AB 2086 is positioned to have a significant impact on state laws regarding foster care financial structures. By mandating that payments to foster family agencies be indexed to rise annually according to the California Necessities Index, the bill seeks to create a more sustainable and equitable funding mechanism. Additionally, it calls for the creation of a workgroup comprising stakeholders to evaluate and recommend a comprehensive foster family agency rate structure aimed at retaining qualified social workers and enhancing the overall system’s effectiveness in supporting foster children and youth.
Assembly Bill 2086, introduced by Assembly Member Blanca Rubio, aims to amend Section 11463 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, specifically addressing the payment system for foster family agencies. The bill intends to improve the compensation structure for foster family agency social workers by requiring annual adjustments to rates based on the California Necessities Index starting July 1, 2021. This adjustment is crucial in addressing the financial aspects of foster care services and ensuring that foster family agencies can adequately support their staff and the children in their care.
The legislative sentiment regarding AB 2086 appears generally positive among lawmakers concerned with child welfare and social services. Advocates for foster care reform express optimism that this bill will help tackle the problem of high turnover among foster family agency social workers, thereby improving outcomes for children in the foster care system. However, there are voices cautioning about the complexities involved in implementing such a structured adjustment and the need for thorough oversight as changes take place.
Notable contention surrounding AB 2086 relates to how effectively the new payment structure will meet varying needs of foster family agencies while also ensuring fair compensation for social workers. Critics may argue that without careful monitoring and clear guidelines, the intended goals of reducing turnover and improving permanency outcomes might not be achieved. Furthermore, there is concern regarding the administrative burden this could place on both agencies and the Department of Social Services in managing and implementing the workgroup's recommendations.