BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 787|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 787
Author: Stone (D)
Amended: 9/6/13 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/11/13
AYES: Yee, Berryhill, Emmerson, Evans, Liu, Wright
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/25/13
AYES: Evans, Walters, Anderson, Corbett, Jackson, Leno, Monning
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-0, 8/30/13
AYES: De Le�n, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-0, 5/16/13 (Consent) - See last page for
vote
SUBJECT : Foster care
SOURCE : Alliance for Children's Rights
California Alliance of Child and Family Services
California Welfare Directors Association
Children's Law Center of California
Judicial Council of California
DIGEST : This bill makes clarifying and technical changes to
the California Fostering Connections to Success Act (Act) to
ensure the continued implementation of the Act.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/6/13 delete language that
CONTINUED
AB 787
Page
2
eliminated case monitoring for nonminor dependent whose
nonrelated guardianship was ordered in juvenile or probate
court. They also add conditions under which a nonminor may
petition the court for re-entry into dependency, specifically
when a guardian, former guardian, or adoptive parent has died.
Additionally, they prevent chaptering conflicts with AB 346 in
WIC Sections 11400 and WIC 727.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Defines a "nonminor dependent" (NMD) as a current, or former
foster child between the ages of 18 and 21, who is in foster
care under the responsibility of the county welfare
department, county probation department, or an Indian tribe,
and is participating in a transitional independent living
plan.
2.Defines "nonminor former dependent or ward" as either:
A. A nonminor who reached 18 years of age while subject to
an order for foster care placement, for whom dependency,
delinquency, or transition jurisdiction has been
terminated, and who is still under the general jurisdiction
of the court; or
B. A nonminor who is over 18 years of age and while a
minor, was a dependent child or ward of the juvenile court
when the guardianship was established, as specified, and
the juvenile court dependency or wardship was dismissed
following the establishment of the guardianship.
1.Defines a "transition dependent" as a minor who is between 17
years and five months and 18 years of age, who is in foster
care, and subject to the court's transition jurisdiction.
2.Establishes the Act, pursuant to AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559,
Statutes of 2010), which is a voluntary program for youth who
meet specified work and education participation criteria. The
Act provides, among other things, for the extension of
transitional foster care benefits to eligible youth up to age
21, as specified.
CONTINUED
AB 787
Page
3
3.Provides for the voluntary continuation or reentry into foster
care for nonminor dependents who meet general Aid to Families
with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) requirements,
and when the nonminor youth has signed a voluntary mutual
agreement and one or more of the following conditions exist:
A. The nonminor is working toward their high school
education or an equivalent credential;
B. The nonminor is enrolled in a postsecondary institution
or vocational education program;
C. The nonminor is participating in a program or activity
designed to promote or remove barriers to employment;
D. The nonminor is employed for at least 80 hours per
month; and/or
E. The nonminor is incapable of doing any of the activities
described above, due to a medical condition, and that
incapability is supported by regularly updated information
in the case plan of the non-minor.
1.Provides that nonminor former dependents are not eligible for
re-entry into extended foster care as nonminor dependents of
the juvenile court.
This bill:
1.Clarifies that former NMDs who reached permanency, but whose
guardian, relative, or adoptive parent died before their 21st
birthday, may re-enter extended foster care.
2.Authorizes probation officers to place NMDs in approved
transitional placements, as specified.
3.Adds the existing definition of "transition dependent" to the
relevant code section which determines recipients of AFDC-FC.
4.Clarifies how the court may terminate jurisdiction over a NMD.
5.Makes other clarifying and technical changes.
Background
CONTINUED
AB 787
Page
4
According to the Senate Human Services Committee analysis,
foster youth who turn 18 while in foster care, but who do not
sign an extended foster care agreement, or who leave foster care
voluntarily, are eligible to return to extended foster care
until they reach age 21. This bill permits a youth who achieved
permanency through adoption or guardianship to return to
extended foster care if their nonrelated guardian, relative
legal guardian or adoptive parent dies before the youth turns 21
years of age.
Additionally, probation foster youth who turn 18 while serving
their probation are also eligible for extended foster care,
subject to the requirements of the program. Existing law
specifies numerous placement types for NMDs, however, it did not
make similar statutory changes for probation youth. This has
meant that probation departments have faced difficulty placing
youth in otherwise appropriate placements such as group homes,
licensed family homes, transitional living programs that are
available to other NMDs.
Prior Legislation
AB 12 (Beall and Bass, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010)
established the California Fostering Connections to Success Act,
which extended transitional foster care services to eligible
youth between ages 18 and 21 and required California to seek
federal financial participation for Kin-GAP.
AB 212 (Beall, Chapter 459, Statutes of 2011) made technical and
clarifying changes to the California Fostering Connections to
Success Act.
AB 1712 (Beall, Chapter 846, Statutes of 2012) made technical
and clarifying changes to the California Fostering Connections
to Success Act.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Potential minor state costs for extended foster care and
adoption assistance benefits for former NMDs whose guardian,
relative, or adoptive parent passed away prior to the NMD's
CONTINUED
AB 787
Page
5
21st birthday. Annual costs in the range of $12,000 to
$36,000 (General Fund) per case, depending on the placement
type.
Potentially significant ongoing state costs in the hundreds of
thousands to millions of dollars (General Fund) for NMDs
placed by probation officers into approved placements not
currently authorized under existing law.
Increased county administrative costs of about $35,000
(General Fund) per year for county assessments conducted 90
days prior to a youth's 18th birthday. This estimate assumes
a 45-minute assessment at a cost of $57 per youth for 600
youth turning 18 per year.
Ongoing county cost savings of $2.3 million (2011 Local
Revenue Fund) for the removal of case management requirements
for NMD placements with Non Related Legal Guardians. This
estimate assumes an average of 425 NMDs would not require case
management services costs of $450 per case per month.
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/9/13)
Alliance for Children's Rights (co-source)
California Alliance of Child and Family Services (co-source)
California Welfare Directors Association (co-source)
Children's Law Center of California (co-source)
Judicial Council of California (co-source)
AFSCME, AFL-CIO
Alliance for Children's Rights
ASPIRAnet
California Coalition for Youth
California Police Chiefs Association
Juvenile Court Judges of California
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
In 2010 the state adopted AB 12 (Beall/Bass, Chapter 559)
which opted California into two provisions of the federal
Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions
Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-351). This landmark child
welfare legislation was substantial, amounting to 207 pages
at the time of adoption.
Due to the complexity and fundamental improvements this act
CONTINUED
AB 787
Page
6
made to the state's welfare system, follow up legislation
has been needed since its adoption to help ensure its
successful implementation. Since its passage, the
Legislature has passed and the state has adopted two
successive measures to this effect; AB 212 (Beall, Chapter
459) from 2011 and AB 1712 (Beall, Chapter 846) from 2012.
Like its predecessors, this bill will continue the
Legislature's efforts to ensure that California's child
welfare system can continue to enhance and provide
necessary and integral support services to foster youth.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-0, 5/16/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Garcia,
Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Hagman, Hall, Harkey,
Roger Hern�ndez, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue,
Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor, Medina, Mitchell, Mullin,
Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea,
V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner,
Ting, Torres, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk,
Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Buchanan, Eggman, Beth Gaines, Grove,
Holden, Melendez, Morrell, Stone, Vacancy
JL:ej 9/9/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED