BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
AB 2573 (Stone)
As Amended April 21, 2014
Hearing Date: June 17, 2014
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
NR
SUBJECT
Foster care: transition jurisdiction
DESCRIPTION
This bill would authorize a court to assume or resume transition
jurisdiction over a nonminor who attained 18 years of age while
subject to an order for foster care placement without
consideration of whether the rehabilitative goals of the
nonminor ward, as set forth in the case plan, have been met.
BACKGROUND
Each year in California, about 5,000 youth emancipate from
foster care, which is by far the largest number of any state in
the union. According to data from the state's Child Welfare
Services/Case Management System, about 52,000 Californians
emancipated from foster care from 1999 to 2009. The immediate
outcomes for these young adults are sobering. Studies have
shown that former foster youth, when compared to other young
adults of the same age and race, are less likely to complete
high school, attend college, or be employed. They are also at a
higher risk for becoming homeless and arrested or incarcerated.
(See Foster Care in California, Public Policy Institute of
California, 2010.)
In 1998, California established the Kinship Guardianship
Assistance Payment program (the Kin-GAP program) to provide
financial assistance for children who, after being adjudged
dependents of the juvenile court, are placed in legal
guardianship with a relative. (SB 1901 (McPherson, Chapter
1055, Statutes of 1998).) The bill was the result of a study
(more)
AB 2573 (Stone)
Page 2 of ?
that concluded that most relative caregivers have strong
commitments to the children in their care, but are averse to
adoption because it requires the termination of the parental
rights of one of their family members. Moreover, while most
relative caregivers supported permanency planning for a child,
many did not pursue legal guardianship for fear of losing the
needed financial support they obtained under the foster care
system.
In October 2008, the federal government enacted the Fostering
Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act (Public Law
110-351) which offers states the opportunity to opt-in to new
federal funding streams if they choose to provide
kinship-guardianship benefits to relative guardians or provide
foster care to 18 to 21-year-old youth. AB 12 (Beall and Bass,
Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010), the California Fostering
Connections to Success Act (Act), allowed California to collect
federal funds for a significant part of California's decade-old,
state-funded Kin-GAP program. AB 12 also authorized the
juvenile courts to exercise transition jurisdiction over and
extend foster benefits to nonminor dependents between the ages
of 18 to 21 if they meet the specified criteria. One year
later, the Legislature enacted AB 212 (Beall, Chapter 459,
Statutes of 2011) to aid in the implementation of the Act. AB
1712 (Beall, Chapter 846, Statutes of 2012) and AB 787 (Stone,
Chapter 487, Statutes of 2013) further clarified specific issues
related to that implementation, including clarifying that former
nonminor dependents (NMD) who reached permanency, but whose
guardian, relative, or adoptive parent died before their 21st
birthday, may reenter extended foster care.
Juvenile delinquency differs from juvenile dependency, which
deals with abused and neglected children, in that it deals with
actions involving violations of laws by a minor. If the court
finds the allegations of an offense to be true, the minor is
declared a ward of the court and usually placed on probation
with terms and conditions, outlined in a case plan, that are
designed to hold the minor accountable for his or her behavior
and enable the minor to become a law-abiding and productive
member of the community. The court must balance the interests of
public safety and protection, the importance of victim
restitution, and the best interests of the minor when deciding
what conditions of probation to impose and where to place the
minor, if removal from the home is necessary.
This bill seeks to address the issue of former nonminor wards of
AB 2573 (Stone)
Page 3 of ?
the court who have not met all rehabilitative goals outlined in
his or her case plan, but may still benefit from the court's
supervision. Accordingly, this bill would allow the court to
exercise transition jurisdiction over these youths if they
otherwise meet the criteria to qualify for extended foster care
benefits.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law , the California Fostering Connections to Success
Act (Act), 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.
(Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 11403 et seq.)
Existing law 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:
the nonminor is working toward his or her high school
education or an equivalent credential;
the nonminor is enrolled in a postsecondary institution or
vocational education program;
The nonminor is participating in a program or activity
designed to promote or remove barriers to employment;
The nonminor is employed for at least 80 hours per month;
and/or,
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 nonminor. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
11403.)
Existing law defines a "nonminor dependent" 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.
(Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 11400.)
Existing law defines "nonminor former dependent or ward" as
either:
a nonminor who reached 18 years of age while subject to an
AB 2573 (Stone)
Page 4 of ?
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
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. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
11400 (aa).)
Existing law provides that nonminor former dependents or wards
are not eligible for reentry into extended foster care as
nonminor dependents of the juvenile court, unless certain
conditions apply. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 11403.)
Existing law establishes the criteria by which a child who has
suffered, or is at risk of suffering, significant abuse or harm
is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may
adjudge that person to be a dependent child of the court. (Welf.
& Inst. Code Sec. 300.)
Existing law includes, within the definition of "child welfare
services," public social services that are directed toward the
prevention of exploitation or delinquency of children as well as
services provided on behalf of children alleged to be the
victims of exploitation. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 16501.)
Existing law provides that a minor who violates a state,
federal, or local law is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile
court, which may adjudge such person to be a ward of the court.
(Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 602.)
This bill would authorize the court to assume or resume
transition jurisdiction, of a nonminor ward who attained 18
years of age while subject to an order for foster care
placement, without consideration of whether the rehabilitative
goals of the nonminor as set forth in the case plan, in place at
the time the juvenile court dismissed delinquency jurisdiction.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
AB 2573 (Stone)
Page 5 of ?
According to the author:
There are instances, although rare, where a nonminor dependent
(NMD) under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court may be
absent or absent without leave (AWOL) when they turn 18 and
automatically get barred from future services offered by the
transitional foster care services since the courts have not
interpreted current statute to allow for reentry. This bill
clarifies/authorizes that the juvenile court may assume/resume
transition jurisdiction of a former nonminor dependent even
when the individual has not met their rehabilitative goals in
certain cases.
2.Authorizing nonminor dependents to reenter foster care despite
failure to meet all rehabilitative goals
Existing law allows the court to resume jurisdiction over a
former NMD or ward when the nonminor youth has signed a
voluntary mutual agreement and the NMD is enrolled in school or
working, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 11403.) The
author claims that NMD wards over whom the court terminated
jurisdiction for failure to meet rehabilitative goals, as
outlined in their delinquency case plan, have been unable to
reenter foster care. This bill would allow the court to
exercise jurisdiction over a youth who would otherwise be
eligible for transition jurisdiction, despite failure to meet
the rehabilitative goals outlined in his or her case plan.
According to the author, the need for this bill is most
prevalent in regard to commercially and sexually exploited
children. Children arrested for solicitation often come under
the delinquency jurisdiction of the court, rather than
dependency. In many cases, these children run away from the
placement and return to their abusers. The court is then forced
to determine that the child is absent without leave (AWOL), and
therefore determined not to have met his or her rehabilitative
goals. This bill would allow the voluntary reentry of these
youths into the foster system, thereby extending to them the
protections of the court and the benefits that the state
provides to foster youths as they transition into adulthood.
Youths utilizing the provisions of this bill would still be
required to meet all other eligibility requirements, including
being enrolled in school, working at least 80 hours per month,
or participating in a program designed to promote or remove
AB 2573 (Stone)
Page 6 of ?
barriers to employment. Arguably, a youth who meets all other
criteria other than fulfilling rehabilitative goals as outlined
in his or her case plan, should not be precluded from reentering
foster care if he or she seeks out the protections of the court.
The Juvenile Court Judges of California write in support that
"AB 2573 is consistent with the spirit of AB 12, in that it
offers support for children under court supervision even if they
have struggled to stabilize their lives. We believe that these
young people are the most at-risk of turning to an unproductive
life. It is these children that the juvenile court needs to
guide."
However, staff notes that there are arguably many rehabilitative
goals that are distinct in nature from AWOL, such as court
ordered anger management classes, substance abuse treatment,
therapy, or vocational training, which could be included in a
case plan. This bill would allow a youth to seek the assistance
of the court and benefits of the foster care system regardless
of what goal remained unmet. This appears to be in line with
the intent behind the Fostering Connections to Success Act,
which seeks to provide California foster youth with stability
and resources as they transition into adulthood.
Support : American federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees (AFSCME); California Alliance of Child and Family
Services; Executive Committee of the Family Law Section
(FLEXCOM); Juvenile Court Judges of California
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : Author
Related Pending Legislation : SB 1099 (Steinberg, 2014) would
authorize a dependent child to request visitation with a sibling
who is in the physical custody of a common parent, and would
authorize the court to grant such a request unless it is
determined by the court that visitation is contrary to the
safety and well-being of either of the siblings.
Prior Legislation :
AB 787 (Stone, Chapter 487, Statutes of 2013) made clarifying
and technical changes to the California Fostering Connections to
AB 2573 (Stone)
Page 7 of ?
Success Act (Act) to ensure the continued implementation of the
Act.
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.
Prior Vote :
Assembly Floor (Ayes 73, Noes 0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 17, Noes 0)
Assembly Human Services Committee (Ayes 7, Noes 0)
**************