Bill to require speedy hearings for foster children admitted to acute psychiatric care gets hearing; OCS and courts outline costs and process

Representative Gray introduced House Bill 36, which would require that a child in the custody of the Office of Children's Services (OCS) who is admitted to an acute psychiatric hospital receive a court hearing within seven days to determine whether continued hospitalization is justified. The sponsor cited the Alaska Supreme Court's decision in the case identified in the hearing record as Quinnahawk v. State of Alaska, Office of Children Services (opinion dated Feb. 9, 2024), which the sponsor said concluded lengthy delays in hearings for children in state custody are constitutionally problematic.

The bill adds statutory definitions—an "acute psychiatric hospital" and a definition for "contemporaneous two-way video conference"—and requires notice to case parties within 24 hours of admission, a hearing within seven days (with a possible seven-day extension if necessary), and judicial review every 30 days thereafter for continued placements. The bill also directs the court to appoint an attorney for a child in specific circumstances (for example, when the child is 10 years or older and certain statutory conditions apply) and requires courts to include the number of children placed in residential facilities outside Alaska in an already-mandated legislative report.

Nancy Mead, general counsel for the Alaska Court System, told the committee the court currently believes it can comply with the hearing timeline and already has authority to hold hearings by video conference; the court's fiscal note is zero. Kim Swisher, deputy director of OCS, explained the department's fiscal note reflects the added cost of representation by the Department of Law—OCS estimated approximately 110 hearings per year and budgeted for attorney time billed by the Department of Law at roughly $170 per hour for those hearings. Swisher noted Medicaid pays for acute psychiatric facility stays and that reduced length of stay would create potential Medicaid savings not captured in OCS's budget.

Committee members asked about the number of acute psychiatric facilities in the state (witnesses said one primary facility receives such admissions), how the 24-hour notice is handled in practice, whether appointments of attorneys and guardian ad litems already take place, whether Alaska retains jurisdiction when children are placed outside the state, and how the statutory tests and ages in the bill were chosen. Nancy Mead said the court rule changes largely formalize what is already done in practice and that guardians ad litem are commonly appointed; Mead said the court is officially neutral on the legislation but understands the operational needs. Sponsor staff told members the seven-day timeline reflected clinical assessment timeframes cited by clinicians and the Supreme Court's ruling that 30 days was too long.

The judiciary's fiscal note was zero. OCS' fiscal note requested funding to cover additional Department of Law representation for hearings; the department estimated 110 hearings and used an assumed AG billing rate to produce the cost estimate. Committee members discussed the potential for net Medicaid savings if lengths of stay decrease but also noted those savings would not appear in OCS's budget lines. The committee set the bill aside for further work and invited additional stakeholders to appear at a later hearing.

Why it matters: HB 36 responds to court findings about due process for children in state custody and would require expedited judicial review of psychiatric commitments for foster children; it could change how quickly hospitals, OCS and courts act to reassess hospitalization and may shift some costs between Medicaid, Department of Law and OCS.