BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                            Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair


          AB 2573 (Stone) - Foster care: transition jurisdiction.
          
          Amended: April 21, 2014         Policy Vote: Judiciary 6-0
          Urgency: No                     Mandate: Yes
          Hearing Date: August 4, 2014                            
          Consultant: Jolie Onodera       
          
          This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.


          Bill Summary: AB 2573 would provide that the juvenile court may  
          assume or resume transition jurisdiction of a former nonminor  
          dependent (NMD) ward without consideration of whether the  
          rehabilitative goals of the NMD have been met.

          Fiscal Impact: Ongoing increase in state costs in the range of  
          $78,000 to $103,000 (General Fund) per year for each NMD  
          provided extended FC benefits. To the extent two cases per year  
          resume transition jurisdiction under the extended FC program,  
          cumulative costs would range between $310,000 and $410,000  
          annually after two years, including grant and additional social  
          worker administrative costs. 

          Proposition 30 (November 2012) eliminated any potential mandate  
          funding liability for any new program or higher level of service  
          mandated on local agencies related to realigned programs,  
          including child welfare services and foster care. Rather,  
          legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an  
          overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local  
          agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment  
          only apply to local agencies to the extent that the state  
          provides annual funding for the cost increase. Local agencies  
          are not obligated to provide programs or levels of service  
          required by legislation above the level for which funding has  
          been provided. 

          Background: The California Fostering Connections to Success Act  
          of 2010, enacted by AB 12 (Beall/Bass) Chapter 559/2010,  
          exercised the state option under the federal Fostering  
          Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008  
          (Public Law 110-351) of extending benefits for youth up to age  
          21 in the Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Kin-GAP  








          AB 2573 (Stone)
          Page 1


          programs. AB 12 aligned the state's existing Kin-GAP program  
          with requirements in order to draw down federal funds and  
          provided for a three-year phase in of extended benefits up to  
          age 21 that was intended to reduce the upfront costs of program  
          expansion.  

          Significant clean-up legislation was pursued through AB 212  
          (Beall) Chapter 459/2011 and AB 1712 (Beall) Chapter 846/2012 to  
          address various issues identified subsequent to implementation  
          of the initial legislation. 

          Existing law allows a 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 (WIC section 11403). This bill would authorize  
          courts to assume or resume transition jurisdiction of NMDs for  
          whom the court terminated jurisdiction for failure to meet  
          rehabilitative goals as outlined in their delinquency case plan,  
          and allow the court to exercise jurisdiction over a NMD who  
          would otherwise be eligible for transition jurisdiction despite  
          failure to meet the rehabilitative goals outlined in his or her  
          case plan.

          Proposed Law: This bill would provide that the juvenile court  
          may assume or resume transition jurisdiction of a former NMD  
          without consideration of whether the rehabilitative goals of the  
          NMD have been met.

          Prior Legislation: AB 12 (Beall/Bass) Chapter 559/2010 enacted  
          the California Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010, and  
          authorized the state to exercise the option of extending  
          benefits in the Foster Care, Kin-GAP, Fed-GAP, and AAP to age 21  
          for youth who meet specified criteria. AB 12 also provided for  
          the alignment of the Kin-GAP program with federal requirements  
          in order to receive federal financial participation.

          AB 212 (Beall) Chapter 459/2011, the follow-up legislation to AB  
          12, made various technical and substantive changes to law in  
          order to ensure the proper implementation of the California  
          Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010.

          AB 1712 (Beall) Chapter 846/2012 expanded the definition of  
          "relative" for purposes of both the federal and state-funded  
          Kin-GAP programs to include guardians who are non-related  








          AB 2573 (Stone)
          Page 2


          extended family members, tribal kin, or current caregivers of  
          foster children, as specified, and extended eligibility for  
          non-related legal guardian placements to age 21.

          AB 787 (Stone) Chapter 487/2013, among other provisions, allows  
          re-entry into nonminor dependency for nonminor former dependents  
          who reached permanency whose guardian died before their 21st  
          birthday.

          Staff Comments: Authorizing courts to resume or assume  
          transition jurisdiction of a former NMD without consideration of  
          whether the rehabilitative goals of the NMD have been met could  
          result in increased state costs in the range of $78,000 to  
          $103,000 (General Fund) per case, depending on the placement  
          type. This estimate is based on a monthly assistance and  
          administrative cost for a nonminor of $6,464 for an extended FC  
          placement in a supervised independent living placement (SILP)  
          and $8,544 for an extended FC placement in a transitional  
          housing placement-plus (THP-Plus) program. While the number of  
          cases that will resume dependency under the provisions of this  
          bill is unknown, to the extent two cases per year resume  
          dependency under the extended FC program, cumulative costs would  
          range between $310,000 and $410,000 annually after two years,  
          including grant and additional social worker administrative  
          costs. 

          Prior to Fiscal Year (FY) 2011-12, the state and counties  
          contributed to the non-federal share of child welfare services  
          and foster care expenditures. AB 118 (Committee on Budget)  
          Chapter 40/2011 and ABX1 16 Chapter 13/2011 realigned state  
          funding to the counties through the 2011 Local Revenue Fund  
          (LRF) for various programs, including child welfare services and  
          foster care. As a result, beginning in FY 2011-12 and for each  
          fiscal year thereafter, non-federal funding and expenditures for  
          foster care and child welfare services activities are funded  
          through the LRF.

          Proposition 30 was passed by the voters in November 2012, and  
          among other provisions, eliminated any potential mandate funding  
          liability for any new program or higher level of service  
          mandated on the counties related to realigned programs,  
          including child welfare services and foster care. Rather,  
          legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an  
          overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local  








          AB 2573 (Stone)
          Page 3


          agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment  
          only apply to local agencies to the extent that the state  
          provides annual funding for the cost increase. Local agencies  
          are not obligated to provide programs or levels of service  
          required by legislation above the level for which funding has  
          been provided. 

          To the extent it is determined that the provisions of this bill  
          impose a higher level of service on local agencies or result in  
          an increase in overall costs already borne by counties for the  
          provision of child welfare services and foster care, the state  
          could potentially elect to, but not be required to, provide  
          funding for the cost increase.  

          Recommended Amendments: To ensure the nonminors who assume or  
          resume transition jurisdiction under the provisions of this bill  
          meet the requirements consistent with existing provisions of law  
          for other nonminors, staff recommends the following amendment:

          On page 7, in line 36, after "placement" insert:
           And who meets the requirements of subparagraph (A)