criminal records exemption has been granted.68 If the relative does
not meet these specific statutory requirements, the child cannot be
placed in his or her home.
So, while the grandmother could be considered as a
placement for the child,69 unlike a legal parent or legal guardian, she
would not be entitled to placement.70 Additionally, as a result of the
child abuse referral, the child’s grandmother would also be listed on
California’s Child Abuse Central Index (“CACI”),71 a database of
known or suspected child abusers that is available to a broad array of
government agencies, employers, and law enforcement agencies.
Many public and private entities in California are required to consult
before licensure); In re Summer H., 43 Cal. Rptr. 3d 682, 688 (Ct. App. 2006)
(citing CAL. WELF. & INST. CODE § 361.4 (West 2013)).
68 CAL. CODE REGS. tit. 22, §§ 80040, 89240 (2013) (explaining that when a
relative seeking placement has a record of criminal convictions, a social worker for
the social services agency may seek an exemption from the Caregiver Background
Check Bureau (CBCB) of the Community Care Licensing Division of California’s
Department of Social Services); see In re S.W., 32 Cal. Rptr. 3d 192, 199 (Ct.
App. 2005) (citing CAL. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE §§ 1526, 1551 (West 2013)).
69 “Placement” or “to place a child” in this context means the home where the child
resides or to allow the child to reside in that home.
70 See CAL. WELF. & INST. CODE §§ 361.3(a), 361.4, 361.45 (West 2013); In re
Stephanie M., 867 P.2d 706, 720 (Cal. 1994) (en banc). But see Cesar V., 111 Cal.
Rptr. 2d at 251-52 (holding that the grandmother, although not a party, has
standing to seek appellate review, which is a petition for extraordinary relief, of the
denial of her request for placement under California Welfare and Institutions Code
71 See CAL. WELF. & INST. CODE § 309(d) (West 2013). California’s Child Abuse
Central Index (CACI) is necessary for screening caretakers in compliance with the
federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, but must provide for
expunction of unsubstantiated or false claims to receive federal funding under
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. CAL. WELF. & INST. CODE §
309(d)(3). A person’s fundamental liberty interest in reputation may be violated if
inappropriately included on the registry, but the person must prove that inclusion
on the registry will damage reputation and that a right or status previously
recognized by state law was distinctly altered or ended. See Humphries v. Cnty. of
L.A., 554 F.3d 1170, 1188 (9th Cir. 2008), rev’d in part on other grounds, 131 S.
Ct. 447 (2010) (solely on the issue of whether Los Angeles County, as a
municipality, is liable for the deprivation, holding that the Monell v. New York City
Dep’t of Soc. Services’ “policy or custom” requirement applies in Section 1983
cases irrespective of whether the relief sought is monetary or prospective).