Foster youth: enrichment activities.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 219 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 219.
You're tracking SB 219
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 219 — Foster youth: enrichment activities.
Last action — August 30 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Existing law states the policy of the state that all minors and nonminors in foster care have specified rights, including, among others, the right to attend school and participate in extracurricular, cultural, and personal enrichment activities, consistent with the child's age and developmental level, with minimal disruptions to school attendance and educational stability. This bill would require the State Department of Social Services, to establish, on or before January 1, 2020, the California Foster Youth Enrichment Grant Pilot Program, upon appropriation by the Legislature of funds for that purpose, to provide grants of $500 or less to qualified foster youth to enable them to participate in activities designed to enhance the foster youth's skills, abilities, self-esteem, or overall well-being. The bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2020, to allocate funds appropriated for these purposes, up to a total of $12,500,000, to 4 county child welfare agencies that submit a 2-year plan by a request for proposal developed by the department. The bill would require the department to select 2 rural counties and 2 urban counties to participate in the pilot program. The bill would require a child welfare agency to indicate its interest in participating in the pilot program by submitting a 2-year plan on or before May 1, 2020, and would specify the required components of the plan. The bill would require the department to develop a grant application form and grant approval instructions for participating county child welfare agencies for purposes of the pilot program. The bill would authorize a specified caregiver to submit an application on behalf of a foster child or youth, and would authorize a foster youth to receive a maximum of $1,000 annually through the pilot program. The bill would prohibit funds provided for purposes of the pilot program from being used for administrative activities. The bill would require the department, on or before October 1, 2022, to submit a report to the Legislature that includes annual data required to be submitted to the department by participating counties. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2023.
Bill Text
- Amended 07/05/19 - Amended Assembly Current pdf July 05, 2019
- Amended 05/17/19 - Amended Senate pdf May 17, 2019
- Amended 03/26/19 - Amended Senate pdf March 26, 2019
- Amended 03/12/19 - Amended Senate pdf March 12, 2019
- Introduced 02/07/19 - Introduced pdf February 07, 2019
- SB219 View text html
Action History
-
August 30 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
-
August 14 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (July 2).
-
Referred to Com. on HUM. S.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 1245.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1093.) (May 16).
-
Set for hearing May 16.
-
April 22 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Set for hearing April 22.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 621.) (April 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Set for hearing April 8.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HUMAN S.
-
March 25 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HUMAN S.
-
Set for hearing March 25.
-
Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 10.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Wilk · Primary
- Kiley · Cosponsor
- Leyva · Cosponsor
- Cooley · Cosponsor
- Mike A. Gipson · Cosponsor
- Tom Lackey · Cosponsor
- Mathis · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 6 co-sponsors · 115 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Wilk
Co-sponsors (6)
- Kiley
- Leyva
- Cooley
- Gipson, Mike A. Democratic
- Lackey, Tom Republican
- Mathis
Not signed on (115)
115 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 115 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (8)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Friedman | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Reyes, Eloise Gómez | Democratic | Yea |
| Choi, Steven S. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 27 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 38 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (38)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Borgeas | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (6)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (6)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (6)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 219 do?
- Existing law states the policy of the state that all minors and nonminors in foster care have specified rights, including, among others, the right to attend school and participate in extracurricular, cultural, and personal enrichment activities, consistent with the child's age and developmental level, with minimal disruptions to school attendance and educational stability. This bill would require the State Department of Social Services, to establish, on or before January 1, 2020, the California Foster Youth Enrichment Grant Pilot Program, upon appropriation by the Legislature of funds for that purpose, to provide grants of $500 or less to qualified foster youth to enable them to participate in activities designed to enhance the foster youth's skills, abilities, self-esteem, or overall well-being. The bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2020, to allocate funds appropriated for these purposes, up to a total of $12,500,000, to 4 county child welfare agencies that submit a 2-year plan by a request for proposal developed by the department. The bill would require the department to select 2 rural counties and 2 urban counties to participate in the pilot program. The bill would require a child welfare agency to indicate its interest in participating in the pilot program by submitting a 2-year plan on or before May 1, 2020, and would specify the required components of the plan. The bill would require the department to develop a grant application form and grant approval instructions for participating county child welfare agencies for purposes of the pilot program. The bill would authorize a specified caregiver to submit an application on behalf of a foster child or youth, and would authorize a foster youth to receive a maximum of $1,000 annually through the pilot program. The bill would prohibit funds provided for purposes of the pilot program from being used for administrative activities. The bill would require the department, on or before October 1, 2022, to submit a report to the Legislature that includes annual data required to be submitted to the department by participating counties. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2023.
- Who sponsors SB 219?
- SB 219 is sponsored by Wilk, Kiley, Leyva, Cooley, Gipson, Mike A. (Democratic), Lackey, Tom (Republican), and Mathis.
- What is the current status of SB 219?
- This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 219?
- Track SB 219 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 219
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 219
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →