An act to amend Sections 309, 827, and 10850 10850, and 16501 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to juveniles.
AB 2767 would expand California’s “family finding” requirements in child welfare and probation cases. The bill requires county social workers to identify and locate relatives and kin not only after a child is removed from parental custody, but also when a child has been accepted for services, including voluntary, diversion, prevention, and other pre-removal cases. It also makes family finding an ongoing duty throughout the life of a case unless a limited exception applies, such as a preadoptive placement, a safety threat, or age 21. The bill defines family finding and engagement broadly to include outreach through phone, mail, home visits, electronic communication, social media, and tribal consultation for Indian children.
The bill also creates new disclosure rules that override existing confidentiality provisions in the Welfare and Institutions Code for the limited purpose of family finding. County child welfare and probation departments would be allowed to share specified information with relatives and kin, including general case-related information and, after verification and a best-interest determination, limited additional details such as the child’s first name, general location, and broad safety concerns. More sensitive information, such as exact addresses, medical records, mental health records, and detailed case files, would remain protected unless otherwise authorized. The bill further authorizes county personnel to access juvenile case files for family finding, requires state-developed training and county policy updates, and directs the Department of Social Services to issue guidance and quality assurance tools.
In state law terms, AB 2767 amends Sections 309, 827, 10850, and 16501 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. It broadens the definition and timing of child welfare services, clarifies that case planning may include family finding and engagement, and creates express statutory authority for counties to use social media and other electronic tools for outreach. It also adds new county reporting and review expectations, including annual comparisons of county relative-placement rates to statewide averages and consultation with a family finding center when counties lag behind. The bill includes state-mandated local program language and reimbursement provisions, indicating that counties may incur new duties and costs.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available voting history is favorable. The bill passed committee votes unanimously, first 12-0 and then 5-0 after amendment, suggesting broad support for the policy goal of strengthening kinship connections and improving placement with relatives. There is no recorded committee transcript in the provided materials, so the available context does not show organized opposition or detailed debate.
The main points of contention are likely to center on privacy, confidentiality, and local implementation burdens. The bill authorizes broader information sharing with relatives and kin and permits use of social media and internet searches, but it also imposes verification, documentation, and best-interest safeguards to limit misuse. Another likely issue is workload and cost for counties, since the bill requires ongoing family finding, training, policy updates, and data review, while also expanding access to juvenile case files and public social services records for county personnel.
AB 2767 would amend the Welfare and Institutions Code to expand county child welfare and probation duties related to locating relatives and kin, sharing limited case information, and conducting outreach in dependency and related child welfare cases. It would broaden access to juvenile case files and create express exceptions to confidentiality rules in Sections 827 and 10850 for family finding purposes, while preserving protections for sensitive records and requiring verification and best-interest determinations before some disclosures. The bill also modifies the definition and administration of child welfare services in Section 16501 to incorporate family finding and engagement into case planning, and it requires state guidance, training, county policy updates, and ongoing implementation oversight. Because it imposes new duties on local agencies, it is treated as a state-mandated local program and may have reimbursable costs subject to mandate determinations.
The available voting record indicates strong support for the bill. It received unanimous do-pass recommendations in committee, including a 12-0 vote and a later 5-0 vote after amendment, and there are no committee transcript excerpts showing opposition or divided views. The bill’s framing around kinship placement, family connection, and improved child welfare outcomes appears to have been broadly well received in committee.
The likely areas of contention are the bill’s expansion of confidentiality exceptions, the use of social media and electronic searches in child welfare investigations, and the added workload for counties. Supporters would view these tools as necessary to find relatives earlier and improve placement options, while critics may worry about privacy, safety, and the risk of disclosing too much information to extended family members. Counties may also be concerned about the operational burden of new training, documentation, reporting, and ongoing family-finding obligations, especially given the bill’s state-mandated local program implications.