Federal help with kinship care costs might help Cali increase foster care until age 21

Foster care system changes are in the works
Melandez, Lyanne. abc7news.com, Dec. 10, 2008.

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- California's foster care system is overstressed and under resourced. Today a blue ribbon commission in San Francisco made some recommendations to begin improving the system. At least two major changes are in the works.

When a foster child turns 18, he or she is on their own -- it's called aging out. Between 4,000 to 5,000 children are forced to leave the system each year. With nowhere to turn, some end up homeless or living with friends or relatives.

Joscelynn Carbonell was in foster care.

"Unlike with other kids you could go back to somebody, you have a support system, you have somebody to pick you up when you fall down, they don't have that, they are on one their own, they are America's forgotten children," said Carbonell.

A federal bill would extend foster care to children past the age of 18 up to 21, but first the California legislature must approve it.

Assemblyman Jim Beall of San Jose led a forum in San Francisco to focus on the state's foster care needs and ways to fund them.

If the foster care age is extended to 21, the state and counties would have to pay half of the cost, then the federal government would pick up the remainder. It's a tough sell given our hard economic times.

Frank Mecca is the executive director of the County Welfare Director's Association.

"In the case of foster care they are very well documented, they are scientifically proven so we know that by not investing we'll incur more costs in the long run," said Mecca.

"This is a policy that is in place in a number of large states and it's been proven to reduce adult incarceration and improve post secondary education outcomes," said Amy Lemley from the John Burton Foundation.

There is a way to pay for this additional expense. Today, California pays 100 percent of the cost of taking care of a child by a relative, and that's about to change.

"By opting into the federal program 50 percent of those costs would be paid for by the federal government, saving California $50 to $60 million a year," said Lemley.

The bill, AB12, still must go before a number of committees before it hits the floor of the Assembly.

Overstressed dependency courts need reform

Taking action for our foster children
Moreno, Carlos. San Francisco Chronicle, Aug. 15, 2008.

Our state has been understandably preoccupied with the heat of wildfires and budget disputes this summer, but there's another crisis on the horizon - one that we can manage if we commit to taking decisive and bold action. This crisis concerns the well-being of children in foster care.

More specifically, it concerns the state of our juvenile dependency courts. Every one of the nearly 80,000 children in foster care in California comes before our dependency courts multiple times. Yet a two-year investigation by the California Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care found an overstressed and under-resourced court system, in which our most vulnerable children and families do not routinely get the attention and services we know they deserve.

This statewide commission, appointed by the chief justice in 2006, found that a number of factors contribute to this crisis. There are fewer than 150 full- and part-time judicial officers across the whole state, and full-time judicial officers have an average caseload of 1,000. It is no surprise that, although our juvenile court judges and commissioners are committed to making fair and impartial decisions about children and families, the participants in juvenile dependency court are not always afforded a meaningful opportunity to participate in their cases. Hearings are only 10 to 15 minutes on average, hardly enough time to get a full picture of a child's hopes or needs, to make critical decisions on services and follow-up. Hearing delays and continuances are routine.

Court attorneys who represent children and families in court have caseloads averaging 273; in a few counties, this rises to more than 600. Some children and parents do not even meet their attorneys until the day of their hearings, when they hear their names called in a crowded waiting room or hallway.

The Blue Ribbon Commission is issuing a series of recommendations today in an urgent call for reform of our juvenile dependency courts. Our recommendations fall into four categories:

Prevention and permanency, to help keep families together whenever it is safe and possible to do so. This includes returning children to their homes as soon as all court-mandated services have been met or finding placement in another permanent home when removal is necessary. It also means increasing efforts to find relatives and family members and addressing the thorny problem of the disproportionate numbers of African American and Native American children in foster care.

Court reforms, the heart and soul of our recommendations. Quite simply, we intend to change the way we do business in dependency court. The commission urges reasonable caseloads for judges, court attorneys and social workers. We want to ensure that children and parents have a meaningful voice in court. Judges make life-changing decisions about children's lives - where they will live and with whom. How can they rule in the best interest of each child if they are not able to hear the full story of each family?

Better collaboration between the courts and our partners. Many families who come before our bench are involved with more than one governmental agency at a time, yet these bureaucracies rarely communicate with one another. We must eliminate the barriers to sharing data and information that too often mean families receive different, even conflicting, direction and case plans. Lack of coordination between the courts and our partners means children sometimes remain in care longer than necessary.

Funding. The commission recognizes the fiscal realities in our state, and not all of our recommendations require new funding. But we believe no child or family should be denied critical services because of funding restraints. We call on the courts and our partner agencies to prioritize children in foster care in allocating services and resources. We urge reform of regulations that prevent agencies from pooling and coordinating funds for important services. And we call on the federal government to allow us to use federal foster care funds - currently restricted for use only after a child is removed from his or her family - for prevention services to support families in their homes.

In the end, we know that if our recommendations are successfully implemented, the state will save money. Fewer children will be placed in foster care or costly group homes, and the reforms will pay for themselves. But we have an obligation to act quickly. After all, time moves slowly in the eyes of a child. Removal from a parent is almost always a traumatic event, and even a month in a stranger's home can seem an eternity.

We believe the Blue Ribbon Commission recommendations are feasible and fiscally responsible. They can make a difference where it counts most - in the lives of children and their families.

Carlos R. Moreno, a state Supreme Court associate justice, is chair of the California Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care. He is also a foster parent.

California dependency courts in need of reform

Commission calls California dependency courts 'overstressed, underresourced'
By Karen de Sá, San Jose Mercury News, March 14, 2008.

A state commission concluded its two-year study of California's juvenile dependency courts Friday by calling for sweeping reforms to make sure children and parents caught in the system are better informed and better served.

The Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care recommended critical changes to ensure that lawyers meet with their clients well in advance of their hearings, that judges preside over all court cases and that children are present and active when their life in foster care is being decided.

The recommendations address several of the critical problems highlighted by the series "Broken Families, Broken Courts," a Mercury News investigation published last month that exposed widespread problems in the courts that oversee 75,000 California children in foster care.

The report of the commission, appointed by Chief Justice Ronald George, echoed the newspaper series with this dire warning: "California's dependency courts are overstressed and underresourced, burdened by crowded dockets and inadequate information."

California's dependency courts decide which children should be returned to their families and which removed permanently following allegations of child abuse and neglect.

The report was posted online Friday, launching a 60-day public comment period. In August, the state's Judicial Council - the policy-making body of the California courts - is expected to consider adopting reforms.

Confirming the Mercury News findings, the commission reported that children and parents afforded court-appointed lawyers "do not meet their attorneys until moments before their hearings." The typical time for hearings is as short as 10 minutes, a far cry from the 30- to 60-minute hearings recommended.

"If we truly are intent on doing better by children and families, we can't ignore the courts and the legal process," said Myriam Krinsky, a member of the Blue Ribbon Commission and a state courts consultant. "The commission's recommendations acknowledge that we have to do business differently, and that children and families will continue to pay the price if we don't start to turn the corner."

The commission is the first of its kind in California, focusing on the court's role in the child welfare system. Commissioners included judges, attorneys, legislators, child welfare directors, foster youth, child advocates, tribal leaders, academics and philanthropists.

The recommendations in the commission's 20-page report aim at reducing the number of children in foster care, a system believed to poorly serve the children it is designed to protect. Key recommendations include:

• Removing children from their homes should be a last resort, and children temporarily separated from parents should be returned home by the courts as quickly as possible. If the state does take custody, children in long-term foster care should receive financial and other support through age 21, rather than ending foster care at age 18 as is the current practice.

• Local trial courts should prioritize the often-shunned dependency courts. All dependency cases should be heard by judges, not the court-appointed referees and commissioners who now hear most cases.

• All court clients - including children - should have an opportunity to participate in their hearings; with the exception of cases in Los Angeles County, children are routinely absent. Clients should get help with rides to court, and hearings should be set at specific times, so that school and work conflicts for parents can be accommodated.

To improve the quality of representation in dependency court, the commission calls for attorneys to meet with clients "before the initial hearing and in advance of all subsequent hearings," a basic communication now lacking in most courtrooms.

The commission also wants higher pay and lowered caseloads for lawyers who now carry as many as 600 cases in some regions. This is hundreds more cases than competent attorneys can reasonably manage, experts say.

What's more, new attorneys should be encouraged to enter a field too often shunned, the report stated: Juvenile dependency law should be a mandatory area of study for the California Bar Exam and student loans should be forgiven for those entering the field.

Some dependency court insiders viewed the long-awaited report with some disappointment, fearing that the language is too vague to have an impact. Others fear the state's dire fiscal crisis will be an obstacle to the legislation and resources needed to make lasting change.

Jonathan Pearson a 25-year-old former foster youth who serves on the commission, said he hopes the recommendations will be strengthened and improved following public comment.

Pearson, removed from his drug-addicted mother at age 3, lived in nine different court-ordered placements. Going to court often meant a four-hour wait, before a minutes-long hearing with a lawyer he had just met.

For the commission to have the impact Pearson and others desire, "I think that we have more work to do," he said. "We need to make sure that not only is the report politically viable, but there's a clear way to implement every recommendation."

Commissioner Darrell Steinberg - who is incoming president pro tem of the state Senate - said the state's fiscal crisis makes it impossible to implement reforms that cost money. But the Sacramento Democrat is hopeful there will be future opportunities to spend money on desperately needed change.

"If we don't help children and families during these most difficult times," Steinberg said, "they will bear the consequences and so will we."

IF YOU'RE INTERESTED

The commission report may be seen at: www.courtinfo.ca.gov/jc/tflists/bluerib-rec.htm