HOUSE BILL NO. 151                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     "An Act  relating to  the duties  of the  Department of                                                                    
     Health and  Social Services;  relating to  training and                                                                    
     workload standards  for employees of the  Department of                                                                    
     Health  and Social  Services; relating  to foster  care                                                                    
     licensing; relating to placement of  a child in need of                                                                    
     aid;  relating to  the rights  and responsibilities  of                                                                    
     foster parents;  relating to subsidies for  adoption or                                                                    
     guardianship of a  child in need of  aid; requiring the                                                                    
     Department  of Health  and Social  Services to  provide                                                                    
     information  to a  child or  person  released from  the                                                                    
     department's  custody; and  providing for  an effective                                                                    
     date."                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:48:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Foster relayed  that the  committee had  heard the                                                                    
bill twice before.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair   Seaton   MOVED   to  ADOPT   proposed   committee                                                                    
substitute  for  HB  151, Work  Draft  30-LS0451\E  (Glover,                                                                    
4/14/17).                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, SPONSOR,  reviewed the changes from                                                                    
the N version  to the E version. The  changes were primarily                                                                    
pear downs  of the bill  to make  it less costly.  Version N                                                                    
included a  provision that would  have granted  adoption and                                                                    
guardianship subsidies  to families  who adopted  youth over                                                                    
the  age of  18. However,  under federal  law, he  could not                                                                    
find  a  way  to  make   the  provision  work.  the  federal                                                                    
government required  the state to also  extend the subsidies                                                                    
to anyone adopted  before age 18. It would  have resulted in                                                                    
an $8 million fiscal note.  The provision was removed in the                                                                    
newest  version.  He  added that  the  previous  $1  million                                                                    
fiscal note was  removed. He continued that in  version E he                                                                    
found a  way to lower the  cost of the bill.  The department                                                                    
recommended that caseloads,  on average, be no  more that 12                                                                    
per case  worker statewide. He  saved about $1 million  in a                                                                    
way that continued to make  the bill work and vastly improve                                                                    
the  system  by  increasing  the statewide  standard  to  13                                                                    
families  instead  of 12.  Version  E  used 13  family.  The                                                                    
committee  substitute also  outlined that  no one  could sue                                                                    
the department  if that standard  was not met.  The standard                                                                    
was subject to appropriation  and recruitment efforts. Those                                                                    
were the major changes in the bill.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being  NO OBJECTION,  the committee substitute  for HB                                                                    
151 was ADOPTED.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Foster   relayed  the  names  of   the  testifiers                                                                    
available  online to  answer  questions.  He indicated  that                                                                    
Representative Pruitt  and Representative Tilton  had joined                                                                    
the  meeting. The  committee  would be  taking  a brief  "at                                                                    
ease"  in  anticipation  of the  arrival  of  Representative                                                                    
Wilson.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Seaton  wanted  to   ask  Christy  Lawton  if  the                                                                    
department was okay with the changes made to the bill.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHRISTY  LAWTON, OFFICE  OF  CHILDREN'S SERVICES,  ANCHORAGE                                                                    
(via  teleconference),  responded  that the  department  was                                                                    
satisfied with  the changes. She  elaborated that  while the                                                                    
department  would   like  to  see  the   additional  subsidy                                                                    
extended  to 21  for all  children, it  realized it  was not                                                                    
fiscally possible was not currently  possible in Alaska. She                                                                    
noted the  department appreciating the immunity  clause that                                                                    
was added to  help give further protection  given that there                                                                    
were  so many  things regarding  workforce that  were beyond                                                                    
the state's  control. The department was  satisfied with the                                                                    
bill as written.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:53:59 PM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:55:01 PM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Foster  indicated   there  were  several  meetings                                                                    
beginning  shortly. The  committee would  stand at  ease and                                                                    
reconvene   following  the   adjournment   of  the   various                                                                    
meetings.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:55:18 PM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
6:31:19 PM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster indicated the amendments  would be heard for                                                                    
HB 151.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Wilson  reported  the  amendments  had  been                                                                    
dropped off to Vice-Chair Gara's office.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 1                                                                     
(copy on file):                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Page 1, line 3, following "licensing":                                                                                     
          Insert  "relating to  civil  and criminal  history                                                                    
          background  checks for  foster care  licensing and                                                                    
          payments;"                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, following line 8:                                                                                                  
          Insert new bill sections to read:                                                                                     
     "* Sec. 4. AS 47.05.310(c) is amended to read:                                                                             
          (c) Except as provided in  <D of this section, the                                                                    
          [THE] department may not issue  or renew a license                                                                    
          or certification  for an  entity if  an individual                                                                    
          is  applying  for   a  license,  license  renewal,                                                                    
          certification,  or certification  renewal for  the                                                                    
          entity and that                                                                                                       
               (1) individual  has been found by  a court or                                                                    
               agency of this or another     jurisdiction                                                                       
               to  have neglected,  abused,  or exploited  a                                                                    
               child or vulnerable adult  under AS 47.10, AS                                                                    
               47.24,  or   AS  47.62  or   a  substantially                                                                    
               similar  provision  in another  jurisdiction,                                                                    
               or  to  have   committed  medical  assistance                                                                    
               fraud under  AS 47.05.210 or  a substantially                                                                    
               similar  provision  in another  jurisdiction;                                                                    
               or                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
               (2)   individual's   name  appears   on   the                                                                    
               centralized  registry  established  under  AS                                                                    
               47.05.330  or  a  similar  registry  of  this                                                                    
              state or another jurisdiction.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     * Sec. 5. AS 47.05.310(i) is amended to read:                                                                              
          (i) Except as provided in  <D of this section, for                                                                    
          [FOR] purposes of (b) and  (c) of this section, in                                                                    
          place of  nonissuance or  nonrenewal of  a license                                                                    
          or certification, an  entity or individual service                                                                    
          provider that  is not required  to be  licensed or                                                                    
          certified by  the department  or a  person wishing                                                                    
          to   become  an   entity  or   individual  service                                                                    
          provider that  is not required  to be  licensed or                                                                    
          certified by the  department is instead ineligible                                                                    
          to receive  a payment, in  whole or in  part, from                                                                    
          the department to provide  for the health, safety,                                                                    
          and  welfare  of persons  who  are  served by  the                                                                    
          programs administered by the department if the                                                                        
          entity, individual service provider, or person                                                                        
               (1) is  in violation  of (a) of  this section                                                                    
               or   would   be   in   violation   based   on                                                                    
               information  received  by the  department  as                                                                    
               part   of   an  application,   approval,   or                                                                    
               selection process;                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
               (2) has  been found by  a court or  agency of                                                                    
               this   or   another  jurisdiction   to   have                                                                    
               neglected,  abused, or  exploited a  child or                                                                    
               vulnerable  adult under  AS 47.10,  AS 47.24,                                                                    
               or  AS  47.62   or  a  substantially  similar                                                                    
               provision  in  another  jurisdiction,  or  to                                                                    
               have   committed  medical   assistance  fraud                                                                    
               under   AS  47.05.210   or  a   substantially                                                                    
               similar  provision  in another  jurisdiction;                                                                    
               or                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
               (3)  appears  on   the  centralized  registry                                                                    
               established under  AS 47.05.330 or  a similar                                                                    
               registry   of    this   state    or   another                                                                    
               jurisdiction.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     * Sec. 6. AS 47.05.310(k) is amended by adding new                                                                         
     paragraphs to read:                                                                                                        
               (4)  "adult family  member"  has the  meaning                                                                    
               given in AS 47.I0.990;                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
               (5) "foster  home" has  the meaning  given in                                                                    
               AS 47.32.900.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     * Sec. 7. AS 47.05.310 is amended by adding a new                                                                          
     subsection to read:                                                                                                        
          (l) The department may issue or renew a foster                                                                        
          home license under AS 47.32                                                                                           
          or provide  payments under AS 47.14.100(b)  or (d)                                                                    
          to  an  entity,  individual service  provider,  or                                                                    
          person if  the applicant  or a person  who resides                                                                    
          in the  home is  barred from licensure  or payment                                                                    
          under (c), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this section and                                                                      
               (1) a person  in the home is  an adult family                                                                    
               member  or family  friend of  a child  in the                                                                    
               custody or supervision of  the state under AS                                                                    
               47.1 O;                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
               (2)  the department  finds  that placing  the                                                                    
               child  with  the entity,  individual  service                                                                    
               provider, or person is  in the best interests                                                                    
               of the child; and                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
               (3)  the conduct  that is  the  basis of  the                                                                    
               finding under (c), (i)(2),  or (i)(3) of this                                                                    
               section  occurred at  least  10 years  before                                                                    
               the   date   the  department   receives   the                                                                    
               application  for  licensure   or  renewal  or                                                                    
               makes  a payment  to  the entity,  individual                                                                    
               service provider, or person."                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 8:                                                                                                           
          Delete "Sections 3 - 8 and 10 - 16"                                                                                   
          Insert "Sections 3 - 12 and 14 - 20"                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 10:                                                                                                          
          Delete "secs. 3 - 8 and 10 - 16"                                                                                      
          Insert "Sections 3 - 12 and 14 - 20"                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 11:                                                                                                          
          Delete "9"                                                                                                            
          Insert "13" 13                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 13:                                                                                                          
          Delete "9"                                                                                                            
          Insert "13"                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 15:                                                                                                          
          Delete "9"                                                                                                            
          Insert "13"                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 28:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 17"                                                                                                      
     Page 12, line 29:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 17"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 31:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 17"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 2:                                                                                                           
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 17"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 3:                                                                                                           
          Delete "secs. 1 - 12 and 14 - 16"                                                                                     
          Insert "secs. 1 - 16 and 18 - 20"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 4:                                                                                                           
          Delete "secs. 1 - 12 and 14 - 16"                                                                                     
          Insert "secs. I - 16 and 18 - 20"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 5:                                                                                                           
          Delete "Section 18"                                                                                                   
          Insert "Section 22"                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson  explained the amendment.  She relayed                                                                    
that  if a  grandparent, aunt,  or  uncle wanted  to have  a                                                                    
child placed  in their home  and a barrier condition  was in                                                                    
place  a child  would not  be able  to be  placed with  that                                                                    
family member.  A barrier  condition was not  the same  as a                                                                    
barrier crime.  A barrier crime  was a circumstance  where a                                                                    
person went  to court, was  found guilty, and was  unable to                                                                    
participate in certain activities  thereafter for many years                                                                    
or  indefinitely. If  a 21-year-old  parent had  their child                                                                    
taken  by the  Office of  Children's Services  but completed                                                                    
all that was  required of them and had  their child returned                                                                    
to them  in 6  months, they would  have a  barrier condition                                                                    
attached  to them.  If that  person's child  were to  get in                                                                    
trouble  and their  child (grandchild)  needed to  be placed                                                                    
somewhere,  the   child  could   not  be  placed   with  the                                                                    
grandparent with  a barrier condition. The  department would                                                                    
have  to consider  past  circumstances. If  a  person had  a                                                                    
clean  record  for  10 years,  then  the  barrier  condition                                                                    
should  not  matter.   A  large  report  was   done  by  the                                                                    
ombudsman's office that concluded  the issue was significant                                                                    
in Alaska.  She mentioned other legislation  in play dealing                                                                    
with  the major  issue. She  thought her  amendment did  not                                                                    
force  the department  to  do anything  but  asked that  the                                                                    
larger picture be reviewed.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
6:34:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Gara understood  Representative Wilson's  point.                                                                    
He  thought the  issue  was already  covered  with a  waiver                                                                    
system in  place. He  noted that when  he first  heard about                                                                    
barrier conditions,  he thought  they were  like an  old DWI                                                                    
[driving under the  influence] or an old crime  that did not                                                                    
involve child  abuse. However, he  referred to Section  7 of                                                                    
the   amendment    noting   the   statute    reference:   AS                                                                    
47.05.310(C). The  barrier conditions included  neglecting a                                                                    
child, abusing  a child, or  exploiting a  child. Additional                                                                    
conditions applied to  persons committing medical assistance                                                                    
fraud and  abusing, exploiting,  or neglecting  a vulnerable                                                                    
adult.  He  opined  that  waiving  a  person's  barrier  and                                                                    
placing someone  in their home was  dangerous. The amendment                                                                    
contained a provision about finding  that it was in the best                                                                    
interest of the child. He  believed it created a presumption                                                                    
that if  a person  abused a child  or vulnerable  adult more                                                                    
than 10 years  prior, the person would be able  to provide a                                                                    
good foster  home. He did not  like the idea, as  he thought                                                                    
that  family   member  would   be  unsafe.   Currently,  the                                                                    
department  had a  waiver  system.  If it  was  in the  best                                                                    
interest of  a child to be  placed with a family  that had a                                                                    
previous  barrier condition  several years  prior, a  waiver                                                                    
could be issued.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Wilson relayed  that  if a  person abused  a                                                                    
child, they  had not been  found guilty of abusing  a child.                                                                    
If a child was taken out  of a home and an emergency removal                                                                    
was  done, the  adult  was considered  guilty,  even if  the                                                                    
child  was placed  back into  a  home and  the person  never                                                                    
appeared before  a jury. She emphatically  stated that there                                                                    
was no waiver system in  place. She indicated that there was                                                                    
a waiver system for someone  with a barrier condition to get                                                                    
a job.  A person could get  a waiver to  get a job at  a day                                                                    
care.  However, there  was no  waiver system.  She commented                                                                    
that she  had never seen  documentation of a  waiver system.                                                                    
The  amendment  provided an  option  for  the department  to                                                                    
reevaluate a person's case after  10 years. She relayed that                                                                    
if a person committed a  barrier crime, after ten years they                                                                    
would be  able to get jobs  and be able to  do other things.                                                                    
In the  instance she  was referring to,  the person  was not                                                                    
even found guilty,  being a civil case. She  argued that the                                                                    
person should be criminally charged  and if found guilty the                                                                    
crimes  would   be  barrier   crimes.  The   amendment  gave                                                                    
grandparents, who might  have made a mistake  when they were                                                                    
young and  were currently  outstanding citizens,  the option                                                                    
of being able  to step in to help a  grandchild. Many times,                                                                    
a  child that  had been  involved  in an  instance ended  up                                                                    
being a  parent later that  repeated the cycle. She  did not                                                                    
want to  continue to  punish someone  who was  never charged                                                                    
criminally. There was a waiver for  a job but not for foster                                                                    
parenting.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
6:39:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Kawasaki read a  portion of the amendment. He                                                                    
thought,  because  of  the  use   of  the  word  "may",  the                                                                    
department  would   not  be  forced   to  issue   a  waiver.                                                                    
Representative  Wilson  responded   that  the  people  being                                                                    
discussed would  not be foster  parents. Rather,  they would                                                                    
be  relative  care  givers.  Section  7(3)  would  allow  an                                                                    
option. If a  person was providing care as a  job, there was                                                                    
a  waiver  system  process they  went  through.  The  person                                                                    
turned  in paperwork  to the  department,  which would  then                                                                    
decide whether  the person could  take the job  they applied                                                                    
for.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
6:40:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Seaton  asked  for  the  opportunity  to  ask  the                                                                    
department.  Ms.   Lawton  clarified  that   variances,  not                                                                    
waivers,  that  were applied  for  by  relatives with  child                                                                    
protective services histories whose  children were in foster                                                                    
care were  reviewed. She reviewed all  variance applications                                                                    
and  made  determinations for  the  division  prior to  them                                                                    
going  to  the  department  level for  final  approval.  She                                                                    
indicated   that,  often,   the  variances   were  approved,                                                                    
especially  in cases  of grandparents  whose histories  were                                                                    
old  could  clearly  demonstrate  that  there  had  been  no                                                                    
additional  concerns.  She  noted  that  Assistant  Attorney                                                                    
General Stacey Kraly would be  the best person to respond to                                                                    
some of the aspects of the bill.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson  asked how the amendment  would impact                                                                    
what the  department was  doing since  there was  a variance                                                                    
option available. She  noted she had never  seen a variance.                                                                    
Ms. Lawton deferred to Ms. Kraly.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
6:42:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
STACIE KRALY,  ATTORNEY, CIVIL  DIVISION, DEPARTMENT  OF LAW                                                                    
(via teleconference), indicated that  the department did not                                                                    
think the amendment  was necessary for a  couple of reasons.                                                                    
First,  within  the  current  regulatory  framework  and  as                                                                    
authorized   by   statute,   the  department   could   adopt                                                                    
regulations to implement the  background check process which                                                                    
included  criminal bars  and civil  bars or  conditions. She                                                                    
continued  that within  the framework  the department  had a                                                                    
variance  review  process,  which was  in  state  regulation                                                                    
found  in 7ac.10.935.  Under the  regulatory framework,  any                                                                    
individual who  had a  baring condition  or a  baring crime,                                                                    
with  very narrow  exceptions, could  seek a  variance. Some                                                                    
variances  that  the  department would  not  allow  included                                                                    
someone convicted  of sexual  misconduct. She  reported that                                                                    
90  percent of  the things  the department  found as  baring                                                                    
conditions were subject to a variance.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Kraly  continued that one  of the things  the department                                                                    
did recently, in light  of Representative Wilson referencing                                                                    
the Ombudsman Report, was to  engage in a candid and through                                                                    
review  of   the  process  over  many   years  and  proposed                                                                    
legislation  through the  governor's office  addressing some                                                                    
of the  concerns raised in  this amendment.  The legislation                                                                    
was  pending in  the current  session. The  department hoped                                                                    
the  legislation  would be  taken  up  in the  spring.  More                                                                    
importantly,   because   of   the  Ombudsman   Report,   the                                                                    
department  crafted a  robust revision  of its  regulations.                                                                    
She  reported  that  within  the  framework  the  department                                                                    
addressed  several concerns  that had  been raised.  In most                                                                    
instances,  a baring  condition was  considered a  permanent                                                                    
bar   subject  to   a   variance.   The  department,   under                                                                    
regulations  that would  be adopted  and effective  within a                                                                    
couple of  months, stated that  the civil bars  were 10-year                                                                    
bars  except for  those instances  where  an individual  had                                                                    
either  had their  parental rights  terminated  or they  had                                                                    
relinquished their  parental rights. In  such circumstances,                                                                    
the department  stated that  those sorts  of bars  should be                                                                    
permanent  bars  subject to  a  variance.  She believed  the                                                                    
department  had   already  addressed   the  representative's                                                                    
concerns  through   a  regulation  process  that   would  be                                                                    
activated shortly. She reported  that the department did not                                                                    
believe  the   changes  proposed   in  the   amendment  were                                                                    
necessary, as they were already addressed.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara  suggested that if  the amendment  passed it                                                                    
would address a  broader group of people rather  than just a                                                                    
relative  who  had  a history  of  abuse,  exploitation,  or                                                                    
neglect. He asked  if it applied to a  non-relative as well.                                                                    
Ms.  Kraly   responded  that  the  amendment,   as  crafted,                                                                    
included  family members  and  family friends.  It was  much                                                                    
broader.   Additionally,   she   was  concerned   with   the                                                                    
amendment's impact on other provider  types. She was unclear                                                                    
if  it  also included  baring  conditions  and crimes  under                                                                    
these circumstances  for individuals  who wanted  to operate                                                                    
other  types  of  license   provider  types  and  individual                                                                    
service  providers   like  personal  care   attendants.  She                                                                    
continued that the lead-in language  on page 2, lines 18-21,                                                                    
of the amendment  was not clear if it was  limited to foster                                                                    
homes.  She  thought  the amendment  would  have  a  broader                                                                    
application and  could raise some other  issues. She thought                                                                    
the  intent of  the  amendment would  only  apply to  foster                                                                    
homes, but it was not clear.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
6:47:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson  clarified that she was  talking about                                                                    
conditions  rather than  crimes. She  opined that  Ms. Kraly                                                                    
was interchanging  the two terms.  Ms. Kraly  responded that                                                                    
she was correct.  In terms of the current  amendment and the                                                                    
central registry, civil conditions were not crimes.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Ortiz  referred to  Representative  Wilson's                                                                    
question about  how the amendment  would affect  the process                                                                    
or  the department's  ability to  do its  job regarding  the                                                                    
issue. Ms.  Kraly answered that  the concern  the department                                                                    
had with  the amendment was  that it  was not clear  that it                                                                    
only applied to foster homes.  She elaborated that the civil                                                                    
background  and   civil  condition  process  in   which  the                                                                    
department  reviewed an  individual's  history to  determine                                                                    
whether  there   was  a  pattern  or   practice  potentially                                                                    
problematic  in  providing  care  to  vulnerable  adults  or                                                                    
children, looked at  all sorts of provider  types. The types                                                                    
of  providers   included  Medicaid  providers,   child  care                                                                    
providers,  foster  care  parents,  respite  providers,  and                                                                    
personal  care  attendants.  The  department  was  concerned                                                                    
whether the amendment  applied to all types  of providers or                                                                    
just  foster parents.  If the  legislator was  attempting to                                                                    
target foster homes,  she did not believe  the amendment met                                                                    
the intent. She thought it  could create confusion about the                                                                    
application  of the  rule.  She also  noted  that while  the                                                                    
amendment somewhat  replicated the variance  process already                                                                    
in  regulation,  the  department  felt  that  providing  the                                                                    
framework  and having  an additional  consideration lead  to                                                                    
more  confusion.  She  mentioned  the  department  having  a                                                                    
broader  array  of  information  to  look  at  to  determine                                                                    
whether to grant a variance.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Wilson  did  not   feel  the  amendment  was                                                                    
confusing.  She read  from the  amendment  (see above).  She                                                                    
highlighted that it had to do  with the issuance of a foster                                                                    
home  license.  She reported  3  criteria  as noted  in  the                                                                    
amendment. The  waiver system would  still have to  pass all                                                                    
three tests.  The amendment only  pertained to  foster care.                                                                    
She thought  the provisions needed  to be in  statute versus                                                                    
regulations.  She reiterated  that the  amendment was  about                                                                    
the person in the home.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
6:53:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Seaton was trying  to follow Representative Wilson.                                                                    
He read  from line 19  of the  amendment. He thought  it was                                                                    
unclear whether it applied to  a service provider, a service                                                                    
entity, or a  foster home. He thought  the amendment covered                                                                    
a broader aspect than just the home.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Wilson  suggested  going  to  1,  2,  and  3                                                                    
[Representative  Wilson was  referring to  Section 7  of the                                                                    
amendment].  She read  from the  amendment (see  above). She                                                                    
had  thought she  was working  with Vice-Chair  Gara on  the                                                                    
amendment. She  remarked that had  she known  her amendments                                                                    
would be  brought forth  in the present  day she  would have                                                                    
prepared differently.  She was only notified  in the morning                                                                    
that her  amendments would be  brought forth. She  wanted to                                                                    
provide hope  to some  grandparents that  they would  not be                                                                    
penalized for the rest of their lives.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara read  the statute related to  the conduct of                                                                    
a potential  foster parent. He indicated  that the amendment                                                                    
would  allow an  individual found  by a  court or  agency to                                                                    
have neglected,  abused or exploited  a child  or vulnerable                                                                    
adult to become a foster  parent. He believed these were the                                                                    
people  that  the amendment  would  allow  to become  foster                                                                    
parents under the standards in  the amendment. He understood                                                                    
the frustrations of the  representative. However, he thought                                                                    
the current variance  process, as it was  being amended, was                                                                    
cleaner.  He  suggested  that  someone  who  had  neglected,                                                                    
abused, or  exploited a  child had  been caught  once, which                                                                    
did  not mean  they had  not been  doing it  since; It  just                                                                    
meant they had been caught once.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
6:56:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Ortiz asked if  the amendment applied only to                                                                    
grandparents   or   to   friends   and   others   as   well.                                                                    
Representative  Wilson responded  that  that  it applied  to                                                                    
individuals. It  could apply to a  family friend. Typically,                                                                    
grandparents  came   forward.  The  grandparents   were  not                                                                    
considered  because of  something that  had occurred  in the                                                                    
past.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Representative Thompson  was curious  about the  agency that                                                                    
was  being referred  to  in the  amendment.  He provided  an                                                                    
example having to  do with a Down Syndrome  child that snuck                                                                    
out  of the  house and  went down  the street  to a  grocery                                                                    
store.  A person  found  him and  notified  the police.  The                                                                    
police picked  up the child,  notified the agency  that then                                                                    
conducted a house  inspection. The family was  told that the                                                                    
state was thinking  about taking the child away.  It was the                                                                    
only time the family had  ever had any problem. However, the                                                                    
incident was a hassle and  the folks had a barrier condition                                                                    
on  their record.  He admitted  not understanding  the issue                                                                    
completely, but he thought the amendment was good.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Wilson  wrapped   up   by  discussing   the                                                                    
downfalls of  the system  in place.  She mentioned  a person                                                                    
not being  able to go  in front of a  judge or have  a court                                                                    
hearing. She  reiterated the amendment had  3 provisions and                                                                    
OCS  made the  decision. She  believed that  after 10  years                                                                    
grandparents  should not  automatically be  denied. She  was                                                                    
simply trying  to change the  automatic denial  currently in                                                                    
place.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara MAINTAINED his OBJECTION.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Kawasaki, Ortiz, Thompson, Tilton, Wilson                                                                             
OPPOSED: Gara, Guttenberg, Foster, Seaton                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative Grenn  and Representative Pruitt  were absent                                                                    
from the vote.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION to ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 1 PASSED (5/4).                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Conceptual Amendment 1 was ADOPTED.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson MOVED to  ADOPT Conceptual Amendment 2                                                                    
(copy on file):                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     Page 1, line 7, following "custody;":                                                                                      
          Insert "relating to the definition of child                                                                           
          neglect;"                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, following line 8:                                                                                                  
     Insert a new bill section to read:                                                                                         
     "* Sec. 4. AS 47.10.014 is amended to read:                                                                                
          Sec.  47.10.014.  Neglect.  For purposes  of  this                                                                    
          chapter, the court may find  neglect of a child if                                                                    
          the  parent,  guardian,   or  custodian  fails  to                                                                    
          provide the child  with necessary [ADEQUATE] food,                                                                    
          clothing, shelter,  [EDUCATION,] medical  care, or                                                                    
          supervision  to   the  degree  that   the  child's                                                                    
          health,  safety,  and  well-being  are  threatened                                                                    
          with  substantial harm  [ATTENTION, OR  OTHER CARE                                                                    
          and CONTROL NECESSARY    FOR THE  CHILD'S PHYSICAL                                                                    
          AND   MENTAL  HEALTH   AND  DEVELOPMENT],   though                                                                    
          financially able to do so  or offered financial or                                                                    
          other reasonable means to do so."                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page 11, following line 6:                                                                                                 
          Insert a new bill section to read:                                                                                    
     "* Sec.16. AS 47.17.290(11) is amended to read:                                                                            
          (11)  "neglect" means  the  failure  by a  parent,                                                                    
          guardian,   or  custodian   of  a   child  [PERSON                                                                    
          RESPONSIBLE  FOR THE  CHILD'S WELFARE]  to provide                                                                    
          the child  with necessary food,  [CARE,] clothing,                                                                    
          shelter, [OR] medical care,  or supervision to the                                                                    
          degree that the child's  health, safety, and well-                                                                    
          being are threatened    with   substantial    harm                                                                    
          [ATTENTION FOR A CHILD];"                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 8:                                                                                                           
          Delete "Sections 3 - 8 and 10 - 16"                                                                                   
          Insert "Sections 3 - 9 and 11 - 18"                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 10:                                                                                                          
          Delete "secs. 3 - 8 and 10 - 16"                                                                                      
          Insert "secs. 3 - 9 and 11 - 18"                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 11:                                                                                                          
          Delete "9"                                                                                                            
          Insert "10"                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 13:                                                                                                          
          Delete "9"                                                                                                            
          Insert "10"                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 15:                                                                                                          
          Delete "9"                                                                                                            
          Insert "10"                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 28:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 14"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 29:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 14"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 12, line 31:                                                                                                          
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 14"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 2:                                                                                                           
          Delete "sec. 13"                                                                                                      
          Insert "sec. 14"                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 3:                                                                                                           
          Delete "secs. 1 - 12 and 14 - 16"                                                                                     
          Insert "secs. 1 - 13 and 15 - 18"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 4:                                                                                                           
          Delete "secs. 1 - 12 and 14 - 16"                                                                                     
          Insert "secs. 1 - 13 and 15 - 18"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 13, line 5:                                                                                                           
          Delete "Section 18"                                                                                                   
          Insert "Section 20"                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson  explained the amendment.  She relayed                                                                    
that the  amendment aligned the state's  definition with the                                                                    
federal  definition for  neglect. She  read the  definition.                                                                    
She spoke of  children being turned into OCS  for missing so                                                                    
many days of school. Nothing  else was the matter with these                                                                    
children  other than  them not  attending school.  There had                                                                    
been  other cases  where  harm had  not  occurred but  there                                                                    
seemed to be neglect. The  Office of Children's Services was                                                                    
not supposed to remove a child  from a home unless there was                                                                    
a  threat to  their health,  safety, wellbeing,  or if  they                                                                    
were  threatened with  harm. She  reported that  by changing                                                                    
the  definition  of neglect  there  would  be several  cases                                                                    
opened by OCS.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Kawasaki asked  Ms.  Lawton  about the  word                                                                    
"education"  being struck  from the  statute definition  for                                                                    
neglect. He  queried if missing  school was a trigger  for a                                                                    
finding of neglect. Ms. Lawton  Responded that the number of                                                                    
cases OCS  responded to that  were strictly  for educational                                                                    
neglect was  slim. Typically, when  OCS was  receiving calls                                                                    
about educational neglect there  were other forms of neglect                                                                    
being reported as well.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
7:01:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Kawasaki wondered if,  for a child who missed                                                                    
several days  of school, it would  trigger an investigation.                                                                    
Ms. Lawton  responded that OCS  would have the  authority to                                                                    
open   an  investigation   based  on   educational  neglect.                                                                    
However, she could not recall  a single case where OCS filed                                                                    
for custody of a child  based solely on educational neglect.                                                                    
Typically,  when there  were several  absences from  school,                                                                    
there were other issues going on  in the home that were more                                                                    
of a primary concern for OCS.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Wilson  did   not  have   a  problem   with                                                                    
reinserting  the word  "education."  She literally  mirrored                                                                    
the definition used by the  federal government. They did not                                                                    
have it in theirs. She did  not have a problem with it being                                                                    
in  the  definition.  Her  largest  concern  was  tying  the                                                                    
definition back to the health and safety of the child.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Gara  responded  that  he could  live  with  the                                                                    
previous  amendment if  it could  be fixed  so that  it only                                                                    
applied  to   foster  families.  However,  in   the  current                                                                    
amendment, it required  a significant amount of  damage to a                                                                    
child  before  they  could  be removed  from  the  home.  He                                                                    
pointed  to  line  10  suggesting  that  a  child's  health,                                                                    
safety,  and  wellbeing  would all  have  to  be  threatened                                                                    
before  a  child could  be  placed  into  a safer  home.  He                                                                    
suggested that  the purpose of  the underlying bill  was for                                                                    
staff to  have the time  to make  sure they were  not making                                                                    
mistakes  and taking  children  out of  homes  in the  first                                                                    
place. He was advocating for more  time to assess a home. He                                                                    
thought that was key to fixing the problem.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Wilson MOVED  to AMEND  Conceptual Amendment                                                                    
2.                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara OBJECTED.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Wilson  suggested  changing  the  word  from                                                                    
"and" to "or" in the amendment on line 10.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara had  seen a pamphlet using the  words in the                                                                    
amendment but had  not seen the federal statute.  He did not                                                                    
believe there  was a problem  with the existing law.  He did                                                                    
not want to  adopt a new standard until  an expert confirmed                                                                    
that it was  a good standard. He argued that  it was not the                                                                    
words  in the  statute, where  a  child had  been abused  or                                                                    
neglected,  that  were  a problem.  He  clarified  that  the                                                                    
problem was that currently case  workers did not have enough                                                                    
time to investigate a case  and would sometimes error on the                                                                    
side of removing  a child. The goal of the  bill was to have                                                                    
enough  staff to  properly analyze,  work with,  and keep  a                                                                    
family together  whenever possible. He asserted  that coming                                                                    
up with a  new standard on the fly was  not the solution. He                                                                    
thought testimony and documents  from experts were necessary                                                                    
to design a new standard.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
7:07:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Kawasaki asked  Ms.  Kraly  about the  items                                                                    
being  removed.  He read  the  language  being removed  (see                                                                    
above).  He noted  the words  physical,  mental health,  and                                                                    
development were  connected by the word  "and." The question                                                                    
before the  committee was that  each of the three  items had                                                                    
to be threatened with substantial  harm. He wondered how the                                                                    
language was  interpreted before. Ms. Kraly  deferred to Ms.                                                                    
Lawton.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Ms. Lawton responded  that OCS had a much  different view of                                                                    
the  federal definition  versus  the  state definition.  The                                                                    
division viewed the state's definition  as far narrower than                                                                    
the federal  definition. She continued that  OCS thought the                                                                    
federal language was  much broader and would  give the state                                                                    
much greater  authority to remove  children. An  example was                                                                    
the  use  of the  word  "wellbeing."  The state  could  deem                                                                    
certain situations  where wellbeing was a  concern. It could                                                                    
potentially  open a  door in  a way  she did  not think  the                                                                    
sponsor of  the amendment intended. She  reiterated that OCS                                                                    
thought the  state's definition was  much narrower  than the                                                                    
federal definition.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson  WITHDREW the conceptual  amendment to                                                                    
Conceptual Amendment  2. She  wanted it  on record  that, in                                                                    
terms of rushing the issue,  she had submitted the amendment                                                                    
to  the  representative quite  a  while  back. A  discussion                                                                    
could  have  occurred  in  finance   at  a  time  where  the                                                                    
committee  had more  time.  She  did not  want  to rush  the                                                                    
issue; that was not her intent.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson also WITHDREW Conceptual Amendment 2.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
7:09:53 PM                                                                                                                    
At EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
7:10:08 PM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster  clarified the results of  the amendments to                                                                    
HB 151.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara  commented that  currently the  House budget                                                                    
was about  $3.29 million to  achieve caseload  standards for                                                                    
new  workers,  adequate  training  for new  workers,  and  a                                                                    
reduction in caseloads  that went up to 43  cases per worker                                                                    
in the valley.  He suggested that if they were  to remain in                                                                    
the budget, in year 2 and  3 it would be about $800 thousand                                                                    
per year  to finally get  caseloads to standards  that would                                                                    
make a difference. He reviewed the fiscal notes:                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Fiscal Impact Note [10]:                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Department:  Department   of  Health  and   Social  Services                                                                    
Appropriation: Children's Services                                                                                              
Allocation: Front Line Social Workers                                                                                           
OMB Component Number: 2305                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
FY 2018:                                                                                                                        
1002 Fed Rcpts  (Fed) $1339.4 million, 1003  G/F Match (UGF)                                                                    
$2013.6  million, 1004  Gen Fund  (UGf)  $863.4 thousand,  a                                                                    
total of $4216.4 million                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
FY 2020:                                                                                                                        
1002 Fed Rcpts  (Fed) $2001.6 million, 1003  G/F Match (UGF)                                                                    
$3227.8  million, 1004  Gen Fund  (UGf)  $1383.3 million,  a                                                                    
total of approximately $4000.6 million(GF).                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara  reported that  the cost  estimates remained                                                                    
stable in the out years.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Fiscal Impact Note [9]                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Department:  Department   of  Health  and   Social  Services                                                                    
Appropriation: Children's Services                                                                                              
Allocation: Children's Services Training                                                                                        
OMB Component Number: 2667                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
FY 2018:                                                                                                                        
1002 Fed Rcpts  (Fed) $279.9 thousand, 1003  G/F Match (UGF)                                                                    
$211.5  thousand, 1004  Gen Fund  (UGf)  $159.6 thousand,  a                                                                    
total of approximately $370.0 million (GF).                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Gara  relayed that the  training would  happen in                                                                    
the first  year. The cost  estimates remained stable  in the                                                                    
out  years. However,  it went  down slightly.  In the  first                                                                    
year the  total was $651.0  thousand and went down  to about                                                                    
$560 thousand  by FY  2023. The  training would  be extended                                                                    
from 2  to 3 weeks  to a minimum of  6 weeks, closer  to the                                                                    
gold standard.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Thompson  had a difficult time  adding to the                                                                    
budget. He thought the budget was in a "free fall."                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
7:14:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Seaton  MOVED to  report  CSHB  151 (FIN)  out  of                                                                    
Committee  as amended  with  individual recommendations  and                                                                    
the accompanying fiscal notes.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson OBJECTED.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson opined that  the legislation was a big                                                                    
band  aid being  placed on  a  huge issue.  She thought  the                                                                    
legislature would be putting more  money into an agency that                                                                    
took more  children every time the  state increased funding.                                                                    
Some people  believe that if  the state invested  money into                                                                    
the program more families would  be put back together again.                                                                    
She  did not  believe the  issue was  simple. She  suggested                                                                    
that if  the legislature truly  wanted to discuss  the issue                                                                    
then it  should include all concerned  parties including the                                                                    
public defenders, the guardian  ad litems, the Department of                                                                    
Law, and  other parties  in the  discussion. She  thought if                                                                    
the state  wanted to  make a change  and keep  families from                                                                    
being torn  apart, taking  the time to  talk about  the real                                                                    
issues and how to fix them  was key. She thought more things                                                                    
were being  given to foster parents  than biological parents                                                                    
which  she had  a problem  with. She  thought that  giving a                                                                    
dysfunctional  agency  more  money and  expecting  different                                                                    
results would  be fruitless. She continued  that likely more                                                                    
children  would be  out  of  the house.  She  hoped she  was                                                                    
wrong.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson MAINTAINED her OBJECTION.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
7:16:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Gara  responded   to  Representative  Thompson's                                                                    
concern. He  indicated that, assuming the  House budget item                                                                    
remained, there  was a  net neutral in  the amount  of $3.29                                                                    
million.  The  amount  was  a   savings  from  Adult  Public                                                                    
Assistance  that moved  over  to  caseworkers. He  indicated                                                                    
that the  amount was cost  neutral to the  governor's budget                                                                    
which  was  a  $30  million  cut to  DHSS.  If  that  amount                                                                    
remained over the following 2 years,  in year 2 and year 3 a                                                                    
total of  $1.6 million would facilitate  caseloads such that                                                                    
case workers,  when they visited  a family to see  whether a                                                                    
child  should be  taken out  of the  home, could  spend time                                                                    
with the family  and work to keep the family  together. In a                                                                    
60-day period,  if a  child was  taken out  of a  family, it                                                                    
allowed the  caseworker to  do as  much visitation  with the                                                                    
family  with the  child as  possible. He  believed the  more                                                                    
visitation with a  family, the more likely  the family would                                                                    
be reunified. However,  presently, caseworkers were spending                                                                    
their  time working  from crisis  to crisis  to crisis.  The                                                                    
legislation would  also allow family  members to  find other                                                                    
family  members  who  might be  good  adoptive  options.  He                                                                    
continued that  case workers were not  conducting the family                                                                    
searches needed to  find a good grandparent  or other family                                                                    
member. Right now, OCS was  a crisis-driven agency. He noted                                                                    
that there were several best  practices adopted by the bill.                                                                    
He reported  that the  state was burning  out 50  percent of                                                                    
its case  workers. Each one  that burned out cost  the state                                                                    
about  $50 thousand  to  get  rid of,  recruit  for, and  to                                                                    
train. He believed the system  was wasting money. Additional                                                                    
case workers would  be better for all  parties. He mentioned                                                                    
the Casey  Family Foundation, the  leading foster  care non-                                                                    
profit  in  the  country.  The entity  suggested  that  what                                                                    
should  be done  was  customer service  for children  rather                                                                    
than  claims processing.  He thought  claims processing  was                                                                    
being done presently.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wilson MAINTAINED her OBJECTION.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Guttenberg, Kawasaki,  Ortiz, Gara, Seaton, Foster                                                                    
OPPOSED: Thompson, Tilton, Wilson                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Grenn  and Representative Pruitt  were absent                                                                    
from the vote.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION to REPORT OUT CSHB 151(FIN) PASSED (6/3).                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CSHB 151(FIN)  was REPORTED out  of committee with  four "do                                                                    
pass"     recommendations,    one     "no    recommendation"                                                                    
recommendation, and four "amend"  recommendations and with a                                                                    
new  zero fiscal  note by  the Department  of Administration                                                                    
and two  previously published fiscal impact  notes: FN1(DHS)                                                                    
and FN2(DHS).                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
7:20:39 PM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
7:21:45 PM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Foster relayed  that it  was possible  the meeting                                                                    
for the following day would  be cancelled. However, he would                                                                    
keep it on the schedule presently.