human Services Agency
to convene an inter-agency, county and stakeholder
workgroup to establish a work plan by which child and
family service reviews shall be conducted.
5.Provides that the work plan shall consider federal
program improvement plans, outcome indicators to be
measured, compliance thresholds for each indicator,
timelines for implementation, corrective action
processes, and other considerations.
6.Requires the workgroup to consider whether to establish
additional outcome indicators that support the federal
outcomes and any program improvement plan as specified.
7.Realigns funding for Adoption Services, Foster Care, and
Child Welfare Services, among other programs from the
state to counties and redirected specified tax revenues
as a dedicated funding source.
This bill
1.Requires the workgroup to determine, by March 1, 2013,
whether additional outcome indicators, additional
analysis of existing outcome indicators, or both, are
necessary to determine the impact, if any, of the
realignment of child welfare programs and services on
child safety and well-being.
2.Requires the workgroup to specifically consider outcome
indicators related to the incidence of child abuse and
neglect and the effectiveness of community based
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageC
prevention efforts including nonaccidental injuries to
children requiring medical care, infant mortality, rates
of low-birthweight infants, rates of births to mothers
who received no prenatal care, rates of births to mothers
under the age of 18.
3.Requires DSS to provide information annually to the
legislative budget and appropriate policy committees
regarding the impact, if any, of the realignment of child
welfare programs and services on child safety and
well-being, as specified.
4.Requires DSS to initiate compliance actions authorized in
existing law if any county child welfare system does not
meet established compliance threshold after receiving
technical assistance for at least six months but not more
than one year.
FISCAL IMPACT
This bill has not been analyzed by a fiscal committee.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Purpose of the bill
According to the author, this bill seeks to ensure that the
state can adequately review and assess the impact of
realignment of child welfare services programs to the
counties. The author states that California has a robust
system of supports and services for abused and neglected
children and that it is crucial for the recently enacted
child welfare realignment plan to include strong oversight
and accountability provisions, and for the realignment
process to be open and transparent.
The author points out that the current performance review
system has been in place since 2004, however, despite years
of outcome measurement and monitoring, performance
improvement plans, and technical assistance by DSS, many
counties still fail to meet minimum standards on outcome
measures directly related to the safety, permanency and
well-being of children. According to the author, the
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageD
greater flexibility and autonomy counties will gain through
realignment must be balanced with accountability and
careful monitoring of outcomes for at-risk children and
families, and with timely and effective enforcement action
by DSS if other measures fail to ensure that county systems
meet minimum standards.
The sponsors and supporters of the bill state their concern
that realignment may create fiscal pressures on county
child welfare systems and incentives to de-emphasize
investigation of abuse and neglect reports, minimize
opening of new cases, close cases too hastily, and
eliminate non-mandatory programs, including community-based
voluntary and preventive services that help keep children
out of the foster care system.
Children and Family Services Review System (CFSR)
DSS supervises a 58 county-administered Child Welfare
Services (CWS) system which investigates approximately
31,500 reports of severe injury, death and life threatening
neglect of children annually. According to DSS, as of
February 2012, there were nearly 58,000 children currently
in foster care placement, with nearly one in three residing
in Los Angeles County.
Currently, federal law pursuant to title IV-B of the Social
Security Act and state law pursuant to AB 636 (Steinberg,
Chapter 678, Statutes of 2001) require DSS to enact the
CFSR which establishes an outcomes-based review process
administered by the Outcomes and Accountability Bureau.
At the federal level, the Children's Bureau of the
Administration for Children and Families under the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services Agency also
conducts Child and Family Services Reviews of the states
based on the statewide assessment prepared by DSS, state
child welfare data, case reviews and interviews and focus
groups conducted on site.
California's last CFSR was conducted in 2008, and found
that California did not achieve substantial conformity with
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageE
any of the seven outcomes reviewed including home
permanency, safety from abuse and neglect, timeliness of
adoptions, placement stability, educational needs and
others. The report additionally found that California's
low performance may be attributed at least in part to the
lack of state-wideness for many of the state's innovative
best practices, high social worker caseloads and high
turnover, insufficient numbers of foster homes and
insufficient support and training for caregivers, and an
over reliance on group homes and residential treatment
facilities.<1>
The Child Welfare Outcomes and Accountability Workgroup
Current law requiring the California Health and Human
Services Agency to convene a workgroup consisting of
representatives of various state agencies, counties, and
stakeholders led to the Child Welfare Outcomes and
Accountability Workgroup. This workgroup created a
framework for accountability called the Child Welfare
Outcomes and Accountability System which consists of
quarterly management reports, performance standards,
improvement goals, a state annual progress report, county
system improvement plans, technical assistance and
training, and if needed, a formal state compliance action.
According to the department, this workgroup has completed
their previously mandated obligations and has not met
recently.
Public Safety and Child Welfare Realignment
The 2011-12 Budget Act, AB 118 (Chapter 15, Statutes of
2011) and SB 89 (Chapter 35, Statutes of 2011) transferred
various state fiscal and program responsibilities to
counties in the areas of public safety, health and human
services. The realignment represented $6.3 billion in
program funding, and included nearly $1.6 billion in foster
care and child welfare services funding. The realignment
legislation created an accounting structure, determined
allocations for some of the funding, and dedicated
specified sales tax and vehicle license fee revenue to fund
-------------------------
<1> Final Report: California Child and Family Services
Review. July 2008.
http://www.childsworld.ca.gov/res/pdf/CFSRFinalReport2008.pd
f
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageF
these local costs in 2011-12.
Under this realignment, each county receives a revenue
allocation and assumes responsibility for the full
non-federal share of most aspects of California's child
welfare system in the county. Specifically, these child
welfare functions include Child Welfare Services, foster
care, dependency adoptions, Adoptions Assistance Program
(AAP), and child abuse prevention. The dedicated revenues
for realignment are ongoing; however, the accounting
structure and funding allocations for 2012-13 and beyond
are currently under consideration within the 2012-13 Budget
Act.
Under the plan, DSS retains the responsibility to ensure
compliance with federal laws and performance measures,
monitoring requirements and California's state plan. DSS
also retains programmatic responsibility for the CWS Case
Management System, social worker training, and independent
adoptions that are handled through private attorneys.
An LAO evaluation of California's prior experience with
realignment included specific recommendations regarding the
realignment proposal:<2>
For some of the realigned programs, the Legislature
will need to make policy decisions regarding how much
programmatic flexibility to give counties. The
Legislature will need to decide the degree to which
counties will be required to operate programs
consistent with past practices versus having the
authority to provide higher or lower levels of
service...The Legislature may also have concerns that
too much flexibility could mean that certain programs
are not operated at an adequate level in some
counties. In those cases where a minimum level of
service is a priority of the Legislature, it can
establish minimum standards or requirements.
The report further recommended that:
-------------------------
<2> Legislative Analyst's Office, "2011 Realignment:
Addressing Issues to Promote Its Long-Term Success."
http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2011/stadm/realignment/realign
ment_081911.pdf
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageG
�T]he Legislature could direct the creation of working
groups in each of the major program areas affected by
realignment with instruction to meet regularly and
report back to the Legislature on its progress
periodically.
Related Legislation
AB 1611 (Beall, 2012) - Requires California Child and
Family Service Review System workgroup to examine outcome
indicators for each racial and ethnic population served
within a county. Additionally, requires counties to
include specified information in a system improvement plan
regarding efforts made to eliminate disparities in services
and outcomes for children of color in its child welfare
system. Requires DSS to identify and promote best
practices for increasing cultural competency in the
provision of services and eliminating inequities in service
delivery to racial and ethnic communities. Authorizes the
department to take various actions if a county has failed
to comply with the requirements of its system improvement
plan, as specified. This bill is currently in the Assembly
Human Services Committee.
AB 118 (Chapter 15, Statutes of 2011) - Implements as part
of the 2011-12 Budget Act the 2011 Public Safety
Realignment, transferring various state fiscal
responsibilities for public safety, child welfare services
and adoption services to counties. This bill also creates
the account structure and allocations for some of the
funding, and dedicates specified tax revenue to fund these
local costs in 2011-12.
AB 636 (Steinberg, Chapter 678, Statutes of 2001) -
Requires DSS to enact the Children and Family Services
Review System which establishes an outcomes-based review
process administered by the Outcomes and Accountability
Bureau.
Comments
The current language may not provide the workgroup with
sufficient time to complete their responsibilities, the
scope of their responsibilities should be clarified to
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageH
include development of the needed indicators, and the
specific outcome indicators required to be considered may
not be the most relevant for the purpose of evaluating
realignment.
Staff recommends the following amendments.
1.Page 4, Lines 7-19 amend to read:
By March 1, 2013, January 15, 2013 the workgroup shall
reconvene and by April 1, 2013 shall determine whether
additional outcome indicators, additional analysis of
existing outcome indicators, or both, are necessary to
determine the impact, if any, of the realignment of child
welfare programs and services on child safety and
well-being and shall develop those indicators and
analysis for inclusion in the California Child and Family
Service Review System work plan, if needed. The workgroup
shall specifically consider outcome indicators related to
the incidence of child abuse and neglect, and the
effectiveness of community-based child abuse prevention
efforts and early intervention efforts, and any changes
to outcomes that may be the result of realignment of
child welfare programs and services. including, but not
limited to, all of the following:
(A) Nonaccidental injuries to children requiring medical
care.
(B) Infant mortality.
(C) Rates of birth of low-birthweight infants.
(D) Rates of birth to mothers who received no prenatal
care.
(E) Rates of birth to mothers under 18 years of age.
2.Page 5, Lines 7-14 amend to read:
The impact, if any, of the realignment of child welfare
programs and services on child safety and well-being,
including, but not limited to, outcome indicators
determined by the workgroup. any increase in
nonaccidental injuries to children receiving medical
care, infant mortality, rates of birth of
low-birthweight infants, rates of birth to mothers who
received no prenatal care, rates of birth to mothers
under 18 years of age, or other factors correlated with
increased risk of child abuse or neglect .
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageI
3.Staff notes that current budget discussions regarding the
realignment proposal are ongoing in the context of the
2012-13 Budget Act. These discussions include
consideration of the appropriate compliance tools to be
used by the Department of Social Services if counties
fail to meet federal and state standards. The author may
wish to revisit the provisions of this bill requiring the
department to initiate compliance actions authorized by
Section 10605, as specified, to ensure consistency with
any action taken in this year's Budget Act.
Additionally, the specified time frame of six months to
one year in triggering a compliance action by the
department may be too short for counties to remedy
deficiencies.
4.The required workgroup membership pertaining to 10601.2
(c) (1) does not reflect the current and relevant makeup
of the workgroup, and requires updating. The Department
of Mental Health, no longer exists, and the Department of
Child Support Services has not worked on this project and
should be removed, according to the Department.
POSITIONS
Support: John Burton Foundation (co-sponsor)
Public Counsel (co-sponsor)
The Alliance for Children's Rights
Children Now
California Youth Connection Alliance for
Children's Rights
Oppose: none received
-- END --
STAFF ANALYSIS OF SENATE BILL 1432 (Steinberg)
PageJ