Existing law generally provides for the placement of foster youth in various placement settings and governs the provision of child welfare services, as specified. Existing law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor dependent missing from foster care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth and the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing. Existing law requires the social worker or probation officer to determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or nonminor dependent running away or otherwise being absent from care, among other things.

This bill, the Luke Madrigal Act, would, among other things, additionally require the social worker or probation officer, when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services is missing from foster care, to immediately, but in no case later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify specified entities or persons, including the local law enforcement agency and the childs or nonminor dependents parents or guardians, except as specified.

The bill would define missing from foster care to mean the whereabouts of a child subject to an order of foster care placement are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department, or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located a child subject to an order of foster care placement in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child, as specified. The bill would include a nonminor dependent in this definition if, based on the totality of the circumstances, the county child welfare agency or probation department suspects that the nonminor dependent did not voluntarily leave foster care or is at risk of substantial harm.

By increasing the duties of county child welfare agencies and probation departments, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law generally provides for the placement of foster youth in various placement settings and governs the provision of child welfare services, as specified. Existing law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor dependent missing from foster care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth and the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing. Existing law requires the social worker or probation officer to determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or nonminor dependent running away or otherwise being absent from care, among other things.

This bill, the Luke Madrigal Act, would, among other things, additionally require the social worker or probation officer, when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services is missing from foster care, to immediately, but in no case later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify specified entities or persons, including the local law enforcement agency and the childs or nonminor dependents parents or guardians, except as specified.

The bill would define missing from foster care to mean the whereabouts of a child subject to an order of foster care placement are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department, or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located a child subject to an order of foster care placement in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child, as specified. The bill would include a nonminor dependent in this definition if, based on the totality of the circumstances, the county child welfare agency or probation department suspects that the nonminor dependent did not voluntarily leave foster care or is at risk of substantial harm.

By increasing the duties of county child welfare agencies and probation departments, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law generally provides for the placement of foster youth in various placement settings and governs the provision of child welfare services, as specified. Existing law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor dependent missing from foster care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth and the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing. Existing law requires the social worker or probation officer to determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or nonminor dependent running away or otherwise being absent from care, among other things.

This bill, the Luke Madrigal Act, would, among other things, additionally require the social worker or probation officer, when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent missing from foster care, to immediately, but in no case later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify specified entities or persons, including the local law enforcement agency and the childs or nonminor dependents parents or guardians, except as specified.

The bill would define absent from foster care to mean when the whereabouts of a child receiving child welfare services are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located the child receiving child welfare services in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child. The bill would also define child receiving child welfare services to include a child or nonminor dependent placed in a specified foster care placement or in the home of an emergency caregiver, and dependents, nonminor dependents, wards, and minors who have been taken into temporary custody pursuant to specified provisions and who are in foster care. missing from foster care to mean the whereabouts of a child subject to an order of foster care placement are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department, or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located a child subject to an order of foster care placement in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child, as specified. The bill would include nonminor dependent in this definition if, based on the totality of the circumstances, the county child welfare agency or probation department suspects that the nonminor dependent did not voluntarily leave foster care or is at risk of substantial harm.

By increasing the duties of county child welfare agencies and probation departments, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm or illness as a result of the failure or inability of their parent or guardian to adequately supervise or protect the child. Existing law requires the court to review the status of every dependent child in foster care periodically, but no less frequently than once every 6 months. Existing law subjects a minor between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who violates any federal, state, or local law or ordinance to, and a minor under 12 years of age who is alleged to have committed specified serious offenses to, the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge the minor to be a ward of the court.

Existing law generally provides for the placement of foster youth in various placement settings and governs the provision of child welfare services, as specified. Existing law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor dependent missing from foster care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth and the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing. Existing law requires the social worker or probation officer to determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or nonminor dependent running away or otherwise being absent from care, among other things.

This bill, the Luke Madrigal Act, would, among other things, additionally require the social worker or probation officer, when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, to immediately, but in no case later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify specified entities or persons, including the local law enforcement agency and the childs or nonminor dependents parents or guardians, except as specified.

The bill would define absent from foster care to mean when the whereabouts of a child receiving child welfare services are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located the child receiving child welfare services in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child. The bill would also define child receiving child welfare services to include a child or nonminor dependent placed in a specified foster care placement or in the home of an emergency caregiver, and dependents, nonminor dependents, wards, and minors who have been taken into temporary custody pursuant to specified provisions and who are in foster care.

By increasing the duties of county child welfare agencies and probation departments, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm or illness as a result of the failure or inability of their parent or guardian to adequately supervise or protect the child. Existing law requires the court to review the status of every dependent child in foster care periodically, but no less frequently than once every 6 months. Existing law subjects a minor between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who violates any federal, state, or local law or ordinance to, and a minor under 12 years of age who is alleged to have committed specified serious offenses to, the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge the minor to be a ward of the court.

Existing law generally provides for the placement of foster youth in various placement settings and governs the provision of child welfare services, as specified. Existing law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor dependent missing from foster care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth and the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing, and missing. Existing law requires the social worker or probation officer to determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or nonminor dependent running away or otherwise being absent from care, among other things.

This bill, the Luke Madrigal Act, would, among other things, additionally require the social worker or probation officer, when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, to immediately, but in no case later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify specified entities or persons, including the local law enforcement agency and the childs or nonminor dependents parents or guardians, except as specified. The

The bill would define absent from foster care to mean when the whereabouts of a child receiving child welfare services is are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located the child receiving child welfare services in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child. The bill would also define child receiving child welfare services to include a child or nonminor dependent placed in a specified foster care placement or in the home of an emergency caregiver, and dependents, nonminor dependents, wards, and minors who have been taken into temporary custody pursuant to specified provisions and who are in foster care. By

By increasing the duties of county child welfare agencies and probation departments, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm or illness as a result of the failure or inability of their parent or guardian to adequately supervise or protect the child. Existing law requires the court to review the status of every dependent child in foster care periodically, but no less frequently than once every 6 months. Existing law subjects a minor between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who violates any federal, state, or local law or ordinance to, and a minor under 12 years of age who is alleged to have committed specified serious offenses to, the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge the minor to be a ward of the court.

Existing law generally provides for the placement of foster youth in various placement settings and governs the provision of child welfare services, as specified. Existing law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor dependent missing from foster care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth and the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing, and requires the social worker or probation officer to determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or nonminor dependent running away or otherwise being absent from care, among other things.

This bill, the Luke Madrigal Act, would, among other things, additionally require the social worker or probation officer, when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, to immediately, but in no case later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify specified persons, including the local law enforcement agency and the childs or nonminor dependents parents or guardians, except as specified. The bill would define absent from foster care to mean when the whereabouts of a child receiving child welfare services is unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located the child receiving child welfare services in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child. The bill would also define child receiving child welfare services to include a child or nonminor dependent placed in a specified foster care placement or in the home of an emergency caregiver, and dependents, nonminor dependents, wards, and minors who have been taken into temporary custody pursuant to specified provisions and who are in foster care. By increasing the duties of county child welfare agencies and probation departments, this bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2108

Author:(Ramos)

As Amended Ver:August 15, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Revises the protocols county child welfare agencies and probation departments are required to develop and implement to expeditiously locate a child or nonminor dependent (NMD) missing from foster care.

Senate Amendments

Make technical and conforming changes to address implementation concerns.

COMMENTS

Background: United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) conducts audits and evaluations to assess the effectiveness of the federal HHS programs and their grantees and contractors. These audit reports identify risks to the people served and taxpayers, and recommend necessary improvements. One such audit released in 2022, entitled National Snapshot of State Agency Approaches to Reporting and Locating Children Missing from Foster Care, examined protocols adopted by state agencies to report and locate missing children. Key findings of the report related to the existing protocols to expeditiously locate a youth absent from foster care found that there was inconsistent oversight and sporadic engagement from family members, tribes, and other supportive adults.

The 2022 report showed that California had the highest number of child deaths while missing. According to the report, one 15-year-old child was reported missing from California on January 25, 2019, and was found dead (of a suspected drug overdose) three days later on January 28, 2019, in Texas. While the report did not contain any recommendations, it did find that many states identified the need to find the correct placement to prevent children in foster care from running away as a challenge.

This bill is attempting to prevent such outcomes.

Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act (Act)(P.L. 113-183) was signed into law in 2014. Children who go missing from their approved placements are at higher risk of experiencing harm, substance use, and trafficking. In recognition of the vulnerability associated with missing children, this federal law added requirements governing how state agencies respond when children are missing from foster care.

The Act requires states to develop and implement specific protocols for locating and ensuring the safety of youth missing from foster care and specifically requires states to develop and implement specific protocols for the following:

1. Expeditiously locating any child missing from foster care;
2. Determining the primary factors that contributed to the child's running away or otherwise being absent from care, and to the extent possible and appropriate, responding to those factors in current and subsequent placements; and,
3. Determining the child's experiences while absent from care, including screening the child to determine if the child is a possible sex trafficking victim and reporting such related information, as required by the secretary of HHS.

Federal laws require the state agency to report immediately, and no later than 24 hours after receiving information on missing or abducted children or youth, to the law enforcement authorities for entry into the National Crime Information Center's database of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The Act further requires counties to develop and implement protocols to locate children and NMDs who have gone missing from foster care. The provisions of this bill align with the federal requirements related to the development of protocols and timelines in order to address missing foster youth.

California's Efforts to Align with Federal Law. As required to maintain federal child welfare funding, SB 794 (Committee on Human Services), Chapter 425, Statutes of 2015, brought the state into compliance with the federal Preventing Sex Trafficking, and Strengthening Families Act to conform state law to federal law related to sex trafficking prevention, among other areas.

In response to this legislation, the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) was required to develop model policies, protocols, and procedures to assist counties in identifying and serving children who are at-risk for, or a victim of, commercial sexual exploitation. As a result, CDSS issued an All County Letter (ACL) 16-15 to provide instructions on these policies. The ACL noted that when the caregiver, social worker, or probation officer first learns that a child has run away or is otherwise missing from care, the child should be immediately reported missing to the local law enforcement agency.

AB 2207 (Eggman), Chapter 757, Statutes of 2018, built off of this policy by requiring CDSS to develop model policies, protocols, and procedures to assist counties in identifying and serving children who are at risk for, or a victim of commercial sexual exploitation, by no later than January 1, 2020. CDSS issued ACL 20-105 on November 13, 2020, in order to provide counties with links to model policies, procedures, and protocols. This ACL also emphasized the importance of counties partnering with tribal governments in the development and implementation of these policies and protocols pertaining to exploited youth and urged counties to seek the participation of local tribal service providers, Indian Health Clinics, tribal law enforcement, tribal courts, and other branches of tribal government. The ACL also stated that in the event that an Indian child is identified as missing from care, local law enforcement, including Tribal Police, must be notified immediately.

Dual Status Youth. When juveniles come into contact with both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems simultaneously, they are referred to as dual-status youth. Essentially, dual-status youth are under the jurisdiction of both the dependency court (child welfare system) and the delinquency court (juvenile justice system) at the same time, and as such, may interact with both a social worker and probation officer. Probation officers have specific responsibilities regarding the placement of, and services for, foster youth and NMDs who fall under the jurisdiction of the probation department. Their unique circumstances require coordinated efforts from both systems to effectively address their needs.

The provisions of this bill seek to bring county practices into compliance with both federal and state law, as well as the minimum standards guidance of CDSS, by enacting several specific requirements for social workers or probation officers to notify specified people when they receive information that a foster youth is missing from foster care.

While current law requires counties to adopt policies that require a number of actions when a social worker or probation officer determines that a youth is missing from foster care, the policies do not specifically require that law enforcement, the court with jurisdiction over the child, the child's family, the child's attorney, and the child's tribe or tribal representative (if applicable) are notified. Nor does the law provide a timeline for when such notifications must occur. This bill would address these considerations.

Equity Implications: Advocates and stakeholders have reported that not all relevant parties are being noticed when a foster youth is missing from foster care and that protocols are not being enforced consistently across counties. For example, advocates have reported there are some counties with high numbers of Tribes who fail to mention them in their protocols. Tribes are also reporting that they are not being consistently notified when an Indian child goes missing from foster care. This bill would require the social worker or probation officer to notify all relevant parties.

This bill is also attempting to address the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons crisis. Tribal children who go missing or run away while in foster care are a critical population in the disproportionately high rates of Indigenous persons reported missing or suffering violence.

Data from the University of California, Berkeley, California Child Welfare Indicators Project reports that the proportions of Black and Native American youth in foster care are around four times larger than the proportions of Black and Native American youth in California overall. As a result, these youth are more likely to be removed from their homes due to poverty, substance use disorders, or other challenges. Tribal and native children are at an especially high risk of exploitation due to poverty, lack of protective services, and geographic isolation. For this population, going missing or running away while in foster care is a pipeline to the disproportionately high rates of violence and exploitation that are experienced by Native Americans, especially Native American women and youth.

According to the Author

"When foster children go missing, county practices are routinely out of compliance with the minimum California Department of Social Services guidance standards and both state and federal law. This negligence can lead to grave, life-changing, even fatal consequences for children. The potential risk is magnified for Native American children in the system who enter at a rate that is 2.7 times their representation in the population, the highest of any racial group. We can do better by our children by ensuring consistent implementation of best practices. This includes requiring notification to appropriate adults when a foster child is missing. Implementing effective, stabilizing and child/family supportive practices and policies will also assist California in confronting the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People. The Luke Madrigal Act, [this bill], is one critical element to addressing this issue."

Arguments in Support

According to Co-Sponsor, The Alliance for Children's Rights, "[This bill] will protect children by creating a more family-centered and child-focused process to locate, return, and stabilize children and youth who go missing while in the care, custody, and control of the child welfare system. Current state law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to quickly locate any child missing from foster care. However, county practices are routinely out of compliance with federal and state laws, and the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) minimum standards guidance.

While counties have been required to develop policies and procedures to locate and respond to youth who go missing from foster care since 2016, those practices don't require notification and engagement from family members, tribes and tribal representatives, other supportive adults, including court appointed attorneys, and engagement with Child and Family Teams is sporadic and inconsistent."

Arguments in Opposition

No opposition on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee on August 15, 2024:

1. Unknown ongoing costs (General Fund and federal funds) for the increased administrative workload for county child welfare agencies and probation departments.
2. Proposition 30 of 2012 provides that any legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for realigned services applies to local agencies only 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.

VOTES:

ASM HUMAN SERVICES: 7-0-0

YES: Lee, Essayli, Calderon, Gipson, Jackson, Ta, Ortega

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Sanchez, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Jim Patterson, Pellerin, Ta, Villapudua

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0-7

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

ABS, ABST OR NV: Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Friedman, Gabriel, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas

UPDATED

VERSION: August 15, 2024

CONSULTANT: Jessica Langtry / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0004891

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2108

Author: Ramos (D)

Amended: 8/15/24 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: 5-0, 7/1/24

AYES: Alvarado-Gil, Ochoa Bogh, Blakespear, Limón, Menjivar

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/15/24

AYES: Caballero, Jones, Ashby, Becker, Bradford, Seyarto, Wahab

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/21/24 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Foster care: missing children and nonminor dependents

SOURCE: Alliance for Children's Rights

California Tribal Families Coalition

Yurok Tribe

DIGEST:

This bill updates and expands the requirements on social workers and probation officers when foster youth and nonminor dependents are missing from foster care.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes a state and local system of child welfare services, including foster care, for children who have been adjudged by the court to be at risk of abuse and neglect or who have been abused or neglected, as specified. (Welfare and Institutions Code (WIC) § 202)
2. Establishes a system of juvenile dependency for children for specific reasons, and designates that a child who meets certain criteria is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and may be adjudged as a dependent child of the court, as specified. (WIC §300 et seq.)
3. Provides that the court may have within its jurisdiction any nonminor dependent between the age of majority and 21 years, as defined. Further requires that a nonminor dependent retain all of their legal decision-making authority as an adult, except as specified. (WIC §303(a)(d))

This Bill:

1. Makes Legislative findings and declarations that:
   1. The release of a 2022 audit by the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General showed that there are several barriers and other deficiencies in California agencies’ policies and procedures related to missing foster youth.
   2. It is the intent of the Legislature to create stronger protections for youth who are missing from foster care in order to expeditiously locate them when they are absent from foster care, improve outcomes for missing foster youth, and reduce the number of instances of missing foster youth by creating notification requirements, including notice to the court and other interested parties, when a youth is absent from foster care.
2. Requires a social worker or probation officer, when they receive information that a child or nonminor dependent receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, to immediately, and no later than 24 hours from receipt of that information, notify all the following persons or entities whose whereabouts are known:
   1. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s parents or Indian custodians, unless parental notification has been limited or terminated by the court.
      
   2. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s legal guardians, unless guardian notification has been limited or terminated by the court.
   3. The attorneys for the parents, legal guardians, or Indian custodians unless notification of the parents, guardians or Indian custodians has been limited or terminated by the court.
   4. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s appointed attorney.
   5. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s Court-Appointed Special Advocate, if one has been appointed.
   6. The court of jurisdiction.
   7. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s tribe or tribal representative, if the child or nonminor dependent is, or may be, an Indian child, as defined.
   8. Any known sibling of the child or nonminor dependent who is 10 years of age or older and adjudged to be a dependent child of the juvenile court, if such notice would not be contrary to the safety and well-being of that sibling. Notice to siblings shall be provided in a trauma-informed manner.
   9. The local law enforcement agency, including, if applicable, any tribal law enforcement agency for the child’s tribe in the case of an Indian child.
3. Provides that notices issued pursuant to the above shall include contact information for an appropriate social worker or probation officer within the agency issuing the notice.
4. Defines, for purposes of this section, “missing from foster care” as when the whereabouts of a child subject to an order of foster care placement are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department, or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located a child subject to an order of foster care placement in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child, taking into account the age, intelligence, mental functioning, and physical condition of the child.
5. Provides that the above shall only apply to a nonminor dependent if, based on the totality of the circumstances, the county child welfare agency or probation department suspects that the nonminor dependent did not voluntarily leave foster care or is at risk of substantial harm.
6. To the extent that this act has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by the 2011 Realignment Legislation within the meaning of Section 36 of Article XIII of the California Constitution, it shall apply to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost increase. Any new program or higher level of service provided by a local agency pursuant to this act above the level for which funding has been provided shall not require a subvention of funds by the state or otherwise be subject to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.

Background

According to the author, “When foster children go missing, county practices are routinely out of compliance with the minimum California Department of Social Services guidance standards and both state and federal law. This negligence can lead to grave, life changing, even fatal consequences for children. The potential risk is magnified for Native American children in the system who enter at a rate that is 2.7 times their representation in the population, the highest of any racial group. We can do better by our children by ensuring consistent implementation of best practices. This includes requiring notification to appropriate adults when a foster child is missing. Implementing effective, stabilizing and child/family supportive practices and policies will also assist California in confronting the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People. The Luke Madrigal Act, AB 2108, is one critical element to addressing this issue.”

Child Welfare Services (CWS) The CWS system is an essential component of the state’s safety net. Social workers in each county who receive reports of abuse or neglect, investigate and resolve those reports. When a case is substantiated, a family is either provided with services to ensure a child’s well-being and avoid court involvement, or a child is removed and placed into foster care. In 2023, the state’s child welfare agencies received 433,571 reports of abuse or neglect and 18,147 children were removed from their homes and placed into foster care via the CWS system. As of January 1, 2024, there were 43,633 children in the CWS system in California.

Missing and Exploited Children According to a 2022 study by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG), the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in 2020 received more than 17,000 reports of possible child sex trafficking. Sex trafficking of children means “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting a child under 18 years of age for the purpose of a commercial sex act” and may include “the exchange for money, food, shelter, and/or drugs.”^[1] The OIG report notes that children in foster care who are victims of sex trafficking may be negatively impacted by multiple physical and mental health issues that can have long-lasting effects. The OIG report also notes that “traffickers are known to prey on vulnerable children with low self-esteem and minimal social support, and histories of abuse, neglect, and trauma-traits that are common among children in foster care.”

Native children are at an increased risk of experiencing trafficking or exploitation. Recent studies reveal that over a 10-year period, nationally 85 percent of all missing Native children were endangered runaways. Foster children who runaway or go missing experience elevated rates of violence and exploitation, which is particularly true for Tribal and Native women and youth.

In January 2022, HHS announced the creation of the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (Task Force). According to HHS, the Task Force, chaired by the Secretary of State, is made up of 20 agencies across the federal government and is responsible for coordinating federal efforts to combat trafficking in persons. The Task Force’s focus includes “the enforcement of criminal and labor laws to end impunity for traffickers; victim-centered identification and trauma-informed assistance; innovations in data gathering and research; education and public awareness activities; and synchronization of strategically linked foreign assistance and diplomatic engagement.”^[2]

Federal Laws for Youth Missing From Foster Care Enacted in 2014, the federal Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act (The Act) (Public Law (P.L.) 113-183) was created in an effort to prevent and address sex trafficking of children in foster care. The Act required states to develop policies and procedures for the identification, documentation, and determination of appropriate services for children in the placement, care, or supervision of the state agency which believes they are, or are at risk of becoming victims of sex trafficking. The Act also requirements for states to develop policies and procedures for “expeditiously locating any child missing from foster care,” and “determining the child’s experiences while absent from care, including screening the child to determine if the child is a possible sex trafficking victim.” Further, child welfare agencies must report a child missing from care to both law enforcement and National Center for Missing and Exploited Children “immediately” (not to exceed 24 hours).

The Act made a number of changes to the Title IV-E Foster Care Program, including enacting new requirements regarding: sex trafficking prevention, intervention, data collection and reporting; the reasonable and prudent parent standards; adoption incentives payments; successor guardianship, and successful adulthood. California codified The Act’s provisions through SB 794 (Committee on Human Services, Chapter 425, Statutes of 2015), which included training requirements for caseworkers (i.e. county social workers and probation officers) such as identifying, documenting and determining appropriate services for a child or youth in foster care who the caseworker has reasonable cause to believe is, or at risk of becoming, a sex trafficking survivor. These requirements are also outlined in CDSS’ 2016 all county letter (ACL) 16‒15.

State Policy for Runaway and Missing Children ACL 16‒15. In 2016, CDSS issued ACL 16‒15 to “provide instructions regarding the policies and procedures counties are required to develop to locate and respond to youth, dependents or wards, who go missing from foster care.”^[3] The letter advised counties, in developing protocols, that they should consider the feasibility of implementing several best practices that are not required by federal law, such as dedicated units or dedicated liaisons in the county. In addition, the letter advised counties about the elements that constitute the statewide minimum standards necessary to comply with federal law. Specifically, CDSS instructed counties that they must have reporting and noticing protocols for missing children and nonminor dependents, and due diligence requirements for social workers to search for and locate missing foster children.

ACIN I‒13‒17 Additionally, in 2017, CDSS issued All County Information Notice (ACIN) I‒13‒17, entitled “Promising Practices for Youth who are Missing or Run Away from Foster Care,” which provided counties with information on promising practices to locate and respond to youth who are missing from care. ACIN I‒13‒17 was issued in recognition that foster youth are disproportionately more vulnerable to commercial sexual exploitation than children not in foster care. The policy recommendations in part state, “when a youth leaves care without permission, they are often running from or to something. Many youth have underlying needs that must be addressed [that] may be unmet or inadequately met in the current placement.”

Several risk factors were noted as reasons a youth may leaving their care setting without permission, including “being 13 years or older, placement instability, substance abuse, youth being upset or overly preoccupied with visitation issues, problematic ties to the community associated with run risk (e.g. gang affiliation, romantic relationships), history of juvenile delinquency, psychological factors (e.g. impulsivity, poor judgment and insight, easily influenced, thrill seeking), etc.” ACIN I‒13‒17 advised several ways county staff could be prepared to respond should a youth go missing or leave care. These included creating a Safety and Support Plan, so that those that have a relationship with the child, such as family, friends, etc. may be contacted if necessary to aid in finding the missing child. It also outlined other best practices county social workers and probation officers can use while the child is missing and when the child is found and/or returns back to their placement.

Veto of AB 273 A similar bill, AB 273 (Ramos, 2023) was vetoed by Governor Newsom. The veto message cited cost as one concern and also noted, “Locating missing children in foster care is a time-sensitive and critical undertaking for the safety and well-being of the child. More can always be done to protect this vulnerable population, which is why I am directing the CDSS to work with county partners to assess existing protocols and identify any needed improvements. With that information, CDSS will work with the author and stakeholders to inform additional guidance, training, or recommend statutory changes to protect all foster youth, especially tribal youth.”

CDSS has begun various AB 273 Working Groups and CDSS is working on an All County Information Notice (ACIN) “to reiterate and clarify the expectations of social workers and probation officers for finding youth, including when there is a reason to know a youth may be an Indian youth, who are missing from care with clear guidance of county placing agencies protocol development.” CDSS did offer a comment period and is processing the feedback received. CDSS plans to issue the ACIN in early/late fall and are planning to schedule another meeting of the AB 273 Working Group to address additional issues raised in the AB 273 veto message, including training and statutory updates, and questions raised by Working Group participants.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 273 (Ramos, 2023) imposes specific requirements on social workers, probation officers, and juvenile courts when foster youth are missing from foster care to notify the youth's family and support systems about court hearings; safely return the youth to their placements; and further protect these vulnerable youth. The bill was vetoed by Governor Newsom.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, unknown ongoing costs (General Fund and federal funds) for the increased administrative workload for county child welfare agencies and probation departments. Proposition 30 of 2012 provides that any legislation enacted after September 30, 2012 that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for realigned services applies to local agencies only 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.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/19/24)

Alliance for Children's Rights (co-source)

California Tribal Families Coalition (co-source)

Yurok Tribe (co-source)
California Alliance of Caregivers
California Coalition for Youth
California Teachers Association
Children's Bureau of Southern California
Picayune Rancheria of The Chukchansi Indians
Smart Justice California, a Project of Tides Advocacy

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/19/24)

None Received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/21/24

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

NO VOTE RECORDED: Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Friedman, Gabriel, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas

Prepared by: Heather Hopkins / HUMAN S. / (916) 651-1524

8/19/24 10:47:19

**** END ****

1. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), Child Sex Trafficking Overview, 2021. Accessed at http://www.missingkids.org/content/dam/missingkids/pdfs/CST%20Identification%20Resource.pdf ↑

2. https://www.state.gov/humantrafficking-interagency-task-force/ ↑

3. https://cdss.ca.gov/lettersnotices/EntRes/getinfo/acl/2016/16-15.pdf ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 2108 (Ramos) - Foster care: missing children and nonminor dependents

Bill Summary:

AB 2108 would update and expand the obligations of social workers and probation officers, when foster youth and nonminor dependents are missing from foster care.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on August 15, 2024

Fiscal Impact:

• Unknown ongoing costs (General Fund and federal funds) for the increased administrative workload for county child welfare agencies and probation departments.
• Proposition 30 of 2012 provides that any legislation enacted after September 30, 2012 that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for realigned services applies to local agencies only 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.

Author Amendments:

Delete the definitions for “absent from foster care” and “child receiving child welfare services” and instead provide a definition for “missing from foster care”; and make other conforming changes.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 2108 (Ramos) - Foster care: missing children and nonminor dependents

Bill Summary:

AB 2108 would update and expand the obligations of social workers and probation officers, when foster youth and nonminor dependents are missing from foster care.

Fiscal Impact:

• The California Department of Social Services (CDSS) estimates ongoing costs of $902,000 ($663,000 General Fund and $239,000 federal funds) for the increased administrative workload for county child welfare agencies and probation departments associated with the requirements for contacting specified parties when absence from foster care is known.
• Proposition 30 of 2012 provides that any legislation enacted after September 30, 2012 that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for realigned services applies to local agencies only 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:

Under the state’s Child Welfare Services system, social workers in each county investigate reports of abuse or neglect. When a case is substantiated, a family is either provided with services to ensure a child’s well-being and avoid court involvement, or a child is removed and placed into foster care.

Current law requires county welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement protocols to expeditiously locate any child missing from foster care, which must, at a minimum, do all of the following:

• Describe the efforts used by county child welfare or probation staff to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor dependent missing from care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth, the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing, any required initial and ongoing efforts to locate youth, and plans to return youth to placement.
• Require the social worker or probation officer to do all of the following:
  • Determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or nonminor dependent running away or otherwise being absent from care.
  • Respond to the factors identified in subsequent placements, to the extent possible.
  • Determine the child's or nonminor dependent's experiences while absent from care.
  • Determine whether the child or nonminor dependent is a possible victim of commercial sexual exploitation.
  • Document the activities and information, as specified, for federal reporting purposes, consistent with instructions from the CDSS.

In 2016, CDSS issued guidance to counties to “provide instructions regarding the policies and procedures counties are required to develop to locate and respond to youth, dependents or wards, who go missing from foster care.” The letter advised counties, in developing protocols, that they should consider the feasibility of implementing several best practices that are not required by federal law, such as dedicated units or dedicated liaisons in the county. In addition, the letter advised counties about the elements that constitute the statewide minimum standards necessary to comply with federal law. Specifically, CDSS instructed counties that they must have reporting and noticing protocols for missing children and nonminor dependents, and due diligence requirements for social workers to search for and locate missing foster children.

Additionally, in 2017, CDSS issued a notice entitled “Promising Practices for Youth who are Missing or Run Away from Foster Care,” which provided counties with information on promising practices to locate and respond to youth who are missing from care. The notice was issued in recognition that foster youth are disproportionately more vulnerable to commercial sexual exploitation than children not in foster care. The policy recommendations in part state, “when a youth leaves care without permission, they are often running from or to something. Many youth have underlying needs that must be addressed [that] may be unmet or inadequately met in the current placement.”

Proposed Law:

AB 2108 would require that when a social worker or probation officer receives information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, as defined, the social worker or probation officer must immediately, but in no case later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify certain persons, as specified.

Related Legislation:

AB 273 (Ramos, 2023) included provisions similar to those in this bill. The bill was vetoed by the Governor. The veto message included, “…I am directing the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) to work with county partners to assess existing protocols and identify any needed improvements. With that information, CDSS will work with the author and stakeholders to inform additional guidance, training, or recommend statutory changes to protect all foster youth, especially tribal youth.”

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES

Senator Alvarado-Gil, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Subject: Foster care: missing children and nonminor dependents

SUMMARY

This bill updates and expands the requirements on social workers, probation officers, and juvenile courts when foster youth and nonminor dependents are missing from foster care.

ABSTRACT

Existing Law:

1. Establishes a state and local system of child welfare services, including foster care, for children who have been adjudged by the court to be at risk of abuse and neglect or who have been abused or neglected, as specified. (WIC 202)
2. Establishes a system of juvenile dependency for children for specific reasons, and designates that a child who meets certain criteria is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and may be adjudged as a dependent child of the court, as specified. (WIC 300 et seq.)

1. Provides that the court may have within its jurisdiction any nonminor dependent between the age of majority and 21 years, as defined. Further requires that a nonminor dependent retain all of their legal decision-making authority as an adult, except as specified. (WIC 303(a), (d))
   
2. Requires the status of every minor or nonminor dependent in foster care to be reviewed by the court at least once every six months, as specified. (WIC 366)
   
3. Requires any social worker in a county welfare department, or in an Indian tribe that has entered into an agreement pursuant to other provisions of law while acting within the scope of their regular duties under the direction of the juvenile court to take into and maintain temporary custody of, without a warrant, a child who has been declared a dependent child of the juvenile court or who the social worker has reasonable cause to believe has an immediate need for medical care or is in immediate danger of physical or sexual abuse or the physical environment poses an immediate threat to the child’s health or safety. (WIC 306)
   
4. Requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to implement policies and procedures related to identification of and provision of services to sexually exploited children, as specified. (WIC 16501.35)
   
5. Allows a county to require a resource family or applicant to receive relevant specialized training for the purpose of preparing them to meet the needs of a particular child in care, such as understanding how to use best practices for providing care and supervision to: commercially sexually exploited children; children who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender; and non-minor dependents, among others. (WIC 16519.5 (h))
   
6. Establishes the Commercially Sexually Exploited Children’s Program to provide funding to counties that elect to participate in the program for the provision of training to county children’s service workers to identify, intervene, and provide case management services to children who are victims of commercial sexual exploitation and trafficking, and to foster caregivers for the prevention and identification of potential victims. (WIC 16524.7)
   
7. Establishes the “Human Trafficking Victims Assistance Fund” in order to provide grants to support programs that assist victims of human trafficking. (Gov’t Code 8590.7 (a))
   
8. Requires all local police and sheriffs’ departments to accept reports of missing persons without delay. Also requires police or sheriff’s departments, if the missing person is under 21 years of age, or is determined to be at risk, to broadcast a “Be on the Lookout” bulletin and to transmit the report to the Department of Justice (DOJ), as provided. (Penal Code 14211)
   
9. Defines “commercially sexually exploited children” as children who are sexually trafficked or receive food or shelter in exchange for the performance of certain sexual acts, as specified. (WIC 300)
   
10. Defines a “nonminor dependent” as a current or former foster youth who is between 18 and 21 years old, in foster care under the responsibility of the county welfare department (CWD), county probation department, or Indian Tribe, and participating in a transitional independent living plan, as specified. (WIC 11400(v))

This Bill:

1. Makes Legislative findings and declarations that:
   
   1. The release of a 2022 audit by the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General showed that there are several barriers and other deficiencies in California agencies’ policies and procedures related to missing foster youth.
      
   2. It is the intent of the Legislature to create stronger protections for youth who are missing from foster care in order to expeditiously locate them when they are absent from foster care, improve outcomes for missing foster youth, and reduce the number of instances of missing foster youth by creating notification requirements, including notice to the court and other interested parties, when a youth is absent from foster care.
      
2. Requires a social worker, when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, to immediately, and no later than 24 hours from receipt of that information, notify all the following persons or entities whose whereabouts are known:
   
   1. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s parents or legal guardians, unless restricted by the court.
      
   2. The attorney for the parents or legal guardians.
      
   3. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s attorney of record.
      
   4. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s court-appointed special advocate, if one has been appointed.
      
   5. The court of jurisdiction.
      
   6. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s tribe or tribal representative.
      
   7. Any known sibling of the child or nonminor dependent who is required to be notified of a hearing.
      
   8. The local law enforcement agency.
      
3. Provides that the notice required shall include an agency contact that the noticed persons may reach for additional information.
   
4. Defines “absent from foster care” to mean when the whereabouts of a child receiving child welfare services are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located the child receiving child welfare services in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child receiving child welfare services, taking into account the age, intelligence, mental functioning, and physical condition of the child receiving child welfare services.
   
5. Defines “child receiving child welfare services” to mean a child or nonminor dependent placed in a foster care placement described in Section 11402 or in the home of an emergency caregiver pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 319, and includes dependents, nonminor dependents, wards, and minors who have been taken into temporary custody pursuant to Section 628 who are in foster care.
   
6. Changes policies and procedures required to be created by county child welfare agencies and probation departments as follows:
   
   1. County child welfare agencies and probation departments shall develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or nonminor depedent “absent” from foster care, rather than “missing”
      
   2. The protocols shall describe the “due diligence” efforts, rather than efforts to expeditiously locate the child or nonminor dependent
      
   3. The due diligence efforts include the notification requirements outlined above.
      

FISCAL IMPACT

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee analysis, “Unknown ongoing local costs, likely in the high-hundreds of thousands of dollars annually (General Fund and federal funds), to county welfare departments and county probation departments for social worker resources and probation officers to conduct the required notifications, based on one to two hours of social worker or probation officer time per missing child. Data indicates approximately 4,500 foster children and nonminor dependents go missing each year.

“Although these are state-mandated costs, they are not reimbursable, but instead must be funded

by the state pursuant to Proposition 30 (2012) which requires legislation that increases costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment (including child welfare services and foster care) to apply to local agencies only to the extent the

state provides annual funding for the cost increase.

“According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years.”

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

Purpose of the Bill:

According to the author, “When foster children go missing, county practices are routinely out of compliance with the minimum California Department of Social Services guidance standards and both state and federal law. This negligence can lead to grave, life changing, even fatal consequences for children. The potential risk is magnified for Native American children in the system who enter at a rate that is 2.7 times their representation in the population, the highest of any racial group. We can do better by our children by ensuring consistent implementation of best practices. This includes requiring notification to appropriate adults when a foster child is missing. Implementing effective, stabilizing and child/family supportive practices and policies will also assist California in confronting the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People. The Luke Madrigal Act, AB 2108, is one critical element to addressing this issue.”

Child Welfare Services (CWS)

The CWS system is an essential component of the state’s safety net. Social workers in each county who receive reports of abuse or neglect, investigate and resolve those reports. When a

case is substantiated, a family is either provided with services to ensure a child’s well-being and

avoid court involvement, or a child is removed and placed into foster care. In 2023, the state’s child welfare agencies received 433,571 reports of abuse or neglect and 18,147 children were removed from their homes and placed into foster care via the CWS system. As of January 1, 2024, there were 43,633 children in the CWS system in California.

Missing and Exploited Children

According to a 2022 study by the United States Department of Health and Human Services

(HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG), the National Center for Missing and Exploited

Children in 2020 received more than 17,000 reports of possible child sex trafficking. Sex trafficking of children means “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting a child under 18 years of age for the purpose of a commercial sex act” and may include “the exchange for money, food, shelter, and/or drugs.”^[1] The OIG report notes that children in foster care who are victims of sex trafficking may be negatively impacted by multiple physical and mental health issues that can have long-lasting effects. The OIG report also notes that “traffickers are known to prey on vulnerable children with low self-esteem and minimal social support, and histories of abuse, neglect, and trauma-traits that are common among children in foster care.”

Native children are at an increased risk of experiencing trafficking or exploitation. Recent studies reveal that over a 10-year period, nationally 85 percent of all missing Native children were endangered runaways. Foster children who runaway or go missing experience elevated rates of violence and exploitation, which is particularly true for Tribal and Native women and youth.

In January 2022, HHS announced the creation of the President’s Interagency Task Force to

Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (Task Force). According to HHS, the Task Force, chaired by the Secretary of State, is made up of 20 agencies across the federal government and is responsible for coordinating federal efforts to combat trafficking in persons. The Task Force’s focus includes “the enforcement of criminal and labor laws to end impunity for traffickers; victim-centered identification and trauma-informed assistance; innovations in data gathering and research; education and public awareness activities; and synchronization of strategically linked foreign assistance and diplomatic engagement.”^[2]

Federal Laws for Youth Missing From Foster Care

Enacted in 2014, the federal Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act (The

Act) (Public Law (P.L.) 113-183) was created in an effort to prevent and address sex trafficking of children in foster care. The Act required states to develop policies and procedures for the identification, documentation, and determination of appropriate services for children in the placement, care, or supervision of the state agency which believes they are, or are at risk of becoming victims of sex trafficking. The Act also requirements for states to develop policies and procedures for “expeditiously locating any child missing from foster care,” and “determining the child’s experiences while absent from care, including screening the child to determine if the child is a possible sex trafficking victim.” Further, child welfare agencies must report a child missing from care to both law enforcement and National Center for Missing and Exploited

Children “immediately” (not to exceed 24 hours).

The Act made a number of changes to the Title IV-E Foster Care Program, including enacting new requirements regarding: sex trafficking prevention, intervention, data collection and reporting; the reasonable and prudent parent standards; adoption incentives payments; successor guardianship, and successful adulthood. California codified The Act’s provisions through SB 794 (Committee on Human Services, Chapter 425, Statutes of 2015), which included training requirements for caseworkers (i.e. county social workers and probation officers) such as identifying, documenting and determining appropriate services for a child or youth in foster care who the caseworker has reasonable cause to believe is, or at risk of becoming, a sex trafficking survivor. These requirements are also outlined in CDSS’ 2016 all county letter (ACL) 16‒15.

State Policy for Runaway and Missing Children

ACL 16‒15. In 2016, CDSS issued ACL 16‒15 to “provide instructions regarding the policies and procedures counties are required to develop to locate and respond to youth, dependents or wards, who go missing from foster care.”^[3] The letter advised counties, in developing protocols, that they should consider the feasibility of implementing several best practices that are not required by federal law, such as dedicated units or dedicated liaisons in the county. In addition, the letter advised counties about the elements that constitute the statewide minimum standards necessary to comply with federal law. Specifically, CDSS instructed counties that they must have reporting and noticing protocols for missing children and nonminor dependents, and due diligence requirements for social workers to search for and locate missing foster children.

ACIN I‒13‒17. Additionally, in 2017, CDSS issued All County Information Notice (ACIN) I‒

13‒17, entitled “Promising Practices for Youth who are Missing or Run Away from Foster

Care,” which provided counties with information on promising practices to locate and respond to youth who are missing from care. ACIN I‒13‒17 was issued in recognition that foster youth are disproportionately more vulnerable to commercial sexual exploitation than children not in foster care. The policy recommendations in part state, “when a youth leaves care without permission, they are often running from or to something. Many youth have underlying needs that must be addressed [that] may be unmet or inadequately met in the current placement.”

Several risk factors were noted as reasons a youth may leaving their care setting without permission, including “being 13 years or older, placement instability, substance abuse, youth being upset or overly preoccupied with visitation issues, problematic ties to the community associated with run risk (e.g. gang affiliation, romantic relationships), history of juvenile delinquency, psychological factors (e.g. impulsivity, poor judgment and insight, easily

influenced, thrill seeking), etc.” ACIN I‒13‒17 advised several ways county staff could be prepared to respond should a youth go missing or leave care. These included creating a Safety and Support Plan, so that those that have a relationship with the child, such as family, friends, etc. may be contacted if necessary to aid in finding the missing child. It also outlined other best practices county social workers and probation officers can use while the child is missing and when the child is found and/or returns back to their placement.

County child welfare and probation departments are currently allowed some latitude in the development of their policies and procedures regarding how to handle cases when a child goes missing from care, as long as they meet federal and state requirements and CDSS’ minimum standards guide. This bill seeks to codify some of these best practices and standards into state law by requiring a social worker or probation officer who receives information that a foster youth is absent from foster care to notify specified persons within 24 hours.

Veto of AB 273

A similar bill, AB 273 (Ramos, 2023) was vetoed by Governor Newsom. The veto message cited cost as one concern and also noted, “Locating missing children in foster care is a time-sensitive and critical undertaking for the safety and well-being of the child. More can always be done to protect this vulnerable population, which is why I am directing the CDSS to work with county partners to assess existing protocols and identify any needed improvements. With that information, CDSS will work with the author and stakeholders to inform additional guidance, training, or recommend statutory changes to protect all foster youth, especially tribal youth.”

CDSS has begun various AB 273 Working Groups and CDSS is working on an All County Information Notice (ACIN) “to reiterate and clarify the expectations of social workers and probation officers for finding youth, including when there is a reason to know a youth may be an Indian youth, who are missing from care with clear guidance of county placing agencies protocol development.” CDSS did offer a comment period and is processing the feedback received. CDSS plans to issue the ACIN in early/late fall and are planning to schedule another meeting of the AB 273 Working Group to address additional issues raised in the AB 273 veto message, including training and statutory updates, and questions raised by Working Group participants.

Related/Prior Legislation:

AB 273 (Ramos, 2023) imposes specific requirements on social workers, probation officers, and juvenile courts when foster youth are missing from foster care to notify the youth's family and support systems about court hearings; safely return the youth to their placements; and further protect these vulnerable youth. This bill was vetoed by Governor Newsom.

SB 794 (Committee on Human Services, Chapter 425, Statutes of 2015) codified the federal

Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act into state law, which included training requirements for caseworkers (i.e. county social workers and probation officers) such as identifying, documenting and determining appropriate services for a child or youth in foster care who the worker has reasonable cause to believe the child is, or at risk of being a victim of sex trafficking.

COMMENTS

According to the California Department of Justice website, in 2023 there were 66,705 missing children reports in the state. As Black and Indigenous children are disproportionately in the care of child welfare and/or probation systems, they are also at greater risk of experiencing exploitation if they go missing from care. While current law requires county welfare departments to adopt policies that require a number of actions when a social worker or probation officer determines that a child is missing from foster care, the policies do not specifically require that law enforcement, the court with jurisdiction over the child, the child’s family, the child’s attorney, and the child’s tribe or tribal representative (if applicable) are notified. Current law also fails to provide a timeline for when such notifications must occur. This bill would require additional notifications and due diligence efforts to be made when a child or youth go missing from care.

PRIOR VOTES

POSITIONS

Support:

Yurok Tribe (Sponsor)

Alliance for Children's Rights (Co-Sponsor)

California Tribal Families Coalition (Co-Sponsor)

California Alliance of Caregivers
California Coalition for Youth
California Teachers Association
Children's Bureau of Southern California
Picayune Rancheria of The Chukchansi Indians
Smart Justice California, a Project of Tides Advocacy

Oppose:

None

-- END --

1. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), Child Sex Trafficking Overview, 2021. Accessed at http://www.missingkids.org/content/dam/missingkids/pdfs/CST%20Identification%20Resource.pdf ↑

2. https://www.state.gov/humantrafficking-interagency-task-force/ ↑

3. https://cdss.ca.gov/lettersnotices/EntRes/getinfo/acl/2016/16-15.pdf ↑

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2108

Author:(Ramos)

As Amended Ver:April 1, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Requires, when a social worker (SW) or probation officer (PO) receives information that a foster youth is absent from foster care, the SW or PO to immediately notify specified persons.

Major Provisions

1. Requires, when an SW or PO receives information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, the SW or PO to immediately, but no later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify all of the following persons or entities if their whereabouts are known:
2. The child's or nonminor dependent's (NMD's) parents or legal guardian, unless notification has been limited or terminated by the court;
3. The attorney for the parents or legal guardians;
4. The child's or NMD's attorney of record;
5. The child or NMD's court-appointed special advocate, if one has been appointed;
6. The court of jurisdiction;
7. The child's or NMD's tribe or tribal representative, if the child is an Indian child, as defined;
8. Any known sibling of the child or NMD who is required to be notified of a hearing; and,
9. The local law enforcement agency.
10. Requires the notice to include an agency contact that noticed persons may reach for additional information.
11. Defines the following terms:
12. "Absent from foster care" means when the whereabouts of a child receiving child welfare services are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department (counties) or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located the child receiving child welfare services in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child receiving child welfare services, taking into account the age, intelligence, mental functioning, and physical condition of the child receiving child welfare services.
13. "Child receiving child welfare services" means a child or NMD placed in an eligible foster care placement or in the home of an emergency caregiver, and includes dependents, NMDs, and minors who have been taken into temporary custody and who are in foster care.
14. Includes NMDs in the requirement for counties to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child absent from foster care. Further specifies that these policies should describe the due diligence efforts used by county staff to expeditiously locate any child absent from foster care, including, but not limited to, the notification and the timeframe for reporting missing youth to interested parties as described in 1) above.
15. Makes findings and declarations related to the release of a 2022 audit by the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) stating there are several barriers and other deficiencies in California agencies' policies and procedures related to missing foster youth.
16. States legislative intent to create stronger protections for youth when they are absent from foster care.

COMMENTS

Background: United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. The HHS-OIG conducts audits and evaluations to assess the effectiveness of the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) programs and their grantees and contractors. These audit reports identify risks to the people served and taxpayers, and recommend necessary improvements. One such audit released in 2022, entitled National Snapshot of State Agency Approaches to Reporting and Locating Children Missing from Foster Care, examined protocols adopted by state agencies to report and locate missing children. Key findings of the report related to the existing protocols to expeditiously locate a youth absent from foster care found that there was inconsistent oversight and sporadic engagement from family members, tribes, and other supportive adults.

The 2022 report showed that California had the highest number of child deaths while missing. According to the 2022 report, one 15-year-old child was reported missing from California on January 25, 2019, and was found dead (of a suspected drug overdose) three days later on January 28, 2019, in Texas. While the report did not contain any recommendations, it did find that many states identified the need to find the correct placement to prevent children in foster care from running away as a challenge.

This bill is attempting to prevent such outcomes.

Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act (P.L. 113-183) was signed into law in 2014. Children who go missing from their approved placements are at higher risk of experiencing harm, substance use, and trafficking. In recognition of the vulnerability associated with missing children, this federal law added requirements governing how state agencies respond when children are missing from foster care.

The Act requires states to develop and implement specific protocols for locating and ensuring the safety of youth missing from foster care and specifically requires states to develop and implement specific protocols for the following:

1. Expeditiously locating any child missing from foster care;
2. Determining the primary factors that contributed to the child's running away or otherwise being absent from care, and to the extent possible and appropriate, responding to those factors in current and subsequent placements; and,
3. Determining the child's experiences while absent from care, including screening the child to determine if the child is a possible sex trafficking victim and reporting such related information, as required by the Secretary of HHS.

Federal laws require the state agency to report immediately, and no later than 24 hours after receiving information on missing or abducted children or youth, to the law enforcement authorities for entry into the NCIC database of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The Act further requires counties to develop and implement protocols to locate children and NMDs who have gone missing from foster care. The provisions of this bill align with the federal requirements related to the development of protocols and timelines in order to address missing foster youth.

California's Efforts to Align with Federal Law. As required to maintain federal child welfare funding, SB 794 (Committee on Human Services), Chapter 425, Statutes of 2015, brought the state into compliance with the federal Preventing Sex Trafficking, and Strengthening Families Act to conform state law to federal law related to sex trafficking prevention, among other areas.

In response to this legislation, CDSS was required to develop model policies, protocols, and procedures to assist counties in identifying and serving children who are at-risk for, or a victim of, commercial sexual exploitation. As a result, CDSS issued an All County Letter (ACL) 16-15 to provide instructions on these policies. The ACL noted that when the caregiver, SW, or PO first learns that a child has run away or is otherwise missing from care, the child should be immediately reported missing to the local law enforcement agency.

AB 2207 (Eggman), Chapter 757, Statutes of 2018, built off of this policy by requiring CDSS to develop model policies, protocols, and procedures to assist counties in identifying and serving children who are at risk for, or a victim of commercial sexual exploitation, by no later than January 1, 2020. CDSS issued ACL 20-105 on November 13, 2020, in order to provide counties with links to model policies, procedures, and protocols. This ACL also emphasized the importance of counties partnering with tribal governments in the development and implementation of these policies and protocols pertaining to exploited youth and urged counties to seek the participation of local tribal service providers, Indian Health Clinics, tribal law enforcement, tribal courts, and other branches of tribal government. The ACL also stated that in the event that an Indian child is identified as missing from care, local law enforcement, including Tribal Police, must be notified immediately.

Dual Status Youth. When juveniles come into contact with both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems simultaneously, they are referred to as dual-status youth. Essentially, dual-status youth are under the jurisdiction of both the dependency court (child welfare system) and the delinquency court (juvenile justice system) at the same time, and as such, may interact with both an SW and PO. POs have specific responsibilities regarding the placement of and services for foster youth and NMDs who fall under the jurisdiction of the probation department. Their unique circumstances require coordinated efforts from both systems to effectively address their needs.

The provisions of this bill seek to bring county practices into compliance with both federal and state law, as well as the minimum standards guidance of CDSS, by enacting several specific requirements for SW or POs to notify specified people when they receive information that a foster youth is absent from foster care.

While current law requires counties to adopt policies that require a number of actions when an SW or PO determines that a youth is missing from foster care, the policies do not specifically require that law enforcement, the court with jurisdiction over the child, the child's family, the child's attorney, and the child's tribe or tribal representative (if applicable) are notified. Nor does the law provide a timeline for when such notifications must occur. This bill would address these considerations.

Equity Implications: Advocates and stakeholders have reported that not all relevant parties are being noticed when a foster youth is missing from foster care and that protocols are not being enforced consistently across counties. For example, advocates have reported there are some counties with high numbers of Tribes who fail to mention them in their protocols. Tribes are also reporting that they are not being consistently notified when an Indian child goes missing from foster care. This bill would require the SW or PO to notify all relevant parties.

This bill is also attempting to address the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons crisis. Tribal children who go missing or run away while in foster care are a critical population in the disproportionately high rates of Indigenous persons reported missing or suffering violence.

Data from the University of California, Berkeley California Child Welfare Indicators Project reports that the proportions of Black and Native American youth in foster care are around four times larger than the proportions of Black and Native American youth in California overall. As a result, these youth are more likely to be removed from their homes due to poverty, substance use disorders, or other challenges. Tribal and native children are at an especially high risk of exploitation due to poverty, lack of protective services, and geographic isolation. For this population, going missing or running away while in foster care is a pipeline to the disproportionately high rates of violence and exploitation that are experienced by Native Americans, especially Native American women and youth.

According to the Author

"When foster children go missing, county practices are routinely out of compliance with the minimum California Department of Social Services guidance standards and both state and federal law. This negligence can lead to grave, life-changing, even fatal consequences for children. The potential risk is magnified for Native American children in the system who enter at a rate that is 2.7 times their representation in the population, the highest of any racial group. We can do better by our children by ensuring consistent implementation of best practices. This includes requiring notification to appropriate adults when a foster child is missing. Implementing effective, stabilizing and child/family supportive practices and policies will also assist California in confronting the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People. The Luke Madrigal Act, [this bill], is one critical element to addressing this issue."

Arguments in Support

According to the California Tribal Families Coalition, a co-sponsor of this bill, "[This bill] will protect not only Native foster children, but all foster children by creating a more family-centered and child-focused process to locate, return, and stabilize children and youth who go missing while in the care, custody, and control of the child welfare system. Current state law requires county child welfare agencies and probation departments to develop and implement specific protocols to quickly locate any child missing from foster care. However, county practices are routinely out of compliance with federal and state laws, including the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) minimum standards guidance.

"The bill creates a more inclusive notification protocol when a child goes missing from care. It gives all parties notified a real-time opportunity to collaborate in locating and stabilizing a child that goes missing, especially in the first 72 hours, the most critical window for locating a missing person."

Arguments in Opposition

No opposition on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations on April 15, 2024, "Unknown ongoing local costs, likely in the high-hundreds of thousands of dollars annually (General Fund and federal funds), to county welfare departments and county probation departments for social worker resources and probation officers to conduct the required notifications, based on one to two hours of social worker or probation officer time per missing child. Data indicates approximately 4,500 foster children and NMDs go missing each year.

Although these are state-mandated costs, they are not reimbursable, but instead must be funded by the state pursuant to Proposition 30 (2012) which requires legislation that increases costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment (including child welfare services and foster care) to apply to local agencies only to the extent the state provides annual funding for the cost increase.

According to the Legislative Analyst's Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years."

VOTES

ASM HUMAN SERVICES: 7-0-0

YES: Lee, Essayli, Calderon, Gipson, Jackson, Ta, Ortega

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Sanchez, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Jim Patterson, Pellerin, Ta, Villapudua

UPDATED

VERSION: April 1, 2024

CONSULTANT: Jessica Langtry / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0003222

Date of Hearing: April 17, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2108

Author:(Ramos) – As Amended Ver:April 1, 2024

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires a county social worker or probation officer to immediately notify specified persons when they receive information that a child receiving child welfare services, including a non-minor dependent (NMD), is absent from foster care. The bill also requires counties to include NMDs in their existing protocols to expeditiously locate a child absent from foster care.

Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires, when a county social worker or probation officer receives information that a child or NMD receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, the social worker or probation officer to immediately, but no later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify all of the following persons or entities whose whereabouts are known:
2. The child’s or NMD’s parents or legal guardians, unless restricted by the court.
3. The attorney for the parents or legal guardians.
4. The child’s or NMD’s attorney of record.
5. The child or NMD’s court-appointed special advocate, if one has been appointed.
6. The court of jurisdiction.
7. The child’s or NMD’s tribe or tribal representative, as applicable.
8. Any known sibling of the child or NMD who is required to be notified of a hearing.
9. The local law enforcement agency.
10. Requires the notice to include an agency contact that noticed persons may reach for additional information.
11. Includes NMDs in the requirement for counties to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child absent from foster care. Further specifies these policies should describe the due diligence efforts used by county staff to expeditiously locate any child absent from foster care, including, but not limited to, the notification and the timeframe for reporting missing youth to interested parties as described in item 1, above.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Unknown ongoing local costs, likely in the high-hundreds of thousands of dollars annually (General Fund and federal funds), to county welfare departments and county probation departments for social worker resources and probation officers to conduct the required notifications, based on one to two hours of social worker or probation officer time per missing child. Data indicates approximately 4,500 foster children and NMDs go missing each year.

Although these are state-mandated costs, they are not reimbursable, but instead must be funded by the state pursuant to Proposition 30 (2012) which requires legislation that increases costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment (including child welfare services and foster care) to apply to local agencies only to the extent the state provides annual funding for the cost increase.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years. 

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

When foster children go missing, county practices are routinely out of compliance with the minimum California Department of Social Services guidance standards and both state and federal law. This negligence can lead to grave, life-changing, even fatal consequences for children. The potential risk is magnified for Native American children in the system who enter at a rate that is 2.7 times their representation in the population, the highest of any racial group. We can do better by our children by ensuring consistent implementation of best practices. This includes requiring notification to appropriate adults when a foster child is missing. Implementing effective, stabilizing and child/family supportive practices and policies will also assist California in confronting the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People.

1. Background. California's Child Welfare Services (CWS) programs are administered by the state’s 58 counties, with each county operating its own program based on local needs, while adhering to state and federal regulations. CDSS secures federal funding to support CWS programs, provides statewide best practices training for social workers, conducts program regulatory oversight and administration, and develops policy. As of October 1, 2023, there were 45,044 youth from birth up to 21 years of age in foster care in California.

Existing law requires counties to adopt policies requiring a social worker or probation officer to take certain actions when they learn a child receiving child welfare services is missing from foster care. These actions, however, do not require a social worker or probation officer to notify law enforcement, the court with jurisdiction over the child, the child's family, the child's attorney, or the child's tribe or tribal representative (if applicable).

Advocates and stakeholders have reported that not all relevant parties are being notified when a foster youth is missing from foster care and that protocols are not being enforced consistently across counties. Advocates report some counties with high numbers of tribes fail to mention tribes in their protocols. Tribes also report they are not consistently notified when an Indian child goes missing from foster care.

This bill requires social workers and probation officers to immediately notify specified people, including tribes, when they receive information that a child, including an NMD, is missing from foster care, and requires counties to include NMDs in their existing protocols to expeditiously locate a child absent from foster care. These requirements align with federal requirements under the Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act.

1. Related Legislation. Last year’s AB 273 (Ramos) was an expanded version of this bill that contained additional requirements, including requirements on the juvenile courts. AB 273 was vetoed by the Governor whose veto message cited cost concerns.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 2, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES

Alex Lee, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2108 (

Author:Ramos) – As Amended Ver:April 1, 2024

SUBJECT: Foster care: missing children and nonminor dependents

SUMMARY: Requires, when a social worker (SW) or probation officer (PO) receives information that a foster youth is absent from foster care, the SW or PO to immediately notify specified persons. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires, when an SW or PO receives information that a child receiving child welfare services is absent from foster care, the SW or PO to immediately, but no later than 24 hours from the receipt of that information, notify all of the following persons or entities if their whereabouts are known:
2. The child’s or nonminor dependent’s (NMD’s) parents or legal guardian, unless notification has been limited or terminated by the court;
3. The attorney for the parents or legal guardians;
4. The child’s or NMD’s attorney of record;
5. The child or NMD’s court-appointed special advocate, if one has been appointed;
6. The court of jurisdiction;
7. The child’s or NMD’s tribe or tribal representative, if the child is an Indian child, as defined;
8. Any known sibling of the child or NMD who is required to be notified of a hearing; and,
9. The local law enforcement agency.
10. Requires the notice to include an agency contact that noticed persons may reach for additional information.
11. Defines the following terms:
12. “Absent from foster care” means when the whereabouts of a child receiving child welfare services are unknown to the county child welfare agency or probation department (counties) or when the county child welfare agency or probation department has located the child receiving child welfare services in a location not approved by the court that may pose a risk to the child receiving child welfare services, taking into account the age, intelligence, mental functioning, and physical condition of the child receiving child welfare services.
13. “Child receiving child welfare services” means a child or NMD placed in an eligible foster care placement or in the home of an emergency caregiver, and includes dependents, NMDs, and minors who have been taken into temporary custody and who are in foster care.
14. Includes NMDs in the requirement for counties to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child absent from foster care. Further specifies that these policies should describe the due diligence efforts used by county staff to expeditiously locate any child absent from foster care, including, but not limited to, the notification and the timeframe for reporting missing youth to interested parties as described in 1) above.
15. Makes findings and declarations related to the release of a 2022 audit by the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) stating there are several barriers and other deficiencies in California agencies’ policies and procedures related to missing foster youth.
16. States legislative intent to create stronger protections for youth when they are absent from foster care.

EXISTING LAW:

State law:

1. Establishes the juvenile court with jurisdiction over children who are subject to abuse or neglect. (Welfare & Institutions Code [WIC] §§ 300 et seq.)
2. Establishes that the purpose of the juvenile court dependency system is the maximum safety and protection for children who are currently being abused, neglected, or exploited. Provides that the focus is on the preservation of the family, as well as the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of the child. (WIC § 300.2)
3. Provides that any minor between 12 and 17 years of age, inclusive, who violates any state or federal law or any city or county ordinance (except curfew ordinances based solely on age) falls under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. (WIC §§ 602 et seq.)
4. Requires counties to develop and implement specific protocols to expeditiously locate any child or NMD missing from foster care and requires, at a minimum, these policies to do all of the following: describe the efforts used by county staff to expeditiously locate any child or NMD missing from care, including, but not limited to, the timeframe for reporting missing youth, the individuals or entities entitled to notice that a youth is missing, any required initial and ongoing efforts to locate youth, and plans to return youth to placement. (WIC § 16501.35(b)(1))
5. Requires SWs and POs to do all of the following:
   1. Determine the primary factors that contributed to the child or NMD running away or otherwise being absent from care;
   2. Respond to factors identified in a) above in subsequent placements, to the extent possible;
   3. Determine the child’s or NMD’s experiences while absent from care;
   4. Determine whether the child or NMD is a possible victim of commercial sexual exploitation; and,
   5. Document the activities and information described in a) to d) above, inclusive, for federal reporting purposes, consistent with instructions from the California Department of Social Services (CDSS). (WIC § 16501.35(b)(2))
6. Requires counties to implement policies and procedures that require SWs and POs to identify and document children receiving child welfare services who are, or are at risk of becoming, victims of commercial sexual exploitation; determine appropriate services for the child or youth, and receive relevant training in the identification, documentation, and determination of appropriate services for any child or youth identified. (WIC § 16501.35(a))
7. Requires CDSS, in consultation with stakeholders, including, but not limited to, the County Welfare Directors Association of California, the Chief Probation Officers of California, former foster youth, and child advocacy organizations to develop model policies, procedures, and protocols to assist the counties in complying with this section. Requires CDSS to consult with the California Department of Education, the California Department of Health Care Services, state and local law enforcement, and agencies with experience serving children and youth at risk of commercial sexual exploitation in the development of the model policies and procedures described in 5) above. (WIC § 16501.35(c))
8. Requires, if the court knows or has reason to know that the child is an Indian child, the Indian child to be detained in a home that complies with the placement preferences set forth in state law and the federal Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) unless the court finds good cause exists not to follow the placement preferences. (WIC § 319(h)(1))
9. Requires the court, when placing in the home of a relative, an extended family member, as defined in state law and federal ICWA, or a nonrelative extended family member (NREFM), to consider the recommendations of the SW based on the assessment of their home, including the results of a criminal records check and prior child abuse allegations, if any, before ordering that the child be placed with a relative or NREFM. (WIC § 319(h)(3))
10. Requires, if the PO or SW determines that the child must be retained in custody, to immediately file a petition with the clerk of the juvenile court, who is required to set the matter for hearing, and requires the PO or SW to serve notice as prescribed to specified persons, including any known sibling of the child 10 years of age or older. (WIC § 290.1(a)(7))

Federal law:

1. Establishes ICWA, which provides guidance to states regarding the jurisdictional requirements, proceedings of tribal courts, and custody proceedings involving the removal of Indian children from their parents. (25 United States Code [U.S.C.] §§ 1901 et seq.)
2. Defines an “Indian child” to mean any unmarried person who is under 18 years of age and is either a member of an Indian tribe or is eligible for membership in an Indian tribe and is the biological child of a member of an Indian tribe. (25 U.S.C §§ 1901 et seq.)
3. Establishes the federal foster care program, authorized by Title IV-E of the Social Security Act (SSA), to allow states to provide safe and stable out-of-home care for children who meet certain eligibility requirements until they are safely returned home, placed permanently with adoptive families, or placed in other planned, permanent living arrangements. (42 U.S.C. § 471(a)(2))
4. Establishes the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act which amended Title IV-E of the SSA by giving states the option to extend the age of eligibility for federally funded foster care to the age of 21. (Public Law [P.L.] 110-351)
5. Requires state agencies to develop policies to quickly locate children who run away from foster care or who otherwise go missing. (42 U.S.C. §§ 471(a)(35)(A) and (B))
6. Mandates that each federal, state, and local law enforcement agency must promptly report each case of a missing child under the age of 21 to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) of the Department of Justice. (34 U.S.C. § 41307)
7. Establishes the Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act, which amended a number of provisions in the Titles IV-B and IV-E of the SSA, to authorize federal foster care programs, and added requirements for Title IV-E agencies to demonstrate that it has developed and implemented protocols to locate any child or NMD who has gone missing from foster care. (P.L. 113-183)

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown, this bill has not been analyzed by a fiscal committee.

COMMENTS:

Background: Child Welfare Services (CWS). California's CWS programs are administered by the 58 individual counties with each county organizing and operating its own program of child protection based on local needs while adhering to state and federal regulations. When a child welfare case is open, counties are the primary governmental entity interacting with children and families when addressing issues of child abuse and neglect and are responsible, either directly or through providers, for obtaining or providing the interventions and relevant services to protect children and assist families with issues related to child abuse and neglect.

CDSS secures federal funding to support CWS programs, provides statewide best practices training for social workers, conducts program regulatory oversight and administration, and is responsible for the development of policy while also providing direct services such as adoption placements.

As of October 1, 2023, there were 45,044 youth from birth up to 21 years of age in foster care in California.

United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. The HHS-OIG conducts audits and evaluations to assess the effectiveness of HHS programs and their grantees and contractors. These audit reports identify risks to the people served and taxpayers, and recommend necessary improvements. One such audit released in 2022, entitled National Snapshot of State Agency Approaches to Reporting and Locating Children Missing from Foster Care, examined protocols adopted by state agencies to report and locate missing children. Key findings of the report related to the existing protocols to expeditiously locate a youth absent from foster care found that there was inconsistent oversight and sporadic engagement from family members, tribes, and other supportive adults.

The 2022 report showed that California had the highest number of child deaths while missing. According to the 2022 report, one 15-year-old child was reported missing from California on January 25, 2019, and was found dead (of a suspected drug overdose) three days later on January 28, 2019, in Texas. While the report did not contain any recommendations, it did find that many states identified the need to find the correct placement to prevent children in foster care from running away as a challenge.

This bill is attempting to prevent such outcomes.

Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act (P.L. 113-183) was signed into law in 2014. Children who go missing from their approved placements are at higher risk of experiencing harm, substance use, and trafficking. In recognition of the vulnerability associated with missing children, this federal law added requirements governing how state agencies respond when children are missing from foster care.

The Act requires states to develop and implement specific protocols for locating and ensuring the safety of youth missing from foster care and specifically requires states to develop and implement specific protocols for the following:

• Expeditiously locating any child missing from foster care;
• Determining the primary factors that contributed to the child’s running away or otherwise being absent from care, and to the extent possible and appropriate, responding to those factors in current and subsequent placements; and,
• Determining the child’s experiences while absent from care, including screening the child to determine if the child is a possible sex trafficking victim and reporting such related information, as required by the Secretary of HHS.

Federal laws require the state agency to report immediately, and no later than 24 hours after receiving information on missing or abducted children or youth, to the law enforcement authorities for entry into the NCIC database of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The Act further requires counties to develop and implement protocols to locate children and NMDs who have gone missing from foster care.

The provisions of this bill align with the federal requirements related to the development of protocols and timelines in order to address missing foster youth.

California’s Efforts to Align With Federal Law. As required to maintain federal child welfare funding, SB 794 (Committee on Human Services), Chapter 425, Statutes of 2015, brought the state into compliance with the federal Preventing Sex Trafficking, and Strengthening Families Act to conform state law to federal law related to sex trafficking prevention, among other areas.

In response to this legislation, CDSS was required to develop model policies, protocols, and procedures to assist counties in identifying and serving children who are at-risk for, or a victim of, commercial sexual exploitation. As a result, CDSS issued an All County Letter (ACL) 16-15 to provide instructions on these policies. The ACL noted that when the caregiver, SW, or PO first learns that a child has run away or is otherwise missing from care, the child should be immediately reported missing to the local law enforcement agency.

AB 2207 (Eggman), Chapter 757, Statutes of 2018, built off of this policy by requiring CDSS to develop model policies, protocols, and procedures to assist counties in identifying and serving children who are at risk for, or a victim of commercial sexual exploitation, by no later than January 1, 2020. CDSS issued ACL 20-105 on November 13, 2020, in order to provide counties with links to model policies, procedures, and protocols. This ACL also emphasized the importance of counties partnering with tribal governments in the development and implementation of these policies and protocols pertaining to exploited youth and urged counties to seek the participation of local tribal service providers, Indian Health Clinics, tribal law enforcement, tribal courts, and other branches of tribal government.

The ACL also stated that in the event that an Indian child is identified as missing from care, local law enforcement, including Tribal Police, must be notified immediately.

Dual Status Youth. When juveniles come into contact with both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems simultaneously, they are referred to as dual-status youth. Essentially, dual-status youth are under the jurisdiction of both the dependency court (child welfare system) and the delinquency court (juvenile justice system) at the same time, and as such, may interact with both an SW and PO. POs have specific responsibilities regarding the placement of and services for foster youth and NMDs who fall under the jurisdiction of the probation department. Their unique circumstances require coordinated efforts from both systems to effectively address their needs.

The provisions of this bill seek to bring county practices into compliance with both federal and state law, as well as the minimum standards guidance of CDSS, by enacting several specific requirements for SW or POs to notify specified people when they receive information that a foster youth is absent from foster care.

While current law requires counties to adopt policies that require a number of actions when an SW or PO determines that a youth is missing from foster care, the policies do not specifically require that law enforcement, the court with jurisdiction over the child, the child's family, the child's attorney, and the child's tribe or tribal representative (if applicable) are notified. Nor does the law provide a timeline for when such notifications must occur. This bill would address these considerations.

Author’s Statement: According to the Author, “When foster children go missing, county practices are routinely out of compliance with the minimum California Department of Social Services guidance standards and both state and federal law. This negligence can lead to grave, life-changing, even fatal consequences for children. The potential risk is magnified for Native American children in the system who enter at a rate that is 2.7 times their representation in the population, the highest of any racial group. We can do better by our children by ensuring consistent implementation of best practices. This includes requiring notification to appropriate adults when a foster child is missing. Implementing effective, stabilizing and child/family supportive practices and policies will also assist California in confronting the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People. The Luke Madrigal Act, [this bill], is one critical element to addressing this issue.”

Equity Implications: Advocates and stakeholders have reported that not all relevant parties are being noticed when a foster youth is missing from foster care and that protocols are not being enforced consistently across counties. For example, advocates have reported there are some counties with high numbers of Tribes who fail to mention them in their protocols. Tribes are also reporting that they are not being consistently notified when an Indian child goes missing from foster care. This bill would require the SW or PO to notify all relevant parties.

This bill is also attempting to address the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons crisis. Tribal children who go missing or run away while in foster care are a critical population in the disproportionately high rates of Indigenous persons reported missing or suffering violence.

Data from the University of California, Berkeley California Child Welfare Indicators Project reports that the proportions of Black and Native American youth in foster care are around four times larger than the proportions of Black and Native American youth in California overall. As a result, these youth are more likely to be removed from their homes due to poverty, substance use disorders, or other challenges. Tribal and native children are at an especially high risk of exploitation due to poverty, lack of protective services, and geographic isolation. For this population, going missing or running away while in foster care is a pipeline to the disproportionately high rates of violence and exploitation that are experienced by Native Americans, especially Native American women and youth.

According to a joint Information Memorandum from the U.S. HHS, children who go missing from foster care are vulnerable to crime and exploitation, which may result in physical harm and even death. The IM further notes that children and youth who are missing or have run away from foster care have a greater likelihood of experiencing adverse outcomes, including HIV infection, substance use disorders, academic underperformance, and involvement with the juvenile justice system. Research supports an association between running away from home and increased vulnerability to experiencing sexual exploitation and human trafficking. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that 19% of children and youth who ran away from foster care likely experienced sex trafficking. With proper and consistent notification, all parties can collaborate to reduce the risk of abuse and sexual exploitation, which current federal and state laws were enacted to combat.

RELATED AND PRIOR LEGISLATION:

SB 998 (Rubio) of the current legislative session, requires SWs and POs to expand the policies and procedures related to foster youth who are, or are at risk of becoming, victims of labor trafficking. Defines “labor trafficking” to have the same meaning as forced labor, as defined in the Penal Code, and requires CDSS to revise the model policies and procedures to apply to victims of labor trafficking. SB 998 is currently set for hearing in the Senate Human Services Committee on April 1, 2024.

AB 273 (Ramos) of 2023, would have imposed specific requirements on SWs, POs, and juvenile courts when foster youth are missing from foster care to notify the youth's family and support systems about court hearings; safely return the youth to their placements; and, further protect these vulnerable youth. AB 273 was vetoed by Governor Newsom who directed CDSS to work with the author and stakeholders to inform additional guidance, training, or recommend statutory changes to protect all foster youth, especially tribal youth.

AB 2628 (Reyes) of 2022, would have changed the name of the Commercially Sexually Exploited Children Program to the Human Trafficked Children Program and would have revised all parts of the program to include all children who are victims of human trafficking, including those who are victims of child labor trafficking; would have modified provisions of WIC to include victims of forced labor under the jurisdiction of the dependency courts. Finally, AB 2628 would have directed CDSS to develop policies and resources tailored to the specific traumas of minors who are forced labor victims. AB 2628 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.

AB 1985 (Blanca Rubio) of 2020, would have changed the name of the Commercially Sexually Exploited Children Program to the Human Trafficked Children Program, explicitly authorized a child who was a victim of labor trafficking, and whose parent or guardian failed to protect the child, to be adjudged a dependent of the juvenile court. AB 1985 would have required that the case plan for a child or NMD who is, or who is at risk of becoming, the victim of labor trafficking, to document the services provided to address that issue. AB 1985 was referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee but the hearing was canceled at the request of the author.

SB 767 (Atkins) of 2017, would have authorized, as reliable corroborating information approved by the California Victim Compensation Board, the inclusion of evidence that a county child welfare caseworker who provides child welfare services has attested by affidavit that the individual was a victim of human trafficking. SB 767 was referred to the Senate Human Services Committee but was not set for a hearing.

AB 2207 (Eggman), Chapter 757, Statutes of 2018, placed a deadline of January 1, 2020, on the requirement in current law that CDSS, in consultation with stakeholders, must develop model policies, procedures, and protocols to assist counties to achieve certain goals related to the commercial sexual exploitation of youth receiving child welfare services.

SB 794 (Senate Human Services Committee), Chapter 425, Statutes of 2015, required counties, among other provisions, to implement policies and procedures to require SWs and POs to identify children receiving child welfare services, including dependents or wards in foster care, NMDs, dependents, and youth receiving services, who are, or are at risk of becoming, victims of commercial sexual exploitation and to document it in the Child Welfare Services/Case Management System and any other agency record.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Alliance for Children's Rights (Co-Sponsor)
California Tribal Families Coalition (Co-Sponsor)
Cahuilla Band of Indians
California Alliance of Caregivers
California Partnership to End Domestic Violence
California Tribal Business Alliance
Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake
John Burton Advocates for Youth
Picayune Rancheria of The Chukchansi Indians
Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians
Smart Justice California, a Project of Tides Advocacy
Strong Hearted Native Women's Coalition, INC.
Tejon Indian Tribe
Tule River Tribe
Yurok Tribe

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Jessica Langtry / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089