Bill Text: CA AB1663 | 2021-2022 | Regular Session | Amended

NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft
Bill Title: Protective proceedings.

Sponsorship: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1)

Status: (Passed) 2022-09-30 - Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 894, Statutes of 2022. [AB1663 Detail]

Download: California-2021-AB1663-Amended.html

Amended  IN  Senate  June 23, 2022
Amended  IN  Assembly  May 19, 2022
Amended  IN  Assembly  March 16, 2022
Amended  IN  Assembly  March 07, 2022

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2021–2022 REGULAR SESSION

Assembly Bill
No. 1663

Introduced by Assembly Member Maienschein

January 19, 2022

An act to amend Sections 416.9, 416.17, and 416.19 of the Health and Safety Code, and to amend Sections 1800, 1800.3, 1812, 1821, 1835, 1850, 1860.5, 1863, and 2113 of, to add Sections 1835.5, 1836, and 1861.5 to, and to add Part 10 (commencing with Section 3950) to Division 4 of, the Probate Code, and to add Division 11 (commencing with Section 20000) to the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to protective proceedings, and making an appropriation therefor.


LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


AB 1663, as amended, Maienschein. Protective proceedings.
Existing law, the Guardianship-Conservatorship Law, generally establishes the standards and procedures for the appointment of, and termination of an appointment for, a guardian or conservator of a person, an estate, or both. Under existing law, a court may appoint the Director of Developmental Services as guardian or conservator of the person and estate or person or estate of a developmentally disabled person, and in which case a specified order of preferences for deciding between equally qualified prospective conservators does not apply. Existing law authorizes the director to have these conservatorship duties performed through a regional center, or an agency or individual designated by the regional center, as specified.
This bill would revise various procedures in the conservatorship process. Among other provisions, the bill would provide that, when equally qualified as other potential conservators, the conservatee’s preference and the prior conservator’s preference, to a prescribed extent, should prevail and that the Director of Developmental Services would could be appointed subject to the existing order of preference. The bill would prohibit a regional center from acting as a conservator but would authorize the regional center to act as a designee of the director, as specified. The bill would only permit the appointment of the director as conservator if the proposed conservatee has not chosen another qualified person, as specified. The
This bill would require the court to provide conservators with written information concerning the conservator’s obligation to support the conservatee to maximize their autonomy, support and respect their preferences, accommodate their preferences to the greatest extent possible, keep them informed of decisions made on their behalf, and to use supported decisionmaking as far as possible. The bill would require the court court, within 30 days of the establishment of a conservatorship and annually thereafter, to provide conservatees under the court’s jurisdiction with written information regarding their rights and options, including a personalized list of the rights the conservatee retains. The bill would expand the annual duties and reporting requirements of court investigators conducting required visits to assess the progress of the conservatorship. The bill would revise the procedures for termination of a limited conservatorships by requiring the court to terminate an uncontested petition for termination under specified circumstances, and without a hearing.
The bill would require the Judicial Council to establish a conservatorship alternatives program within each self-help center in each superior court. Among other goals, the conservatorship alternatives program would identify petitions for conservatorships for which less restrictive alternatives, including supported decisionmaking, could be used to avoid the provide information relating to less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship. The bill would designate the duties of court staff reviewing petitions under the conservatorship alternatives program and would require the Judicial Council to ensure that judges are provided with education on alternatives to conservatorship. The bill would make communications with the program confidential.
The bill would establish a supported decisionmaking process and a process for entering into a supported decisionmaking agreement for adults with disabilities. disabilities, as defined. The bill would define “supported decisionmaking” as an individualized arrangement process in which an adult with a disability chooses one or more trusted supporters to help them understand, make, communicate, implement, or act on, their own choices. The bill would authorize an adult with a disability to request and have present one or more adults, including supporters, in any meeting or communication. The bill would set forth the duties of supporters. The supportive decisionmaking agreement would be informal or memorialized in writing, and the bill supporters and would specify the elements of a written agreement. The bill would provide that a supported decisionmaking agreement may be terminated by the adult with a disability, by all supporters, or by the terms of the agreement. The agreement would also be terminated with respect to any supporter who is found liable for specified offenses with respect to the adult with a disability. supported decisionmaking agreement, if one is used. The bill would require the State Council on Developmental Disabilities to establish and staff a centralized Supported Decisionmaking Technical Assistance Program (SDM-TAP), which would be administered in consultation with the University of California Davis MIND Institute and a specified protection and advocacy agency agency, and in consultation with a nonprofit organization with specified experience. The bill would require the SDM-TAP to provide support, education, and technical assistance, and to administer grants to expand and strengthen the use of supported decisionmaking. The bill would require the council to report to the Legislature on the use of supported decisionmaking, as prescribed, and would make the information about specific individuals engaging in supported decisionmaking exempt from disclosure as public records.
The bill would appropriate $10,000,000 from the General Fund to the Judicial Council and the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, to be allocated for purposes of implementing the conservatorship alternatives program and the SDM-TAP, as prescribed.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Vote: 2/3   Appropriation: YES   Fiscal Committee: YES   Local Program: NO  

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:


SECTION 1.

 Section 416.9 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:

416.9.
 The court may appoint the Director of Developmental Services as guardian or conservator of the person and estate or person or estate of a minor or adult developmentally disabled person. The preferences established in Section 1812 of the Probate Code for appointment of a conservator applies. An appointment of the Director of Developmental Services as conservator shall not of itself constitute a judicial finding that the developmentally disabled person is legally incompetent. The petition for the appointment of the Director of Developmental Services as conservator of an adult developmentally disabled person may include a request that the court adjudge the developmentally disabled person to be legally incompetent or that adjudication may be made subsequently upon a petition made, noticed, and heard by the court in the same manner as a petition for the appointment of the director as conservator. If the Director of Developmental Services is serving as the guardian of an adult developmentally disabled person on December 31, 1980, after that date the appointment shall be deemed to be the appointment of a conservator and the conservatee shall be deemed to have been adjudged to be legally incompetent.

SEC. 2.

 Section 416.17 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:

416.17.
 It is the intent of this article that the director, when acting as guardian or conservator of the person of a developmentally disabled person, shall maintain close contact with the developmentally disabled person no matter where the person is living in this state; shall act as a wise parent would act in caring for the parent’s developmentally disabled child; shall permit and encourage maximum self-reliance on the part of the developmentally disabled person under their protection; and shall work with regional centers and the person, to the greatest extent possible, to develop and implement less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship.

SEC. 3.

 Section 416.19 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:

416.19.
 The services to be rendered by the director as adviser or as guardian or conservator of the person may be performed through the regional centers or by other agencies or individuals designated by the regional centers, except that a regional center shall not act as guardian or conservator of for a person if that regional center is also responsible for providing service coordination activities pursuant to Section 4647 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

SEC. 4.

 Section 1800 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1800.
 It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to do the following:
(a) Protect the rights of persons who are placed under conservatorship.
(b) Provide that an assessment of the needs of the person is performed in order to determine the appropriateness and extent of a conservatorship and to set goals for increasing the conservatee’s functional abilities to whatever extent possible.
(c) Provide that the health and psychosocial needs of the proposed conservatee are met.
(d) Provide that community-based services are used to the greatest extent in order to allow the conservatee to remain as independent and in the least restrictive setting as possible.
(e) Provide that the periodic review of the conservatorship by the court investigator shall consider the best interests and expressed wishes of the conservatee; whether the conservatee has regained or could regain abilities and capacity with or without supports; and whether the conservatee continues to need a conservatorship.
(f) Ensure that the conservatee’s basic needs for physical health, food, clothing, and shelter are met.
(g) Provide for the proper management and protection of the conservatee’s real and personal property.
(h) Ensure Ensure, to the greatest possible extent, that the conservatee is able to understand, make, and communicate their own, informed, choices to the greatest possible extent while under conservatorship.

SEC. 5.

 Section 1800.3 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1800.3.
 (a) If the need therefor is established to the satisfaction of the court and the other requirements of this chapter are satisfied, the court may appoint:
(1) A conservator of the person or estate of an adult, or both.
(2) A conservator of the person of a minor who is married or whose marriage has been dissolved.
(b) A conservatorship of the person or of the estate shall not be granted by the court unless the court makes an express finding that the granting of the conservatorship is the least restrictive alternative needed for the protection of the conservatee.
(c) In determining whether a conservatorship is the least restrictive alternative available, and whether to grant or deny a conservatorship petition, the court shall consider the person’s abilities and capacities with current and possible supports, including, but not limited to, supported decisionmaking, decisionmaking agreements, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 20001 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, powers of attorney, and advance health care directives.
(d) If the court becomes aware that the proposed conservatee has a developmental disability, and the proposed conservator is not seeking authority to act under Section 2356.5, the court shall deem the proceeding to be seeking a limited conservatorship.

SEC. 6.

 Section 1812 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1812.
 (a) Subject to Sections 1810, 1813, and 1813.1, the selection of a conservator of the person or estate, or both, is solely in the discretion of the court and, in making the selection, the court is to be guided by what appears to be for the best interests of the proposed conservatee.
(b) Subject to Sections 1810, 1813, and 1813.1, of persons equally qualified in the opinion of the court to appointment as conservator of the person or estate or both, preference is to be given in the following order:
(1) The conservatee or proposed conservatee’s stated preference, including preferences expressed by speech, sign language, alternative or augmentative communication, actions, facial expressions, and other spoken and nonspoken methods of communication.
(2) The prior conservator’s preference, if known, if the selection of a successor conservator is being made pursuant to the provisions of Article 2 (commencing with Section 2680) of Chapter 9.5 of Part 4 and the prior conservator is a person described in paragraphs (3) to (6), inclusive, unless either of the following apply:
(A) The reason for the appointment of a successor conservator is due to the prior conservator’s removal pursuant to the provisions of Article 1 (commencing with Section 2650) of Chapter 9 of Part 4.
(B) The prior conservator or prior conservator’s preference for successor conservator has been found criminally, civilly, or administratively liable for abuse, neglect, mistreatment, coercion, or fraud with respect to the conservatee or any elder or dependent adult.

(1)

(3) The spouse or domestic partner of the proposed conservatee or the person nominated by the spouse or domestic partner pursuant to Section 1811.

(2)

(4) An adult child of the proposed conservatee or the person nominated by the child pursuant to Section 1811.

(3)

(5) A parent of the proposed conservatee or the person nominated by the parent pursuant to Section 1811.

(4)

(6) A sibling of the proposed conservatee or the person nominated by the brother or sister pursuant to Section 1811.

(5)

(7) Any other person or entity eligible for appointment as a conservator under this code or, if there is no person or entity willing to act as a conservator, under the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(c) The preference for any nominee for appointment under paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) (4), (5), and (6) of subdivision (b) is subordinate to the preference for any other parent, child, or sibling in that class.
(d) An appointment of the Director of Developmental Services as provided by Article 7.5 (commencing with Section 416) of Chapter 2 of Part 1 of Division 1 of the Health and Safety Code may only be made if the court determines that another qualified person is not chosen and preferred by the proposed conservatee who is willing to act as conservator, the appointment presents no substantial risk of a conflict of interest, and the appointment is in the best interests of the proposed conservatee. A regional center, as provided in Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 4620) of Division 4.5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or any employee or agent acting on a regional center’s behalf, shall not act as a conservator, but may act as the designee of the Director of Developmental Services, subject to Section 416.19 of the Health and Safety Code.

SEC. 7.

 Section 1821 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1821.
 (a) The petition shall request that a conservator be appointed for the person or estate, or both, shall specify the name, address, and telephone number of the proposed conservator and the name, address, and telephone number of the proposed conservatee, and state the reasons why a conservatorship is necessary. Unless the petitioner or proposed conservator is a bank or other entity authorized to conduct the business of a trust company, the petitioner or proposed conservator shall also file supplemental information as to why the appointment of a conservator is required. The supplemental information to be submitted shall include a brief statement of facts addressed to each of the following categories:
(1) The inability of the proposed conservatee to properly provide for their own needs for physical health, food, clothing, and shelter.
(2) The location of the proposed conservatee’s residence and the ability of the proposed conservatee to live in the residence while under conservatorship.
(3) Alternatives to conservatorship considered and tried by the petitioner or proposed conservator, if any, including details as to the length and duration of attempted alternatives and the reasons why those alternatives do not meet the proposed conservatee’s needs. Those alternatives include, but are not limited to, all of the following:
(A) Supported decisionmaking set forth in Part 10 (commencing with Section 3950). agreements, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 20001 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
(B) Powers of Attorney set forth in Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4000).
(C) Advanced Health Care Directives set forth in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4670) of Part 2 of Division 4.7.
(D) Designations of a health care surrogate as set forth in Section 4711.
(4) Health or social services provided to the proposed conservatee during the year preceding the filing of the petition, when the petitioner or proposed conservator has information as to those services.
(5) The substantial inability of the proposed conservatee to substantially manage their own financial resources, or to resist fraud or undue influence.
The facts required to address the categories set forth in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, shall be set forth by the petitioner or proposed conservator if the proposed conservator has knowledge of the facts or by the declarations or affidavits of other persons having knowledge of those facts.
If any of the categories set forth in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, are not applicable to the proposed conservatorship, the petitioner or proposed conservator shall so indicate and state on the supplemental information form the reasons therefor.
The Judicial Council shall develop a supplemental information form for the information required pursuant to paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, after consultation with individuals or organizations approved by the Judicial Council, who represent public conservators, court investigators, the State Bar, specialists with experience in performing assessments and coordinating community-based services, and legal services for the elderly and disabled.
The supplemental information form shall be separate and distinct from the form for the petition. The supplemental information shall be confidential and shall be made available only to parties, persons given notice of the petition who have requested this supplemental information or who have appeared in the proceedings, their attorneys, and the court. The court shall have discretion at any other time to release the supplemental information to other persons if it would serve the interests of the conservatee. The clerk of the court shall make provision for limiting disclosure of the supplemental information exclusively to persons entitled thereto under this section.
(b) The petition shall set forth, so far as they are known to the petitioner or proposed conservator, the names and addresses of the spouse or domestic partner, and of the relatives of the proposed conservatee within the second degree. If no spouse or domestic partner of the proposed conservatee or relatives of the proposed conservatee within the second degree are known to the petitioner or proposed conservator, the petition shall set forth, so far as they are known to the petitioner or proposed conservator, the names and addresses of the following persons who, for the purposes of Section 1822, shall all be deemed to be relatives:
(1) A spouse or domestic partner of a predeceased parent of a proposed conservatee.
(2) The children of a predeceased spouse or domestic partner of a proposed conservatee.
(3) The siblings of the proposed conservatee’s parents, if any, but if none, then the natural and adoptive children of the proposed conservatee’s parents’ siblings.
(4) The natural and adoptive children of the proposed conservatee’s siblings.
(c) If the petitioner or proposed conservator is a professional fiduciary, as described in Section 2340, who is required to be licensed under the Professional Fiduciaries Act (Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 6500) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code), the petition shall include the following:
(1) The petitioner’s or proposed conservator’s proposed hourly fee schedule or another statement of their proposed compensation from the estate of the proposed conservatee for services performed as a conservator. The petitioner’s or proposed conservator’s provision of a proposed hourly fee schedule or another statement of their proposed compensation, as required by this paragraph, shall not preclude a court from later reducing the petitioner’s or proposed conservator’s fees or other compensation.
(2) Unless a petition for appointment of a temporary conservator that contains the statements required by this paragraph is filed together with a petition for appointment of a conservator, both of the following:
(A) A statement of the petitioner’s or proposed conservator’s license information.
(B) A statement explaining who engaged the petitioner or proposed conservator or how the petitioner or proposed conservator was engaged to file the petition for appointment of a conservator or to agree to accept the appointment as conservator and what prior relationship the petitioner or proposed conservator had with the proposed conservatee or the proposed conservatee’s family or friends.
(d) If the petition is filed by a person other than the proposed conservatee, the petition shall include a declaration of due diligence showing both of the following:
(1) Either the efforts to find the proposed conservatee’s relatives or why it was not feasible to contact any of them.
(2) Either the preferences of the proposed conservatee concerning the appointment of a conservator and the appointment of the proposed conservator or why it was not feasible to ascertain those preferences.
(e) If the petition is filed by a person other than the proposed conservatee, the petition shall state whether or not the petitioner is a creditor or debtor, or the agent of a creditor or debtor, of the proposed conservatee.
(f) If the proposed conservatee is a patient in or on leave of absence from a state institution under the jurisdiction of the State Department of State Hospitals or the State Department of Developmental Services and that fact is known to the petitioner or proposed conservator, the petition shall state that fact and name the institution.
(g) The petition shall state, so far as is known to the petitioner or proposed conservator, whether or not the proposed conservatee is receiving or is entitled to receive benefits from the Veterans Administration and the estimated amount of the monthly benefit payable by the Veterans Administration for the proposed conservatee.
(h) The petition may include an application for any order or orders authorized under this division, including, but not limited to, orders under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 1870).
(i) The petition may include a further statement that the proposed conservatee is not willing to attend the hearing on the petition, does not wish to contest the establishment of the conservatorship, and does not object to the proposed conservator or prefer that another person act as conservator.
(j) In the case of an allegedly developmentally disabled adult, the petition shall set forth the following:
(1) The nature and degree of the alleged disability, the specific duties and powers requested by or for the limited conservator, and the limitations of civil and legal rights requested to be included in the court’s order of appointment.
(2) Whether or not the proposed limited conservatee is or is alleged to be developmentally disabled.
(k) The petition shall state, so far as is known to the petitioner, whether or not the proposed conservatee is a member of a federally recognized Indian tribe. If so, the petition shall state the name of the tribe, the state in which the tribe is located, whether the proposed conservatee resides on tribal land, and whether the proposed conservatee is known to own property on tribal land. For the purposes of this subdivision, “tribal land” means land that is, with respect to a specific Indian tribe and the members of that tribe, “Indian country” as defined in Section 1151 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

SEC. 8.

 Section 1835 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1835.
 (a) Every superior court shall provide all conservators with written information concerning a conservator’s rights, duties, limitations, and responsibilities under this division.
(b) The information to be provided shall include, but need not be limited to, the following:
(1) The rights, duties, limitations, and responsibilities of a conservator.
(2) The rights of a conservatee.
(3) How to assess the needs and preferences of the conservatee.
(4) How to use community-based services to meet the needs of the conservatee.
(5) How to ensure that the conservatee is provided with the least restrictive possible environment.
(6) The court procedures and processes relevant to conservatorships.
(7) The procedures for inventory and appraisal, and the filing of accounts.
(8) Procedures to petition to terminate or modify the conservatorship.
(9) The conservator’s obligation to support the conservatee to maximize their autonomy, support and respect their preferences, accommodate their preferences to the greatest extent possible, keep them informed of decisions made on their behalf, and use supported decisionmaking as far as possible, and support their development and learning to obviate the need for conservatorship. possible pursuant to Section 2113.
(c) An information package shall be developed by the Judicial Council, after consultation with the following organizations or individuals:
(1) The California State Association of Public Administrators, Public Guardians, and Public Conservators, or other comparable organizations.
(2) The State Bar.
(3) Individuals or organizations, approved by the Judicial Council, who represent court investigators, specialists with experience in performing assessments and coordinating community-based services, and legal services programs for the elderly.
(d) The failure of any court or any employee or agent thereof, to provide information to a conservator as required by this section does not:
(1) Relieve the conservator of any of the conservator’s duties as required by this division.
(2) Make the court or the employee or agent thereof, liable, in either a personal or official capacity, for damages to a conservatee, conservator, the conservatorship of a person or an estate, or any other person or entity.
(e) The information package shall be made available to individual courts. The Judicial Council shall periodically update the information package when changes in the law warrant revision. The revisions shall be provided to individual courts.
(f) To cover the costs of providing the written information required by this section, a court may charge each private conservator a fee of twenty dollars ($20) which shall be distributed to the court in which it was collected.

SEC. 9.

 Section 1835.5 is added to the Probate Code, to read:

1835.5.
 (a) Every Within 30 days of the establishment of a conservatorship under this division, and annually thereafter, the superior court shall provide all conservatees with information information to a conservatee under its jurisdiction, written in plain language language, describing the conservatee’s rights and options within the conservatorship.
(b) The information to be provided shall include, but need not be limited to, all of the following:
(1) The name and contact information of the conservator.
(2) A description of the conservatorship, including the rights the conservatee retains under the conservatorship.
(3) The role, duties, and contact information, including name, telephone number, address, and email address, of the court investigator and the court alternatives program.
(4) The person to petition to end or change the conservatorship and contact information for the person to contact to begin that process.
(5) A personalized list of rights that the conservatee retains, even under the conservatorship, including the rights to do all of the following:
(A) Directly receive and control their own salary.
(B) Make or change their will.
(C) Get married, unless expressly withheld by the court.
(D) Receive mail.
(E) Have visits from family and friends, unless expressly withheld by the court.
(F) Have a lawyer.
(G) Ask a judge to change conservators.
(H) Ask a judge to end the conservatorship.
(I) Vote, unless expressly withheld by the court.
(J) Control personal spending money if a judge permits an allowance to be paid directly to the conservatee.
(K) Make their own health care decisions, unless expressly withheld by the court.
(L) Enter into business transactions to provide for the conservatee’s basic needs and those of their children.
(M) Participate in other activities the court allows when the conservator is appointed, or when the court order later grants that right at the conservatee’s request.

SEC. 10.

 Section 1836 is added to the Probate Code, to read:

1836.
 (a) The Judicial Council shall establish a conservatorship alternatives program within each self-help center in every state Superior Court.
(b) The purposes of the conservatorship alternatives program are:
(1) To identify petitions for conservatorship for which provide information relating to less restrictive alternatives, alternatives to conservatorship, including, but not limited to, supported decisionmaking, could be used to avoid the conservatorship. decisionmaking agreements, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 20001 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, to interested individuals.
(2) To educate parties in conservatorship proceedings interested individuals on less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship that may be appropriate, and to provide assistance and guidance in considering and implementing those alternatives.

(3)To reduce the number of people who lose their rights under conservatorships.

(c) Each court’s conservatorship alternatives program shall include staff who provide information and resources to potential petitioners and potential conservatees about options that could avoid conservatorships to the maximum extent practical. interested individuals about less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship.
(d) The conservatorship alternatives program shall operate as follows:
(1) Any person interested individual who contacts a superior court self-help center by telephone, email, or in person to inquire about conservatorship proceedings or to request documents to petition for a conservatorship shall be directed to contact advised of the conservatorship alternatives program. The conservatorship alternatives program shall also be available to other potential or present conservators, conservatees, their attorneys, or others involved in the conservatorship system.
(2) The conservatorship alternatives program shall be a component of each superior court’s self-help center.
(3) Conservatorship alternatives program staff shall be trained in less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship and shall meet with potential conservators and conservatees with the following goals: be available to meet, through in-person or remote means, with interested individuals to provide education and resources on supported decisionmaking agreements and other less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship, and to provide resources to assist people who wish to implement or establish those alternatives.

(A)Providing education and resources to inform people about how they can avoid conservatorships when alternatives are appropriate.

(B)Providing guidance and resources to support people who wish to implement or establish those alternatives.

(4) Conservatorship alternatives program staff shall provide all of the following to potential petitioners and potential conservatees: be able to provide the following to interested individuals:

(A)Information about a range of alternatives to conservatorship, including supported decisionmaking.

(B)

(A) Practical resources resources, information, and documents to establish and implement less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship, including powers of attorney, advance health care directives, and supported decisionmaking agreements.

(C)

(B) Technical support and education on these alternatives, including assistance in filling out any associated paperwork, in understanding these alternatives, and in providing referrals to the Supported Decisionmaking Technical Assistance Program (SDM-TAP) established under Section 3959, Division 11 (commencing with Section 20000) of the Welfare and Institutions Code and other experts who can provide more extensive support.

(5)Communication with conservatorship alternatives program staff shall be confidential.

(6)Participation in the conservatorship alternatives program is not mandatory.

(5) Interactions or communication with the CAP Program shall not be used as evidence of incapacity or introduced for any other reason in a conservatorship proceeding under this division unless introduced by the conservatee or proposed conservatee.
(e) The Judicial Council, in coordination with the SDM-TAP, shall ensure judges are provided with education on alternatives to conservatorship, including supported decisionmaking. Education may include, but is not limited to, training courses, continuing education, and informational materials.

SEC. 11.

 Section 1850 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1850.
 (a) Except as provided in subdivision (e), each conservatorship established pursuant to this part shall be reviewed by the court as follows:
(1) Six months after the initial appointment of the conservator, the court investigator shall visit the conservatee, conduct an investigation as provided in subdivision (a) of Section 1851, and report to the court regarding the appropriateness of the conservatorship and whether the conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee’s placement, quality of care, including physical and mental health treatment, and finances. In response to the investigator’s report, the court may take appropriate action including, but not limited to, ordering a hearing or ordering the conservator to submit an accounting pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 2620.
(2) One year after the initial appointment of the conservator and annually thereafter, the court investigator shall, as provided in Section 1851, visit the conservatee, conduct an investigation, including, when possible, discussing with the conservatee less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship as set forth in Section 1800.3, and report the findings of the investigation to the court, including whether the conservator or conservatee wishes to modify or terminate the conservatorship and whether less restrictive alternatives could be tried. On receipt of the investigator’s report, the court shall, if indicated by the report, consider promptly terminating or altering the conservatorship at a hearing pursuant to Section 1860.5 or 1863 and take any other appropriate action.
(b) At any time, the court may, on its own motion or upon request by any interested person, take appropriate action including, but not limited to, ordering a review of the conservatorship at a noticed hearing or ordering the conservator to submit an accounting pursuant to Section 2620.
(c) Notice of a review hearing pursuant to this section shall be given to the persons, for the period and in the manner provided in Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 1460) of Part 1.
(d) This chapter does not apply to either of the following:
(1) A conservatorship for an absentee as defined in Section 1403.
(2) A conservatorship of the estate for a nonresident of this state where the conservatee is not present in this state.
(e) (1) A superior court shall not be required to perform any duties imposed pursuant to the amendments to this section enacted by Chapter 493 of the Statutes of 2006 until the Legislature makes an appropriation identified for this purpose.
(2) A superior court shall not be required to perform any duties imposed pursuant to the measure that added this paragraph until the Legislature makes an appropriation identified for this purpose.

SEC. 12.

 Section 1860.5 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1860.5.
 (a) A limited conservatorship continues until the authority of the conservator is terminated by one of the following:
(1) The death of the limited conservator.
(2) The death of the limited conservatee.
(3) An order appointing a conservator of the former limited conservatee.
(4) An order of the court terminating the limited conservatorship.
(b) A petition for the termination of a limited conservatorship may be filed by any of the following:
(1) The limited conservator.
(2) The limited conservatee.
(3) Any relative or friend of the limited conservatee.
(c) The petition shall state facts showing that the limited conservatorship is no longer required.
(d) Notice of a hearing pursuant to Section 1850.5 or on a petition filed pursuant to this section shall be given to the same persons and in the same manner as provided for a petition for the appointment of a limited conservator.
(1) If a petition is filed and the limited conservator is not the petitioner, or has not joined in the petition, the limited conservator shall be served with a notice of the time and place of the hearing accompanied by a copy of the petition at least five days prior to the hearing. This service shall be made in the same manner provided for in Section 415.10 or 415.30 of the Code of Civil Procedure or in another manner authorized by the court. If the limited conservator cannot, with reasonable diligence, be so served with notice, the court may dispense with notice.
(2) If the court sets a hearing pursuant to Section 1850.5 to consider termination of a limited conservatorship and no petition is filed, the court shall order the limited conservator to give notice of the hearing as provided in this subdivision and to appear at the hearing and show cause why the limited conservatorship should not be terminated.
(e) (1) The limited conservatee shall be produced at the hearing except in the following cases:
(A) When the limited conservatee is out of the state and is not the petitioner.
(B) When the limited conservatee is unable to attend the hearing by reason of medical inability.
(C) When the court investigator has reported to the court that the limited conservatee has expressly communicated that the limited conservatee (i) is not willing to attend the hearing, (ii) does not wish to contest the continuation of the limited conservatorship, and (iii) does not object to the current limited conservator or prefer that another person act as limited conservator, and the court makes an order that the limited conservatee need not attend the hearing.
(2) If the limited conservatee is unable to attend the hearing because of medical inability, that inability shall be established by the affidavit or certificate of a licensed medical practitioner or, if the conservatee is an adherent of a religion whose tenets and practices call for reliance on prayer alone for healing and is under treatment by an accredited practitioner of that religion, by the affidavit of the practitioner. The affidavit or certificate is evidence only of the limited conservatee’s inability to attend the hearing and shall not be considered in determining the issue of need for the continuation of the limited conservatorship.
(3) Emotional or psychological instability is not good cause for the absence of the conservatee from the hearing unless, by reason of that instability, attendance at the hearing is likely to cause serious and immediate physiological damage to the conservatee.
(f) The limited conservator or any relative or friend of the limited conservatee may appear and support or oppose termination of the limited conservatorship. The court shall hear and determine the matter according to the laws and procedures relating to the trial of civil actions, including trial by jury if demanded. If the court terminates the limited conservatorship, the limited conservator may, either at the hearing or thereafter on further notice and hearing, be discharged and the bond exonerated upon the settlement and approval of the final account by the court.
(g) (1) The court shall order the termination of the limited conservatorship unless the court finds, on the record and by clear and convincing evidence, that the limited conservatee still meets the criteria for appointment of a limited conservator under Section 1801 and a limited conservatorship remains the least restrictive alternative needed for the limited conservatee’s protection.
(2) If the petition for termination is uncontested and states facts showing that both the limited conservator and limited conservatee wish to terminate the limited conservatorship, and the conservatorship is no longer the least restrictive alternative for the limited conservatee’s protection, the court may terminate the limited conservatorship without a an evidentiary hearing.
(h) If the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, that the limited conservatee meets the criteria for appointment of a limited conservator under Section 1801, the court shall determine whether to modify the powers granted to the limited conservator to ensure that the limited conservatorship remains the least restrictive alternative needed for the limited conservatee’s protection. If the court modifies any powers granted to the limited conservator, new letters shall issue.

SEC. 13.

 Section 1861.5 is added to the Probate Code, to read:

1861.5.
 Upon the receipt of a communication from the conservatee that the conservatee wishes to terminate the conservatorship, a court shall appoint counsel for the conservatee and set a hearing for the termination of the conservatorship when either of the following conditions apply:
(a) There has not been a hearing for the termination of the conservatorship within the 12 months preceding the communication from the conservatee.
(b) The court believes there is good cause to set a hearing for the termination of the conservatorship.

SEC. 14.

 Section 1863 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

1863.
 (a) The court shall hear and determine the matter according to the law and procedure relating to the trial of civil actions, including trial by jury if demanded by the conservatee. The conservator, the conservatee, the spouse or domestic partner, or any relative or friend of the conservatee or other interested person may appear and support or oppose the termination of the conservatorship.
(b) (1) The conservatee shall be produced at the hearing except in the following cases:
(A) When the conservatee is out of the state and is not the petitioner.
(B) When the conservatee is unable to attend the hearing by reason of medical inability.
(C) When the court investigator has reported to the court that the conservatee has expressly communicated that the conservatee (i) is not willing to attend the hearing, (ii) does not wish to contest the continuation of the conservatorship, and (iii) does not object to the current conservator or prefer that another person act as conservator, and the court makes an order that the conservatee need not attend the hearing.
(2) If the conservatee is unable to attend the hearing because of medical inability, that inability shall be established by the affidavit or certificate of a licensed medical practitioner or, if the conservatee is an adherent of a religion whose tenets and practices call for reliance on prayer alone for healing and is under treatment by an accredited practitioner of that religion, by the affidavit of the practitioner. The affidavit or certificate is evidence only of the conservatee’s inability to attend the hearing and shall not be considered in determining the issue of need for the continuation of the conservatorship.
(3) Emotional or psychological instability is not good cause for the absence of the conservatee from the hearing unless, by reason of that instability, attendance at the hearing is likely to cause serious and immediate physiological damage to the conservatee.
(c) Unless the court determines, on the record and by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) the conservatee still meets the criteria for appointment of a conservator of the person under subdivision (a) of Section 1801, a conservator of the estate under subdivision (b) of Section 1801, or both; and (2) a conservatorship remains the least restrictive alternative needed for the conservatee’s protection, as required by subdivision (b) of Section 1800.3, the court shall enter judgment terminating the conservatorship.
(d) If the court determines, by clear and convincing evidence, that the conservatee meets the criteria for appointment of a conservator of the person under subdivision (a) of Section 1801, a conservator of the estate under subdivision (b) of Section 1801, or both, the court shall determine whether to modify the existing powers of the conservator to ensure that the conservatorship remains the least restrictive alternative needed for the conservatee’s protection and shall order the conservatorship to continue accordingly. If the court modifies the existing powers of the conservator, new letters shall issue.
(e) At the hearing, or thereafter on further notice and hearing, the conservator may be discharged and the bond given by the conservator may be exonerated upon the settlement and approval of the conservator’s final account by the court.
(f) This section does not apply to limited conservatorships.
(g) Termination of conservatorship does not preclude a new proceeding for appointment of a conservator on the same or other grounds.
(h) If a petition for termination pursuant to Section 1861 is uncontested and states facts showing that both the conservator and conservatee wish to terminate the conservatorship and the conservatorship is no longer the least restrictive alternative for the conservatee’s protection, the court may terminate the conservatorship without a an evidentiary hearing.

SEC. 15.

 Section 2113 of the Probate Code is amended to read:

2113.
 A conservator shall accommodate the desires of the conservatee, except to the extent that doing so would violate the conservator’s fiduciary duties to the conservatee or impose an unreasonable expense on the conservatorship estate. To the greatest extent possible, the conservator, on a regular basis, shall inform the conservatee of decisions made on their behalf. In determining the desires of the conservatee, the conservator shall consider stated or previously expressed preferences, including preferences expressed by speech, sign language, alternative or augmentative communication, actions, facial expressions, and other spoken and nonspoken methods of communication.

SEC. 16.Part 10 (commencing with Section 3950) is added to Division 4 of the Probate Code, to read:
10.SUPPORTED DECISIONMAKING
3950.

The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a)Adults with disabilities, including older adults with disabilities, are presumed competent and to have the capacity to make decisions regarding their day-to-day health, safety, welfare, social, and financial affairs, unless otherwise determined through legal proceedings.

(b)All adults, to the best of their ability and with supports they choose, should be able to be informed about, and participate in, the management of their affairs.

(c)Like adults without disabilities, adults with disabilities may use a wide range of voluntary supports to help them understand, make, and communicate their own decisions. These voluntary arrangements should be encouraged and recognized as a valid way for people with disabilities to strengthen their capacity and maintain their autonomy.

(d)The capacity of any adult should be assessed with any supports, including supported decisionmaking, that the person is using or could use. The capacity of any adult should never be assessed in isolation from existing or possible supports.

(e)All adults with disabilities should receive the most effective, yet least restrictive and intrusive, form of supports, assistance, or protection when they need help to care for themselves or manage their affairs.

(f)Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have passed laws recognizing supported decisionmaking as a valid way for adults with disabilities to make, understand, and communicate their own choices.

(g)Supported decisionmaking offers adults with disabilities a flexible way to maintain autonomy and decisionmaking authority over their own lives by developing and maintaining voluntary supports to assist them in understanding, making, communicating, and implementing their own informed choices.

(h)Supported decisionmaking can be a way to strengthen the capacity of an adult with a disability and can prevent or remove the need to use more restrictive protective mechanisms, such as conservatorship. The ability of an adult with a disability to meet their personal needs or manage their financial resources through supported decisionmaking shall be assessed in determining the appropriateness and extent of any conservatorship.

(i)A supported decisionmaking agreement or arrangement is not evidence that the adult with a disability lacks capacity or needs a conservatorship and does not preclude the adult with a disability from acting independently of the agreement.

(j)Supported decisionmaking is one of several options available to adults with disabilities to understand, make, and communicate decisions and to express preferences, including, but not limited to, medical and financial powers of attorney, authorized representative forms, health care directives, release of information forms, and representative payees.

3951.

The following definitions apply for purposes of this part:

(a)“Adult with a disability” includes an adult with any disability, including, but not limited to, an intellectual or developmental disability, cognitive disability, communication disability, psychiatric disability, age-related disability, physical disability, sensory disability, learning disability, dementia, cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, major neurocognitive disorder, or chronic illness or condition.

(b)“Life decision” means any decision, whether minor or major, that affects the adult with a disability, including, but not limited to, a decision regarding any medical, psychological, financial, educational, residential, social, sexual, religious, and occupational matter. Life decisions include decisions about institutional, residential, and community-based services such as those provided by a regional center, In-Home Supportive Services, a nursing home, or a skilled nursing facility.

(c)“Supported decisionmaking” means an individualized arrangement in which an adult with a disability chooses one or more people they trust as supporters to help them understand, make, communicate, implement, or act on, their own choices. Supported decisionmaking recognizes and accepts the preferences of the adult with a disability, as expressed with the supports and supporters they choose.

(d)“Supporter” means another adult who agrees to help the adult with a disability in using supported decisionmaking. A supporter agrees to help the adult with a disability as requested, which may include providing assistance to the adult with a disability to understand, make, communicate, implement, or act on, their own life decisions. Unless the adult with a disability explicitly delegates decisionmaking, a supporter is not entitled to substitute their judgment for the decision of the adult with a disability.

3952.

(a)An adult with a disability may choose to enter into supported decisionmaking with one or more chosen supporters. The adult with a disability may request a supporter to provide assistance in any or all of the following ways:

(1)Participate in supported decisionmaking, including assistance in understanding information, options, responsibilities, and consequences of the life decisions of the adult with a disability.

(2)Assist the adult with a disability in accessing, collecting, obtaining, and understanding information that is relevant to a given life decision from any person or entity, and information about how supporters and supported decisionmaking is used.

(3)Assist the adult with a disability in understanding information related to a life decision.

(4)Assist the adult with a disability in communicating the adult’s life decisions to appropriate persons, and advocate or assist to ensure that the adult’s preferences and decisions are implemented.

(b)Supported decisionmaking can take many forms and may be informal. An adult with a disability is not required to enter into a written supported decisionmaking agreement to participate in supported decisionmaking.

3953.

(a)Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, an adult with a disability may request, and is entitled to have present, one or more other adults, including supporters, in any meeting or communication, including, but not limited to, all of the following:

(1)An individualized education plan (IEP) meeting.

(2)An individual program plan (IPP) meeting.

(3)A service planning meeting.

(4)A care plan and hospital discharge planning meeting.

(5)A financial planning meeting.

(6)A communication or meeting with a bank or other financial institution.

(7)An employment planning meeting.

(8)A medical appointment.

(b)When an adult with a disability indicates that they wish to have one or more other adults present in any meeting or communication, any entity or third party shall permit the other adult or adults to attend with the adult with a disability. An adult with a disability may indicate that they wish to have the other adult or adults to attend a meeting or communication through oral statement, gesture, or any augmentative or alternative communication method used by the adult with a disability.

(c)The Legislature finds and declares that this section is declaratory of existing law.

3954.

(a)A supporter is an adult identified by a person with a disability to participate in supported decisionmaking, and who agrees to participate in supported decisionmaking. An adult with a disability may have multiple supporters.

(b)Each supporter shall do all of the following:

(1)Support and implement the will and preferences of the adult with a disability.

(2)Respect the values, beliefs, and preferences of the adult with a disability.

(3)Act honestly, diligently, and in good faith.

(4)Act within the scope identified by the adult with a disability.

(5)Avoid, to the greatest extent possible, disclose, minimize, and manage conflicts of interest.

(c)Supporters shall not coerce the adult with a disability.

(d)Unless explicitly authorized, supporters shall not do any of the following:

(1)Make decisions for or on behalf of the adult with a disability, except when necessary to prevent imminent bodily harm or injury.

(2)Sign documents on behalf of the adult with a disability.

(3)Substitute their own judgment for the decision or preference of the adult with a disability.

(4)Obtain information that is not reasonably related to matters with which the supporter may assist the adult through supported decisionmaking.

(5)Use or disclose information acquired for the purpose of supporting the adult with a disability for another purpose that does not support the adult with a disability.

(e)(1)To minimize conflicts of interest, a supporter shall avoid, to the maximum extent possible, providing support on life decisions for which the supporter has a financial or other tangible stake in the outcome, such as decisions related to an employment relationship between the adult with a disability and the supporter.

(2)Where feasible, the supporter should work diligently with the adult with a disability to find other trusted supporters who can provide support on life decisions for which the first supporter has a financial or other tangible stake in the outcome.

(3)If a supporter does provide support on decisions in which the supporter has a financial or other tangible stake, the supporter shall disclose and discuss any conflicts with the adult with a disability.

(4)A supporter who is paid solely to provide paid supported decisionmaking services does not have a conflict of interest.

(f)A person shall not be a supporter if the adult with a disability has obtained an order of protection for abuse against that person or if the person is the subject of a civil or criminal order prohibiting contact with the adult with a disability.

(g)In addition to the obligations in this section, a supporter is bound by all existing obligations and prohibitions otherwise applicable by law that protect people with disabilities and the elderly from fraud, abuse, neglect, coercion, or mistreatment. This section does not limit a supporter’s civil or criminal liability for prohibited conduct against the person with a disability, including liability for fraud, abuse, neglect, coercion, or mistreatment, including liability under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 15600) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code), including, but not limited to, Sections 15656 and 15657 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

3955.

(a)If an adult with a disability chooses to use a written supported decisionmaking agreement, the agreement shall include all of the following elements:

(1)The name of the adult with a disability.

(2)The name, address, telephone number, and email address, if applicable, of each supporter.

(3)A list of the areas in which the adult with a disability requests support from one or more supporters.

(4)An acknowledgment by each supporter agreeing to do all of the following:

(A)Provide information as requested by the adult with a disability.

(B)Support the adult with a disability in good faith and to the best of their abilities.

(C)Respect that the final decision shall be made by the adult with a disability and not the supporter.

(D)Not coerce or manipulate the adult with a disability into making any decision.

(E)Provide the most up-to-date and relevant information to the adult with a disability, based on all the available and known information the supporter has.

(F)Disclose, minimize, and manage conflicts of interest.

(5)The day, month, and year the agreement was entered into.

(b)A supported decisionmaking agreement shall be signed by the adult with a disability and each supporter, in the presence of two or more attesting and disinterested witnesses who are at least 18 years of age, or a notary public. The adult with a disability may use reasonable modifications, such as assistive technology or physical assistance, to sign the agreement. The adult with a disability shall enter the agreement voluntarily and without coercion.

(c)A supported decisionmaking agreement shall be written in simple language that is accessible to the adult with a disability. It may contain images or be read out loud or be audio- or video-recorded.

(d)A supported decisionmaking agreement may include other elements, including, but not limited to, any of the following:

(1)A description of the type of assistance and support each supporter agrees to provide, such as a list of which supporter or supporters will provide assistance with each decision, or a description of decisions for which only certain supporters may assist.

(2)A list of decisions for which a supporter may not assist.

(3)A statement whether the supporters may communicate with each other about support without the adult with a disability present and, if so, in what context and with what limitations.

(4)The name and contact information of oversight or review person who is not a supporter to oversee any financial assistance or decisions.

(5)Information and copies of other supported or substituted decisionmaking documents the adult with a disability has in place, including, but not limited to, powers of attorney, authorizations to share medical or educational information, authorized representative forms, or representative payee agreements.

3956.

(a)A supported decisionmaking agreement is effective until it is terminated by the adult with a disability, by all supporters, or by the terms of the agreement. Any party may choose to terminate their participation in the agreement at any time by providing written or verbal notice of the termination to all parties to the agreement.

(b)If there is more than one supporter, the termination by one supporter does not terminate the supported decisionmaking agreement with respect to other supporters.

(c)A supported decisionmaking agreement is terminated with respect to any supporter who is found criminally, civilly, or administratively liable for abuse, neglect, mistreatment, coercion, or fraud, or is subject to a restraining order with respect to the adult with a disability.

3957.

Supported decisionmaking shall be encouraged and used, to the maximum extent possible, by adults with disabilities who are subject to conservatorship or other protective arrangements. To the greatest extent possible, conservators shall encourage and respect the preference of an adult with a disability under conservatorship to use supported decisionmaking within the conservatorship, or to rely on supported decisionmaking in seeking to terminate a conservatorship.

3958.

A person may rely on known supports used by an adult with a disability, including a written supported decisionmaking agreement as described in Section 3955.

3959.

(a)The State Council on Developmental Disabilities, in coordination with the University of California Davis MIND Institute and the protection and advocacy agency described in subdivision (i) of Section 4900 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and in consultation with a nonprofit organization with experience in supported decisionmaking and other alternatives to conservatorship, shall administer the statewide Supported Decisionmaking Technical Assistance Program (SDM-TAP), as established pursuant to subdivision (b), to provide support, education, technical assistance, and administer grants to expand and strengthen the use of supported decisionmaking throughout California.

(b)(1)The State Council on Developmental Disabilities shall establish and staff a centralized SDM-TAP program, which shall provide guidance, assistance, and training to educational entities, families, service providers, professionals, people with disabilities, courts, attorneys, mediators, and others in California who wish to use or expand supported decisionmaking in their professional or personal life.

(2)The SDM-TAP program shall respond to inquiries about SDM, including providing technical assistance to people referred to them by the conservatorship alternatives program in subdivision (d) of Section 1836.

(3)The SDM-TAP program shall further develop and disseminate information, materials, training, and support on the use of supportive decisionmaking, with consideration to providing both of the following:

(A)Tailored access and support for populations and communities that have been historically underserved, including speakers of languages other than English and immigrant, native, and rural populations.

(B)Supportive decisionmaking for people who do not rely on speech to communicate, people with complex and significant disabilities, people who do not already have established support networks, people with psychiatric disabilities, and older adults.

(c)The State Council on Developmental Disabilities, in coordination with the University of California Davis MIND Institute and the protection and advocacy agency described in subdivision (i) of Section 4900 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and in consultation with state and local advocacy, disability, and aging agencies, including self-advocacy organizations, shall administer SDM-TAP grant funding to state or local government entities such as courts and school districts and nongovernmental entities such as nonprofit organizations that submit project proposals to expand the use of supported decisionmaking and reduce the use of conservatorship. SDM-TAP shall conduct outreach to educate local, grassroots, and nontraditional entities about the program, and to solicit these entities to apply for funding under this section. In deciding and allocating grant funding under this section, SDM-TAP shall consider equity and diversity of grant recipients, including with regard to geographic location, population size, type of entity seeking funding, type of project proposed, and size of the grant.

SEC. 16.

 Division 11 (commencing with Section 20000) is added to the Welfare and Institutions Code, to read:

DIVISION 11. Supported Decisionmaking

20000.
 The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Adults with disabilities, including older adults with disabilities, are presumed competent and to have the capacity to make decisions regarding their day-to-day health, safety, welfare, and social and financial affairs, unless otherwise determined through legal proceedings.
(b) All adults, to the best of their ability and with supports they choose, should be able to be informed about, and participate in, the management of their affairs.
(c) Like adults without disabilities, adults with disabilities may use a wide range of voluntary supports to help them understand, make, and communicate their own decisions. These voluntary arrangements should be encouraged and recognized as a valid way for people with disabilities to strengthen their capacity and maintain their autonomy.
(d) The capacity of an adult should be assessed with any supports, including supported decisionmaking, that the person is using or could use.
(e) Supported decisionmaking offers adults with disabilities a flexible way to maintain autonomy and decisionmaking authority over their own lives by developing and maintaining voluntary supports to assist them in understanding, making, communicating, and implementing their own informed choices.
(f) Supported decisionmaking can be a way to strengthen the capacity of an adult with a disability.
(g) Supported decisionmaking is one of several options available to adults with disabilities to understand, make, and communicate decisions and to express preferences, including, but not limited to, medical and financial powers of attorney, authorized representative forms, health care directives, release of information forms, and representative payees.

20001.
 The following definitions apply for purposes of this division:
(a) “Adult with a disability” includes an adult with any disability, including, but not limited to, an intellectual or developmental disability, cognitive disability, communication disability, psychiatric disability, age-related disability, physical disability, sensory disability, learning disability, dementia, cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, major neurocognitive disorder, or chronic illness or condition.
(b) “Life decision” means a decision, whether minor or major, that affects the adult with a disability, including, but not limited to, a decision regarding any medical, psychological, financial, educational, residential, social, sexual, religious, and occupational matter. Life decisions include decisions about institutional, residential, and community-based services such as those provided by a regional center, In-Home Supportive Services, a nursing home, or a skilled nursing facility.
(c) “Supported decisionmaking” means an individualized process in which an adult with a disability chooses one or more people they trust as supporters to help them understand, make, communicate, implement, or act on, their own choices. Supported decisionmaking recognizes and accepts the preferences of the adult with a disability, as expressed with the supports and supporters they choose.
(d) “Supported decisionmaking agreement” means a voluntary, written agreement, signed by the supporter and the supported person, which may revoked orally or in writing at any time by either party. A supported decisionmaking agreement shall be written in plain language that is accessible to the adult with a disability. It may include images, be read aloud, or be video or audio recorded, in addition to the written version.
(e) “Supporter” means another adult who agrees to help the adult with a disability in using supported decisionmaking. A supporter agrees to help the adult with a disability as requested, which may include providing assistance to the adult with a disability to understand, make, communicate, implement, or act on, their own life decisions. A supporter is not entitled to substitute their judgment for that of the adult with a disability or make a decision on behalf of the adult with a disability unless they have independent legal authorization to do so. An adult with a disability may have multiple supporters.

20002.
 (a) An adult with a disability may choose to enter into supported decisionmaking with one or more chosen supporters. The adult with a disability may request a supporter to provide assistance in any way, including, but not limited to, the following:
(1) Participate in supported decisionmaking, including assistance in understanding information, options, responsibilities, and consequences of the life decisions of the adult with a disability.
(2) Assist the adult with a disability in accessing, collecting, obtaining, and understanding information that is relevant to a given life decision from a person or entity, and information about how supporters and supported decisionmaking is used.
(3) Assist the adult with a disability in understanding information related to a life decision.
(4) Assist the adult with a disability in communicating the adult’s life decisions to appropriate persons, and advocate or assist to ensure that the adult’s preferences and decisions are implemented.
(b) Supported decisionmaking can take many forms and may be informal. An adult with a disability is not required to enter into a written supported decisionmaking agreement to participate in supported decisionmaking.
(c) An adult’s participation in a supported decisionmaking process or the execution of a supported decisionmaking agreement shall not be used by a court or other entity as evidence of incapacity. Participation in a supported decisionmaking agreement, or the existence of a supported decisionmaking agreement, does not preclude the adult with a disability from acting independently of the supported decisionmaking process or agreement. This subdivision does not limit the admissibility of evidence pursuant to Section 28 of Article 1 of the California Constitution.

20003.
 (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, an adult with a disability is entitled to have present one or more other adults, including supporters, in any meeting or communication, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(1) An individualized education program plan (IEP) meeting.
(2) An individual program plan (IPP) meeting.
(3) A service planning meeting.
(4) A care plan and hospital discharge planning meeting.
(5) A financial planning meeting.
(6) A communication or meeting with a bank or other financial institution.
(7) An employment planning meeting.
(8) A medical appointment.
(b) An adult with a disability may indicate that they wish to have one or more adults attend a meeting or communication through oral statement, gesture, or any augmentative or alternative communication method used by the adult with a disability.
(c) A third party may refuse the presence of a supporter or supporters under subdivision (a) only if they have reasonable cause to believe that there is fraud, coercion, or abuse by the supporter or supporters.
(d) The Legislature finds and declares that this section is declaratory of existing law.

20004.
 (a) Each supporter shall do all of the following:
(1) Support and implement the will and preferences of the adult with a disability.
(2) Respect the values, beliefs, and preferences of the adult with a disability.
(3) Act honestly, diligently, and in good faith.
(4) Act within the scope identified by the adult with a disability.
(5) Avoid, to the greatest extent possible, disclose, minimize, and manage conflicts of interest.
(b) A supporter shall not coerce an adult with a disability.
(c) Unless legally authorized, including, but not limited to, authorization by power of attorney, a supporter shall not do any of the following:
(1) Make decisions for, or on behalf of, the adult with a disability, except when necessary to prevent imminent bodily harm or injury.
(2) Sign documents on behalf of the adult with a disability.
(3) Substitute their own judgment for the decision or preference of the adult with a disability.
(4) Obtain information that is not reasonably related to matters with which the supporter may assist the adult through supported decisionmaking.
(5) Use or disclose information acquired for the purpose of supporting the adult with a disability for another purpose that does not support the adult with a disability.
(d) (1) To minimize conflicts of interest, a supporter shall avoid, to the maximum extent possible, providing support on life decisions for which the supporter has a financial or other tangible stake in the outcome, such as decisions related to an employment relationship between the adult with a disability and the supporter.
(2) Where feasible, the supporter shall work diligently with the adult with a disability to find other trusted supporters who can provide support on life decisions for which the first supporter has a financial or other tangible stake in the outcome.
(3) If a supporter does provide support on decisions in which the supporter has a financial or other tangible stake, the supporter shall disclose and discuss any conflicts with the adult with a disability.
(e) A person shall not be a supporter if the adult with a disability has obtained an order of protection for abuse against that person or if the person is the subject of a civil or criminal order prohibiting contact with the adult with a disability.
(f) In addition to the obligations in this section, a supporter is bound by all existing obligations and prohibitions otherwise applicable by law that protect people with disabilities and the elderly from fraud, abuse, neglect, coercion, or mistreatment. This section does not limit a supporter’s civil or criminal liability for prohibited conduct against the person with a disability, including liability for fraud, abuse, neglect, breach of fiduciary duty, if any exists, coercion, or mistreatment, including liability under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 15600) of Part 3 of Division 9), including, but not limited to, Sections 15656 and 15657.

20005.
 (a) A supported decisionmaking agreement shall include all of the following elements:
(1) The name of the adult with a disability.
(2) The name, address, telephone number, and email address, if applicable, of each supporter.
(3) A list of the areas in which the adult with a disability requests support from one or more supporters.
(4) An acknowledgment by each supporter agreeing to do all of the following:
(A) Provide information, as requested by the adult with a disability.
(B) Support the adult with a disability in good faith and to the best of their abilities.
(C) Respect that the final decision shall be made by the adult with a disability and not the supporter.
(D) Not coerce or manipulate the adult with a disability into making any decision.
(E) Provide the most up-to-date and relevant information to the adult with a disability, based on all the available and known information the supporter has.
(F) Disclose, minimize, and manage conflicts of interest.
(5) The day, month, and year the agreement was entered into.
(6) Any additional information the adult with a disability or the supporter wishes to include in order to express the intent of the parties with respect to the supported decisionmaking agreement.
(b) A supported decisionmaking agreement shall be signed by the adult with a disability and each supporter, in the presence of two or more attesting and disinterested witnesses who are at least 18 years of age, or a notary public. The adult with a disability may use reasonable modifications, such as assistive technology or physical assistance, to sign the agreement. The adult with a disability shall enter the agreement voluntarily and without coercion.
(c) A supported decisionmaking agreement shall be written in simple language that is accessible to the adult with a disability. It may contain images or be read out loud or be audio- or video-recorded.
(d) A supported decisionmaking agreement may include other elements, including, but not limited to, any of the following:
(1) A description of the type of assistance and support each supporter agrees to provide, such as a list of which supporter or supporters will provide assistance with each decision, or a description of decisions for which only certain supporters may assist.
(2) A list of decisions for which a supporter shall not assist.
(3) A statement whether the supporters may communicate with each other about support without the adult with a disability present and, if so, in what context and with what limitations.
(4) The name and contact information of an oversight or review person who is not a supporter to oversee any financial assistance or decisions.
(5) Information and copies of other supported or substituted decisionmaking documents the adult with a disability has in place, including, but not limited to, powers of attorney, authorizations to share medical or educational information, authorized representative forms, or representative payee agreements.

20006.
 (a) (1) A supported decisionmaking agreement is effective until it is terminated in one of the following ways:
(A) By the adult with a disability.
(B) By all supporters.
(C) By the terms of the agreement.
(D) By the death of the adult with a disability.
(E) By operation of law.
(2) Any party may choose to terminate their participation in the agreement at any time by providing written or oral notice of the termination to all parties to the agreement. An adult with a disability may terminate a supported decisionmaking agreement by other conduct intended to communicate termination, including by canceling, defacing, obliterating, burning, tearing, or otherwise destroying the supported decisionmaking agreement or directing another in the presence of the adult with a disability to so destroy the supported decisionmaking agreement.
(b) If there is more than one supporter, the termination by one supporter does not terminate the supported decisionmaking agreement with respect to other supporters.
(c) A supported decisionmaking agreement is terminated with respect to any supporter who is found criminally, civilly, or administratively liable for abuse, neglect, mistreatment, coercion, or fraud, or is subject to a restraining order with respect to the adult with a disability.

20007.
 This division does not apply to CARE court proceedings or to a CARE supporter trained and appointed under the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act (Part 8 (commencing with Section 5970) of Division 5).

20008.
 (a) The State Council on Developmental Disabilities, in coordination with the University of California Davis MIND Institute and the protection and advocacy agency described in subdivision (i) of Section 4900, and in consultation with a nonprofit organization with experience in supported decisionmaking and other alternatives to conservatorship, shall administer the statewide Supported Decisionmaking Technical Assistance Program (SDM-TAP), as established pursuant to subdivision (b), to provide support, education, and technical assistance, and to administer grants to expand and strengthen the use of supported decisionmaking throughout California.
(b) (1) The council shall establish and staff a centralized SDM-TAP program, which shall provide guidance, assistance, and training to educational entities, families, service providers, professionals, people with disabilities, courts, attorneys, mediators, and others in California who wish to use or expand supported decisionmaking in their professional or personal life.
(2) The SDM-TAP program shall respond to inquiries about supported decisionmaking, including providing technical assistance to people referred to them by the conservatorship alternatives program in subdivision (d) of Section 1836 of the Probate Code.
(3) The SDM-TAP program shall further develop and disseminate information, materials, training, and support on the use of supported decisionmaking, with consideration to providing both of the following:
(A) Tailored access and support for populations and communities that have been historically underserved, including speakers of languages other than English and immigrant, native, and rural populations.
(B) Supported decisionmaking for people who do not rely on speech to communicate, people with complex and significant disabilities, people who do not already have established support networks, people with psychiatric disabilities, and older adults.
(c) The council, in coordination with the University of California Davis MIND Institute and the protection and advocacy agency described in subdivision (i) of Section 4900, and in consultation with state and local advocacy, disability, and aging agencies, including self-advocacy organizations, shall administer SDM-TAP grant funding to state or local government entities, such as courts and school districts, and to nongovernmental entities, such as nonprofit organizations, that submit project proposals to expand the use of supported decisionmaking and reduce the use of conservatorship. SDM-TAP shall conduct outreach to educate local, grassroots, and nontraditional entities about the program, and to solicit these entities to apply for funding under this subdivision. In deciding and allocating grant funding under this subdivision, SDM-TAP shall consider equity and diversity of grant recipients, including with regard to geographic location, population size, type of entity seeking funding, type of project proposed, and size of the grant.
(d) (1) No later than six months after the Judicial Council issues its findings on conservatorships under Section 1458 of the Probate Code, the council, in coordination with the University of California Davis MIND Institute and the protection and advocacy agency described in subdivision (i) of Section 4900, and in consultation with state and local advocacy, disabilities, and aging agencies, including self-advocacy organizations, shall report to the Legislature on the use of supported decisionmaking in the state, recommendations for how to improve and expand the use of supported decisionmaking in the state, whether and how the SDM-TAP reduces the number of conservatorships, best practices for supported decisionmaking employed in other states, and effective measures for adults with disabilities to strengthen autonomy and protect against undue influence within supported decisionmaking.
(2) The report shall be submitted pursuant to Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(3) Any information contained in the report shall be deidentified to prevent disclosure of any personal information about specific individuals engaging in supported decisionmaking. Information about specific individuals engaging in supported decisionmaking obtained by SDM-TAP is exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Division 10 (commencing with Section 7920.000) of Title 1 of the Government Code).

SEC. 17.

 The sum of ten million dollars ($10,000,000) is appropriated from the General Fund as follows:
(a) Five million dollars ($5,000,000) to the Judicial Council for implementation of the conservatorship alternatives program established pursuant to Section 1836 of the Probate Code, as follows:
(1) Two million dollars ($2,000,000) for administration and establishment of resources, guides, oversight, and training, including judicial training and educational materials.
(2) Three million dollars ($3,000,000) for distribution to the 58 superior court self-help centers, proportional to the applicable county’s population.
(b) Five million dollars ($5,000,000) to the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, for implementation of the Supported Decisionmaking Technical Assistance Program (SDM-TAP) established pursuant to Section 3959 of the Probate Division 11 (commencing with Section 20000) of the Welfare and Institutions Code, as follows:
(1) Two million dollars ($2,000,000) for the establishment and operation of the SDM-TAP within the State Council on Developmental Disabilities.
(2) Three million dollars ($3,000,000) to be awarded in grant funding pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 3959 of the Probate 20008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

SEC. 18.

 The Legislature finds and declares that Section 10 16 of this act, which adds Section 1836 to the Probate 20008 to the Welfare and Institutions Code, imposes a limitation on the public’s right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies within the meaning of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution. Pursuant to that constitutional provision, the Legislature makes the following findings to demonstrate the interest protected by this limitation and the need for protecting that interest:
In order to protect the interests and privacy of vulnerable individuals subject to protective proceedings, it is necessary that information disclosed pursuant to the program described in Section 1836 of the Probate 20008 of the Welfare and Institutions Code be kept confidential.

LegiScan Search

View Top 50 Searches

Select area of search.
Find an exact bill number.
Search bill text and data. [help]
Reset

LegiScan Trends

View Top 50 National

CA AB635 Mobilehome Residency Law Protection Program: Attorney General.
CA SB1092 Mobilehome parks: resident organizations: option to purchase.
CA AB1872 False reporting.
CA AB2258 Early childhood education and childcare: alternative payment programs.
LA HB953 Provides relative to plumbing licenses
CA AB1753 Protective orders: firearms and ammunition: notice and procedures.
NY A05036 Requires certain elections take place in even-numbered years for certain...
NH SB223 Relative valid photo identification for purposes of obtaining a ballot...
CA AB2174 Mobilehomes and manufactured housing: registration and titling documen...
CA AR126 Relative to Suicide Prevention Awareness Month.
feedback