Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04095/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04095-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 444
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Welfare
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

U

For the Northern District of California

NITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE OF CHILD AND

FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff,

v.

CLIFF ALLENBY and MARY AULT,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

No. C 06-04095 MHP

ORDER

Re: Cross-Motions for Summary

Judgment

On June 30, 2006 plaintiff California Alliance of Child and Family Services filed a

complaint against Cliff Allenby, Interim Director of the California Department of Social Services

(“DSS”), in his official capacity, and Mary Ault, Deputy Director of the Children and Family

Services Division of DSS, in her official capacity, alleging that defendants violated the foster care

provider reimbursement provisions of the Child Welfare Act, 42 U.S.C. sections 670-679b. Now

before the court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. Before the court issues a

ruling, the court seeks additional information as described below.

This action requires interpretation of California Welfare and Institutions Code section

11462(g)(2), which provides that “[b]eginning with the 2000-01 fiscal year, the standardized

schedule for rates shall be adjusted annually by an amount equal to the CNI computed pursuant to

Section 11453, subject to the availability of funds.” This statute, by it terms, requires an annual

assessment where the DSS is to compute a standardized schedule of rates based on the CNI increase

and then analyze whether the resultant schedule ought to be adopted based upon the availability of

funds. This annual review is required independent of the amount of funds available.

Case 3:06-cv-04095-MHP Document 54 Filed 12/11/07 Page 1 of 2
UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Since 2001-02, the CNI has increased 17.77%, whereas the standardized schedule of rates

has remained unchanged. Thus, at least five annual reviews must have been performed by the DSS

since the 2001-02 fiscal year.

The court seeks evidence of these annual reviews where it was determined that the

standardized schedule will not be adjusted due to the non-availability of funds. The court orders that

the DSS provide evidence, in the form of declarations containing detailed information and

contemporaneous documents, to elucidate the facts surrounding each annual review. Specifically,

whether the annual review took place, what decisions were made during the annual review, and how

the DSS determined that the funds required to sanction an increase in the standardized schedule were

not available.

The DSS is to submit this evidence within forty-five (45) days of the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 10, 2007

_______________________________

MARILYN HALL PATEL

United States District Court Judge

Northern District of California

Case 3:06-cv-04095-MHP Document 54 Filed 12/11/07 Page 2 of 2