HB 151-DHSS;CINA; FOSTER CARE; CHILD PROTECTION  4:42:17 PM CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ announced that the final order of business would be 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." [In front of the committee was Version R, which had not yet been adopted as the working draft.] 4:43:11 PM LAURA CHARTIER, Staff, Representative Les Gara, Alaska State Legislature, directed attention to the Sectional Summary [Included in members' packets] for the proposed committee substitute, Version R, and she paraphrased these changes, which read: Section 1 provides that the short title of the bill is the Children Deserve a Loving Home Act. Section 2 provides that an adoption subsidy for a hard-to-place child may be paid until the child turns 21; under current law, the subsidies are available until the child turns 18. Section 3 amends legislative findings related to children to add a finding that the Department of Health and Social Services (the department) should enable a child's contact with previous out-of-home caregivers if it is in the best interests of the child. Section 4 amends requirements relating to the transfer of a child from one placement to another to require a supervisor at the department to certify in writing whether the department has conducted a search for an appropriate placement with an adult family member or family friend. Section 5 provides that a foster parent has the right and responsibility to use a reasonable and prudent parent standard to make decisions relating to the child in care, and requires the department to provide foster parents with training relating to the reasonable and prudent parent standard. Section 6 requires the department to engage a child in an out-of-home placement who is 14 years of age or older in the development or revisions of a case plan or permanency plan for the child and allows the child to select up to two adults to participate in the development of the plan. Section 7 amends confidentiality provisions to require a state or municipal agency or employee to disclose appropriate confidential information regarding a case to the sibling of a child who is the subject of the case if it is in the best interests of the child to maintain contact with the sibling. Section 8 requires a supervisor at the department, when the department takes emergency custody of a child, to certify in writing whether the department has conducted a search for an appropriate placement with an adult family member or family friend. Section 9 requires the department to pay the costs of caring for a foster child with a physical or mental disability, and for respite care, until the child turns 21; under current law, the payments are available until the child turns 18. Section 10 requires the department to search for an appropriate placement with an adult family member or friend when the child is removed from the parent's home. The section also requires a supervisor at the department to certify in writing whether the department has conducted the search. Section 11 amends AS 14.14.1 OO(i) to provide that when a child can remain safely at home with an adult family member or guardian who lives with the child, the child may not be placed with an out-of-home care provider. Section 12 requires the department to provide contact information to siblings who are in separate placements if it is in the best interests of the children to maintain contact. Section 13 requires the department to implement workload standards and a training program for department employees and to provide a report to the legislature if the department is not able to meet certain standards. Section 14 adds a new subsection requiring the department to assist an adult family member in obtaining a foster care license, including any necessary variances, if placing the child with the adult family member is in the best interests of the child. Section 15 requires the department, for a person who is 16 years of age or older, to provide the person, or assist the person with obtaining, the person's birth certificate, social security card, health insurance information, medical records, driver's license or identification card, and certificate of degree of Indian or Alaska Native blood, if applicable, when the person is released from state custody under AS 4 7 .10. Section 16 requires the department, to the extent feasible, to approve or deny a foster care home license, including a request for a variance, not more than 45 days after the date the department receives the application for a foster care home license. Section 17 provides that sections 2 and 9 of the Act, which relate to payments for foster care, guardianship, and adoption, apply to a person who is eligible for a payment on or after the effective date of sections 2 and 9, including a person who was ineligible for a payment solely because the child turned 18. All other sections of the Act apply to a child in the custody or under the supervision of the department under AS 4 7 .10 on or after the effective dates of sections 3 - 8 and 10 - 16 of the Act. Section 18 allows the department to adopt regulations necessary to implement the changes made by the Act. The regulations may not take effect until the effective date of the section of the Act implemented by the regulation. Section 19 requires the department to (1) adopt training regulations necessary to meet the standards in AS 47.14.112(a)(3)(A) (sec. 13 of the Act), not later than one year after the effective date of sec. 13 of the Act, (2) hire the staff necessary to meet the workload standards in AS 47.12.112(a)(l), (2), and (3)(B) (sec. 13 of the Act), not later than two years after the effective date of sec. 13 of the Act, and (3) implement the changes made by the remainder of the Act not later than three years after the effective date of secs. 1 - 12 and 14 - 16 of the Act. Section 20 provides that sec. 18 of the Act take effect immediately. 4:49:23 PM REPRESENTATIVE KITO asked about the limitations on placements and penalties and what were the consequences of limiting the number of placements and not meeting that level. REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, Alaska State Legislature, said there was not any limitation on placements or penalties for those limitations in the proposed bill. He opined that the discussion for limits was with trying to meet the federal standard of case load limits for new case workers, as there was a 50 percent turnover rate by new case workers in the first year. He said that there was a 75 percent federal match for meeting the federal standard of no more than six cases in the first three months, and no more than twelve cases in the first six months, in order to learn the job and train. He reiterated that there were no penalties for the number of placements, even though "we don't like a lot of placements." REPRESENTATIVE KITO asked to clarify that the limitation was on the number of cases per caseworker. REPRESENTATIVE GARA expressed his agreement, and explained that a major part of the proposed bill was to limit the number of cases for a new caseworker, in order to decrease the 50 percent caseworker turnover in the first year. He shared that each new worker training cost about $50,000. REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSTON pointed out that the CRP did not track the cases per case worker as different cases resulted in different time demands, and asked if this should instead reflect the time element instead of the number of cases. REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that the only case load limitations were for new case workers, as the training necessitated a smaller case load. He reiterated that there was a 75 percent federal match if this was implemented. After the six-month period, the case load limit was determined by the department in order to allow for each case to achieve permanency in a loving home. He said that the standard was for good work to "get youth out of the system as quickly as possible." He shared that OCS wanted to achieve a case load limit of twelve families per case worker, although this would differ per region as some areas were more accessible. He pointed out that case workers in the Matanuska-Susitna office had 43 cases each at one point. 4:54:44 PM CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ removed her earlier objection to the committee substitute, Version R [objection carried from House Health and Social Services Standing Committee meeting on March 16, 2017]. There being no further objection, the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 151, labeled 30-LS0451\R, Glover, 3/7/17, was before the committee as the working document. 4:56:15 PM BARBARA MALCHICK stated that she was in support of HB 151. She reported that she had served for 25 years as a guardian ad litum in Anchorage and other urban and rural communities. She noted that she was on the board of directors of Facing Foster Care in Alaska and was also a part time, temporary employee of the court system, working on a multi-disciplinary training curriculum for the judges, lawyers, tribal representatives, and child advocates. She stated that she was speaking on her own behalf and that she had submitted a letter of support. She said that she would focus on three topics. She addressed Section 13 of the proposed bill regarding the extra training and the case load standards for new OCS employees. She offered her belief that hiring, training, and retention of good case workers would alleviate the necessity for other areas of the proposed bill. She stated that the lower-case load would allow for establishment of the necessary relationships and the adequate assessment of the situations, as well as the time to do relative, family, and friend searches for appropriate adoptive homes. She declared that the huge turnover at OCS was bad for families, and it was her firm belief that children, families, and the system as a whole would benefit if OCS was able to do its job better. She moved on to discussion of the relationships with siblings, which were often the most important, as when the parents were not available for physical and emotional needs, the children become care givers for each other. She relayed that current law required that siblings be placed together if possible, and, although OCS policy required that communication should be arranged between separated siblings, this was "one of those things that falls by the wayside when the case workers are overworked," and it was not happening. She pointed out that the proposed bill required OCS to provide contact information for siblings, and it encouraged that care givers provide opportunities for siblings to see each other. She suggested that the proposed bill could be even stronger and include legislative language recognizing the importance of sibling relationships. She suggested that there should be provisions in the adoption decree if siblings are separated for there to be ongoing contact, if it was in the best interest of the children. She added that confidentiality should allow for the contact information to be shared in order to maintain the relationship. She spoke about the guardianship and adoption subsidies. She reported that current law allowed for subsidies until 18 years of age, although it was proposed for an increase to age 21. She offered her observations that, as many youth often don't graduate from high school until after 18 years of age, the court case stays open even though the subsidies end, and that an increase of the age, to at least the completion of high school, would allow for more adoptions and guardianships. 5:07:23 PM ROSALIE REIN said that she had been a licensed front line social worker with OCS for seven years, although she was not speaking on behalf of OCS. She highlighted two components of the proposed bill: improving relationships between workers and the families, and training and caseload. She stated that case load was directly tied to the worker being in contact with the children and families on a regular basis. She shared that parents and foster parents had to have communication and concerns addressed by the case workers, yet, suffice it to say, there were not enough hours in the day for the case workers to keep up good communication with the invested parties, as well as do high level social work, which included diligent searches for extended relatives or tribal members who could provide the best home for the children who could not return to their parents. She declared that it was important for caseworkers to maintain relationships between family members, the resource family, the biological parents, and the child in care, which would lead to an integrated sense of self for the child, with the best long- term outcomes, but that they needed time and training to do this. She relayed that actual social work was about educating the parties for the importance of providing each child with the network of support. Child welfare research suggested that caseworkers with social work education, appropriate training, specialized competencies, and greater experience were better able to facilitate permanency. She stated that proposed HB 151 could ensure that case workers have the necessary training to develop the skill set specific to child protection and to foster resiliency. She stated that the proposed bill would help address the steep learning curve issues for new workers. 5:11:50 PM TAMMI SANDOVAL, Director, UAA Child Welfare Academy, stated that she was in support of the proposed bill. She reported that she had worked in child welfare work for 33 years, and that the Child Welfare Academy provided the training to all the OCS frontline workers, supervisors, and other staff. She declared that Section 13 of the proposed bill would help the situation for retention, meet federal outcomes, and offer best practice for families and children. She pointed to earlier testimony for the necessary time for staff to learn, and stated that the only way to make a difference for the way we treat children and families was with more training. She declared that it was necessary to change "what we give to our front-line staff" and that the proposed bill was "the right thing to do." REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked that some of these individuals be available for later testimony. She stated that she wanted the opportunity for testimony from the Office of Public Advocacy and to share the case worker side of things, as well as the representation for families. CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ said that the bill would be held over.