(1)Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which is permitted to adjudge certain children to be a ward or a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, and authorizes the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over those persons until they attain 21 years of age. Existing law authorizes nonminors who have not yet attained 21 years of age and who exited foster care at or after the age of majority to petition the court to resume dependency jurisdiction or to assume transition jurisdiction over the nonminor.

Under existing law, the county welfare department is required to submit reports at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has attained 16 years of age, at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child attains 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, verifying that specified information, documents, and services have been provided to the child or nonminor.

This bill would require certain additional verifications to be included in those reports, including, among other things, verification that specified information has been included in the childs or nonminors case plan.

Existing law prohibits the court from terminating jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 18 years of age until the county welfare department has submitted a report verifying that it has provided all of the information, documents, and services referred to above to the nonminor dependent, or in the case of a nonminor dependent who, after reasonable efforts by the county welfare department, cannot be located, verifying the efforts made to make that information and those documents and services available to the nonminor dependent.

This bill would authorize the court to retain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 21 years of age until the county welfare department has provided the nonminor dependent that information and those documents and services and, if the nonminor dependent has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that specified requirements have been met. The bill would extend the authority of the court to retain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 21 years of age for the limited purpose of complying with those requirements. The bill would authorize a nonminor dependent over whom jurisdiction has been extended pursuant to that authorization to continue receiving the support and services they were entitled to receive immediately prior to attaining 21 years of age, and benefits equal to the amount of Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care program benefits, until jurisdiction has been terminated. By imposing additional duties on county welfare departments, this bill would impose a state-mandated program.

(2)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.

(1)Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which is permitted to adjudge certain children to be a ward or a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, and authorizes the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over those persons until they attain 21 years of age. Existing law authorizes nonminors who have not yet attained 21 years of age and who exited foster care at or after the age of majority to petition the court to resume dependency jurisdiction or to assume transition jurisdiction over the nonminor.

Under existing law, the county welfare department is required to submit reports at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has attained 16 years of age, at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child attains 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, verifying that specified information, documents, and services have been provided to the child or nonminor.

This bill would require certain additional verifications to be included in those reports, including, among other things, verification that specified information has been included in the childs or nonminors case plan.

Existing law prohibits the court from terminating jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 18 years of age until the county welfare department has submitted a report verifying that it has provided all of the information, documents, and services referred to above to the nonminor dependent, or in the case of a nonminor dependent who, after reasonable efforts by the county welfare department, cannot be located, verifying the efforts made to make that information and those documents and services available to the nonminor dependent.

This bill would additionally prohibit jurisdiction from being terminated authorize the court to retain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 21 years of age until the county welfare department has provided the nonminor dependent that information and those documents and services and, if the nonminor dependent has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that specified requirements have been met. The bill would extend the authority of the court to retain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 21 years of age for the limited purpose of complying with those requirements. The bill would authorize a nonminor dependent over whom jurisdiction has been extended pursuant to that authorization to continue receiving the support and services they were entitled to receive immediately prior to attaining 21 years of age, and benefits equal to the amount of Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care program benefits, until jurisdiction has been terminated. By imposing additional duties on county welfare departments, this bill would impose a state-mandated program.

(2)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.

(1)Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which is permitted to adjudge certain children to be a ward or a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, and authorizes the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over those persons until they attain 21 years of age. Existing law authorizes nonminors who have not yet attained 21 years of age and who exited foster care at or after the age of majority to petition the court to resume dependency jurisdiction or to assume transition jurisdiction over the nonminor.

Under existing law, the county welfare department is required to submit reports at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has attained 16 years of age, at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child attains 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, verifying that specified information, documents, and services have been provided to the child or nonminor.

This bill would require certain additional verifications to be included in those reports, including, among other things, verification that specified information has been included in the childs or nonminors case plan.

Existing law prohibits the court from terminating jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 18 years of age until the county welfare department has submitted a report verifying that it has provided all of the information, documents, and services referred to above to the nonminor dependent, or in the case of a nonminor dependent who, after reasonable efforts by the county welfare department, cannot be located, verifying the efforts made to make that information and those documents and services available to the nonminor dependent.

This bill would additionally prohibit jurisdiction from being terminated over a nonminor dependent who has attained 21 years of age until the county welfare department has provided the nonminor dependent that information and those documents and services and, if the nonminor dependent has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that specified requirements have been met. The bill would extend the authority of the court to retain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has attained 21 years of age for the limited purpose of complying with those requirements. The bill would authorize a nonminor dependent over whom jurisdiction has been extended pursuant to that authorization to continue receiving the support and services they were entitled to receive immediately prior to attaining 21 years of age, and benefits equal to the amount of Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care program benefits, until jurisdiction has been terminated. By imposing additional duties on county welfare departments, this bill would impose a state-mandated program.

(2)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.

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 867

Author:(Friedman)

As Enrolled Ver:September 18, 2023

2/3 vote

SUMMARY

Authorizes the court to allow foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency, including, being screened for eligibility for all public benefits for which the nonminor dependent (NMD) may be eligible, and for those who have not secured housing, verification that referrals to transitional housing, or assistance in securing other housing has been made.

Senate amendments

Clarified that the court is permitted, rather than required, to retain jurisdiction over an NMD who has attained 21 years of age until the county welfare department has satisfied specified requirements.

Governor’s Veto Message

This bill authorizes a nonminor dependent to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 until the county has provided the youth with the documents, information, and services needed for their transition.

While I appreciate the author's work to support foster youth in successfully transitioning into adulthood, this bill will likely cost millions of dollars and must be considered in the annual budget process.

In partnership with the Legislature, we enacted a budget that closed a shortfall of more than $30 billion through balanced solutions that avoided deep program cuts and protected education, health care, climate, public safety, and social service programs that are relied on by millions of Californians. This year, however, the Legislature sent me bills outside of this budget process that, if all enacted, would odd nearly $19 billion of unaccounted costs in the budget, of which $11 billion would be ongoing.

With our state facing continuing economic risk and revenue uncertainty, it is important to remain disciplined when considering bills with significant fiscal implications, such as this measure.

COMMENTS

Child Welfare Services (CWS). California's CWS system exists to protect children from abuse and neglect, and in doing so, to provide for their health, safety, and overall well-being. When suspicions of abuse or neglect arise, often as a result of a report by a mandated reporter like a doctor or teacher, Child Protective Services is tasked with investigating the report. If the allegation of abuse or neglect is substantiated, it is then determined whether it is in the best interest of the child to remain in their parent's custody or be placed within the CWS system. If a child is suspected to be at risk of neglect, abuse, or abandonment, the juvenile court holds legal jurisdiction, and the CWS system appoints a social worker to ensure that the needs of the youth are met. As of October 2022, there were 53,371 youth between the ages of zero and 21 placed in California's CWS system.

Extended Foster Care. California was one of the first states to opt in to the federal opportunity to create an extended foster care program which represented a historic expansion of services to foster youth and was intended to improve outcomes for youth, who often faced enormous challenges as they emancipated from the foster care system at age 18 often facing poverty, homelessness, and incarceration. In 2010, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010, which extended foster care benefits for certain eligible youth until the age of 21. Prior to the enactment of AB 12, known as the "Fostering Connections to Success Act", youth "aged out" of the CWS system at 18 years old and were required to navigate the challenges of young adulthood, including obtaining education, stable housing, and employment, without the support of the CWS system.

In recognition of these difficulties, AB 12 (Beall) provided eligible youth between the ages of 18 and 21, known as NMDs, with the services and supports they need to experience independent living in supervised living environments. Extended foster care also enables youth to obtain educational and employment training to better prepare them to transition to adulthood and self-sufficiency. NMDs must also sign an agreement to remain in foster care within six months of turning 18, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet the goals of their transitional living plan.

Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that young people leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. For example, state law requires county welfare departments, at the last scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child turns 18 years old, and at every review hearing thereafter, to submit a report verifying that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to the minor or non-minor, including: certain essential documents, such as a Social Security card, birth certificate, and a valid ID; information on financial literacy programs and state internships; and, services such as assistance with applying for public benefits, applying for college or vocational training, and securing housing.

Foster youth and homelessness. The 2022 national Point in Time count conducted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that California had the largest number of unaccompanied youth at a staggering 9,590 people, which accounts for more than a third of all unaccompanied youth nationally. California also accounted for 52% (6,752 people) of all unsheltered unaccompanied youth. Youth who age out of the foster care system are at high risk of becoming homeless.

A study conducted by the University of Chicago's Chapin Hall and released in 2020, addressed whether extending foster care past the age of 18 influenced outcomes during the transition to adulthood, what factors influence the types of support youth receive in extended foster care; and how living arrangements and other services that result from extending foster care influence the relationship between extending care and youth outcomes. The study reported that more than one in four reported experiencing at least one night of homelessness in the past two years, while nearly 30% said they had couch surfed, staying with friends because they lacked housing. From the research conducted when the youth were 21 years old, they concluded: "In particular, our findings raise questions about the wisdom of abruptly curtailing services for these young people when they reach their 21st birthday. Our findings suggest that when COVID-19 is behind us, it will still be the case that many young adults in care could potentially benefit from ongoing support past their 21st birthday."

This bill would provide an opportunity for a foster youth to remain in care until the required appropriate documents and services have been provided to ensure a successful transition into independence.

Equity Implications. Foster youth represent one of the most vulnerable and academically at-risk student groups, according to the California Department of Education and suffer poorer educational outcomes with higher rates of suspension and lower rates of graduation. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), in California, the populations reflected in foster care are predominantly youth of color as 21% are Black and 50% are Latino. Further highlighting the disproportionality comprising the foster youth population, the number of Black and Native American youth in foster care are four times larger than the number of the general population of Black and Native American youth in California. The LAO also states that racial disproportionalities and disparities are present within initial allegations and persist at all levels of the system – becoming the most pronounced for youth in care. Additionally, LGBTQ youth are also overrepresented in foster care, according to the UCLA Williams Institute, with 13.6 % of foster youth identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or questioning, and 5.6% identifying as transgender, compared to 10.3% of California's students in public middle and high schools identifying as LGBTQ.

After over a decade of the enactment of extended foster care in California, the youth who participate have demonstrated that they receive needed education, employment, and social support, however, advocates have reported that some youth are exiting foster care without the appropriate referrals to housing and public benefits that they are entitled. This bill would ensure that foster youth in California experiencing housing instability have access to these services and support while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition after emancipation, and achieve independence in adulthood.

According to the Author

"California's Extended Foster Care (EFC) program has demonstrated numerous benefits for the young adults who participate, including improvements in education, employment, and social support. However, the research has also shown that over 35% of youth reported that they experienced homelessness while actively enrolled in the EFC program.

"The promise and potential of the EFC program falls short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and supports that they are entitled to under the law. Both federal and state law include protections to ensure that enrollees leave foster care with a transition plan that provides the foster youth safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. When a county fails to meet their obligation under the law and provide assistance to secure housing, youth are exiting the system to homelessness.

"[This bill] ensures that foster youth experiencing housing instability have access to services and supports while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition to independence safely."

Arguments in Support

Co-sponsors, Children's Law Center of California, write in support, "A significant barrier to foster youth deriving a benefit from extended foster care involves inadequate discharge planning and mechanisms for accountability when county agencies fail to provide foster youth who are exiting care with essential documents, information and services that they need to survive independently. Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that young people leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive….However, there is no process in place to remedy the situation when the county child welfare agency does not provide youth with the documents, information, and services needed to transition successfully to independence. The law is unclear regarding whether a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the county child welfare agency has failed to provide exiting youth with critical support that enables youth to secure education, employment, and most importantly, housing. Appropriate enforcement mechanisms, including keeping a court case open past age 21, will ensure that the necessary discharge planning begins early, so that youth are less likely to exit the foster care system to homelessness."

Arguments in Opposition

No opposition on file

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee on September 1, 2023: unknown, ongoing costs (General Fund and federal funds), due to the following:

1. Increased, ongoing costs for extended foster care assistance payments.
2. One-time costs for automation, likely hundreds of thousands, including integration of new data into court documentation, creation of new forms, and addition of new fields.
3. One-time costs in 2023-24 and 2024-25 for the California Department of Social Services for state staffing resources.
4. Increased, ongoing county workload to provide expanded services to foster youth and provide documentation to the courts. To the extent the bill increases county costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by the 2011 Realignment, the bill would apply to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost increases.

VOTES

ASM HUMAN SERVICES: 8-0-0

YES: Jackson, Sanchez, Alanis, Arambula, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Garcia

ASM JUDICIARY: 11-0-0

YES: Maienschein, Essayli, Connolly, Dixon, Haney, Kalra, Pacheco, Papan, Reyes, Robert Rivas, Sanchez

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-1

YES: Holden, Megan Dahle, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Mathis, Papan, Pellerin, Sanchez, Weber, Ortega

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0-0

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

SENATE FLOOR: 39-0-1

YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Cortese, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Seyarto, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener, Wilk

ABS, ABST OR NV: Caballero

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0-0

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

UPDATED

VERSION: September 18, 2023

CONSULTANT: Jessica Langtry / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0002519

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 867

Author:(Friedman)

As Amended Ver:September 1, 2023

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Authorizes the court to allow foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency, including, being screened for eligibility for all public benefits for which the nonminor dependent (NMD) may be eligible, and for those who have not secured housing, verification that referrals to transitional housing, or assistance in securing other housing has been made.

Senate Amendments

Clarify that the court is permitted, rather than required, to retain jurisdiction over an NMD who has attained 21 years of age until the county welfare department has satisfied specified requirements.

COMMENTS

Child Welfare Services (CWS). California's CWS system exists to protect children from abuse and neglect, and in doing so, to provide for their health, safety, and overall well-being. When suspicions of abuse or neglect arise, often as a result of a report by a mandated reporter like a doctor or teacher, Child Protective Services is tasked with investigating the report. If the allegation of abuse or neglect is substantiated, it is then determined whether it is in the best interest of the child to remain in their parent's custody or be placed within the CWS system. If a child is suspected to be at risk of neglect, abuse, or abandonment, the juvenile court holds legal jurisdiction, and the CWS system appoints a social worker to ensure that the needs of the youth are met. As of October 2022, there were 53,371 youth between the ages of zero and 21 placed in California's CWS system.

Extended Foster Care. California was one of the first states to opt in to the federal opportunity to create an extended foster care program which represented a historic expansion of services to foster youth and was intended to improve outcomes for youth, who often faced enormous challenges as they emancipated from the foster care system at age 18 often facing poverty, homelessness, and incarceration. In 2010, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010, which extended foster care benefits for certain eligible youth until the age of 21. Prior to the enactment of AB 12, known as the "Fostering Connections to Success Act", youth "aged out" of the CWS system at 18 years old and were required to navigate the challenges of young adulthood, including obtaining education, stable housing, and employment, without the support of the CWS system.

In recognition of these difficulties, AB 12 o 2010 provided eligible youth between the ages of 18 and 21, known as NMDs, with the services and supports they need to experience independent living in supervised living environments. Extended foster care also enables youth to obtain educational and employment training to better prepare them to transition to adulthood and self-sufficiency. NMDs must also sign an agreement to remain in foster care within six months of turning 18, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet the goals of their transitional living plan.

Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that young people leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. For example, state law requires county welfare departments, at the last scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child turns 18 years old, and at every review hearing thereafter, to submit a report verifying that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to the minor or non-minor, including: certain essential documents, such as a Social Security card, birth certificate, and a valid ID; information on financial literacy programs and state internships; and, services such as assistance with applying for public benefits, applying for college or vocational training, and securing housing.

Foster youth and homelessness. The 2022 national Point in Time count conducted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that California had the largest number of unaccompanied youth at a staggering 9,590 people, which accounts for more than a third of all unaccompanied youth nationally. California also accounted for 52% (6,752 people) of all unsheltered unaccompanied youth. Youth who age out of the foster care system are at high risk of becoming homeless.

A study conducted by the University of Chicago's Chapin Hall and released in 2020, addressed whether extending foster care past the age of 18 influenced outcomes during the transition to adulthood, what factors influence the types of support youth receive in extended foster care; and how living arrangements and other services that result from extending foster care influence the relationship between extending care and youth outcomes. The study reported that more than one in four reported experiencing at least one night of homelessness in the past two years, while nearly 30% said they had couch surfed, staying with friends because they lacked housing. From the research conducted when the youth were 21 years old, they concluded: "In particular, our findings raise questions about the wisdom of abruptly curtailing services for these young people when they reach their 21st birthday. Our findings suggest that when COVID-19 is behind us, it will still be the case that many young adults in care could potentially benefit from ongoing support past their 21st birthday."

This bill would provide an opportunity for a foster youth to remain in care until the required appropriate documents and services have been provided to ensure a successful transition into independence.

Equity Implications. Foster youth represent one of the most vulnerable and academically at-risk student groups, according to the California Department of Education and suffer poorer educational outcomes with higher rates of suspension and lower rates of graduation. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), in California, the populations reflected in foster care are predominantly youth of color as 21% are Black and 50% are Latino. Further highlighting the disproportionality comprising the foster youth population, the number of Black and Native American youth in foster care are four times larger than the number of the general population of Black and Native American youth in California. The LAO also states that racial disproportionalities and disparities are present within initial allegations and persist at all levels of the system – becoming the most pronounced for youth in care. Additionally, LGBTQ youth are also overrepresented in foster care, according to the UCLA Williams Institute, with 13.6 % of foster youth identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or questioning, and 5.6% identifying as transgender, compared to 10.3% of California's students in public middle and high schools identifying as LGBTQ.

After over a decade of the enactment of extended foster care in California, the youth who participate have demonstrated that they receive needed education, employment, and social support, however, advocates have reported that some youth are exiting foster care without the appropriate referrals to housing and public benefits that they are entitled. This bill would ensure that foster youth in California experiencing housing instability have access to these services and support while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition after emancipation, and achieve independence in adulthood.

According to the Author

"California's Extended Foster Care (EFC) program has demonstrated numerous benefits for the young adults who participate, including improvements in education, employment, and social support. However, the research has also shown that over 35% of youth reported that they experienced homelessness while actively enrolled in the EFC program.

"The promise and potential of the EFC program falls short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and supports that they are entitled to under the law. Both federal and state law include protections to ensure that enrollees leave foster care with a transition plan that provides the foster youth safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. When a county fails to meet their obligation under the law and provide assistance to secure housing, youth are exiting the system to homelessness.

"[This bill] ensures that foster youth experiencing housing instability have access to services and supports while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition to independence safely."

Arguments in Support

Co-sponsors, Children's Law Center of California, write in support, "A significant barrier to foster youth deriving a benefit from extended foster care involves inadequate discharge planning and mechanisms for accountability when county agencies fail to provide foster youth who are exiting care with essential documents, information and services that they need to survive independently. Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that young people leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive….However, there is no process in place to remedy the situation when the county child welfare agency does not provide youth with the documents, information, and services needed to transition successfully to independence. The law is unclear regarding whether a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the county child welfare agency has failed to provide exiting youth with critical support that enables youth to secure education, employment, and most importantly, housing. Appropriate enforcement mechanisms, including keeping a court case open past age 21, will ensure that the necessary discharge planning begins early, so that youth are less likely to exit the foster care system to homelessness."

Arguments in Opposition

No opposition on file

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee on September 1, 2023: unknown, ongoing costs (General Fund and federal funds), due to the following:

1. Increased, ongoing costs for extended foster care assistance payments.
2. One-time costs for automation, likely hundreds of thousands, including integration of new data into court documentation, creation of new forms, and addition of new fields.
3. One-time costs in 2023-24 and 2024-25 for the California Department of Social Services for state staffing resources.
4. Increased, ongoing county workload to provide expanded services to foster youth and provide documentation to the courts. To the extent the bill increases county costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by the 2011 Realignment, the bill would apply to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost increases.

VOTES:

ASM HUMAN SERVICES: 8-0-0

YES: Jackson, Sanchez, Alanis, Arambula, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Garcia

ASM JUDICIARY: 11-0-0

YES: Maienschein, Essayli, Connolly, Dixon, Haney, Kalra, Pacheco, Papan, Reyes, Robert Rivas, Sanchez

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-1

YES: Holden, Megan Dahle, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Mathis, Papan, Pellerin, Sanchez, Weber, Ortega

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0-0

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

SENATE FLOOR: 39-0-1

YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Cortese, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Seyarto, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener, Wilk

ABS, ABST OR NV: Caballero

UPDATED

VERSION: September 1, 2023

CONSULTANT: Jessica Langtry / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0002027

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 867

Author: Friedman (D)

Amended: 9/1/23 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/19/23

AYES: Alvarado-Gil, Ochoa Bogh, Hurtado, Menjivar, Wahab

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 11-0, 6/27/23

AYES: Umberg, Wilk, Allen, Ashby, Caballero, Durazo, Laird, Min, Niello, Stern, Wiener

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 9/1/23

AYES: Portantino, Jones, Ashby, Bradford, Seyarto, Wahab, Wiener

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 5/30/23 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Foster youth

SOURCE: Youth Law Center

DIGEST:

This bill authorizes a nonminor dependent (NMD) to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21, unless they object, for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency.

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 or have been abused or neglected, as specified. (WIC 202)
2. Permits a nonminor former foster youth under the age of 21 to petition the court for reentry into foster care if the guardian or adoptive parent is no longer providing support, as specified. (WIC 388.1)
3. Defines “nonminor dependent (NMD)” 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, county probation department, or Indian tribe, and participating in a transitional independent living plan, as specified. (WIC 11400(v))
4. Prohibits the court from terminating dependency jurisdiction over an NMD who has reached 18 years of age until a hearing is conducted and the county welfare department has submitted a report verifying that specified information, documents, and services have been provided, including the health and education summary. (WIC 391 (h)(1)(3))
5. Requires, when appropriate, for a child who is 16 years of age or older for a youth dependent, the case plan to include the transitional independent living plan (TILP), a written description of the programs and services that will help the child, consistent with the child’s best interests, to prepare for the transition from foster care to successful adulthood, and, in addition, whether the youth has an in-progress application pending for SSI benefits or for special immigrant juvenile status or other applicable application for legal residency. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))
6. Requires, when appropriate for an NMD, the TILP, as described, a written description of the programs and services that will help the youth dependent, consistent with their best interests, to prepare for transition from foster care and assist the youth in meeting the eligibility criteria. Requires, if applicable, the case plan to describe the individualized supervision provided in the supervised independent living placement (SILP). Requires the case plan to be developed with the NMD and individuals identified as important to the youth and to include steps the agency is taking to ensure that the youth dependent achieves permanence, including maintaining or obtaining permanent connections to caring and committed adults. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))

This bill:

1. Authorizes the court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent child of the juvenile court after reaching 21 years of age, unless the NMD objects, for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications related to applying for all public benefits for which they may be eligible while in foster care and, if the NMD has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying specified information related to referrals to transitional housing.
2. Authorizes the court, once the above verifications have been made, to terminate its dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction over a NMD.
3. Provides that this continued jurisdiction does not continue any terms or conditions of probation.
4. Requires, if the court terminates dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction, the NMD to remain under the general jurisdiction of the court until the NMD reaches 21 years of age in order to allow for a petition to resume dependency.
5. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has reached 16 years of age.
6. Adds the health and education summary to the list of information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age.
7. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, including the following:
   1. That the youth has been screened for eligibility for all public benefits and applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible;
   2. That the TILP is included in the case plan;
   3. That the county has complied with the Foster Care Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status and the status of those applications, if applicable; and,
   4. That the case plan includes documentation showing a consumer credit report was requested annually, that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report; and, that the case plan identifies the person or persons who will be responsible for assisting the child or NMD. F

Comments

According to the author, “California’s Extended Foster Care (EFC) program has demonstrated numerous benefits for the young adults who participate, including improvements in education, employment, and social support. However, the research has also shown that over 35 percent of youth reported that they experienced homelessness while actively enrolled in the EFC program.”

The author goes on to state, “The promise and potential of the EFC program falls short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and supports that they are entitled to under the law. Both federal and state law include protections to ensure that enrollees leave foster care with a transition plan that provides the foster youth safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. When a county fails to meet their obligation under the law and provide assistance to secure housing, youth are exiting the system to homelessness. AB 867 ensures that foster youth experiencing housing instability have access to services and supports while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition to independence safely.”

Child Welfare Services (CWS) The CWS system is an essential component of the state’s safety net. Social workers in each county receive reports of abuse or neglect, and work to investigate and resolve those reports. When a case is substantiated, a family is either provided with services to ensure a child’s wellbeing and avoid court involvement, or a child is removed from the family and placed into foster care. In 2022, the state’s child welfare agencies received 440,212 reports of abuse or neglect. Of these, 51,806 reports contained allegations that were substantiated and 19,953 children were removed from their homes and placed into foster care via the CWS system.

Extended Foster Care The intent of EFC is to bridge the gap between the intensive supervision of foster care and unsupervised adulthood by maintaining a safety net of support while providing youth independence and additional educational or work opportunities. It was prompted by the recognition that many youth were unable to successfully transition from foster care or group care to adulthood without additional guidance and assistance.

The federal Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (P.L. 110- 351) enabled states to expand the definition of a foster “child,” by creating extended care for youth up to age 21. The federal law allows foster youth to remain in care past age 18 if they meet one of the following participation criteria: enrolled in high school or a high school equivalency credential; enrolled in college, community college, or vocational education; employed for at least 80 hours a month; participating in other qualifying activities or programs designed to remove barriers to employment; or medically exempt from meeting any of the other participation criteria.

In 2010, California enacted AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010), which permits foster youth to remain in EFC until age 21, under the same criteria as the federal statute. At the six-month hearing prior to a youth turning 18 years old, the youth’s social worker or probation officer must submit a transitional living plan to ensure that the youth will meet at least one participation criteria, listed above, if the youth plans to participate in EFC. The youth must also sign an agreement to remain in foster care within six months of turning 18, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet the goals of their TILP. Additionally, existing law permits qualifying nonminors who are former foster youth under the age of 21 to petition the court for re-entry into foster care to participate in EFC, as provided.

This bill would authorize the dependency court to retain jurisdiction over the youth beyond age 21 pending receipt of a report verifying the county has provided specified information, documents and services to the youth. The bill would also give the youth the option to reject remaining under the jurisdiction of the court past age 21.

Foster Care and Extended Foster Care Services While receiving foster care and EFC, the minor and NMD are eligible for certain services and supports while living in a CWD approved placement. These supports can include supplemental support for pregnant individuals, and if provided by the county, a clothing allowance. Under current state law, the additional payments are tied to the minor or NMD residing in an approved placement setting and are paid through the provider’s rate.

Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that youth leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge, one that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. These protections are in part enforced through the juvenile dependency court’s status review hearings, which must be held at least every 6 months. At these review hearings, a social worker submits a report to the court verifying that the CWD has provided the NMD with access to specified services, documents, and information, as provided. Before a case can be terminated for a NMD, the court holds a hearing to ensure all of these requirements have been met. At this hearing, state law requires a CWD, and at the last scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child turns 18 years old, the CWD’s court report must verify that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to the minor or non-minor, including: certain essential documents, such as a Social Security card, birth certificate, and a valid ID; information on financial literacy programs and state internships; and services such as assistance with applying for public benefits, applying for college or vocational training, and securing housing.

Counties are not supposed to just be verifying that this support has been provided when a youth turns 18 and at their final review hearing. Rather, counties are supposed to document the provision of certain documents, information, and services at each 6 month review hearing. This means they have approximately six opportunities to document to the court their ongoing efforts to support a youth in meeting their TILP, setting them up for a successful transition to adulthood.

However, according to the author, the law is unclear regarding whether a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the CWD agency has not met the requirements of the EFC program to support youth in successfully transitioning to independence with documents and services, which enable them to secure education, employment, and, most importantly, housing.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2189 (Friedman, 2022) was substantially similar to this bill and would have authorized foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county prior to termination of dependency, including, AB 2189 would have also required a county, if a county opts to provide a clothing allowance, to provide the clothing allowance to minors and NMDs, including those who may be pregnant, who would have been eligible to have foster care payments paid on their behalf but for the minor or NMD not residing in an approved placement. AB 2189 was vetoed by Governor Newsom.

AB 592 (Friedman, Chapter 702, Statutes of 2021) expanded the scope of a host family within the foster care system to include supervised transitional housing services provided by a THP provider; permitted a host family to include certain approved placements and declared that those placements, when operating as a host family, do not require additional certification; and expanded the definition of a Supervised Independent Living Setting (SILS) to include a transitional housing unit in which a host family lives with an NMD. Further allowed a THP provider to offer supportive services to an NMD placed in a certified family home or resource family of a foster family agency, and allowed a county to elect to allow a THP provider to provide services to a youth in SILS.

SB 912 (Beall, 2021) would have made an NMD who turned 21 years of age between March 4, 2020, and June 30, 2021, inclusive, eligible to continue receiving extended foster care support through June 30, 2021. Further, SB 912 would have, for a state of emergency declared by the Governor on or after January 1, 2021, required that extended foster care support continue for six months from the date of the declaration for an NMD who turns 21 years of age while the state of emergency is in effect. SB 912 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), due to the following:

• Increased, ongoing costs for extended foster care assistance payments.
• One-time costs for automation, likely hundreds of thousands, including integration of new data into court documentation, creation of new forms, and addition of new fields.
• One-time costs in 2023-24 and 2024-25 for the California Department of Social Services for state staffing resources.
• Increased, ongoing county workload to provide expanded services to foster youth and provide documentation to the courts. To the extent the bill increases county costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by the 2011 Realignment, the bill would apply to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost increases.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/2/23)

Youth Law Center (source)

Alliance for Children's Rights
California Alliance of Caregivers
California Court Appointed Special Advocate Association
California Lawyers Association - Family Law Section
Children Now
Children's Law Center of California
Children's Legal Services of San Diego
Dependency Legal Services
John Burton Advocates for Youth
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
Public Counsel
Starting Over, Inc.

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/2/23)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 5/30/23

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

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

9/2/23 16:44:07

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 867 (Friedman) - Foster youth

Bill Summary:

AB 867 would authorize a nonminor dependent to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency.

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

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on September 1, 2023

Fiscal Impact:

Unknown, ongoing costs (General Fund and federal funds), due to the following:

• Increased, ongoing costs for extended foster care assistance payments.
• One-time costs for automation, likely hundreds of thousands, including integration of new data into court documentation, creation of new forms, and addition of new fields.
• One-time costs in 2023-24 and 2024-25 for the California Department of Social Services for state staffing resources.
• Increased, ongoing county workload to provide expanded services to foster youth and provide documentation to the courts. To the extent the bill increases county costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by the 2011 Realignment, the bill would apply to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost increases.

Author Amendments:

Author amendments permit, rather than require, the court to retain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent, as specified.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 867 (Friedman) - Foster youth

Bill Summary:

AB 867 would authorize a nonminor dependent to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency.

Fiscal Impact:

The California Department of Social Services anticipates unknown, ongoing significant costs, likely tens of millions (General Fund and federal funds), due to the following:

• Increased, ongoing costs for extended foster care assistance payments.
• One-time costs for automation, likely hundreds of thousands, including integration of new data into court documentation, creation of new forms, and addition of new fields.
• One-time costs of $173,000 in 2023-24 and $169,000 in 2024-25 for state staffing resources.
• Increased, ongoing county workload to provide expanded services to foster youth and provide documentation to the courts. To the extent the bill increases county costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by the 2011 Realignment, the bill would apply to local agencies only to the extent that the state provides annual funding for the cost increases.

Background:

Extended Foster Care (EFC) serves to bridge the gap between the intensive supervision of foster care and unsupervised adulthood by maintaining a safety net of support while providing youth independence and additional educational or work opportunities. Existing law permits foster youth to remain in EFC until age 21. At the six-month hearing prior to a youth turning 18 years old, the youth’s social worker or probation officer must submit a transitional living plan to ensure that the youth will meet at least one participation criteria, if the youth plans to participate in EFC. The youth must also sign an agreement to remain in foster care within six months of turning 18, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet the goals of their transitional independent living plan. Additionally, existing law permits qualifying nonminors who are former foster youth under the age of 21 to petition the court for re-entry into foster care to participate in EFC, as provided.

While receiving foster care and EFC, the minor and nonminor dependent are eligible for certain services and supports while living in a county welfare department approved placement. These supports can include supplemental support for pregnant individuals, and if provided by the county, a clothing allowance.

State law requires, at the last scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child turns 18 years old, the county welfare department’s court report to verify that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to the minor or non-minor, including:

• Certain essential documents, such as a Social Security card, birth certificate, and a valid ID;
• Information on financial literacy programs and state internships; and,
• Services such as assistance with applying for public benefits, applying for college or vocational training, and securing housing.

Proposed Law:

Specific provisions of the bill would:

• Allow the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent of the court after reaching 21 years of age, unless the nonminor objects, for limited purposes, as follows:
  • The court may not terminate jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent unless the child welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that specified information, documents, and services, as specified, have been provided to the nonminor.
  • The court may not terminate jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that the welfare department made referrals to transitional housing or provided assistance in securing other housing.
  • The nonminor dependent must continue to receive the support and services they were entitled to receive immediately prior to reaching 21 years of age, and benefits equal to the amount of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) benefits provided until jurisdiction has been terminated.
• Require additional information, documents, and services that must be included in the reports submitted to the court by the county welfare department, as specified.

Related Legislation:

AB 2189 (Friedman, 2022) was similar to this bill. The bill was vetoed by the Governor.

-- END --

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Thomas Umberg, Chair

2023-2024 Regular Session

Bill No: AB 867 (Author:Friedman)

Version: February 14, 2023

Hearing Date: June 27, 2023

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: AWM

SUBJECT

Foster youth

DIGEST

This bill authorizes foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications of the information, documents, and services that are required to be provided by the county welfare department to the foster youth prior to emancipation.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Many children who become dependents of the juvenile dependency system remain so when they are, at least chronologically, no longer children; the juvenile court retains jurisdiction over certain dependents until they attain the age of 21 years. California extended its foster care program to youths between 18 and 21 years of age in 2010—known as “nonminor dependents”—in recognition of the extreme hardship many former foster youths faced after being emancipated from the foster system at 18 years old; data showed that former foster youths were less likely to graduate from high school or college and more likely to be homeless. Since 2010, the Legislature has passed additional measures to refine the foster care system for nonminor dependents and provide additional protections to help them ease into independence.

This bill continues the Legislature’s efforts to ensure that FCSA is properly implemented to provide necessary and integral support services to foster youth as they prepare and transition into adulthood in several ways. First, it allows juvenile courts to maintain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent beyond the age of 21 years if the prerequisites to the termination of the court’s jurisdiction over the nonminor dependent have not been satisfied. Second, the bill requires verification that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to foster youth as they near aging out of foster care and then as they age out of foster care, including that the youth has applied for all public benefits to which they are entitled or specifically declined to do so. Third, the bill requires a court, if the youth agrees, to maintain jurisdiction over them even after 21 years of age if they have not been provided with the required services, information, and documents prior to turning 21, including assistance in securing housing. In all cases, a court’s extended jurisdiction is dependent upon agreement of the nonminor dependent.

This bill is sponsored by the Children’s Law Center of California, Public Counsel, and the Youth Law Center, and is supported by California Alliance of Caregivers, the National Association of Social Workers – California Chapter, and Starting Over, Inc. There is no known opposition. The Senate Human Services Committee passed this bill with a vote of 5-0.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW

Existing law:

1. Establishes that the juvenile court has jurisdiction over:
   1. A child who is subject to abuse or neglect. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300.)
   2. A child, when that child has committed acts that trigger delinquency jurisdiction rendering the child a ward. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 601, 602.)
   3. Any nonminor dependent, between the age of majority and 21 years, under specified conditions. A nonminor dependent under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court retains their legal decision-making authority as an adult, except as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 303, 388(e).)
2. Defines “nonminor dependent” for purposes of 1)(c) as a current foster youth or a nonminor under the transition jurisdiction of the court who is between 18 and 21 years old, turned 18 years old while under an order of foster care placement, is in foster care under the responsibility of the county welfare department, county probation department, or Indian Tribe, and is participating in a transitional independent living plan, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 11400(v).)
3. Requires the court, before exercising continuing jurisdiction over a nonminor, to find that the nonminor has been informed of their options, including the benefits of remaining in foster care and the right to petition to reenter foster care by resuming dependency jurisdiction. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 391(e).)
4. Requires the court to review the status of every minor or nonminor dependent in foster care at least once every six months, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.)
5. Requires the court, in regular status reviews after the youth has attained 16 years of age, to review the status of providing the youth certain information, documents, and services, including the social security card, birth certificate, driver’s license or identification card; assistance obtaining employment; assistance applying to college and financial aid; and information regarding financial literacy programs. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.3, 391(a).)
6. Requires the court, in the last regular status review before the youth has attained 18 years of age, to review the status of providing the youth certain information, documents, and services, including the social security card, birth certificate, driver’s license or identification card, Medi-Cal benefits card, proof of the youth’s citizenship or legal residence, and an advance health care directive. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.3, 391(b).)
7. Requires the court, in the last regular status review before the youth has attained 18 years of age and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, to review the status of providing certain information, documents, and services to the youth, including assistance obtaining employment, assistance applying for college and financial aid, information regarding financial literacy programs, assistance in maintaining close relationships, and the whereabouts of siblings, as provided. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.3, 391(c).)
8. Prohibits a dependency court from terminating jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent until a hearing is conducted and the county welfare department does all of the following:
   1. Ensures that the youth is present in court, unless the youth does not wish to appear in court, as provided.
   2. Submits a report describing whether it is in the nonminor’s best interests to remain under the court’s dependency jurisdiction, which includes a recommended transitional independent living case plan for the nonminor, as provided.
   3. If the county welfare department recommends termination of the court’s dependency jurisdiction, submits documentation of the reasonable efforts made by the department to provide the nonminor with the assistance needed to meet or maintain eligibility as a nonminor dependent.
   4. If the nonminor has indicated that they do not want dependency jurisdiction to continue, provides that the report addresses the manner in which the nonminor was advised of their options, including the benefits of remaining in foster care, and of their right to reenter foster care prior to attaining 21 years of age. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 391(d).)
9. States that the foundation and central unifying tool in child welfare services is the case plan, and requires the case plan, when appropriate, for a child who is 16 years of age or older and for a nonminor dependent, to include a transitional independent living plan (TILP), a written description of, among other things, the programs and services that will help the child, consistent with the child’s best interests, prepare for the transition from foster care to successful adulthood, and, in addition, whether the youth has an in-progress application pending for SSI benefits or for special immigrant juvenile status or other applicable applications for legal residency and whether an active dependency case is required for that application. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 16501.1(g)(16).)
10. Requires the California Department of Social Services (DSS) to establish procedures for county welfare departments to, among other things:
    1. Determine the time and manner for conducting disability screenings for children in the custody of the county who may be eligible for social security or Supplemental Security Income/State Supplementary Payment benefits (collectively, SSI benefits).
    2. Assist in the application process for SSI benefits for each child who has been determined to be eligible.
    3. Request reconsideration and appeal adverse decisions where appropriate.
    4. Inform parents and caretakers, when the child leaves foster care, of potential eligibility for SSI benefits for any child not receiving benefits but who may be eligible.
    5. Maximize the amount of federal benefits received for the current maintenance of children in the county’s custody.
    6. Inform foster youth of their rights and responsibilities for the continued receipt of SSI benefits, the assistance that may be available if the youth have problems with receiving their benefits, and the process for transferring accumulated benefits. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 13752.)
11. Requires a county, when a foster youth who is receiving SSI payments is approaching their 18th birthday, to do all of the following:
    1. Provide information to the youth regarding the federal requirement that the youth establish continuing disability as an adult, if necessary, in order for SSI benefits to continue beyond their 18th birthday.
    2. Provide information to the youth regarding the process for becoming their own payee, or designating an appropriate representative payee if benefits continue beyond their 18th birthday, and regarding any SSI benefits that have accumulated on their behalf.
    3. Assist the youth, as appropriate, in fulfilling the requirements of a) and b). (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 13753.)

This bill:

1. Allows the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent of the court after reaching 21 years of age for limited purposes, as follows:
   1. Unless the nonminor objects to continued jurisdiction, the court may not terminate jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent unless the child welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that specified information, documents, and services, both under existing law, as well as additional items required by this bill, including under 7), have been provided to the nonminor or if the nonminor cannot be located, verifying that efforts have been made to locate the nonminor.
   2. Unless the nonminor objects to continued jurisdiction, the court may not terminate jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that the welfare department made referrals to transitional housing or provided assistance in securing other housing.
   3. Notwithstanding the age restrictions in any law providing for support, services, and benefits, the nonminor dependent must continue to receive the support and services they were entitled to receive immediately prior to reaching 21 years of age, and benefits equal to the amount of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) benefits provided until jurisdiction has been terminated.
2. Clarifies that continuing jurisdiction for a nonminor dependent after 21 years of age under 1) cannot be construed to continue any terms or conditions of probation.
3. Clarifies that, when a dependency court terminates dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent, the nonminor dependent remains under the general jurisdiction of the court until they attain 21 years of age in order to allow for a petition to resume jurisdiction.
4. Adds the following verification requirements to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has reached 16 years of age:
   1. That the TILP is included in the case plan, as specified, how the child welfare department has complied with requirements of the Foster Care Social Security and SSI Assistance Program, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status or residency and the status of those applications, if applicable.
   2. That documentation in the case plan includes that a consumer credit report was requested annually, and that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report.
   3. That the case plan identifies persons who will be responsible for assisting the child with applications for postsecondary education and related financial aid, as specified.
   4. That the case plan includes the health and education summary, as described.
5. Adds the health and education summary to the list of information, documents, and services that must be included in the report submitted to the court by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age.
6. Adds, to the list of information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, verifications that the following was provided or occurred:
   1. Assistance in maintaining relationships with individuals important to the nonminor, based on the nonminor’s wishes, as opposed to their best interest.
   2. Screening for eligibility for all public benefits and applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible; if a discharge from foster care is contemplated at the hearing or prior to the next review hearing, there must be verification that the child or the child’s caregiver has applied for all public benefits for which the child may be eligible. If the child or caregiver does not submit any or all of those applications, requires the county to submit written verification, signed by the child or caregiver, that the county welfare department offered assistance in submitting applications and that the child or caregiver made a knowing and informed decision not to submit the applications.
   3. The TILP has been included in the case plan, as specified, that the county has complied with the Foster Care Social Security and SSI Assistance Program, as specified, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status or residency and the status of those applications, if applicable.
   4. The case plan includes documentation showing a consumer credit report was requested annually and that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report.
   5. The case plan identifies the person or persons who will be responsible for assisting the youth with applications for postsecondary education and related financial aid, as specified, and whether the youth has been provided that assistance.
7. Eliminates from the list of information, documents, and services that are required to be provided to the nonminor dependent prior to the court terminating dependency jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has reached 18 years of age, or in the case of a youth who, after reasonable efforts by the county welfare department, cannot be located, a health and education summary, as specified.
8. Adds, to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department prior to the court terminating dependency jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has reached 18 years of age, or in the case of a youth who, after reasonable efforts by the county welfare department, cannot be located, a requirement that the county welfare department verify the efforts made to ensure that the youth has applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible. If the youth does not submit any or all of those applications, the county must submit written verification, signed by the youth, that the county welfare department offered assistance in submitting applications and that the youth made a knowing and informed decision not to submit the applications.
9. Applies the requirements in 8) to the probation department at the hearing for a ward who is 18 years of age or older and subject to an order for foster care placement.
10. Makes nonsubstantive technical and conforming changes.

COMMENTS

1. Author’s comment

According to the author:

California’s Extended Foster Care (EFC) program has demonstrated numerous benefits for the young adults who participate, including improvements in education, employment, and social support. However, the research has also shown that over 35 percent of youth reported that they experienced homelessness while actively enrolled in the EFP program.

The promise and potential of the EFC program falls short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and supports that they are entitled to under the law. Both federal and state law include protections to ensure that enrollees leave foster care with a transition plan that provides the foster youth safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. When a county fails to meet their obligation under the law and provide assistance to secure housing, youth are exiting the system to homelessness.

AB 867 ensures that foster youth experiencing housing instability have access to services and supports while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition to independence safely.

2. Background on California’s expansion of dependency jurisdiction to nonminor dependents between 18 and 21 years of age

In October 2008, the federal government enacted the Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act,^[1] which, among other things, offered additional funding to states that opted to extend foster care to youths from 18 to 21 years of age. Two years later, the Legislature enacted the California Fostering Connections to Success Act (the Act)^[2] that authorized the juvenile courts to exercise jurisdiction over, and extend foster care benefits to, nonminor dependents between the ages of 18 to 21 who are eligible for specified public assistance and when one or more of the following conditions exist:

• The nonminor is working toward their high school education or an equivalent credential;
• The nonminor is enrolled in a postsecondary institution or vocational education program;
• The nonminor is participating in a program or activity designed to promote or remove barriers to employment;
• The nonminor is employed for at least 80 hours per month; and/or,
• The nonminor is incapable of doing any of the activities described above, due to a medical condition, and that incapability is supported by regularly updated information in the case plan of the nonminor.^[3]

In the years after the Act’s passage, the Legislature passed several additional measures to refine, and close gaps in, the laws governing foster care for youths between 18 and 21 years of age.^[4]

For the last several years, California’s population of children and youths in foster care has been between 50,000 and 60,000.^[5] Prior to the Act, the statistics surrounding 18-year-olds’ emancipation from foster care were bleak: foster youth, when compared to other young adults of the same age and race, were less likely to complete high school, attend college, or be employed, and were at a higher risk of becoming homeless, arrested, or incarcerated.^[6] The Act and related subsequent legislation were intended to provide foster youth with the option of a smoother transition to independent adulthood. Since the Act’s passage, the number of foster youth between 18 and 21 years of age has increased considerably, from under 2,500 in 2010 to 7,121 in January 2023.^[7]

Despite these reforms, former foster youth still face significant barriers, particularly with respect to securing housing after they transfer out of the state’s care. A survey conducted by the University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall reported that more than 25 percent of former foster youth in California reported experiencing at least one night of homelessness in the past two years, while nearly 30 percent said they had couch surfed by staying with friends because they lacked housing.^[8] The study questioned “the wisdom of abruptly curtailing services for these young people when they reach their 21st birthday”^[9] and stated “when COVID-19 is behind us, it will still be the case that many young adults in care could potentially benefit from ongoing care past their 21st birthday.”^[10]

3. This bill seeks to provide better support for nonminor dependents emancipating out of foster care

This bill seeks to better support youth—dependents and wards—aging out of foster care, in two important ways. First, it requires verification that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to foster youth as they near aging out of foster care and then as they age out of foster care. This includes verification that the youth has been screened for eligibility for all public benefits and applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible; that the TILP is included in the case plan, as specified; that the county has complied with the Foster Care Social Security and Supplemental Security Income Assistance Program, as specified; and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status or residency and the status of those applications, if applicable.

Second, the bill requires a court, if the youth agrees, to maintain jurisdiction over a youth even after they turn 21 if they have not been provided with required services, information, and documents before their 21st birthday. In particular, in order to prevent homelessness immediately after the termination of juvenile court jurisdiction, the bill provides for continued jurisdiction of a youth who has not secured housing until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that efforts were made to assist the youth in securing housing, which could include referrals to transitional housing, if available, or assistance in securing other housing.

These provisions, taken together, are all designed to help youth who have emancipated out of foster care – and thus who may have little or no adult support in their lives – receive additional support and, if needed, more time in transitioning to adulthood and full independence. According to the Youth Law Center, the sponsor of the bill:

[T]here is no process in place to remedy the situation when the child county welfare agency does not provide youth with the documents, information, and services needed to transition successfully to independence. The law is unclear regarding whether a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the county child welfare agency has failed to provide exiting youth with critical support that enables youth to secure education, employment, and most importantly, housing. Appropriate enforcement mechanisms, including keeping a court case open past age 21, will ensure that the necessary planning begins early, so that youth are less likely to exit the foster care system to homelessness.

AB 867 will ensure accountability with current law and successful discharge planning by (1) requiring the county welfare department to verify efforts to ensure youth have access to relevant programs, services, or documents before exiting the system, and (2) clarifying that the court may keep a case open past age 21 if the requirements to terminate jurisdiction have not been satisfactorily met.

4. This bill is similar to, but narrower than, a bill vetoed last year

Last year, the Legislature enacted AB 2189 (Friedman, 2022), which was substantially similar to this bill. Both bills authorized foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 years for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county prior to termination of dependency. AB 2189 was broader, however, in that it required counties to provide certain benefits, such as clothing allowances and benefits for pregnant foster youth regardless of their placement.

Governor Newsom vetoed AB 2189, stating in his veto message:

This bill would establish parameters by which a foster youth could remain in the foster care system beyond the age of 21.

It is important that foster youth receive the services to which they are entitled to help them successfully transition to independence. I applaud the author's intent in seeking to ensure those services are appropriately provided prior to the foster youth aging out of the program. However, extending foster care beyond the age of 21 raises policy and implementation considerations. Additionally, millions of dollars will be needed to successfully implement this policy, but were not included in the budget.

With our state facing lower-than-expected revenues over the first few months of this fiscal year, it is important to remain disciplined when it comes to spending, particularly spending that is ongoing. We must prioritize existing obligations and priorities, including education, health care, public safety and safety-net programs.

The Legislature sent measures with potential costs of well over $20 billion in one-time spending commitments and more than $10 billion in ongoing commitments not accounted for in the state budget. Bills with significant fiscal impact, such as this measure, should be considered and accounted for as part of the annual budget process. For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

SUPPORT

Children’s Law Center of California (co-sponsor)

Public Counsel (co-sponsor)

Youth Law Center (co-sponsor)
California Alliance of Caregivers

National Association of Social Workers – California Chapter
Starting Over, Inc.

OPPOSITION

None known

RELATED LEGISLATION

Pending Legislation: SB 9 (Cortese, 2023) creates a three-year pilot program for DSS to extend foster care to 22 years of age for nonminor dependents who are experiencing homelessness or at reasonable risk of homelessness if they are not under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. SB 9 is pending before the Assembly Judiciary Committee.

Prior Legislation:

SB 1300 (Durazo, 2022) would have extended county Supplemental Security Income (SSI) screening and application duties for foster youth to include nonminor dependents. SB 1300 died in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

AB 2189 (Friedman, 2022) was similar to this bill. AB 2189 was vetoed by Governor Newsom; see Comment 4 for a further discussion of the veto and the differences between AB 2189 and this bill.

AB 2306 (Cooley, 2022) would have expanded and modernized the Independent Living Program (ILP) to include current and former foster youth up to 22 years of age, and, subject to an appropriation and federal approval, up to age 23, and expanded the services for which counties could provide stipends to assist youth with specified independent living needs to include former foster youth up to 25 years of age, as specified. AB 2306 was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom, who stated in his veto message that “[w]hile an expanded ILP would benefit more transition-aged youth, millions of dollars would be needed to implement the proposed expansion, and funds were not provided in the budget for this purpose.”

SB 912 (Beall, 2021), would have made an nonminor dependent who turned 21 years of age between March 4, 2020, and June 30, 2021, eligible to continue receiving extended foster care support through June 30, 2021; and, for a state of emergency declared by the Governor on or after January 1, 2021, required that extended foster care support continue for six months from the date of the declaration for a nonminor dependent who turned 21 years of age while the state of emergency is in effect. SB 912 was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom, who stated in his veto message that, because disasters and pandemics vary and are difficult to predict, the bill would obligate the State to a specific approach that may not always be the most prudent or effective.

SB 100 (Hurtado, 2021) would have required the DSS to convene a working group of representatives from specified state agencies and stakeholders to examine the extended foster care program and make recommendations for improvements to the program, and to submit a report to the Legislature with recommendations on or before July 1, 2022. SB 100 died in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

AB 748 (Gipson, Ch. 682, Stats. 2019) provided that a youth who was subject to an order for foster care before they reached 18 years of age, but was not yet adjudged a dependent of the juvenile court before reaching their 18th birthday, is eligible for extended foster care benefits.

AB 2337 (Gipson, Ch. 539, Stats. 2018) expanded the circumstances under which a nonminor dependent under the age of 21 who was previously a dependent or delinquent of the juvenile court may petition to assume dependency jurisdiction to include a youth who met all of the existing eligibility requirements, except received SSI benefits in lieu of foster care payments.

PRIOR VOTES:

Senate Human Services Committee (Ayes 5, Noes 0)

Assembly Floor (Ayes 80, Noes 0)

Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 15, Noes 0)

Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 11, Noes 0)

Assembly Human Services Committee (Ayes 8, Noes 0)

**************

1. P.L. 110-351 (2008). ↑

2. AB 12 (Beall, Ch. 559, Stats. 2010). ↑

3. Welf. & Inst. Code § 11403. ↑

4. See AB 212 (Beall, Ch. 459, Stats. 2011), AB 1712 (Beall, Ch. 846, Stats. 2012), AB 787 (Stone, Ch. 487, Stats. 2013), AB 2454 (Quirk-Silva, Ch. 769, Stats. 2014), AB 2337 (Gipson, Ch. 539, Stats. 2018), AB 748 (Gipson, Ch. 682, Stats. 2019). ↑

5. California Child Welfare Indicators Project, University of California at Berkeley, Report: Children in Foster Care, CWS/CMS 2022 Quarter 4 Extract (Jun. 12, 2023), available at https://ccwip.berkeley.edu/childwelfare/reports/PIT/MTSG/r/ab636/s. All links in this analysis are current as of June 23, 2023. ↑

6. See Public Policy Institute of California, Foster Care in California (2010). ↑

7. California Child Welfare Indicators Project, supra. ↑

8. Courtney, et al., Findings from the California Youth Transitions to Adulthood Study (CalYOUTH): Conditions of youth at age 23 (2020) Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago, pp. 18-19, available at https://www.chapinhall.org/wp-content/uploads/CY_YT_RE1020.pdf. ↑

9. Id. at p. 156. ↑

10. Id. at p. 157. ↑

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES

Senator Alvarado-Gil, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Subject: Foster youth

SUMMARY

This bill authorizes a nonminor dependent (NMD) to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21, unless they object, for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency.

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 or have been abused or neglected, as specified. (WIC 202)
   
2. States that the purpose of foster care law is to provide maximum safety and protection for children who are currently being physically, sexually, or emotionally abused, neglected, or exploited, and to ensure the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of children who are at risk of harm. (WIC 300.2)
   
3. Provides for extended foster care funding for youth until age 21, and adopts other changes to conform to the federal Fostering Connections to Success Act. (WIC 241.1, 303, 366.3, 388, 391, 450, 11400, 11402, 11403)
   
4. Permits a nonminor former foster youth under the age of 21 to petition the court for re-entry into foster care if the guardian or adoptive parent is no longer providing support, as specified. (WIC 388.1)
   
5. Defines “nonminor dependent (NMD)” 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, county probation department, or Indian tribe, and participating in a transitional independent living plan, as specified. (WIC 11400(v))
   
6. Prohibits the court from terminating dependency jurisdiction over an NMD who has reached 18 years of age until a hearing is conducted and the county welfare department has submitted a report verifying that specified information, documents, and services have been provided, including the health and education summary. (WIC 391 (h)(1)(3))
   
7. Requires, when a child is placed in foster care, the case plan for each child to include a summary of the health and education information or records, including mental health information or records, of the child which can be maintained in the form of a health and education passport, or a comparable format designed by the child protective agency. (WIC 16010(a)(1))
   
8. Requires the health and education summary to include the names and addresses of the child’s health, dental, and education providers; the child’s grade level performance; the child’s school record; the number of school transfers the child has already experienced; the child’s educational progress, a record of the child’s immunizations and allergies; the child’s known medical problems; the child’s current medications, past health problems, and hospitalizations; a record of the child’s relevant mental health history; the child’s known mental health condition and medications; and any other relevant mental health, dental, health, and education information. (WIC 16010(a))
   
9. Requires the case plan to be developed considering the recommendations of the child and family team, and for a child who is 14 or 15 years of age, requires the case plan to include a written description of the programs and services that will help the child, consistent with the child’s best interests, to prepare for the transition from foster care to successful adulthood. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))
   
10. Requires, when appropriate, for a child who is 16 years of age or older for a youth dependent, the case plan to include the transitional independent living plan (TILP), a written description of the programs and services that will help the child, consistent with the child’s best interests, to prepare for the transition from foster care to successful adulthood, and, in addition, whether the youth has an in-progress application pending for SSI benefits or for special immigrant juvenile status or other applicable application for legal residency. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))
    
11. Requires, when appropriate for an NMD, the TILP, as described, a written description of the programs and services that will help the youth dependent, consistent with their best interests, to prepare for transition from foster care and assist the youth in meeting the eligibility criteria. Requires, if applicable, the case plan to describe the individualized supervision provided in the supervised independent living placement (SILP). Requires the case plan to be developed with the NMD and individuals identified as important to the youth and to include steps the agency is taking to ensure that the youth dependent achieves permanence, including maintaining or obtaining permanent connections to caring and committed adults. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))

This Bill:

1. Authorizes the court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent child of the juvenile court after reaching 21 years of age, unless the NMD objects, for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications related to applying for all public benefits for which they may be eligible while in foster care and, if the NMD has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying specified information related to referrals to transitional housing.
   
2. Authorizes the court, once the above verifications have been made, to terminate its dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction over a NMD.
   
3. Provides that this continued jurisdiction does not continue any terms or conditions of probation.
   
4. Requires, if the court terminates dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction, the NMD to remain under the general jurisdiction of the court until the NMD reaches 21 years of age in order to allow for a petition to resume dependency.
   
5. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has reached 16 years of age.
   
6. Adds the health and education summary to the list of information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age.
   
7. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, including the following:
   
   1. That the youth has been screened for eligibility for all public benefits and applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible;
      
   2. That the TILP is included in the case plan;
      
   3. That the county has complied with the Foster Care Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status and the status of those applications, if applicable; and,
      
   4. That the case plan includes documentation showing a consumer credit report was requested annually, that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report; and, that the case plan identifies the person or persons who will be responsible for assisting the child or NMD.
      

FISCAL IMPACT

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, ongoing General Fund (GF) cost pressures of an unknown amount, potentially in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars to the low-millions of dollars annually, to retain foster care eligibility for youth who reach their 21st birthday, but remain under the court’s jurisdiction. For illustration, if 5 percent to 20 percent of the approximately 2,200 youth in extended foster care who are 20 years of age (110 to 440 youth) each received a $2,500 monthly benefit for three months after reaching age 21, costs would range from $825,000 to $3.3 million annually. This cost estimate does not include social worker time for case management. Actual costs would vary, and could be substantially less, depending on the degree of county noncompliance with emancipation requirements and the number of youth who allow extended jurisdiction of the court.

One-time GF automation costs of up to $850,000 (GF) for changes to the Child Welfare Services - California Automated Response and Engagement System (CWS-CARES) to integrate new data into court documentation and processes, among other items.

Estimated ongoing GF costs of approximately $1 million to $3 million annually, for increased workload to county social workers to provide housing assistance and public benefit screening and assistance, and to include additional verifications in the report to the court per the increased requirements in the bill. Although these county costs are mandated by the state, they are not reimbursable, but instead must be paid by the state pursuant to Proposition 30 of 2012. Proposition 30 provides that legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment (including child welfare services and foster care) applies to local agencies only to the extent the state provides annual funding for the cost increase.

The author is seeking $1.5 million in the budget for this proposal.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

Purpose of the Bill:

According to the author, “California’s Extended Foster Care (EFC) program has demonstrated numerous benefits for the young adults who participate, including improvements in education, employment, and social support.  However, the research has also shown that over 35 percent of youth reported that they experienced homelessness while actively enrolled in the EFC program.” 

The author goes on to state, “The promise and potential of the EFC program falls short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and supports that they are entitled to under the law.  Both federal and state law include protections to ensure that enrollees leave foster care with a transition plan that provides the foster youth safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive.  When a county fails to meet their obligation under the law and provide assistance to secure housing, youth are exiting the system to homelessness.  AB 867 ensures that foster youth experiencing housing instability have access to services and supports while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition to independence safely.” 

Child Welfare Services (CWS)

The CWS system is an essential component of the state’s safety net. Social workers in each county receive reports of abuse or neglect, and work to investigate and resolve those reports. When a case is substantiated, a family is either provided with services to ensure a child’s wellbeing and avoid court involvement, or a child is removed from the family and placed into foster care. In 2022, the state’s child welfare agencies received 440,212 reports of abuse or neglect. Of these, 51,806 reports contained allegations that were substantiated and 19,953 children were removed from their homes and placed into foster care via the CWS system.

After the county child welfare department becomes involved with families, approximately 12 months of services are provided to children who are able to remain safely in their home while the family receives services. This is considered family preservation services and the child does not come under the jurisdiction of the juvenile dependency court during this time.

If it is determined that a child cannot remain in the home, even with family preservation and support services, the child comes under the jurisdiction of the county’s juvenile dependency court while the family is served by a CWS system social worker. This system seeks to ensure the safety and protection of these children, and where possible, preserve and strengthen families through visitation and family reunification. It is the state’s goal to reunify a foster child or youth with their biological family whenever possible.

Generally, if a child cannot be safely returned home after the time allotted for reunification services ends, the court terminates the parental rights of the child’s parents. The child’s case plan then focuses on permanency services, in an effort to connect the child to a permanent placement through adoption or guardianship. If an adoption or guardianship is not established, a child may remain in long-term foster care. The child is always supposed to be placed in the most family like setting, with short-term residential treatment programs used only as necessary to provide intensive services. A child remains eligible for services for the length of their time in the child welfare system; time limits relate to the provision of services to the child’s parents.

Extended Foster Care

The intent of EFC is to bridge the gap between the intensive supervision of foster care and unsupervised adulthood by maintaining a safety net of support while providing youth independence and additional educational or work opportunities. It was prompted by the recognition that many youth were unable to successfully transition from foster care or group care to adulthood without additional guidance and assistance.

The federal Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (P.L. 110- 351) enabled states to expand the definition of a foster “child,” by creating extended care for youth up to age 21. The federal law allows foster youth to remain in care past age 18 if they meet one of the following participation criteria: enrolled in high school or a high school equivalency credential; enrolled in college, community college, or vocational education; employed for at least 80 hours a month; participating in other qualifying activities or programs designed to remove barriers to employment; or medically exempt from meeting any of the other participation criteria.

In 2010, California enacted AB 12 (Beall, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010), which permits foster youth to remain in EFC until age 21, under the same criteria as the federal statute. At the six-month hearing prior to a youth turning 18 years old, the youth’s social worker or probation officer must submit a transitional living plan to ensure that the youth will meet at least one participation criteria, listed above, if the youth plans to participate in EFC. The youth must also sign an agreement to remain in foster care within six months of turning 18, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet the goals of their TILP. Additionally, existing law permits qualifying nonminors who are former foster youth under the age of 21 to petition the court for re-entry into foster care to participate in EFC, as provided.

The University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall conducted the California Youth Transitions to Adulthood Study (CalYOUTH) in 2018. This study evaluated the impacts of extended foster care on outcomes for transition age foster youth. The following were among the findings of the CalYOUTH study for each additional year a youth spent in extended foster care:

• Increased the probability that they completed a high school credential by about 8 percent;

• Increased their expected probability of enrolling in college by 10 to 11 percent;

• Decreased the odds that they became pregnant or impregnated an individual between the ages of 17 and 21 by 28 percent; and

• Decreased the odds of being homeless or couch-surfing between the ages of 17 and 21 by about 28 percent.

Youth participation in the program has exceeded expectations. As of January 1, 2022 there were an estimated 7,565 youth participating in extended foster care in California.

This bill would require the dependency court to retain jurisdiction over the youth beyond age 21 pending receipt of a report verifying the county has provided specified information, documents and services to the youth. The bill would also give the youth the option to reject remaining under the jurisdiction of the court past age 21.

Foster Care and Extended Foster Care Services

While receiving foster care and EFC, the minor and NMD are eligible for certain services and supports while living in a CWD approved placement. These supports can include supplemental support for pregnant individuals, and if provided by the county, a clothing allowance. Under current state law, the additional payments are tied to the minor or NMD residing in an approved placement setting and are paid through the provider’s rate.

Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that youth leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge, one that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. These protections are in part enforced through the juvenile dependency court’s status review hearings, which must be held at least every 6 months. At these review hearings, a social worker submits a report to the court verifying that the CWD has provided the NMD with access to specified services, documents, and information, as provided. Before a case can be terminated for a NMD, the court holds a hearing to ensure all of these requirements have been met. At this hearing, state law requires a CWD, and at the last scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child turns 18 years old, the CWD’s court report must verify that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to the minor or non-minor, including:

• Certain essential documents, such as a Social Security card, birth certificate, and a valid ID;

• Information on financial literacy programs and state internships; and,

• Services such as assistance with applying for public benefits, applying for college or vocational training, and securing housing.

Counties are not supposed to just be verifying that this support has been provided when a youth turns 18 and at their final review hearing. Rather, counties are supposed to document the provision of certain documents, information, and services at each 6 month review hearing. This means they have approximately six opportunities to document to the court their ongoing efforts to support a youth in meeting their TILP, setting them up for a successful transition to adulthood.

However, according to the author, the law is unclear regarding whether a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the CWD agency has not met the requirements of the EFC program to support youth in successfully transitioning to independence with documents and services, which enable them to secure education, employment, and, most importantly, housing.

Youth Homelessness

Under federal law, homeless children and youth are defined under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 2011 as minors younger than 18 or young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 years who “lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence.” The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reported in its Annual Homeless Assessment Report (Report) that on a single night in 2020, almost 568,000 people experience homelessness across the United States. Of that total, approximately 34,210 of the counted AB 2189 (Friedman) Page 8 of 10 individuals were unaccompanied youth, and just over 50 percent of those youth were unsheltered. HUD further reported that California had the largest number of unaccompanied youth experiencing homelessness, with 12,172 homeless youth being counted – representing over one-third of all unaccompanied youth experiencing homelessness in the country. Nonetheless, this is likely an underestimate given that many young people experiencing homelessness cycle through informal living arrangements, which may make them invisible to traditional point-in-time counts.

Former foster youth are at high risk of experiencing homelessness. Youth who ‘age out’ of the foster care system are at an increased risk of homelessness and represent an estimated 20 percent of the 20,000 youth who leave foster care and are currently homeless. According to a 2020-2021 statewide analysis conducted by John Burton Advocates for Youth (JBAY), county administrators and service providers report a statewide need of supportive housing for 3,428 former foster youth in California. The JBAY analysis reports that as of June 30, 2021, California only has capacity to serve 2,179 youth in FY 2020-21 through housing programs or use of housing vouchers. This bill would allow, a NMD to remain under the court’s jurisdiction until the county verifies their specific efforts to help the youth secure housing.

Related/Prior Legislation:

AB 2189 (Friedman, 2022) was substantially similar to this bill and would have authorized foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county prior to termination of dependency, including, AB 2189 would have also required a county, if a county opts to provide a clothing allowance, to provide the clothing allowance to minors and NMDs, including those who may be pregnant, who would have been eligible to have foster care payments paid on their behalf but for the minor or NMD not residing in an approved placement. AB 2189 was vetoed by Governor Newsom.

AB 592 (Friedman, Chapter 702, Statutes of 2021) expanded the scope of a host family within the foster care system to include supervised transitional housing services provided by a THP provider; permitted a host family to include certain approved placements and declared that those placements, when operating as a host family, do not require additional certification; and expanded the definition of a Supervised Independent Living Setting (SILS) to include a transitional housing unit in which a host family lives with an NMD. Further allowed a THP provider to offer supportive services to an NMD placed in a certified family home or resource family of a foster family agency, and allowed a county to elect to allow a THP provider to provide services to a youth in SILS.

SB 912 (Beall, 2021) would have made an NMD who turned 21 years of age between March 4, 2020, and June 30, 2021, inclusive, eligible to continue receiving extended foster care support through June 30, 2021. Further, SB 912 would have, for a state of emergency declared by the Governor on or after January 1, 2021, required that extended foster care support continue for six months from the date of the declaration for an NMD who turns 21 years of age while the state of emergency is in effect. SB 912 was vetoed by Governor Newsom.

AB 89 (Ting Chapter 7, Statutes of 2020) known as the Budget Act of 2020, appropriated funds to extend foster care eligibility for NMDs who turn 21 years of age while in extended foster care on or after April 17, 2020, through June 30, 2021.

AB 1979 (Friedman), Chapter 141, Statutes of 2020, addressed housing needs of NMDs in the CWS system by expanding the definition of a SILS, as provided, required counties to examine their ability to meet NMDs emergency housing needs, and preserved a NMD’s transitional housing placement during an absence of up to 14 days, as provided.

SB 80 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review), Chapter 27, Statutes of 2019, allocated $8 million in grants to counties for child welfare services agencies to help young adults ages 18 to 25 years find and maintain housing. The THP program required that priority be given to youth who were formerly in the foster care or probation systems. SB 80 required the HCD to consult with other stakeholders to develop an allocation schedule for purposes of distributing funds. Use of funds could include: identifying and assisting housing services; helping youth secure and maintain housing; improving coordination of services and linkages to community resources within the child welfare system and the homeless continuum of care; and, outreach and targeting to serve those with the most severe needs.

AB 531 (Friedman) of 2019, would have increased housing options available for youth in the extended foster care system. AB 531 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

AB 748 (Gipson), Chapter 682, Statutes of 2019, allowed youth who are subject to an order for foster care before they reached 18 years of age, but not yet adjudged wards of the juvenile court before their 18th birthday, to be eligible for extended foster care benefits by requiring the court to hold a dispositional proceeding for a youth who is 18 years of age in order to be eligible for extended foster care benefits, if certain criteria is met.

AB 2337 (Gipson), Chapter 539, Statutes of 2018, expanded the circumstances under which NMDs under the age of 21 who were previously a dependent or delinquent of the juvenile court may petition to assume dependency jurisdiction to include youth who would have otherwise been eligible but for receiving SSI benefits in lieu or foster care payments.

AB 604 (Gipson), Chapter 707, Statutes of 2017, required the court to assume transition jurisdiction over a youth who was arrested for, or convicted of, any nonviolent offense committed while they were a victim of human trafficking regardless of a court order vacating the underlying adjudication, as specified.

AB 766 (Friedman), Chapter 710, Statutes of 2017, included a dormitory or other designated housing of a postsecondary educational institution in which a minor dependent who is living independently among the placement options in which a child or NMD must live in order to be eligible for Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC); allowed a minor dependent who is otherwise eligible to receive AFDC-FC payments who meets certain requirements to receive their AFDC-FC payments directly, and prohibits AFDC-FC payments paid directly to the minor dependent from being considered by the California State University and the California Community Colleges when determining eligibility for financial aid.

AB 1930 (Stone), Chapter 910, Statutes of 2018; AB 404 (Stone), Chapter 732, Statutes of 2017; and, AB 1997 (Stone), Chapter 612, Statutes of 2016, furthered CCR efforts adopted by AB 403.

AB 403 (Stone), Chapter 773, Statutes of 2015, implemented CCR recommendations to better serve children and youth in California’s child welfare services system, including eliminating group homes and emphasizing family-based care.

AB 1712 (Beall), Chapter 846, Statutes of 2012, enacted numerous technical, clarifying, and federal conformity changes to the California Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010.

AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010, created the “California Fostering Connections to Success Act” and conformed state law to federal requirements to revise and expand programs and funding for certain foster and adopted children.

COMMENTS

The EFC Program expanded foster care services to improve outcomes for foster youth, who often faced enormous challenges as they emancipated from the foster care system at age 18 (prior to the creation of EFC), often leading to poverty, homelessness, and incarceration. Participation in EFC has greatly improved the outcomes for NMDs. However, it is well documented that former foster youth, both while in EFC and once aged out of the foster care system, continue to struggle when compared to their non-foster youth peers in terms of their educational achievement, employment, and rates of homelessness.

Given the struggles former foster youth face compared to non-foster youth, it is imperative that they receive every service and benefit they are entitled to under the law. This bill seeks to ensure that youth in EFC receive what the law says they are entitled to before the court terminates jurisdiction. The hope is that this will improve foster youth outcomes.

Double Referral: This bill has been double-referred. Should this bill pass out of this Committee, it will be referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

PRIOR VOTES

POSITIONS

Support:

Youth Law Center (Sponsor)

Alliance for Children's Rights

California Alliance of Caregivers

Children Now

National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter

Starting Over, INC.

Oppose:

None received

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 867

Author:(Friedman)

As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2023

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Authorizes foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency, including, being screened for eligibility for all public benefits for which the nonminor dependent (NMD) may be eligible, and for those who have not secured housing, verification that referrals to transitional housing, or assistance in securing other housing has been made.

Major Provisions

1. Unless the NMD objects, authorizes the court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent child of the juvenile court after reaching 21 years of age for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications related to applying for all public benefits for which they may be eligible while in foster care and, if the NMD has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying specified information related to referrals to transitional housing.
2. Authorizes the court to terminate its dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction over an NMD after 21 years of age for the limited purpose of compliance with 1), above.
3. Requires, if the court terminates dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction, the NMD to remain under the general jurisdiction of the court until the NMD reaches 21 years of age in order to allow for a petition to resume dependency.
4. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has reached 16 years of age.
5. Adds the health and education summary to the list of information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age.
6. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, including the following:
7. That the youth has been screened for eligibility for all public benefits and applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible;
8. That the transitional independent living plan (TILP) is included in the case plan;
9. That the county has complied with the Foster Care Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status and the status of those applications, if applicable; and,
10. That the case plan includes documentation showing a consumer credit report was requested annually, that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report; and, that the case plan identifies the person or persons who will be responsible for assisting the child or NMD.

COMMENTS

Child Welfare Services (CWS). California's CWS system exists to protect children from abuse and neglect, and in doing so, to provide for their health, safety, and overall well-being. When suspicions of abuse or neglect arise, often as a result of a report by a mandated reporter like a doctor or teacher, Child Protective Services is tasked with investigating the report. If the allegation of abuse or neglect is substantiated, it is then determined whether it is in the best interest of the child to remain in their parent's custody or be placed within the CWS system. If a child is suspected to be at risk of neglect, abuse, or abandonment, the juvenile court holds legal jurisdiction, and the CWS system appoints a social worker to ensure that the needs of the youth are met. As of October 2022, there were 53,371 youth between the ages of zero and 21 placed in California's CWS system.

Extended Foster Care. California was one of the first states to opt in to the federal opportunity to create an extended foster care program which represented a historic expansion of services to foster youth and was intended to improve outcomes for youth, who often faced enormous challenges as they emancipated from the foster care system at age 18 often facing poverty, homelessness, and incarceration.

In 2010, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010, which extended foster care benefits for certain eligible youth until the age of 21. Prior to the enactment of AB 12, known as the "Fostering Connections to Success Act", youth "aged out" of the CWS system at 18 years old and were required to navigate the challenges of young adulthood, including obtaining education, stable housing, and employment, without the support of the CWS system. In recognition of these difficulties, AB 12 provided eligible youth between the ages of 18 and 21, known as NMDs, with the services and supports they need to experience independent living in supervised living environments. Extended foster care also enables youth to obtain educational and employment training to better prepare them to transition to adulthood and self-sufficiency.

NMDs must also sign an agreement to remain in foster care within six months of turning 18, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet the goals of their transitional living plan.

Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that young people leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. For example, state law requires county welfare departments, at the last scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child turns 18 years old, and at every review hearing thereafter, to submit a report verifying that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to the minor or non-minor, including: certain essential documents, such as a Social Security card, birth certificate, and a valid ID; information on financial literacy programs and state internships; and, services such as assistance with applying for public benefits, applying for college or vocational training, and securing housing.

However, the law is unclear if a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the county welfare department has not met the requirements of the extended foster care program. This program is intended to support youth in successfully transitioning to independence with critical documents which enable them to secure education, employment, and most importantly, housing.

When a county fails to provide assistance to secure housing, youth might be exiting the foster care system to homelessness. Appropriate enforcement mechanisms, including keeping a court case open past age 21, can help to ensure that the necessary discharge planning begins in time to discharge the youth into a stable environment.

Foster youth and homelessness. The 2022 national Point in Time count conducted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that California had the largest number of unaccompanied youth at a staggering 9,590 people, which accounts for more than a third of all unaccompanied youth nationally. California also accounted for 52% (6,752 people) of all unsheltered unaccompanied youth. For youth, homelessness can mean living in cars, shelters, or couch surfing with friends; due to an increased susceptibility to exploitation and violence, youth experiencing homelessness may develop substance use issues or engage in survival sex in exchange for shelter or food.

Youth who age out of the foster care system are at high risk of becoming homeless. A 2013 study published in the Journal of Public Health found that between 31% and 46% of former foster youth had been homeless at least once by age 26. According to the study, the odds of becoming homeless by age 19 were higher for youth who had been physically abused before entering foster care, had run away more than once while in foster care, had engaged in delinquent behaviors, were placed in a group care setting at baseline, and did not feel very close to a biological parent or grandparent.

A study conducted by the University of Chicago's Chapin Hall and released in 2020, addressed whether extending foster care past the age of 18 influenced outcomes during the transition to adulthood, what factors influence the types of support youth receive in extended foster care; and how living arrangements and other services that result from extending foster care influence the relationship between extending care and youth outcomes. The study reported that more than one in four reported experiencing at least one night of homelessness in the past two years, while nearly 30% said they had couch surfed, staying with friends because they lacked housing. From the research conducted when the youth were 21 years old, they concluded: "In particular, our findings raise questions about the wisdom of abruptly curtailing services for these young people when they reach their 21st birthday. Our findings suggest that when COVID-19 is behind us, it will still be the case that many young adults in care could potentially benefit from ongoing support past their 21st birthday."

This bill would provide an opportunity for a foster youth to remain in care until the required appropriate documents and services have been provided to ensure a successful transition into independence.

Equity Impact: Foster youth represent one of the most vulnerable and academically at-risk student groups, according to the California Department of Education and suffer poorer educational outcomes with higher rates of suspension and lower rates of graduation. According to the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), in California, the populations reflected in foster care are predominantly youth of color as 21% are Black and 50% are Latino. Further highlighting the disproportionality comprising the foster youth population, the number of Black and Native American youth in foster care are four times larger than the number of the general population of Black and Native American youth in California. The LAO also states that racial disproportionalities and disparities are present within initial allegations and persist at all levels of the system—becoming the most pronounced for youth in care. Additionally, LGBTQ youth are also overrepresented in foster care, according to the UCLA Williams Institute, with 13.6 % of foster youth identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or questioning, and 5.6% identifying as transgender, compared to 10.3% of California’s students in public middle and high schools identifying as LGBTQ.

After over a decade of the enactment of extended foster care in California, the youth who participate have demonstrated that they receive needed education, employment, and social support, however, advocates have reported that some youth are exiting foster care without the appropriate referrals to housing and public benefits that they are entitled. This bill would ensure that foster youth in California experiencing housing instability have access to these services and support while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition after emancipation, and achieve independence in adulthood.

According to the Author

"California's Extended Foster Care (EFC) program has demonstrated numerous benefits for the young adults who participate, including improvements in education, employment, and social support. However, the research has also shown that over 35% of youth reported that they experienced homelessness while actively enrolled in the EFC program.

"The promise and potential of the EFC program falls short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and supports that they are entitled to under the law. Both federal and state law include protections to ensure that enrollees leave foster care with a transition plan that provides the foster youth safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. When a county fails to meet their obligation under the law and provide assistance to secure housing, youth are exiting the system to homelessness.

"[This bill] ensures that foster youth experiencing housing instability have access to services and supports while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition to independence safely."

Arguments in Support

According to the Children's Law Center, a co-sponsor, "A significant barrier to foster youth deriving a benefit from extended foster care involves inadequate discharge planning and mechanisms for accountability when county agencies fail to provide foster youth who are exiting care with essential documents, information and services that they need to survive independently…Appropriate enforcement mechanisms, including keeping a court case open past age 21, will ensure that the necessary discharge planning begins early, so that youth are less likely to exit the foster care system to homelessness."

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on May 3, 2023:

1. Ongoing General Fund (GF) cost pressures of an unknown amount, potentially in the high-hundreds of thousands of dollars to the low-millions of dollars annually, to retain foster care eligibility for youth who reach their 21^st birthday, but remain under the court's jurisdiction. For illustration, if 5% to 20% of the approximately 2,200 youth in extended foster care who are 20 years of age (110 to 440 youth) each received a $2,500 monthly benefit for three months after reaching age 21, costs would range from $825,000 to $3.3 million annually. This cost estimate does not include social worker time for case management. Actual costs would vary, and could be substantially less, depending on the degree of county non-compliance with emancipation requirements and the number of youth who allow extended jurisdiction of the court.
2. One-time GF automation costs of up to $850,000 (GF) for changes to the Child Welfare Services - California Automated Response and Engagement System (CWS-CARES) to integrate new data into court documentation and processes, among other items.
3. Estimated ongoing GF costs of approximately $1 million to $3 million annually, for increased workload to county social workers to provide housing assistance and public benefit screening and assistance, and to include additional verifications in the report to the court per the increased requirements in the bill. Although these county costs are mandated by the state, they are not reimbursable, but instead must be paid by the state pursuant to Proposition 30 of 2012. Proposition 30 provides that legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment (including child welfare services and foster care) applies to local agencies only to the extent the state provides annual funding for the cost increase.

(The author is seeking $1.5 million in the budget for this proposal.)

VOTES

ASM HUMAN SERVICES: 8-0-0

YES: Jackson, Sanchez, Alanis, Arambula, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Garcia

ASM JUDICIARY: 11-0-0

YES: Maienschein, Essayli, Connolly, Dixon, Haney, Kalra, Pacheco, Papan, Reyes, Robert Rivas, Sanchez

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-1

YES: Holden, Megan Dahle, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Mathis, Papan, Pellerin, Sanchez, Weber, Ortega

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

UPDATED

VERSION: February 14, 2023

CONSULTANT: Jessica Langtry / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0000628

Date of Hearing: May 3, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Chris Holden, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 867

Author:(Friedman) – As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2023

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

SUMMARY:

This bill authorizes foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications of the information, documents and services required to be provided by the county welfare department to the foster youth prior to emancipation.

Specifically, this bill:

1. Allows the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent of the court after reaching 21 years of age for the limited purpose of compliance with the following:
2. Unless the nonminor objects to continued jurisdiction, prevents the court from terminating jurisdiction over an NMD unless the child welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that specified information, documents, and services, both under existing law, as well as additional items required by this bill, including under 4), have been provided to the nonminor or if the nonminor cannot be located, verifying that efforts have been made to locate the nonminor.
3. Unless the nonminor objects to continued jurisdiction, prevents the court from terminating jurisdiction over an NMD who has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that intensive and ongoing efforts were made to assist the nonminor in securing housing.
4. Requires, notwithstanding the age restrictions in any law providing for support, services, and benefits, for the NMD to continue to receive the support and services they were entitled to receive immediately prior to reaching 21 years of age, and benefits equal to the amount of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) benefits provided until jurisdiction has been terminated.
5. Clarifies that continuing jurisdiction for an NMD after 21 years of age under 1), above, cannot be construed to continue any terms or conditions of probation.
6. Requires certain additional verifications be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has reached 16 years of age, at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child attains 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter. This includes, among other things, verification that specified information, such as a transitional independent living plan, eligibility for public benefits, a consumer credit report and a health and education summary, has been included in the child’s or nonminor’s case plan.
7. Requires an additional verification that an NMD who has reached 18 years of age has applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible be included in a report submitted by the county welfare department prior to the court terminating dependency jurisdiction. Requires, if the youth does not submit any or all of those applications, the county to submit written verification, signed by the youth, that the county welfare department offered assistance in submitting applications and the youth made a knowing and informed decision not to submit the applications.
8. Applies the requirements in 4) to the probation department at the hearing for a ward who is 18 years of age or older and subject to an order for foster care placement.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Ongoing General Fund (GF) cost pressures of an unknown amount, potentially in the high-hundreds of thousands of dollars to the low-millions of dollars annually, to retain foster care eligibility for youth who reach their 21^st birthday, but remain under the court’s jurisdiction. For illustration, if 5% to 20% of the approximately 2,200 youth in extended foster care who are 20 years of age (110 to 440 youth) each received a $2,500 monthly benefit for three months after reaching age 21, costs would range from $825,000 to $3.3 million annually. This cost estimate does not include social worker time for case management. Actual costs would vary, and could be substantially less, depending on the degree of county non-compliance with emancipation requirements and the number of youth who allow extended jurisdiction of the court.
2. One-time GF automation costs of up to $850,000 (GF) for changes to the Child Welfare Services - California Automated Response and Engagement System (CWS-CARES) to integrate new data into court documentation and processes, among other items.
3. Estimated ongoing GF costs of approximately $1 million to $3 million annually, for increased workload to county social workers to provide housing assistance and public benefit screening and assistance, and to include additional verifications in the report to the court per the increased requirements in the bill. Although these county costs are mandated by the state, they are not reimbursable, but instead must be paid by the state pursuant to Proposition 30 of 2012. Proposition 30 provides that legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a local agency for programs or levels of service mandated by realignment (including child welfare services and foster care) applies to local agencies only to the extent the state provides annual funding for the cost increase.

(The author is seeking $1.5 million in the budget for this proposal.)

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. The author of this bill seeks to better support youth aging out of foster care by ensuring the NMD has received all of the supports and services to which they are entitled prior to leaving extended foster care and the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. According to the author:

Both federal and state law include protections that are designed to provide emancipated foster youth with stability, support, and the opportunity to thrive. However, the large number of foster youth experiencing homelessness while enrolled in [extended foster care], only showcases that we must reaffirm the county’s obligation under law to provide needed assistance, such as housing assistance, to emancipated youth.

1. Extended Foster Care. As a result of AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2009, foster youth who turn 18 years old are eligible to remain in foster care until they turn 21 years old. This is known as extended foster care and is designed to assist eligible youth achieve self-sufficiency and includes educational opportunities, employment trainings, and supervised independent living environments. In January 2023, there were approximately 7,120 youth in extended foster care.

This bill seeks to better support youth aging out of foster care, both dependents and wards, in several ways. First, it allows juvenile courts to maintain jurisdiction over an NMD beyond the age of 21 years if the prerequisites to the termination of the court’s jurisdiction over the NMD have not been satisfied. Second, the bill requires verification that certain documents, information and services have been provided to a foster youth as they near aging out of foster care and then as they age out of foster care, including that the youth has applied for all public benefits to which they are entitled, or specifically declined to do so. Third, the bill requires a court, if the youth agrees, to maintain jurisdiction over the nonminor even after 21 years of age if the youth has not been provided with the required services, information and documents prior to turning 21, including assistance securing housing. Finally, a court’s extended jurisdiction is dependent upon agreement of the NMD.

1. Youth Homelessness. The 2022 Point-in-Time Count conducted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reported, on a single night in 2022, there were 9,590 unaccompanied youth under the age of 25 experiencing homelessness in California. This is the largest number of unaccompanied youth in any state and accounts for more than a third of all unaccompanied youth nationally. California also accounted for 52% (6,752 people) of all unsheltered unaccompanied youth. Youth who age out of the foster care system are at high risk of becoming homeless. A 2013 study published in the Journal of Public Health found between 31% and 46% of former foster youth had been homeless at least once by age 26.
2. Prior Legislation. AB 2189 (Friedman), of the 2021-22 Legislative Session, was substantially similar to this bill, but included additional provisions. AB 2189 was vetoed by the Governor, who cited costs concerns and stated, “Bills with significant fiscal impact, such as this measure, should be considered and accounted for as part of the annual budget process.”

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

Date of Hearing: April 11, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Brian Maienschein, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 867

Author:(Friedman) – As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2023

PROPOSED CONSENT

SUBJECT: Foster youth

KEY ISSUE: SHOULD THE JUVENILE COURT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO EXTEND ITS JURISDICTION OVER NONMINOR DEPENDENTS who are over THE AGE OF 21 FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF ENSURING THAT THESE NONMINOR DEPENDENTS, PRIOR TO LEAVING FOSTER CARE, ARE SCREENED FOR, AND OFFERED ACCESS TO, THE RESOURCES AND SUPPORTS TO WHICH THEY ARE ENTITLED as they transition to independence?

SYNOPSIS

The California Fostering Connection to Success Act (FCSA) of 2010 provides transitional foster care support to qualifying foster youths aged 18-21 years to help them successfully transition to adulthood. It seeks to provide some of the same support that parents provide to their young adult children to help them succeed. Due to the complexity and fundamental improvements the FCSA made to the state’s child welfare system, follow up legislation has been needed since its adoption to help ensure full and successful implementation.

This bill continues the Legislature’s efforts to ensure that FCSA is properly implemented to provide necessary and integral support services to foster youth as they prepare and transition into adulthood in several ways. First, it allows juvenile courts to maintain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent beyond the age of 21 years if the prerequisites to the termination of the court’s jurisdiction over the nonminor dependent have not been satisfied. Second, the bill requires verification that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to foster youth as they near aging out of foster care and then as they age out of foster care, including that the youth has applied for all public benefits to which they are entitled or specifically declined to do so. Third, the bill requires a court, if the youth agrees, to maintain jurisdiction over them even after 21 years of age if they have not been provided with the required services, information, and documents prior to turning 21, including assistance in securing housing. Finally and importantly, a court’s extended jurisdiction is dependent upon agreement of the nonminor dependent.

The bill passed out of the Human Services Committee last month on an 8-0 vote. Co-sponsored by Children’s Law Center of California; Alliance for Children’s Rights; Public Counsel; and Youth Law Center, the bill is also supported by numerous children’s advocacy organizations and has no opposition on file.

SUMMARY: Allows courts to maintain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent beyond the age of 21 years if the prerequisites to the termination of the court’s jurisdiction over the nonminor dependent have not been satisfied and the nonminor dependent agrees to the continuation. Specifically, this bill:

1. Allows the juvenile court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent of the court after reaching 21 years of age for the limited purpose of compliance with the following:
   1. Unless the nonminor objects to continued jurisdiction, prevents the court from terminating jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent unless the child welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that specified information, documents, and services, both under existing law, as well as additional items required by this bill, including under 7), have been provided to the nonminor or if the nonminor cannot be located, verifying that efforts have been made to locate the nonminor.
   2. Unless the nonminor objects to continued jurisdiction, prevents the court from terminating jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying that intensive and ongoing efforts were made to assist the nonminor in securing housing. Provides that intensive and ongoing efforts to assist the nonminor dependent in securing housing include, but are not limited to, active case management in which the county verifies eligibility for housing programs, prepares and submits housing applications on behalf of the nonminor dependent, and confirms that any applications for housing submitted by, or on behalf of, the nonminor dependent have been processed by the receiving agency. Requires the county welfare department to obtain authorization from a nonminor dependent prior to preparing and submitting any housing applications on the nonminor dependent’s behalf.
   3. Requires, notwithstanding the age restrictions in any law providing for support, services, and benefits, for the nonminor dependent to continue to receive the support and services they were entitled to receive immediately prior to reaching 21 years of age, and benefits equal to the amount of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) benefits provided until jurisdiction has been terminated.
2. Clarifies that continuing jurisdiction for a nonminor dependent after 21 years of age under 1) cannot be construed to continue any terms or conditions of probation.
3. Authorizes the court to terminate its dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent after 21 years of age. Requires the nonminor dependent, if the court terminates dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction, to remain under the general jurisdiction of the court until the nonminor reaches 21 years of age in order to allow for a petition to resume dependency.
4. Adds the following verification requirements to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has reached 16 years of age:
   1. That the transitional independent living plan (TILP) is included in the case plan, as specified, how the child welfare department has complied with requirements of the Foster Care Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Program, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status or residency and the status of those applications, if applicable;
   2. That documentation in the case plan includes that a consumer credit report was requested annually, and that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report;
   3. That the case plan identifies persons who will be responsible for assisting the child with applications for postsecondary education and related financial aid, as specified; and
   4. That the case plan includes the health and education summary, as described.
5. Adds the health and education summary to the list of information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted to the court by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age.
6. Adds the following verification requirements to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter:
   1. Assistance in maintaining relationships with individuals important to the nonminor, based on the nonminor’s wishes, as opposed to their best interest.
   2. That the youth has been screened for eligibility for all public benefits and applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible, including, but not limited to, SSI, CalFresh benefits, CalWORKs benefits, Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program benefits, a California Alternate Rates for Energy discount, and childcare assistance. If a discharge from foster care is contemplated at the hearing or prior to the next review hearing, verification that the child or the child’s caregiver has applied for all public benefits for which the child may be eligible, as specified. If the child or caregiver does not submit any or all of those applications, requires the county to submit written verification, signed by the child or caregiver, that the county welfare department offered assistance in submitting applications and that the child or caregiver made a knowing and informed decision not to submit the applications.
   3. That the TILP is included in the case plan, as specified, that the county has complied with the Foster Care Social Security and SSI Assistance Program, as specified, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status or residency and the status of those applications, if applicable.
   4. That the case plan includes documentation showing a consumer credit report was requested annually, that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report.
   5. That the case plan identifies the person or persons who will be responsible for assisting the youth with applications for postsecondary education and related financial aid, as specified, and whether the youth has been provided that assistance.
7. Adds the following verification requirement to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department prior to the court terminating dependency jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent who has reached 18 years of age, or in the case of a youth who, after reasonable efforts by the county welfare department, cannot be located, verifying the efforts made to make the following available to the youth: that the youth has applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible, including, but not limited to, SSI, CalFresh benefits, CalWORKs benefits, Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program benefits, a California Alternate Rates for Energy discount, and childcare assistance. Requires, if the youth does not submit any or all of those applications, the county to submit written verification, signed by the youth, that the county welfare department offered assistance in submitting applications and that the youth made a knowing and informed decision not to submit the applications.
8. Applies the requirements in 7), above, to the probation department at the hearing for a ward who is 18 years of age or older and subject to an order for foster care placement.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the juvenile court with jurisdiction over children who are subject to abuse or neglect. (Welfare & Institutions Code (WIC) Section 300. Unless stated otherwise, all further statutory references are to the Welfare & Institutions Code.)
2. Requires a county to file a petition to the court requesting a detention hearing within 48 hours of placing a child under temporary custody to determine whether a child should remain in custody and whether any specific court permissions are necessary to provide for the health and safety of the child. (Sections 313 and 319.)
3. Requires a detention hearing to be held within 24 hours of the next court day whenever a detention petition is filed with the court. (Section 315.)
4. Requires a juvenile court to hold a “jurisdictional hearing” within 15 judicial days of the petition filed to take the child into temporary custody to determine whether the court has jurisdiction to adjudicate the child. (Section 334.)
5. Requires a juvenile court to hold a “dispositional hearing” within 60 days of the detention hearing to determine the appropriate placement for the youth if they are adjudicated to be a dependent of the court. (Section 352 (b).)
6. Requires the court, at the jurisdictional hearing, to first consider only the question whether the minor is a person within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, as specified by current law. Further, deems as admissible any legally admissible evidence that is relevant to the circumstances or acts that are alleged to bring the minor within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, and, further, permits the evidence to be entered into evidence. (Section 355 (a).)
7. Requires a court to hold a dispositional hearing for a youth who is 18 years of age if (a) the youth was found to be a dependent child prior to the youth turning 18 years old and was continuously detained, as provided, and (b) the youth has provided informed consent to the dispositional proceeding. (Section 358 (d).)
8. Establishes the California Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010 (FCSA) which, among other provisions:
   1. Provides for the extension of transitional foster care to eligible youth up to age 21 as a voluntary program for youth who meet specified work and education participation criteria; and
   2. Requires changes to the Kin-GAP program in order to allow for federal financial participation in the program. (See Family Code Section 17552.)
9. Defines a “nonminor dependent” as a current or former foster child between the ages of 18 and 21 who is in foster care and under the responsibility of the county welfare department, county probation department, or Indian tribe and is participating in a transitional independent living plan. (Section 11400 (v).)
10. Defines “nonminor former dependent or ward” as either:
    1. A nonminor who turned 18 while subject to an order for foster care placement, and for whom dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction has been terminated, and who is still under the general jurisdiction of the court; or
    2. A nonminor who is at least 18 years old and, while a minor, was a dependent child or ward of the juvenile court when the guardianship was established, as specified, and the juvenile court dependency or wardship was dismissed following the establishment of the guardianship. (Section 11400 (aa).)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS: The California Fostering Connection to Success Act (FCSA) of 2010, enacted by AB 12 (Beall), Chap. 559, Stats. 2010, provides transitional foster care support to qualifying foster youths aged 18-21 years to help them successfully transition to adulthood. It seeks to provide some of the same support that parents provide to their young adult children to help them succeed. Due to the complexity and fundamental improvements the FCSA made to the state’s child welfare system, follow up legislation has been needed since its adoption to help ensure full and successful implementation.

This bill, co-sponsored by Children’s Law Center of California; Alliance for Children’s Rights; Public Counsel; and Youth Law Center, continues the Legislature’s efforts to ensure the FCSA is properly implemented and that it provides necessary and integral support services to foster youth as they prepare and transition into adulthood. It does so by allowing a juvenile court’s jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent to continue beyond the youth’s 21^st birthday for the limited purpose of ensuring that the nonminor dependent has all of the information, referrals, and support to which they are entitled prior to termination of the court’s jurisdiction. According to the author:

California was one of the first states to opt into the federal opportunity to create an Extended Foster Youth Program (EFC). . . . The EFC program has been effective in providing needed education, employment, and social assistance to foster youth after their 18th birthday. However, research has shown that 35 percent of foster youth reported being homeless while enrolled in the EFC program.

The potential and promise of the EFC program, intended to create safeguards for foster youth exiting the system, fall short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and support they are entitled to under law. Both federal and state law include protections that are designed to provide emancipated foster youth with stability, support, and the opportunity to thrive. However, the large number of foster youth experiencing homelessness while enrolled in EFC, only showcases that we must reaffirm the county’s obligation under law to provide needed assistance, such as housing assistance, to emancipated youth.

California Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010. The FCSA was landmark child welfare legislation that opted the state into two provisions of the federal Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act of 2008 (Fostering Connections Act). Specifically, the FCSA:

• • • • Re-enacted California’s existing state- and county-funded Kin-GAP program to align it with new federal requirements and allow the state to bring federal financial participation into California’s kinship guardianship assistance program for the first time; and
      • Provides transitional foster care support to qualifying foster youth ages 18 to 21.

The goal of the FCSA is to assist nonminor dependents in their transition to adulthood, by providing them with the opportunity to create a case plan alongside their caseworkers tailored to their individual needs, which charts the course towards independent living through incremental levels of responsibility. It is a voluntary program grounded in evidence of how the option of continued support to age 21 can counter the dismal outcomes faced by youth who are forced to leave the foster care system at age 18, including high rates of homelessness, incarceration, reliance on public assistance, teen pregnancy, and low rates of high school and postsecondary graduation.

In essence, FCSA seeks to mirror the type of continued guidance and assistance most young adults receive from their parents and families in their late teens and early twenties. It provides nonminors with the option to petition to reenter care after 18 years of age, provided they meet the eligibility criteria set forth in federal and state law.

To be eligible to continue foster care benefits up to age 21, a nonminor dependent must: continue under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court; sign a mutual agreement which commits both the nonminor and the placing agency to certain responsibilities; reside in an approved, supervised placement; work alongside their caseworker to prepare and participate in the transitional independent living case plan; and have their status reviewed every six months. In addition, pursuant to the federal Fostering Connections Act, a youth must meet certain work or education-related eligibility criteria.

Extended foster care provides real benefits for former foster youth and for the larger community. The prospects for former foster youth are significantly worse in terms of securing education, consistent employment, and stable housing, among other things, as compared with youth who have no involvement with the dependency system. (See, e.g., A. Dworsky, L. Napolitano, and M. Courtney, “Homelessness during the transition from foster care to adulthood,” American Journal of Public Health, 103 (Suppl2), S318-S323 (2013).) However, researchers at Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago, using data from California, found that providing extended foster care for nonminor dependents significantly improves their otherwise bleak outcomes. The researchers found that each additional year in extended foster care:

• Increased the probability that youth completed a high school credential by about 8%.

• Increased their expected probability of enrolling in college by 10–11%.

• Increased the number of quarters that youth were employed between their 18th and 21st birthdays (about half of a quarter for each year in extended care).

• Increased the amount of money youth had in back accounts by about $404.

• Decreased the amount of money received in need-based public food assistance by more than $700.

• Decreased the odds of experiencing an additional economic hardship (e.g., not being able to pay utility bills) experienced between the ages of 17 and 21 by about 12%.

• Decreased the odds of being homeless or couch-surfing between the ages of 17 and 21 by about 28%. Also decreased the number of times youth had been homeless and the number of days youth had been homeless during that period.

• Increased the odds that youth described a professional (e.g., caseworker, therapist, counselor, etc.) as a source of social support by about 42%. Also increased the odds that youth felt they had enough people to turn to for emotional support, tangible support, and advice/guidance.

• Decreased the odds that youth became pregnant (females) or impregnated a female (males) between the ages of 17 and 21 by about 18%.

• Decreased the odds that youth had been arrested between the ages of 17 and 21 by about 41% and decreased the odds that youth had been convicted of a crime during the same period by about 40%.

(M. E. Courtney, N. J. Okpych, S.E. Park, Report from CalYOUTH: Findings on the relationship between extended foster care and youth’s outcomes at age 21, Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago (2018) p. ii-iii.)

This bill continues the Legislature’s efforts to ensure that foster youth are supported as they prepare and transition into adulthood in several ways. First, it allows juvenile courts to maintain jurisdiction over a nonminor dependent beyond the age of 21 years if the prerequisites to the termination of the court’s jurisdiction over the nonminor dependent have not been satisfied. Second, it requires verification that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to foster youth as they near aging out of foster care and then as they age out of foster care, including that the youth has applied for all public benefits to which they are entitled or specifically declined to do so. Third, it requires a court, if the youth agrees, to maintain jurisdiction over the youth, even after the age of 21 years of age, if they have not been provided, prior to age 21, with the required services, information, and documents, including assistance in securing housing to which they are entitled. Finally and importantly, a court’s extended jurisdiction is dependent upon agreement of the nonminor dependent. If they object to continued jurisdiction, the court’s jurisdiction may not continue.

These provisions, taken together, are all designed to help youth who have emancipated out of foster care – and thus who may have little or no adult support in their lives – receive additional support and, if needed, more time in transitioning to adulthood and full independence. This short-term extension of support to willing young adults who have not yet received the support they should have from the foster care system, should help prevent some of the worse outcomes that too often befall former foster youth, including dire poverty and homelessness.

Last year’s AB 2189 (and its veto). AB 2189, also by the author of this bill, was substantially similar to this bill. Like this bill, it would have authorized foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 years for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county prior to termination of dependency. AB 2189 would have also required a county, if a county opted to provide a clothing allowance, to provide the clothing allowance to minors and nonminor dependents, including those who may be pregnant. AB 2189 also would have required a pregnant youth who is under the dependency jurisdiction of the juvenile court and who would be eligible to have foster care benefits paid on their behalf --but for not residing in an approved placemen--to be eligible for those benefits. AB 2189 was vetoed by Governor Newsom, who wrote the following in his veto message:

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 2189 without my signature.

This bill would establish parameters by which a foster youth could remain in the foster care system beyond the age of 21.

It is important that foster youth receive the services to which they are entitled to help them successfully transition to independence. I applaud the author's intent in seeking to ensure those services are appropriately provided prior to the foster youth aging out of the program. However, extending foster care beyond the age of 21 raises policy and implementation considerations. Additionally, millions of dollars will be needed to successfully implement this policy, but were not included in the budget.

With our state facing lower-than-expected revenues over the first few months of this fiscal year, it is important to remain disciplined when it comes to spending, particularly spending that is ongoing. We must prioritize existing obligations and priorities, including education, health care, public safety and safety-net programs.

The Legislature sent measures with potential costs of well over $20 billion in one-time spending commitments and more than $10 billion in ongoing commitments not accounted for in the state budget. Bills with significant fiscal impact, such as this measure, should be considered and accounted for as part of the annual budget process. For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.

While this bill does not include the provisions regarding clothing allowances and aid to pregnant nonminor dependents living away from an approved placement, it is unclear whether elimination of those provisions have resolved Governor Newsom’s concerns.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Children’s Law Center of California, co-sponsor of the bill, writes that the bill “will help ensure that foster youth have the benefits they need to survive precisely when they are most vulnerable and it will ensure that they have the support necessary to maintain housing and stability upon exiting care.”

[T]here is no process in place to remedy the situation when the county child welfare agency does not provide youth with the documents, information, and services needed to transition successfully to independence. The law is unclear regarding whether a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the county child welfare agency has failed to provide exiting youth with critical support that enables youth to secure education, employment, and most importantly, housing. Appropriate enforcement mechanisms, including keeping a court case open past age 21, will ensure that the necessary discharge planning begins early, so that youth are less likely to exit the foster care system to homelessness.

Co-sponsor Children Now writes that it supports the bill because the bill will “ensure accountability with current law and discharge planning obligations.” In addition, according to Children Now, the bill will “help ensure youth fully benefit from the supports and services provided by EFC, have the benefits they need to survive precisely when they are most vulnerable, and thereby make it less likely that youth exit foster care unprepared and unequipped to independently maintain housing and employment.”

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Children's Law Center of California (co-sponsor)

Alliance for Children's Rights (co-sponsor)
Public Counsel (co-sponsor)
Youth Law Center (co-sponsor)

California Alliance of Caregivers
California Court Appointed Special Advocate Association
California Lawyers Association - Family Law Section
Children Now
Children's Legal Services of San Diego
Dependency Legal Services
Dependency Legal Services (UNREG)
John Burton Advocates for Youth
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
Starting Over, INC.

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Alison Merrilees / JUD. / (916) 319-2334

Date of Hearing: March 28, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES

Corey A. Jackson, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 867 (

Author:Friedman) – As Introduced Ver:February 14, 2023

SUBJECT: Foster youth

SUMMARY: Authorizes foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county welfare department of the foster youth prior to termination of dependency, including, being screened for eligibility for all public benefits for which the nonminor dependent (NMD) may be eligible, and for those who have not secured housing, verification that referrals to transitional housing, or assistance in securing other housing has been made. Specifically, this bill:

1. Unless the NMD objects, authorizes the court to retain jurisdiction over any ward or dependent child of the juvenile court after reaching 21 years of age for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications related to applying for all public benefits for which they may be eligible while in foster care and, if the NMD has not secured housing, until the county welfare department has submitted a report to the court verifying specified information related to referrals to transitional housing.
2. Authorizes the court to terminate its dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction over an NMD after 21 years of age for the limited purpose of compliance with 1), above.
3. Requires, if the court terminates dependency, delinquency, or transition jurisdiction, the NMD to remain under the general jurisdiction of the court until the NMD reaches 21 years of age in order to allow for a petition to resume dependency.
4. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the first regularly scheduled review hearing after a dependent child has reached 16 years of age.
5. Adds the health and education summary to the list of information, documents, and services that are required to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age.
6. Adds specified verification requirements to the information, documents, and services to be included in the report submitted by the county welfare department at the last regularly scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child reaches 18 years of age, and at every regularly scheduled review hearing thereafter, including the following:
7. That the youth has been screened for eligibility for all public benefits and applied for all public benefits for which they may be eligible;
8. That the transitional independent living plan (TILP) is included in the case plan;
9. That the county has complied with the Foster Care Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, and whether the child has a pending application for SSI or special immigrant juvenile status and the status of those applications, if applicable; and,
10. That the case plan includes documentation showing a consumer credit report was requested annually, that the child has received a copy of their credit report and assistance to resolve any problems or errors found in the credit report; and, that the case plan identifies the person or persons who will be responsible for assisting the child or NMD

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 or have been abused or neglected, as specified. (Welfare and Institutions Code Section [WIC] 202)
2. States that the purpose of foster care law is to provide maximum safety and protection for children who are currently being physically, sexually, or emotionally abused, neglected, or exploited, and to ensure the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of children who are at risk of harm. (WIC 300.2)
3. Provides for extended foster care funding for youth until age 21, and adopts other changes to conform to the federal Fostering Connections to Success Act. (WIC 241.1, 303, 366.3, 388, 391, 450, 11400, 11402, 11403)
4. Permits a nonminor former foster youth under the age of 21 to petition the court for re-entry into foster care if the guardian or adoptive parent is no longer providing support, as specified. (WIC 388.1)
5. Defines “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, county probation department, or Indian tribe, and participating in a transitional independent living plan, as specified. (WIC 11400(v))
6. Prohibits the court from terminating dependency jurisdiction over an NMD who has reached 18 years of age until a hearing is conducted and the county welfare department has submitted a report verifying that specified information, documents, and services have been provided, including the health and education summary. (WIC 391 (h)(1)(3))
7. Requires, when a child is placed in foster care, the case plan for each child to include a summary of the health and education information or records, including mental health information or records, of the child which can be maintained in the form of a health and education passport, or a comparable format designed by the child protective agency. (WIC 16010(a)(1))
8. Requires the health and education summary to include the names and addresses of the child’s health, dental, and education providers; the child’s grade level performance; the child’s school record; the number of school transfers the child has already experienced; the child’s educational progress, a record of the child’s immunizations and allergies; the child’s known medical problems; the child’s current medications, past health problems, and hospitalizations; a record of the child’s relevant mental health history; the child’s known mental health condition and medications; and any other relevant mental health, dental, health, and education information. (WIC 16010(a))
9. Requires the case plan to be developed considering the recommendations of the child and family team, and for a child who is 14 or 15 years of age, requires the case plan to include a written description of the programs and services that will help the child, consistent with the child’s best interests, to prepare for the transition from foster care to successful adulthood. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))
10. Requires, when appropriate, for a child who is 16 years of age or older for a youth dependent, the case plan to include the TILP, a written description of the programs and services that will help the child, consistent with the child’s best interests, to prepare for the transition from foster care to successful adulthood, and, in addition, whether the youth has an in-progress application pending for SSI benefits or for special immigrant juvenile status or other applicable application for legal residency. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))
11. Requires, when appropriate for an NMD, the TILP, as described, a written description of the programs and services that will help the youth dependent, consistent with their best interests, to prepare for transition from foster care and assist the youth in meeting the eligibility criteria. Requires, if applicable, the case plan to describe the individualized supervision provided in the supervised independent living placement (SILP). Requires the case plan to be developed with the NMD and individuals identified as important to the youth and to include steps the agency is taking to ensure that the youth dependent achieves permanence, including maintaining or obtaining permanent connections to caring and committed adults. (WIC 16501.1 (g)(16)(A)(i)(ii))

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

COMMENTS:

Background: Child Welfare Services (CWS). California’s CWS system exists to protect children from abuse and neglect, and in doing so, to provide for their health, safety, and overall well-being. When suspicions of abuse or neglect arise, often as a result of a report by a mandated reporter like a doctor or teacher, Child Protective Services is tasked with investigating the report. If the allegation of abuse or neglect is substantiated, it is then determined whether it is in the best interest of the child to remain in their parent’s custody or be placed within the CWS system. If a child is suspected to be at risk of neglect, abuse, or abandonment, the juvenile court holds legal jurisdiction, and the CWS system appoints a social worker to ensure that the needs of the youth are met. As of October 2022, there were 53,371 youth between the ages of 0 and 21 placed in California’s CWS system.

Extended Foster Care. California was one of the first states to opt in to the federal opportunity to create an extended foster care program which represented a historic expansion of services to foster youth and was intended to improve outcomes for youth, who often faced enormous challenges as they emancipated from the foster care system at age 18 often facing poverty, homelessness, and incarceration.

In 2010, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010, which extended foster care benefits for certain eligible youth until the age of 21. Prior to the enactment of AB 12, known as the “Fostering Connections to Success Act”, youth “aged out” of the CWS system at 18 years old and were required to navigate the challenges of young adulthood, including obtaining education, stable housing, and employment, without the support of the CWS system. In recognition of these difficulties, AB 12 provided eligible youth between the ages of 18 and 21, known as NMDs, with the services and supports they need to experience independent living in supervised living environments. Extended foster care also enables youth to obtain educational and employment training to better prepare them to transition to adulthood and self-sufficiency.

At the six-month hearing prior to a youth attaining 18 years of age, the youth’s social worker or probation officer must have a plan to ensure that the youth will meet at least one of the following criteria for participation in extended foster care:

1. Be enrolled in a high school or equivalent program;
2. Be enrolled in a college, community college, or vocational program;
3. Be employed at least 80 hours a month;
4. Participate in a program or activity designed to remove barriers to employment; or,
5. Be unable to do one of the above requirements due to a medical condition.

NMDs must also sign an agreement to remain in foster care within six months of turning 18, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet the goals of their transitional living plan.

Both federal and state law provide protections to ensure that young people leave foster care with a concrete plan for discharge that provides safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. For example, state law requires county welfare departments, at the last scheduled review hearing held before a dependent child turns 18 years old, and at every review hearing thereafter, to submit a report verifying that certain documents, information, and services have been provided to the minor or non-minor, including:

• Certain essential documents, such as a Social Security card, birth certificate, and a valid ID;
• Information on financial literacy programs and state internships; and,
• Services such as assistance with applying for public benefits, applying for college or vocational training, and securing housing.

However, the law is unclear if a court can maintain jurisdiction over a youth once they turn 21 when the county welfare department has not met the requirements of the extended foster care program. This program is intended to support youth in successfully transitioning to independence with critical documents which enable them to secure education, employment, and most importantly, housing.

When a county fails to provide assistance to secure housing, youth might be exiting the foster care system to homelessness. Appropriate enforcement mechanisms, including keeping a court case open past age 21, can help to ensure that the necessary discharge planning begins in time to discharge the youth into a stable environment.

Foster youth and homelessness. The 2022 national Point in Time count conducted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development reported that California had the largest number of unaccompanied youth at a staggering 9,590 people, which accounts for more than a third of all unaccompanied youth nationally. California also accounted for 52% (6,752 people) of all unsheltered unaccompanied youth. For youth, homelessness can mean living in cars, shelters, or couch surfing with friends; due to an increased susceptibility to exploitation and violence, youth experiencing homelessness may develop substance use issues or engage in survival sex in exchange for shelter or food.

Youth who age out of the foster care system are at high risk of becoming homeless. A 2013 study published in the Journal of Public Health found that between 31% and 46% of former foster youth had been homeless at least once by age 26. According to the study, the odds of becoming homeless by age 19 were higher for youth who had been physically abused before entering foster care, had run away more than once while in foster care, had engaged in delinquent behaviors, were placed in a group care setting at baseline, and did not feel very close to a biological parent or grandparent.

A study conducted by the University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall and released in 2020, addressed whether extending foster care past the age of 18 influenced outcomes during the transition to adulthood, what factors influence the types of support youth receive in extended foster care; and how living arrangements and other services that result from extending foster care influence the relationship between extending care and youth outcomes. The study reported that more than 1 in 4 reported experiencing at least one night of homelessness in the past two years, while nearly 30% said they had couch surfed, staying with friends because they lacked housing. From the research conducted when the youth were 21 years old, they concluded: “In particular, our findings raise questions about the wisdom of abruptly curtailing services for these young people when they reach their 21st birthday. Our findings suggest that when COVID-19 is behind us, it will still be the case that many young adults in care could potentially benefit from ongoing support past their 21st birthday.”

Housing options for foster youth: There are many housing models and programs available to foster youth as they make the transition from care to independence. Below is a list of programs designed for foster youth and are a part of the services and supports that counties can connect foster youth to upon their discharge from foster care:

The Housing Navigation & Maintenance Program. Formerly the Housing Navigators Program, this program was established in Budget Act of 2019, AB 74 (Ting), Chapter 23, Statutes of 2019, and allocated $5 million to help young adults between 18 and 21 years old secure and maintain housing, with priority given to NMDs in the foster care system. The program is administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to county child welfare agencies to provide housing navigators to help young adults secure and maintain housing. Funds allocated to counties may be used to provide housing navigation services directly or through a contract with other housing assistance programs in the county, and counties are encouraged to coordinate with the local Continuum of Care to facilitate communication and collaboration. Funds may be used to: assist young adults secure and maintain housing; provide housing case management, including essential services in emergency supports to foster youth; prevent young adults from becoming homeless; and, improve coordination of services and linkages to key resources across the community. Effective July 1, 2022, as a result of the enactment of SB 187 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review), Chapter 50, Statutes of 2022, the program expanded the upper age limit to include youth up to until turning 25 years old, in order to align the program with federal Housing Choice Voucher Programs for former foster youth. The budget includes $8.7 million in ongoing funding for this expansion, and was designed to equip counties with funding to provide the required supportive services.

Transitional Housing Placement (THP). In 2019, SB 80 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review), Chapter 27, Statutes of 2019, allocated $8 million in grants to counties for child welfare services agencies to help young adults ages 18 to 25 years find and maintain housing. The THP program required that priority be given to youth who were formerly in the foster care or probation systems. SB 80 required HCD to consult with the California Department of Social Services, Department of Finance (DOF), and the County Welfare Directors Association of California to develop an allocation schedule for purposes of distributing funds, and subjected the program to suspend implementation on December 31, 2021, unless DOF made certain findings related to General Fund revenues and expenditures. Use of funds can include: identifying and assisting housing services; helping youth secure and maintain housing; improving coordination of services and linkages to community resources within the child welfare system and the homeless continuum of care; and, outreach and targeting to serve those with the most severe needs.

Transitional Housing Placement Program for Non-Minor Dependents (THP-NMD). When AB 12 enacted extended foster care, the legislation also created the “Transitional Housing Placement Program + Foster Care” placement, now known as THP-NMD. This placement provides 18 to 21-year-old NMDs with transitional housing and supportive housing based on the youth’s TILP. Youth participating in a THP-NMD placement receive case management, supervision, and supportive services from their THP-NMD provider. The goal of these services is to help the NMD transition to independent living by helping them meet education goals, obtain gainful employment, learn financial management and other daily living skills.

Transitional Housing Program-Plus (THP-Plus). The THP-Plus program provides housing for former foster youth between the ages of 18 and 24 who exited foster care on or after their 18th birthday. A qualifying youth can then receiving THP-Plus housing and services for 24 cumulative months, or until they turn 24 if that occurs before their 24 month clock has run. To participate, an eligible youth must be actively pursuing the goals of their TILP, which is reviewed and updated annually. Additionally, the youth must report any changes to their TILP to their Independent Living Program coordinator, including but not limited to, changes in their address, living circumstances, or education training. Residential units including apartments, single family dwellings, condominiums, college dormitories, and host family models may all qualify as an acceptable residential unit for the purposes of a THP-Plus placement. These placements are certified by the county social services agency who must ensure certain health and safety standards are met and must certify that the program is needed by the county and the provider is capable of effectively operating the program and meeting the needs of the identified population.

Supervised Independent Living Placements. NMDs in extended foster care also have the option of living in a SILP which allows the youth to live independently while still receiving the supports and services extended foster care provides. In an SILP, a youth lives in an apartment, house, condominium, room and board arrangement, or college dorm, either alone or with an approved roommate, while still under the supervision of their social worker or probation officer. A SILP may also include a transitional living setting approved by the county to support youth who are entering or reentering foster care or transitioning between placements, but prohibits this setting from including a youth homelessness prevention center or an adult homeless shelter. Youth must be approved to live in an SILP, and this occurs through them undergoing a SILP Readiness Assessment that reviews the youth’s preparedness to live independently. If this assessment finds the youth is ready for a SILP, then the housing arrangement the youth has found must undergo and pass a health and safety inspection which is conducted by the county. If the residence passes this inspection, a placement agreement is completed by the NMD and their social worker or probation officer whereby they agree that the placement has met certain safety standards and is an appropriate placement for the youth.

Author’s statement: According to the author, “California’s Extended Foster Care (EFC) program has demonstrated numerous benefits for the young adults who participate, including improvements in education, employment, and social support. However, the research has also shown that over 35 percent of youth reported that they experienced homelessness while actively enrolled in the EFC program.

“The promise and potential of the EFC program falls short when we fail to connect enrollees to the services and supports that they are entitled to under the law. Both federal and state law include protections to ensure that enrollees leave foster care with a transition plan that provides the foster youth safety, stability, and an opportunity to thrive. When a county fails to meet their obligation under the law and provide assistance to secure housing, youth are exiting the system to homelessness.

“[This bill] ensures that foster youth experiencing housing instability have access to services and supports while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition to independence safely.”

Need for this bill: The provisions of this bill seek to ensure that prior to youth leaving extended foster care, they have been provided all of the supports and services to which they are entitled by allowing courts to keep a case open past the age of 21 if requirements to terminate a case have not been met.

California is slowly emerging from the ongoing pandemic while simultaneously dealing with the rising costs for everyday items like gas and food, compounded by a housing crisis. The impacts of all of these challenges are particularly difficult on foster youth who often struggle to meet their basic needs upon exiting foster care and do not enjoy the same familial safety net that their non-foster youth peers do.

This bill would provide an opportunity for a foster youth to remain in care until the required appropriate documents and services have been provided to ensure a successful transition into independence.

Equity Impact: Foster youth represent one of the most vulnerable and academically at-risk student groups, according to the California Department of Education and suffer poorer educational outcomes with higher rates of suspension and lower rates of graduation. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), in California, the populations reflected in foster care are predominantly youth of color as 21% are Black and 50% are Latino. Further highlighting the disproportionality comprising the foster youth population, the number of Black and Native American youth in foster care are four times larger than the number of the general population of Black and Native American youth in California. The LAO also states that racial disproportionalities and disparities are present within initial allegations and persist at all levels of the system—becoming the most pronounced for youth in care. Additionally, LGBTQ youth are also overrepresented in foster care, according to the UCLA Williams Institute, with 13.6 % of foster youth identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or questioning, and 5.6% identifying as transgender, compared to 10.3% of California’s students in public middle and high schools identifying as LGBTQ.

After over a decade of the enactment of extended foster care in California, the youth who participate have demonstrated that they receive needed education, employment, and social support, however, advocates have reported that some youth are exiting foster care without the appropriate referrals to housing and public benefits that they are entitled. This bill would ensure that foster youth in California experiencing housing instability have access to these services and support while in the system, and provides safeguards to ensure that they can transition after emancipation, and achieve independence in adulthood.

Double referral: This bill will be referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee should it pass out of this committee.

RELATED AND PRIOR LEGISLATION:

AB 2189 (Friedman) of 2022, was substantially similar to this bill and would have authorized foster youth to remain in extended foster care beyond the age of 21 for the limited purpose of compliance with specified verifications by the county prior to termination of dependency, including, AB 2189 would have also required a county, if a county opts to provide a clothing allowance, to provide the clothing allowance to minors and NMDs, including those who may be pregnant, who would have been eligible to have foster care payments paid on their behalf but for the minor or NMD not residing in an approved placement. AB 2189 was vetoed by Governor Newsom.

AB 592 (Friedman), Chapter 702, Statutes of 2021, expanded the scope of a host family within the foster care system to include supervised transitional housing services provided by a THP provider; permitted a host family to include certain approved placements and declared that those placements, when operating as a host family, do not require additional certification; and expanded the definition of a Supervised Independent Living Setting (SILS) to include a transitional housing unit in which a host family lives with an NMD. Further allowed a THP provider to offer supportive services to an NMD placed in a certified family home or resource family of a foster family agency, and allowed a county to elect to allow a THP provider to provide services to a youth in SILS.

SB 912 (Beall) of 2021, would have made an NMD who turned 21 years of age between March 4, 2020, and June 30, 2021, inclusive, eligible to continue receiving extended foster care support through June 30, 2021. Further, SB 912 would have, for a state of emergency declared by the Governor on or after January 1, 2021, required that extended foster care support continue for six months from the date of the declaration for an NMD who turns 21 years of age while the state of emergency is in effect. SB 912 was vetoed by Governor Newsom.

AB 89 (Ting), Chapter 7, Statutes of 2020, known as the Budget Act of 2020, appropriated funds to extend foster care eligibility for NMDs who turn 21 years of age while in extended foster care on or after April 17, 2020, through June 30, 2021.

AB 1979 (Friedman), Chapter 141, Statutes of 2020, addressed housing needs of NMDs in the CWS system by expanding the definition of a SILS, as provided, required counties to examine their ability to meet NMDs emergency housing needs, and preserved a NMD’s transitional housing placement during an absence of up to 14 days, as provided.

SB 80 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review), Chapter 27, Statutes of 2019, allocated $8 million in grants to counties for child welfare services agencies to help young adults ages 18 to 25 years find and maintain housing. The THP program required that priority be given to youth who were formerly in the foster care or probation systems. SB 80 required the HCD to consult with other stakeholders to develop an allocation schedule for purposes of distributing funds. Use of funds could include: identifying and assisting housing services; helping youth secure and maintain housing; improving coordination of services and linkages to community resources within the child welfare system and the homeless continuum of care; and, outreach and targeting to serve those with the most severe needs.

AB 531 (Friedman) of 2019, would have increased housing options available for youth in the extended foster care system. AB 531 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

AB 819 (Stone), Chapter 777, Statutes of 2019, adopted changes to further implement Continuum of Care Reform (CCR) efforts.

AB 748 (Gipson), Chapter 682, Statutes of 2019, allowed youth who are subject to an order for foster care before they reached 18 years of age, but not yet adjudged wards of the juvenile court before their 18th birthday, to be eligible for extended foster care benefits by requiring the court to hold a dispositional proceeding for a youth who is 18 years of age in order to be eligible for extended foster care benefits, if certain criteria is met.

AB 2337 (Gipson), Chapter 539, Statutes of 2018, expanded the circumstances under which NMDs under the age of 21 who were previously a dependent or delinquent of the juvenile court may petition to assume dependency jurisdiction to include youth who would have otherwise been eligible but for receiving SSI benefits in lieu or foster care payments.

AB 604 (Gipson), Chapter 707, Statutes of 2017, required the court to assume transition jurisdiction over a youth who was arrested for, or convicted of, any nonviolent offense committed while they were a victim of human trafficking regardless of a court order vacating the underlying adjudication, as specified.

AB 766 (Friedman), Chapter 710, Statutes of 2017, included a dormitory or other designated housing of a postsecondary educational institution in which a minor dependent who is living independently among the placement options in which a child or NMD must live in order to be eligible for Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC); allowed a minor dependent who is otherwise eligible to receive AFDC-FC payments who meets certain requirements to receive their AFDC-FC payments directly, and prohibits AFDC-FC payments paid directly to the minor dependent from being considered by the California State University and the California Community Colleges when determining eligibility for financial aid.

AB 1930 (Stone), Chapter 910, Statutes of 2018; AB 404 (Stone), Chapter 732, Statutes of 2017; and, AB 1997 (Stone), Chapter 612, Statutes of 2016, furthered CCR.

efforts adopted by AB 403.

AB 403 (Stone), Chapter 773, Statutes of 2015, implemented CCR recommendations to better serve children and youth in California’s child welfare services system, including eliminating group homes and emphasizing family-based care.

AB 1712 (Beall), Chapter 846, Statutes of 2012, enacted numerous technical, clarifying, and federal conformity changes to the California Fostering Connections to Success Act of 2010.

AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010, created the “California Fostering Connections to Success Act” and conformed state law to federal requirements to revise and expand programs and funding for certain foster and adopted children.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Children's Law Center of California (Co-Sponsor)

Public Counsel (Co-Sponsor)

Youth Law Center (Co-Sponsor)

Alliance for Children's Rights

California Alliance of Caregivers

California Court Appointed Special Advocate Association

Children Now

Dependency Legal Services (UNREG)

John Burton Advocates for Youth

Starting Over, INC.

Opposition

None on file

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