Legislature(2019 - 2020)DAVIS 106
02/27/2020 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB189 | |
| HB242 | |
| HB184 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 242 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 189 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 184 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 189-CHILD IN NEED OF AID; NOTICE OF PLACEMENT
3:07:33 PM
CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 189, "An Act relating to the identification,
location, and notification of specified family members of a
child who is in state custody."
3:08:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAVE TALERICO, Alaska State Legislature,
paraphrased from a prepared statement [Included in members'
packets], which read:
Ensuring Extended Family Members Are Contacted as
Potential Foster Parents Under Alaska law a youth who
faces the unfortunate circumstance of being placed in
foster care is entitled to a placement that is in his
or her "best interests". Federal law and rules
internal to the Office of Children's Services (OCS)
note that a search of family members and friends who
are akin to family members should be completed in a
timely manner, within 30 days. The main provision of
HB 189 makes sure a supervisor signs off that the
requirement of a diligent search for family members
has occurred. If it has not, the social worker is
directed to complete that search to the supervisor's
satisfaction in as timely a manner as possible. HB 189
puts into statute this additional protection, which is
not currently addressed by OCS statutes or policy but
is warranted due to the continuous high social worker
turnover rate. Some social workers are very new, and
many don't make it as social workers beyond one year
or two years. Having a supervisor sign off that a
family search has been thoroughly conducted will
ensure children are protected, and in the best foster
home possible. This provision is expected to be cost-
neutral. It is recognized in the area of foster care
that, where a good family placement is available,
keeping a child in their family is often the placement
that is the child's best interests.
3:10:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO explained Proposed Amendment 1, which he
read:
Page 1, lines 9 - 11
Delete "If circumstances prevent the department from
completing this due diligence search in 30 days, the
department shall complete the search as soon as
possible."
Insert "in this subsection, an adult family member
means a person who is 18 years of age or older and who
is related to the child as the child's grandparent,
aunt, uncle, or sibling."
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO offered to deliver this to the
committee.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked about the existing Office of Children's
Services (OCS) relative search process.
3:11:46 PM
CHRISSY VOGELEY, Manager, Community Relations, Office of
Children's Services, Department of Health and Social Services,
pointed out that, as there was already a federal statutory
requirement that all adult family members need to be notified
regarding the removal of a child within 30 days, the proposed
bill without the amendment would just codify in state statute
what was already a federal requirement. She added that OCS
already had the policies and procedures in place to ensure that
this happened. She noted that there was an ongoing relative
search, with social media as an excellent source for finding
relatives. Any findings were then put into the data base under
the case file and all those relatives were automatically
notified. As this was ongoing, there was a question for when a
supervisor would sign off on this. She reminded the committee
that a requirement to sign off would become another
administrative task for the supervisor.
3:13:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked whether there was the capacity
for this to be done in practice on a regular basis.
MS. VOGELEY acknowledged that, while OCS did have struggles, the
division had a 52 percent relative placement rate versus the
national average of 32 percent. She declared that, even though
this placement rate was one of the highest placement rates in
the United States, there was still room for improvement. She
offered her belief that OCS did have the capacity. She pointed
out that there was a difference for children who were defined by
the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), as OCS had compacted with
the tribal co-signers for a much more extensive relative search.
She added that the tribal partners could find "an incredible
number of relatives." She noted that, for children not defined
under ICWA, OCS did "as much as we can with what we have because
it is a federal mandate, but it is unfunded."
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked if the children placed with
family members were more stable and there was less turnover.
MS. VOGELEY replied, "yes."
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked if it was already in the best
interest of OCS to be doing this work.
MS. VOGELEY replied, "yes."
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ expressed her agreement and shared an
anecdote about her adoption of a foster child who had initially
been placed with biological relatives who did not have the
capacity to care for her.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked if this was the same or similar to an
earlier bill by former Representative Les Gara.
MS. VOGELEY asked if this was a reference to House Bill 151.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR offered her belief that it was another bill.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ stated that House Bill 151 required
that a supervisor sign off that a comprehensive relative and
family friend search had taken place within 30 days each time
there was a placement change, and then House Bill 27, in 2017,
required the court to confirm this at the status hearings.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked about the costs anticipated in the attached
fiscal note, noting that a portion of the proposed bill appeared
to codify what was already federally required.
3:18:28 PM
MS. VOGELEY reiterated that the federal mandate to contact all
adult family members within 30 days was an unfunded requirement
and that OCS did this to its best ability. She reported that,
in compacting with the tribes, OCS knew how long a relative
search would take and how much it would cost. She relayed that,
if the intent of the proposed bill were to contact all adult
family members, this would be an extensive relative search like
the tribal searches. She reported that this took about 10 hours
at a cost of $56.11 per hour. The fiscal note considered the
total cost considering the number of children removed, minus the
costs passed along to the tribes to conduct these relative
searches, and the remainder was the cost to do extensive
relative searches for children not defined by ICWA. She offered
her belief that the proposed amendment which specified a much
smaller search would eliminate the fiscal note.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY opined that the [Alaska] Tribal Child Welfare
Compact was beneficial to the State of Alaska in understanding
costs for OCS to do these extensive family searches.
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND asked about the OCS responsibility if
family members were not in Alaska.
MS. VOGELEY replied that this could be an entire presentation.
She explained that OCS was still required to notify out-of-state
relatives and should a relative request placement of the child
with them, the Interstate Compact Replacement of Children would
dictate that Alaska work with that state. She emphasized that
it was a long process with many documents. There was the
possibility that a case worker would escort the child to their
relative in another state or OCS would pay for the relative to
come to Alaska to escort the child. She added that this was not
uncommon.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY referred to the fiscal note and asked about the
percentage of children covered by ICWA.
MS. VOGELEY said that she would research that information.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR reported that the proposed bill had "a
little bit of an overlap in terms of the language" to the
earlier bill referenced, and she read from that bill regarding
the department transfers of a child from one out-of-home
placement to another. She shared an anecdote of her work with
OCS and a constituent and asked whether being prescriptive was
more important than the child's safety.
3:24:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked for the OCS definition of "adult
family members of the child."
MS. VOGELEY replied that there was not a federal definition for
the notification of adult family members; however, there was a
definition in Alaska statute. She stated that she would follow
up.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY asked about any overlap with earlier legislation
and requirements by the federal government. She asked which
component of the proposed bill was necessary for statutory
language versus the need for funding and a standardized internal
OCS policy and process. She asked if OCS promulgated its own
rules and regulations to guide this work and could be used for a
budget request. She opined that it appeared there was a lot of
policy overlap and asked if a gap existed in the policy.
MS. VOGELEY offered her belief that OCS currently had enough in
policy so there was not any gap. She reported that the concern
raised by family members who were not notified was mainly due to
the parents not sharing that information with OCS. She
acknowledged that, although it was not a perfect system, OCS did
try their best. She added that in these situations there were
clearly family dynamics that prevented timely notifications.
CHAIR ZULKOSKY opined that currently there was "enough policy
cover," although there was a large unfunded mandate.
3:28:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO offered his belief that it was important
to put in Alaska statute what was already in federal statute.
He offered to provide the proposed amendment which added the
definition for adult family members, and would include a child's
grandparent, aunt, uncle, or sibling. He shared an anecdote for
constituents who did not have that contact, and another anecdote
about a friend who was successfully raised by his sibling. In
response to Representative Spohnholz, he said that the
definition for "adult family member" was included in the
proposed amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ referenced the issue regarding a
relative not being notified and asked if there was a gap between
the law and practice.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO shared that the relative was ultimately
contacted, was approved by OCS, and the children were moved. He
expressed his concern that due process was "skipped over in
favor of an accusation."
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ asked about the timing for this episode
in question, as there had been legislation passed in 2017 and
2018 which addressed this topic.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO replied that most of this occurred in
August and September 2019.
3:33:12 PM
HB 189 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 184A 02.17.2020.PDF |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Veterinarian Medical Association PP.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Legislative Alert PDMP exemption for veterinarians 12.21.2019.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Board of Veterinarian Examiners Letter.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 184 Fiscal Note DCCED.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 184 |
| HB 189 ver A 1.24.20.PDF |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 189 |
| HB 189 Sponsor Statement 1.24.20.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 189 |
| HB 189 Fiscal Note DHSS.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 189 |
| HB 242 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242 Pharmacy Board Audit 2017.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242 PDMP 2019 Legislative Report.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242 Audit of the Medical Board 2019.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242.PDF |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242 Fiscal Note DCCED.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242 Fiscal Note DHSS.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |
| HB 242 Overprescription by Spayd & Davidhizar.pdf |
HHSS 2/27/2020 3:00:00 PM |
HB 242 |