BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2276
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2276 (Bocanegra)
As Amended May 1, 2014
Majority vote
EDUCATION 7-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Buchanan, Olsen, Ch�vez, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Gonzalez, Nazarian, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Weber, Williams | |Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| | | |Holden, Jones, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, |
| | | |Weber |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Makes a number of changes regarding the transfer of
pupils from juvenile court schools to district schools.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Specifies that a pupil who has been enrolled in a juvenile
court school, upon release, shall not be denied immediate
enrollment in a public school for any of the reasons specified
in Education Code Section 48853.5(e)(8)(B), including, but not
limited to, a delay in the transfer of educational records.
2)Encourages local educational agencies (LEAs) to enter into
memoranda of understanding and create joint policies, systems,
including data sharing systems, transition centers, and other
joint structures, create uniform systems for calculating and
awarding course credit, and allow for the immediate enrollment
of pupils transferring from juvenile court schools.
3)Specifies that as part of their existing responsibilities for
coordinating education and services for youth in the juvenile
justice system, the county office of education (COE) and
county probation department shall develop a transition
planning policy that includes collaboration with relevant LEAs
to improve communication regarding dates of release and the
educational needs for pupils who have had contact with the
juvenile justice system, to coordinate immediate school
AB 2276
Page 2
placement, and to ensure that probation officers in the
community have the information they need to support the return
of pupils who are being transferred from juvenile court
schools to public schools in their communities.
4)Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) and
the Board of State and Community Corrections to convene a
statewide group with stakeholders from the community, advocacy
organizations, and education and probation department leaders
to develop a model and study existing successful county
programs for the immediate transfer of educational records,
uniform systems for calculating and awarding credits,
transition planning, and immediate enrollment of pupils who
are being transferred from juvenile court schools.
5)Requires, on or before January 1, 2016, the statewide group to
report its findings and provide recommendations for state
action to the Legislature and appropriate policy committees.
Requires the report to be submitted consistent with the
procedures for submitting reports to the Legislature. Repeals
the provisions requiring the report on January 1, 2020.
6)Finds and declares that pupils who have had contact with the
juvenile justice system are often denied credit or partial
credit earned during enrollment in juvenile court schools.
Delays in school enrollment and loss of earned credit can
result in improper class or school placement, denial of
special education services, and school dropout.
7)Specifies that the proper and timely transfer between schools
of pupils in foster care is the responsibility of both the
LEA, including the COE for pupils in foster care who are
enrolled in juvenile court schools, and the county placing
agency, which includes the county probation department.
8)Requires, a county placing agency or a county board of
education to contact the appropriate person at the LEA of the
pupil as soon as the county placing agency or county board of
education becomes aware of the need to transfer a pupil in
foster care out of his or her current school. Specifies that
the county placing agency, which includes the county probation
department, is required to notify the LEA of the date that the
pupil will be leaving the school and request that the pupil be
transferred out.
AB 2276
Page 3
9)Specifies that upon receiving a transfer request from a county
placing agency, which includes the county probation department
or LEA, including the COE for pupils in foster care who are
enrolled in juvenile court schools, the LEA receiving the
transfer request shall, within two business days, transfer the
pupil out of school and deliver the educational information
and records of the pupil to the next educational placement.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Potential General Fund and Proposition 98 (1988)
state-mandated costs, likely in the range of $130,000 to
$250,000, for COEs and county probation to develop a
transition plan in coordination with LEAs. The bill specifies
this activity is part of existing responsibilities for
coordinating education and services for youth in the juvenile
justice system. To the extent the Commission on State
Mandates determines additional requirements are imposed on
COEs or county probation, the bill would impose a
state-mandated local program.
2)One-time General Fund administrative costs to the California
Department of Education (CDE) and the Board of State and
Community Corrections in the range of $120,000 to $130,000 to
convene a statewide group to develop a model and study
relating to the transfer of educational records and enrollment
of pupils who are being transferred from juvenile court
schools.
COMMENTS : According to the author, this bill clarifies existing
law to help ensure that juvenile justice-involved youth have a
successful educational transition when they return to their
local schools, and creates a process to help promote best
practices for this transition. The author states that school
engagement reduces recidivism, and that if a pupil does not
successfully transition back to their local school, they will
likely reoffend and return to confinement; yet, very little is
done to effectively transition youth from juvenile court schools
to local district schools. According to the author, nationwide,
66% of justice-involved youth are not reenrolled in school after
release from custody.
AB 2276
Page 4
A 2010 report by the Center for Juvenile Justice Reform at
Georgetown University titled "Addressing the Unmet Educational
Needs of Children and Youth in the Juvenile Justice and Child
Welfare Systems" identified an estimated 1.6 million youth who
are referred to juvenile court a year nationally. According to
the report, of those, approximately 24% are charged with
offenses against another person(s), 39% are charged with
property offenses, 12% involve drug-related offenses, and 25%
involve public order offenses. The report found that youth who
enter the juvenile justice system are often from low-income
families, have learning disabilities, have substance abuse
issues, or have experienced physical or emotional abuse. The
researchers found that "reenrollment of youth in schools
following discharge from a juvenile correctional facility has
been a perennial challenge as schools and school districts have
resisted reenrollment of formerly incarcerated youth."
County boards of education oversee juvenile court schools, which
can be situated in a variety of settings, including juvenile
halls, group homes, ranches, camps, day centers, or regional
youth facilities. The schools are required to provide
incarcerated pupils with an educational program that meet
minimum daily minutes and state standards. According to the
CDE, as of October 2010, there were 83 juvenile court schools in
California.
This bill specifies that a pupil released from a juvenile court
school shall not be denied immediate enrollment in a public
school for any of the following reasons: the pupil has
outstanding fees, fines, textbooks, or other items or moneys due
to the school last attended or is unable to produce clothing or
records normally required for enrollment, such as previous
academic records, medical records, including, but not limited
to, records or other proof of immunization history, proof of
residency, other documentation, or school uniforms.
This bill does several things in an effort to bring about
collaboration at the local level. This bill encourages LEAs to
form memoranda of understanding and create joint policies,
systems, transition centers and joint structures in order to
expedite the transfer of educational records, create uniform
systems for calculating and awarding course credit, and allow
for the immediate enrollment of pupils transferring from
juvenile court schools.
AB 2276
Page 5
This bill also directs COEs and county probation departments to,
in collaboration with LEAs, develop a transition planning policy
to improve communication regarding a pupil's release from
juvenile court school and the placement in school, while
ensuring that probation officers have the information they need
to support the return of a pupil to school. The National Center
for Youth Law states in a 2007 publication that one of the
barriers to reentry to school is the lack of clear roles and
responsibilities between a correctional facility and the school.
The article states that "lack of clarity among probation
officers, corrections staff, school personnel at the
correctional facility, and community school staff about who has
the responsibility to ensure that school records are timely
transferred from the correctional facility to the community
school often results in avoidable and excessive delays in
enrollment. And the longer a youth upon reentry is out school,
the greater the likelihood that the youth will return to old
patterns in the community."
To develop a statewide perspective and identify model local
programs, this bill directs the SPI and the Board of State and
Community Corrections to convene a statewide group with
stakeholders from the community, advocacy organizations, and
education and probation department, and submit a report to the
Legislature.
This bill specifies the role of COEs in facilitating the
transfer of pupils released from juvenile court schools and
clarifies that "county placing agency" includes county probation
departments. In the provision requiring a LEA to, upon
receiving a transfer request from a county placing agency,
transfer a pupil out of school and deliver the educational
information and records of the pupil to the next educational
placement within two business days, the bill applies the
requirement to a county office of education for pupils in foster
care who are enrolled in juvenile court schools, and requires
the receiving LEA to transfer the pupil out of school and
deliver the educational information and records of the pupil
within two business days. According to the author's office,
this provision is intended to require the expeditious transfer
of pupils and academic records for pupils being transferred from
district schools to the juvenile justice system as well as from
the juvenile justice system to district schools.
AB 2276
Page 6
The Youth Law Center supports the bill and states,
"Unfortunately, we do not have comprehensive data concerning the
educational status of California's juvenile justice youth.
However, there is strong evidence that these youth encounter the
same barriers to continued education. While detained, youth
should be enrolled in California's juvenile court school system,
a system in which we invest millions of dollars. To capitalize
on this investment, assuring that these youth are immediately
enrolled in school and placed in appropriate educational
programs once released should be a priority for California."
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0003794