Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement

125 th General Assembly of Ohio

Ohio Legislative Service Commission

77 South High Street, 9th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215-6136 Phone: (614) 466-3615

Internet Web Site: http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/

BILL:

Am. Sub. H.B. 11

DATE:

December 14, 2004

STATUS:

As Enacted Ė Effective May 18, 2005

SPONSOR:

Rep. Jerse

LOCAL IMPACT STATEMENT REQUIRED:

No ó

Introduced version carried minimal local cost; Current version carries potential costs exceeding minimal for certain county entities

 


CONTENTS:

Creates the offenses of misrepresentation by a child day-care provider, failure of a child day-care center to disclose the death or serious injury of a child, and failure of a type A or type B family day-care home to disclose the death or serious injury of a child, revises the law pertaining to child day-care, includes additional offenses in criminal background checks of child care providers, regulates criminal background checks performed for child day camps, and makes changes in the law governing certification of type B family day-care homes

 

State Fiscal Highlights

 

 

STATE FUND

FY 2005

FY 2006

FUTURE YEARS

General Revenue Fund (GRF)

†††† Revenues

Potential negligible

gain

Potential negligible

gain

Potential negligible

annual gain

†††† Expenditures

(1) Potential increase of $155,000 due to registry; (2) Potential increase due to training; (3) Potential minimal decrease related to provisional licenses

(1) Potential increase of $55,000 due to maintenance of the registry; (2) Potential increase due to training;

(3) Potential minimal decrease related to provisional licenses

(1) Potential annual increase of $55,000 due to maintenance of the registry; (2) Potential annual increase due to training; (3) Potential minimal annual decrease related to provisional licenses

General Reimbursement Fund (Fund 106)

†††† Revenues

Potential gain,

depending on the number of background checks

Potential gain,

depending on the number

of background checks

Potential annual gain, depending on the number

of background checks

†††† Expenditures

Potential increase, commensurate with revenue gained from fees

Potential increase, commensurate with revenue gained from fees

Potential annual increase, commensurate with revenue gained from fees

Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 402)

†††† Revenues

Potential negligible

gain

Potential negligible

gain

Potential negligible

annual gain

†††† Expenditures

- 0 -

- 0 -

- 0 -

Note:The state fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.For example, FY 2005 is July 1, 2004 Ė June 30, 2005.

 

        New child care offenses: state court cost revenues.Given the potential number of additional child day-care providers that might be convicted as a result of the bill appears likely to be relatively small, any annual gain in court cost revenues deposited to the credit of the stateís General Revenue Fund (GRF) and the Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 402) would be negligible.

        Investigation of complaints.The bill's requirement that the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) inspect a child care center of a type A home upon receipt of a complaint involving physical harm to a child will not increase its annual operating costs, as the Department currently conducts such inspections under existing permissive authority.

        Licenses.The bill prohibits the Director of ODJFS from issuing a provisional license or license, or renew a license for a child day-care center or type A family day-care home.This provision may result in a decrease in the number of provisional licenses issued by ODJFS and the costs associated with such licensure.However, it is unlikely that someone who is unable to comply with the criteria for certification of a type B family day-care home would attempt to become licensed as a child day-care center or type A family day-care home.Therefore, any decrease in costs to ODJFS is likely to be minimal.

        Registry of persons providing child care.The bill requires ODJFS to develop and maintain a registry of persons providing child day-care.Development of a registry would involve the time and expense of ODJFS management information system (MIS) staff, and possibly a contractor, to develop a database and web site for this information.A spokesperson for the Office for Children and Families at ODJFS estimates that MIS costs would be at a minimum $100,000 and also believes that the Department would have to hire at least one additional staff person at a cost of approximately $55,000 (salary and benefits) to manage the registry.

        Recommendation of standards for imposing sanctions.The bill requires the Director of ODJFS to recommend standards for imposing sanctions on persons and entities that are licensed or certified providers of child care and that violate the law governing child care providers and centers.The Director is to provide copies of the recommendations to the Governor and leadership in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and on request, make copies available to the public.This provision is likely to increase the administrative costs of ODJFS to develop such recommendations.The Department will also incur costs to print and distribute copies of the recommendations.However, ODJFS will likely accomplish these tasks using existing resources.

        Day-care provider background checks.The bill adds to the list of offenses that would preclude a person from obtaining licensure as a child day-care center or type A family day-care home.When the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation (BCII) conducts a criminal background check, the entire criminal background of the person is determined.Since BCII charges a flat rate ($15) for a criminal background check, adding additional offenses for which BCII must check will have no fiscal impact on BCII.The associated cost, if any, for ODJFS to review a person's record to determine if these additional offenses have been committed would be negligible.

        FBI background check costs for certain child care providers.The bill requires a background check from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) if a person who is subject to a criminal background check related to licensure or certification as a child care provider does not present proof that the individual has been a resident of this state for the last five years.The state's BCII charges an additional $24 for an FBI background check.The Office of the Attorney General would realize revenue gains that would cover its cost to conduct the background check.This provision may also increase ODJFS' costs to obtain this additional information.However, since applicants for licensure or certification as child care providers pay the costs of the background checks, any additional costs will be offset by revenue generated from the collection of fees from the applicants.

        Advisory Council.The addition of four members to the renamed Child Care Advisory Council may cause a negligible increase in ODJFS' costs to reimburse necessary expenses of these additional Council members.

        Providers receiving copies of rules.The bill revises certain time periods within which the Director of ODJFS must provide copies of certain adopted rules governing day-care homes and centers to specified persons and entities.This provision may reduce the costs of providing copies of the rules since the bill permits copies to be in paper or electronic form.In addition, it may change the time at which the costs are incurred by a few weeks depending on the current practice of ODJFS in providing these rules to the appropriate persons or entities.

        Establishing standards for training.The bill requires ODJFS to provide training to individuals with whom ODJFS and county departments of job and family services employ or contract with to inspect and investigate type B family day-care homes.This provision is likely to result in an increase in cost to ODJFS to provide such training.

        Administrative rules.There are several provisions in the bill that require the Director of ODJFS to adopt administrative rules to govern or implement certain provisions of the bill.The Department has in place an infrastructure for adopting rules.It is likely that ODJFS will be able to adopt rules required by those provisions at a minimal cost using existing resources.

        Head Start.The bill repeals a section of law that entitles a family to continue to receive publicly funded child care until the end of the head start program year if the family has a child enrolled in a Head Start program and receives publicly funded child day-care for that child in a collaborative model at the same location unless the caretaker parent fails to pay the required fee for publicly funded child day-care.It seems that repealing this section of law may decrease the cost of the publicly funded child care program since ODJFS will no longer be required to provide funding for child care to families under circumstances described in the provision being repealed.Publicly funded child day-care is funded with GRF, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), and other federal funds.In the past few years, ODJFS has expended all available funds for the publicly funded day-care program.Any reduction in the number of children receiving publicly funded child day-care may reduce the amount of TANF dollars the Department uses to fund the program.

        Child day camp compliance checks. The bill allows ODJFS to conduct a random sample of registered child day camps to determine the rate of compliance with section 2151.681 of the Revised Code, which requires criminal records check and fingerprinting of employees responsible for out-of-home child care.If the child day camp is not in compliance, ODJFS must consider imposing a civil penalty and require a criminal background check of the individual.The bill may result in an increase in administrative costs for ODJFS regarding the periodic random sampling of registered day camps, posting notices at day camps, and maintaining a list of day camps found not to be in compliance on the Departmentís web site.The bill may also result in a gain of revenue generated from any civil penalties imposed on child day camps.†††

        Child day camp background checks.There could be an increase in costs to the BCII, operated by the Office of the Attorney General, to conduct background checks on child day camp employees and appointees.However, any additional costs will be offset by revenue generated from the collection of fees from the applicants or child day camps.Although current law already requires child day camps to initiate criminal background checks and fingerprinting, it is unclear at this time whether child day camps comply with the law.According to ODJFS, child day camps typically do not conduct background checks.Consequently, the number of background checks requested could increase depending on the number of employees and appointees that work at a child day camp for which a criminal background check has not been completed.

 

Local Fiscal Highlights

 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

FY 2005

FY 2006

FUTURE YEARS

Counties and Municipalities (criminal and civil justice systems)

†††† Revenues

Potential gain, at most minimal

Potential gain, at most minimal

Potential annual gain, at most minimal

†††† Expenditures

Potential increase, at most minimal

Potential increase, at most minimal

Potential annual increase, at most minimal

County Departments of Job and Family Services

†††† Revenues

- 0 -

- 0 -

- 0 -

†††† Expenditures

Potential minimal increase

Potential minimal

increase

Potential minimal

annual increase

Public Children Services Agencies

†††† Revenues

- 0 -

- 0 -

- 0 -

†††† Expenditures

Potential increase

Potential increase

Potential annual increase

Note:For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year.The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.

 

        Local criminal justice expenditures.Although annual county and municipal criminal justice expenditures related to investigating, prosecuting, adjudicating, defending (if indigent), and sanctioning certain day-care entities may rise, such an increase, should it occur, would be minimal at most, as the number of affected cases appears to be likely to be relatively small.

        Day-care pre-admittance disclosure and post-admittance notice requirements.It would not appear that the billís pre-admittance disclosure and post-admittance notice requirements will create a costly new burden for any day-care facilities or programs that are operated by local governments.In most cases, a day-care facility or program should find it fairly easy and inexpensive to assemble, update, and distribute certain information on its day-care operation and services, including the provision of timely notices of the death or serious injury of a child to certain persons.

        Local revenues.Counties and municipalities may collect additional court cost and fine revenues from day-care entities that violate the billís prohibitions.Given, however, that the number of new convictions resulting from the bill will likely be relatively small, any gain in local court cost and fine revenues collected annually would be no more than minimal.

        Complaint procedure.The bill requires inspection of a child care home on receipt of a complaint involving physical harm to a child.This requirement seems unlikely to increase costs to a county department of job and family services (CDJFS) since inspections in those circumstances are presumably conducted under the permissive authority granted under current law.To the extent that such inspections are not conducted, a CDJFS may experience an increase in costs to conduct such inspections.

        Application for certification. The bill requires a CDJFS that receives an application for certification as a type B family day-care home to request from the public children services agency (PCSA) information concerning any abuse or neglect reported regarding the applicant and to consider any information provided by the PCSA when determining whether or not to certify an applicant or revoke a prior certification.This provision would require the county departments to request information from the PCSA on each application filed.This will add to the current administrative costs of a CDJFS for certifying type B homes.

        Licenses.The bill requires a PCSA to promptly provide ODJFS or a CDJFS any information the PCSA determines to be relevant for the purpose of evaluating the fitness of a person who has applied for licensure or renewal of licensure as a type A family day-care home or certification or renewal of certification as a type B family day-care home. This provision may increase costs to the PCSAs for gathering such information, reviewing it for relevancy, and providing it to a requesting entity.

        Disqualifying offenses.The bill adds to the list of offenses that would preclude a person from obtaining certification as a type B family day-care home.The associated cost, if any, for a CDJFS to review a person's record to determine if these additional offenses have been committed would be negligible.

        Background checks.The bill requires a background check from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) if a person who is subject to a criminal background check related to certification as a child care provider does not present proof that the individual has been a resident of this state for the last five years.The BCII charges an additional $24 for an FBI background check.This provision may increase a CDJFS' costs to obtain this additional information.However, since applicants for certification as child care providers pay the costs of the background checks, any additional costs will be offset by revenue generated from the collection of fees from the applicants.

        Providers receiving copies of rules.The bill revises certain time periods within which the director of a CDJFS must provide copies of certain adopted rules governing type B family day-care homes to specified persons and entities.This provision may reduce the costs of providing copies of the rules since the bill permits copies to be in paper or electronic form.In addition, it may change the time at which the costs are incurred by a few weeks depending on the current practice of each CDJFS in providing these rules to the appropriate persons or entities.

        Courts of common pleas.It appears unlikely that the billís requirements will generate a costly new burden for courts of common pleas in the form of a large number of civil cases requiring adjudication brought about by the Office of the Attorney Generalís pursuit of civil remedies imposed on child day camps.

 



 

Detailed Fiscal Analysis

 

††††††††††† For the purposes of this fiscal analysis, the billís most notable contents relative to revising the law pertaining to child care include the following:

 

        Child care disclosure requirements.

        Inspections of child care providers.

        Restriction on licensing centers and type A homes.

        Information from public children services agencies.

        Disqualifying offenses.

        Operation of a center or type A home without a license.

        Recommendation of standards for imposing sanctions.

        Advisory council.

        Registry of persons providing child care.

        Establishing standards for training.

        Providers receiving copies of rules.

        Eligibility for children enrolled in a Head Start program.

        Child day camp criminal records checks.

 

Child care disclosure requirements

 

The bill creates the following three new offenses:

(1)   Misrepresentation by a child day-care provider, a misdemeanor of the first degree.

(2)   Failure of a type A or type B family day-care home to disclose the death or serious injury of a child, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

(3)   Failure of a child day-care center to disclose the death or serious injury of a child, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

 

Charging certain child day-care entities generally

 

Rather than creating new criminal cases, it would appear that the new offenses created by the bill relative to the actions of a child day-care provider, a type A or type B family day-care home, or a child day-care center will primarily permit a prosecuting attorney to stack more charges against an individual and possibly secure a more serious punishment than might otherwise have occurred under current law.

 

Misrepresentation by a child day-care provider

 

††††††††††† Under the bill, a child day-care provider who knowingly misrepresents to specified persons any factor or condition that relates to the provision of child day-care and that substantially affects the health or safety of any child or children in that providerís facility or receiving child day-care from that provider is guilty of misrepresentation by a child day-care provider, a misdemeanor of the first degree.

 

While it is possible that a child day-care provider could be charged solely with the offense of misrepresentation by a child day-care provider, it appears more likely that the new misrepresentation offense would be used in combination with existing law intended to protect children, including prohibitions against child endangering.Thus, it seems unlikely that the new misrepresentation offense will create many, if any, new cases for local criminal justice systems to handle.

 

Failure to disclose the death or serious injury of a child

 

Under the bill, a child day-care center licensee or a type A or type B family day-care home who knowingly fails to disclose the death or serious injury of a child or to provide notice of the death or serious injury of a child to specified persons and entities is guilty of failure to disclose the death or serious injury of a child, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

 

It appears that, similar to the offense of misrepresentation, these two new offenses of failure to disclose or provide notice in relation to the death or serious injury of a child will not create many, if any, new criminal cases.It appears very likely that these two new offenses of failure to disclose would be used in conjunction with existing law, including prohibitions against child endangering.

 

Day-care requirements and immunity

 

††††††††††† The bill also:

 

        Requires type A and type B family day-care homes to make certain pre-admittance disclosures and to provide certain post-admittance notices to specified persons.

        Requires day-care center licensees to make certain pre-admittance disclosures to the person responsible for a child only if the person requests the information and requires post-admittance notice to specified persons if a currently enrolled child dies.

        Specifies the circumstances under which certain day-care entities are not subject to prosecution or are not subject to civil liability.

        Requires the Director of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) to adopt rules specifying a procedure for reporting injuries to children that occur at child day-care centers.

 

Local fiscal effects

 

††††††††††† Expenditures.The new offenses created by the bill appear unlikely to generate significant fiscal burdens for county and municipal criminal justice systems.A few new misdemeanor cases may be created, but most likely these new offenses would provide a prosecuting attorney with additional charges that could be filed against certain child day-care entities whose actions already rise to the level of criminal conduct under current law.Thus, to the degree that the bill will affect annual county and municipal expenditures related to the adjudication, prosecution, defense (if indigent), and sanctioning of certain day-care entities, it would be to cause, at most, a minimal increase.

 

It would not appear that the billís pre-admittance disclosure and post-admittance notice requirements will create a costly new burden for any day-care facilities or programs that are operated by local governments.One would think that, in most cases, a day-care facility or program could fairly easily and inexpensively assemble, update, and distribute certain information on its day-care operation and services, including the provision of timely notices of the death or serious injury of a child to specified persons.

 

Revenues.If additional misdemeanor convictions are secured as a result of the bill, then counties and municipalities may gain court cost and fine revenues.As it appears that the number of additional convictions will likely be relatively small, any additional court cost and fine revenues that might be collected by counties and municipalities annually would be minimal at most.

 

State fiscal effects

 

Expenditures.The requirement that ODJFS adopt rules specifying a procedure for reporting injuries to children that occur at child day-care centers appears likely to create no more than a potential minimal one-time expenditure increase.

 

Revenues.In addition to any fines and local court costs charged, offenders must pay locally collected state court costs. State court costs for a misdemeanor conviction total $24, of which $9 is deposited to the credit of the Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund and $15 is deposited to the credit of the General Revenue Fund (GRF).Given that relatively few, if any, additional misdemeanor convictions appear likely to occur as a result of the bill, at most, a negligible amount of state court cost revenues may be collected annually and deposited to the credit of the GRF and the Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund.

 

Inspections of child care providers

 

Inspection of a Type B home

 

A type B family day-care home is a permanent residence of the provider in which child day-care is provided for one to six children at one time and in which no more than three children are under two years of age at one time.[1]Under current law, a "certified type B family day-care home" and "certified type B home" means a type B family day-care home that is certified by the county department of job and family services (CDJFS) to receive public funds for providing child day-care.

 

Under current law, a CDJFS is required to inspect a type B home, at least twice during every 12-month period of operation of the home.Upon receipt of a complaint, the county director is required to investigate and is authorized, but not required, to inspect the home.The bill changes the permissive authority to inspect a type B home in certain instances to a requirement that the county director conduct an inspection.An inspection is required if a complaint alleges that a child suffered physical harm while receiving child care at the home or the noncompliance with the law or act alleged in the complaint involved, resulted in, or poses a substantial risk of physical harm to a child receiving child care at the home.

 

Inspection of a child's home

 

Under current law, a county director may certify in-home aides to provide publicly funded child care.The county director is to inspect every home of a child who is receiving publicly funded child care in the child's own home while the in-home aide is providing the services.Upon receipt of a complaint, the county director is required to investigate the in-home aide and is authorized, but not required, to inspect the child's home.The bill changes the permissive authority to inspect a child's home in certain instances to a requirement that the county director conduct an inspection.An inspection is required if a complaint alleges that a child suffered physical harm while receiving publicly funded child care in the child's own home from an in-home aide or the noncompliance with the law or act alleged in the complaint involved, resulted in, or poses a substantial risk of physical harm to the child.

 

It is likely that county directors, on receipt of complaints involving physical harm to a child, currently conduct inspections of the child care home in question.Therefore, the provisions of the bill requiring inspection of a child care home in certain circumstances are not likely to increase costs to a CDJFS since inspections in those circumstances are presumably conducted under the permissive authority granted under current law.To the extent that such inspections are not conducted, a CDJFS may experience an increase in costs to conduct such inspections.

 

Type A family day-care homes and child care centers

 

††††††††††† A type A family day-care home is a permanent residence of the administrator in which child day-care is provided for seven to twelve children at one time or a permanent residence of the administrator in which child day-care is provided for four to twelve children at one time if four or more children at one time are under two years of age.[2]A child day-care center is any place in which child day-care is provided for thirteen or more children at one time or any place that is not the permanent residence of the licensee or administrator in which child day-care is provided for seven to twelve children at one time.[3]

 

Under current law, ODJFS is required to inspect a child day-care center or type A home, at least twice during every 12-month period of operation of the center or home.(Once during that period for a part-time home or center.)Upon receipt of a complaint that a center or home is out of compliance with the laws or rules governing operation of type A day-care homes and child care centers or is operating without a license, the Department is required to investigate and is authorized, but not required, to inspect the center or home.The bill changes the permissive authority to inspect centers and homes in certain instances to a requirement that ODJFS conduct an inspection.An inspection is required if a complaint alleges that a child suffered physical harm while receiving child care at the center or home or the noncompliance alleged in the complaint involved, resulted in, or poses a substantial risk of physical harm to a child receiving child care at the center or home.

 

††††††††††† Current practice of ODJFS is to inspect one out of every five complaints that it receives regarding alleged illegal operations of a type A home or centers, except that the Department inspects every complaint if it alleges that there are ten or more children involved at one site or that a child has been physically harmed or is in danger of being physically harmed.The provisions of the bill requiring inspection of a child care center of a type A home in certain circumstances will not increase costs to ODJFS since inspections in those circumstances are currently conducted under the permissive authority granted under current law.

 

Restriction on licensing centers and type A homes

 

††††††††††† Under current law, any person, firm, organization, institution, or agency desiring to establish a child day-care center or type A family day-care home is to apply for a license to the Director of ODJFS.Once the center or home has been investigated and inspected and the Director is satisfied that the law and rules governing the operation of such centers and homes are complied with, the Director is to issue a provisional license that is valid for six months.The Director is then to investigate and inspect the center or home once during operation and if all the requirements of the law are met, the Director is to issue a license that is effective for two years from the date of issuance of the provisional license.

 

The bill prohibits the Director from issuing a provisional license or license, or renew a license for a child day-care center or type A family day-care home if the Director, based on documentation provided by the appropriate CDJFS, determines that the applicant previously had been certified as a type B family day-care home, that the county revoked the certification, that the revocation was based on the applicant's refusal or inability to comply with the criteria for certification, and that the refusal or inability resulted in a risk to the health and safety of children.This provision may result in a decrease in the number of provisional licenses issued by ODJFS and the costs associated with such licensure.However, it is unlikely that someone who is unable to comply with the criteria for certification of a type B family day-care home would attempt to become licensed as a child day-care center or type A family day-care home.Therefore, any decrease in costs to ODJFS is likely to be minimal.

 

Information from public children services agencies

 

The bill requires a CDJFS that receives an application for certification as a type B family day-care home to request from the public children services agency (PCSA) information concerning any abuse or neglect report regarding the applicant and to consider any information provided by the PCSA when determining whether or not to certify an applicant or revoke a prior certification.

 

The bill further requires a PCSA to promptly provide to ODJFS or to a CDJFS any information the PCSA determines to be relevant for the purpose of evaluating the fitness of a person who has applied for licensure or renewal of licensure as a type A family day-care home or certification or renewal of certification as a type B family day-care home.

 

Currently, there are 12,000 to 13,000 certified type B homes in the state.That number does not include applicants that were denied certification.This provision would require the county departments to request information from the PCSA on each application filed.This adds to the current administrative costs of a CDJFS for certifying type B homes.This provision will also increase costs to the PCSAs for gathering such information, reviewing it for relevancy, and providing it to a requesting entity.

 

Disqualifying offenses

 

††††††††††† New disqualifying offenses

 

Under existing law, the Director of ODJFS is prohibited from granting a license to a child day-care center or type A family day-care home and the director of a CDJFS is prohibited from certifying a type B family day-care home if the criminal records check of certain individuals affiliated with the center or home shows that the person previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to the list of offenses specified in the statute.The offenses currently listed include, but are not limited to, murder, assault, sex offenses, robbery, drug trafficking, and crimes involving children.(For a complete list of offenses, see the LSC Bill Analysis.)

 

The bill adds to the list of offenses.Under the bill, the Director of ODJFS is prohibited from licensing a child day-care center or type A family day-care home and the director of a CDJFS is prohibited from certifying a type B family day-care home if an owner, licensee, or administrator of a child day-care center or type A family day-care home or an authorized provider of a certified type B family day-care home previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to any of the additional offenses listed in the bill.The additional offenses are crimes related to various kinds of theft and fraud.(For a complete list of the additional offenses, see the LSC Bill Analysis.)

 

The Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation (BCII), operated by the Attorney General's office, charges $15 for a criminal background check.When BCII conducts a criminal background check, the entire criminal background of the person is determined.The child care licensing or certifying authority must review the list of offenses committed and determine if any of the offenses prohibit the person from being licensed or certified as a child care provider.Since BCII charges a flat rate to provide the entire criminal background of the person, adding offenses for which BCII must check will have no fiscal impact on BCII.However, this provision may cause a negligible, if that, increase in the administrative burden of the licensing or certifying authority associated with reviewing a person's record to determine if these additional offenses have been committed.

 

FBI background check

 

In addition, under the bill, if an individual who is subject to a criminal background check does not present proof that the individual has been a resident of this state for the five-year period immediately prior to the date upon which the criminal records check is requested or does not present evidence that the Superintendent of BCII has requested information about that individual from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Director of ODJFS or the county director, whomever is appropriate, is to request that the Superintendent obtain information from the FBI as part of the criminal records check application.The bill grants the Director of ODJFS and a county director authority to request an FBI check even if the individual presents proof that the individual has been a resident of this state for the five-year period.

 

BCII charges an additional $24 for an FBI background check.Presumably, the additional charge covers BCII's costs to obtain a background check from the FBI.In other words, the Attorney Generalís office would realize revenue gains that would cover its cost to conduct the background check.This provision may also increase ODJFS and county costs to obtain this additional information.However, since applicants for licensure or certification as child care providers pay the costs of the background check, any additional costs will be offset by revenue generated from the collection of fees from the applicants.

 

Operation of a center or type A home without a license

 

Penalties

 

The bill modifies the penalty for a violation of the prohibition against operating, establishing, managing, conducting, or maintaining a child day-care center or type A family day-care home without a license.Existing law provides that any person or entity that violates the prohibition described above must be fined not less than $100 or more than $500 for each offense.Under the bill, a person who violates the prohibition must be fined, for each offense, not less than $100 or more than $500 multiplied by the number of children receiving child day-care at the center or type A home that either exceeds the number of children to which a type B family day-care home may provide child day-care or, if the offender is a licensed type A family day-care home that is operating a child day-care center without being licensed as a center, exceeds the license capacity of the type A home.In addition to the fine, the court is to order the offender to cease operation until it obtains the proper license or certification.

 

If the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to two such violations, the offender is guilty of a first-degree misdemeanor.In addition to the penalties described above, the court may impose an additional fine provided that the total amount of the fine does not exceed the maximum fine authorized for a misdemeanor of the first degree.

 

If the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to three or more such violations, the offender is guilty of a fifth-degree felony.In addition to the penalties described above, the court may impose an additional fine provided that the total amount of the fine does not exceed the maximum fine authorized for a felony of the fifth degree.

 

††††††††††† According to ODJFS, the Department has referred complaints for prosecution.However, no case has ever reached the point at which a financial penalty was assessed against the provider.Therefore, this change only increases the potential of what may be imposed upon a person found guilty of the violation.

 

Recommendation of standards for imposing sanctions

 

The bill also requires the Director of ODJFS to recommend standards for imposing sanctions on persons and entities that are licensed or certified providers of child care and that violate the law governing child care providers and centers.The standards are to be based on the scope and severity of the violations.The Director is to provide copies of the recommendations to the Governor, the Speaker and minority leader of the House of Representatives, and the President and minority leader of the Senate, and on request, make copies available to the public.This provision is likely to increase the administrative costs of ODJFS to develop such recommendations.The Department will also incur costs to print and distribute copies of the recommendations.However, ODJFS will likely accomplish these tasks using existing resources.

 

Advisory council

 

††††††††††† Current law provides for the creation of the Day-Care Advisory Council to advise and assist ODJFS in the administration of the law governing child care centers and homes.Currently, the Council consists of 18 members appointed by the Director of ODJFS with the approval of the Governor.The Director of ODJFS, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Director of Health, the Director of Commerce, and the State Fire Marshal serve as nonvoting members of the Council.

 

††††††††††† The bill adds four members appointed by the Director of ODJFS and approved by the Governor and renames the Council the Child Care Advisory Council.In addition, the Director of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities (MR/DD) and the Director of Mental Health are added to the Council to serve as nonvoting members.The bill also makes changes to the organization of the Council as well as the content of the Council's annual report.Members of the Council serve without compensation but are to be reimbursed for necessary expenses.Presumably, reimbursement for necessary expenses comes from ODJFS.The addition of four Council members may cause a negligible increase in ODJFS' costs to reimburse necessary expenses of these additional Council members.

 

The Director of ODJFS is to adopt rules to implement the section of law governing the Advisory Council.The Department has in place an infrastructure for adopting rules.It is likely that ODJFS will be able to adopt rules required by this provision at a minimal cost using existing resources.

 

Registry of persons providing child care

 

The bill requires ODJFS (instead of authorizing it, as under existing law) to develop and maintain a registry of persons providing child care and requires the Director of ODJFS to adopt rules establishing procedures and requirements for the registry's administration.

 

At the present, ODJFS has not exercised its authority to develop and maintain a child care registry.Across the state of Ohio, there are currently 25,000 child care providers that are either licensed or certified by ODJFS or a CDJFS.

 

Development of a registry would involve the time and expense of ODJFS management information system (MIS) staff, and possibly a contractor, to develop a database and web site for this information.A spokesperson for the Office for Children and Families at ODJFS, estimates that MIS costs would be at a minimum $100,000 and also believes that the Department would have to hire at least one additional staff person at a cost of approximately $55,000 (salary and benefits) to manage the flow of information from the counties and ensure that changes to the registry are made as new providers are licensed or certified or as current providers choose or are forced to no longer provide child care services.However, since the Director must adopt rules regarding the registry, there may be some flexibility for ODJFS to limit the components of the registry thereby controlling costs.

 

Currently each CDJFS provides ODJFS with information on certified type B homes for purposes of the publicly funded child care program.Therefore, the counties are not likely to experience any increase in administrative costs to provide the information on all type B homes for the registry.

 

Establishing standards for training

 

When adopting rules governing the operation of a child day-care center, the bill requires the Director of ODJFS to include standards for the training of individuals who any CDJFS employs or contracts with, or who the Director of ODJFS contracts with to inspect or investigate type B family day-care homes.The Department has in place an infrastructure for adopting rules.It is likely that ODJFS will be able to adopt rules required by the provision at a minimal cost using existing resources.

 

The bill also requires ODJFS to provide training in accordance with the adopted standards for those individuals.This provision is likely to result in an increase in cost to ODJFS to provide such training.

 

Providers receiving copies of rules

 

The bill revises certain time periods within which the Director of ODJFS and the director of a CDJFS must provide copies of certain adopted rules governing day-care homes and centers to specified persons and entities.The bill specifies that the copies may be in either paper or electronic form.This provision may reduce the costs of providing copies of the rules since the bill permits copies to be in paper or electronic form.It may also change the time at which the costs are incurred by a few weeks depending on the current practice of ODJFS and each CDJFS in providing these rules to the appropriate persons or entities.

 

Eligibility for children enrolled in a Head Start program

 

The bill repeals a section of law that entitles a family to continue to receive publicly funded child care until the end of the Head Start program year if the family has a child enrolled in a head start program and receives publicly funded child day-care for that child in a collaborative model at the same location unless the caretaker parent fails to pay the required fee for publicly funded child day-care.It seems that repealing this section of law may decrease the cost of the publicly funded child care program since ODJFS will no longer be required to provide funding for child care to families under circumstances described in the provision being repealed.Publicly funded child day-care is funded with GRF, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), and other federal funds.In the past few years, ODJFS has expended all available funds for the publicly funded day-care program.Any reduction in the number of children receiving publicly funded child day-care may reduce the amount of TANF dollars the Department uses to fund the program.

Child day camp criminal records checks

 

Section 2151.681 of the Revised Code requires criminal records checks and fingerprinting of employees responsible for out-of-home child care, which includes child day camps.The bill allows the ODJFS to conduct a random sample of registered child day camps to determine the rate of compliance with section 2151.681 of the Revised Code.Current law requires ODJFS to annually register child day camps with some exemptions.According to ODJFS, there are 316 registered child day camps in Ohio.However, there are other child day camps in Ohio that would be subject to the criminal background checks required by the bill that are not registered because of exemptions outlined in section 5104.21 of the Revised Code.Neither ODJFS nor the Ohio American Camping Association collects data on unregistered day camps, thus it is currently unknown how many unregistered day camps there might be in Ohio.

 

Under the bill, if a child day camp fails to comply with section 2151.86 of the Revised Code, ODJFS must consider imposing a civil penalty on the child day camp and order the camp to initiate a criminal records check of the person who is the subject of the violation within a specified period of time.If a child day camp fails to comply with an order to initiate a criminal records check or to release the person from employment within the specified period of time, the bill requires ODJFS to impose a civil penalty and order the child day camp to initiate a criminal records check of the person who is the subject of the violation.The bill requires the Attorney General to prosecute to judgment a civil action to collect any civil penalty imposed by ODJFS that remains unpaid.

 

If ODJFS determines that a child day camp is not in compliance with these requirements, the bill permits ODJFS to post a notice at the camp that states that the camp has failed to conduct criminal records checks on its staff.The bill requires ODJFS to include a list of child day camps that are not in compliance with the criminal background check requirements on the Departmentís web site.

 

The bill may result in an increase in administrative costs for ODJFS regarding the periodic random sampling of registered day camps, posting notices at day camps, and maintaining a list of child day camps found not to be in compliance on the Departmentís web site.The bill may also result in a gain of revenue generated from any civil penalties imposed on child day camps.Since the random sampling of registered day camps is permissive, any increase in costs or gain in revenue to ODJFS would be the result of a voluntary action of ODJFS.However, an ODJFS spokesperson states that the Department will enforce these provisions if enacted.As of this writing, ODJFS does not know how it would implement these provisions of the bill.Currently, child day camps are not inspected and are only required to register with the Department.Thus, it is not known at this time what kind of infrastructure (e.g., more staff) would be needed to implement the bill.

 

There could be an increase in costs to BCII, operated by the Office of the Attorney General, to conduct background checks on child day camp employees and appointees.However, any additional costs will be offset by revenue generated from the collection of fees from the applicants or child day camps.Although current law already requires child day camps to initiate criminal background checks and fingerprinting, it is unclear at this time whether child day camps comply with the law.According to ODJFS, child day camps typically do not conduct background checks.Consequently, the number of background checks requested could increase depending on the number of employees and appointees that work at a child day camp for which a criminal background check has not been completed.BCII charges $15 to perform a criminal records check of state records and charges an additional $24 to obtain information from the FBI to perform a federal criminal records check if the individual has not lived in Ohio for five years.Thus, a request to perform a criminal records check on a person could cost either $15 for a state criminal records check or $39 for both a state and federal criminal records check.

 

It appears unlikely that a large number of new civil cases will be generated each year and added to the prosecutorial workload of the Office of the Attorney General.Thus, if there is any resulting increase in the Officeís annual costs of doing business, it seems likely that such an increase would be no more than minimal.

 

It appears unlikely that the billís requirements will generate a costly new burden for courts of common pleas in the form of a large number of civil cases requiring adjudication brought about by the Office of the Attorney Generalís pursuit of civil remedies.

 

 

 

LSC fiscal staff:Laura A. Potts, Budget Analyst

Clay Weidner, Budget Analyst

Maria Seaman, Senior Budget Analyst

††††††††††††††††††††††† Jamie Doskocil, Budget Analyst

 

HB0011EN.doc/arc



[1] In counting children, any children under six years of age who are related to the provider and who are on the premises of the type B home must be counted.A type B family day-care home does not include a residence in which the needs of children are administered to, if all of the children whose needs are being administered to are siblings of the same immediate family and the residence is the home of the siblings.Type B family day-care homes and type B homes do not include any child day camp.

[2] In counting children, any children under six years of age who are related to a licensee, administrator, or employee and who are on the premises of the type A home must be counted.A type A family day-care home does not include a residence in which the needs of children are administered to, if all of the children whose needs are being administered to are siblings of the same immediate family and the residence is the home of the siblings.Child day camp is not included in the definition of a type A family day-care home or type A home.

 

[3] In counting children, any children under six years of age who are related to a licensee, administrator, or employee and who are on the premises of the center must be counted.Child day camp is not included in the definition of a child care center.In addition, there are certain exceptions for hospitals and religious gatherings.