Next TOC Last Juvenile Justice in California Part II: Dependency System
Prepared by the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund, Juvenile Justice Study Committee. July 1998.


APPENDIX H: UPDATE OF LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS OF 1992

The Little Hoover Commission Report "Mending Our Broken Children", 1992 was sent to local Leagues in California in the fall of 1997. Since 1992, several of the Little Hoover Commission recommendations(177) have been implemented.

Family Preservation:

1: The State should pass legislation to ensure more emphasis is focused on prevention of removal from the home and family preservation;

2: support for federal funding for these services, and

3: encourage counties to invest in family preservation and place children out of their homes only when warranted.

Family Preservation Programs are now in place in every county. From 1994-95, federal funds have been made more available for this program. The 1995-96 budget included $61.3 million for these "in-home" preservation services, $19.2 million of which was federal funds.(178)

Foster Parents:

4. ...make training and psychological evaluation a prerequisite to foster parents.

This has not been done. There continues to be a shortage of foster parents. This may be because "there has been no increase in family foster care compensation since 1991".(179)

5. ...encourage the counties to maximize the use of federal Title IV-E funds for the purposes of training foster parents.

The Study Committee was not able to learn if any counties are doing this.

6. ...provide additional funding for the Foster Parent Training Program administered through the California Community Colleges.

More funding has been provided for Los Angeles County. There are fifteen programs in the state using the Model Approach to Partnerships in Parenting (MAPP), fourteen of them are in Los Angeles County.(180) The Study Committee was not able to learn about other counties.

7. ...increase the statewide basic foster care rates of reimbursement to adequately cover the costs of raising foster children in foster family homes.

This is still an issue.(181)

8. ...make all foster children federally eligible for AFDC Foster Care.

This has not been done. Under federal regulations, only those foster children whose birth parents qualify for AFDC are eligible for AFDC Foster Care.

Ethnic Placements:

9. ...reinstate funding for Minority Home Recruitment Program and concentrate its recruitment efforts on ethnic minority foster parents.

10. ...ensure the counties are making placements in accordance with the law.

There is still a critical shortage of ethnic minority foster parents, as there is for all parents. The rapid growth of kinship care, especially among minority families, may be related to this issue.

State Oversight:

11. ...establish a statewide foster care ombudsman program.

This has not been done. There is some debate. Members of the California Youth Connection favor an ombudsman program.

12. ...eliminate the ability of ...the counties to perform the licensing functions in the foster care system, thus making the Department of Social Services solely responsible for these functions.

This is still being debated. Can the counties fairly license the agencies they work with?

13. ...complete the foster care performance standards.

...monitor counties' adherence to (them)

Standards are being written. (See Chapter VIII: Role of the State)

14. ...require a bona fide longitudinal study of California's foster care system and its clients to determine the long-range effectiveness of the system.

(See Chapter VIII: Role of the State)

Coordinated Services:

15. ...establish the Child Development and Education Agency.

Child Development is now part of the California Department of Education and Children's Protective Services are a part of the Department of Social Services under the Children and Family Services Division. (See Chapter VII: Collaboration, on need for collaboration at the state level)

16. The State should provide start up funds for counties to establish systems that institute interagency coordination.

No direct funding for this has been legislated on a state wide basis. See Chapters VII: Collaboration, VIII: Role of the State and VI: Life After Foster Care and the sections on Substance Abuse and Domestic Violence in Chapter II: Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect on efforts to collaborate and the need for more collaboration.



LastPrevious section. Table of Contents. Next section.

Juvenile Justice in California Part II: Dependency System
Prepared by the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund, Juvenile Justice Study Committee. July 1998.