(b)

1. (1) The probation department and the child welfare services department in each county shall jointly develop a written protocol to ensure appropriate local coordination in the assessment of a minor described in subdivision (a), and the development of recommendations by these departments for consideration by the juvenile court.
2. (2) These protocols shall require, but not be limited to, consideration of the nature of the referral, the age of the minor, the prior record of the minor’s parents for child abuse, the prior record of the minor for out-of-control or delinquent behavior, the parents’ cooperation with the minor’s school, the minor’s functioning at school, the nature of the minor’s home environment, and the records of other agencies that have been involved with the minor and his or her family. The protocols also shall contain provisions for resolution of disagreements between the probation and child welfare services departments regarding the need for dependency or ward status and provisions for determining the circumstances under which filing a new petition is required to change the minor’s status.

3. (3)

   1. (A) These protocols may also require immediate notification of the child welfare services department and the minor’s dependency attorney upon referral of a dependent minor to probation, procedures for release to, and placement by, the child welfare services department pending resolution of the determination pursuant to this section, timelines for dependents in secure custody to ensure timely resolution of the determination pursuant to this section for detained dependents, and nondiscrimination provisions to ensure that dependents are provided with any option that would otherwise be available to a nondependent minor.
   2. (B) If the alleged conduct that appears to bring a dependent minor within the description of Section 601 or 602 occurs in, or under the supervision of, a foster home, group home, or other licensed facility that provides residential care for minors, the county probation department and the child welfare services department may consider whether the alleged conduct was within the scope of behaviors to be managed or treated by the foster home or facility, as identified in the minor’s case plan, needs and services plan, placement agreement, facility plan of operation, or facility emergency intervention plan, in determining which status will serve the best interests of the minor and the protection of society pursuant to subdivision (a).

4. (4) The protocols shall contain the following processes:

   1. (A) A process for determining which agency and court shall supervise a child whose jurisdiction is modified from delinquency jurisdiction to dependency jurisdiction pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 607.2 or subdivision (i) of Section 727.2.
   2. (B) A process for determining which agency and court shall supervise a nonminor dependent under the transition jurisdiction of the juvenile court.
   3. (C) A process that specifically addresses the manner in which supervision responsibility is determined when a nonminor dependent becomes subject to adult probation supervision.

(e) Notwithstanding subdivision (d), the probation department and the child welfare services department, in consultation with the presiding judge of the juvenile court, in any county may create a jointly written protocol to allow the county probation department and the child welfare services department to jointly assess and produce a recommendation that the child be designated as a dual status child, allowing the child to be simultaneously a dependent child and a ward of the court. This protocol shall be signed by the chief probation officer, the director of the county social services agency, and the presiding judge of the juvenile court prior to its implementation. A juvenile court shall not order that a child is simultaneously a dependent child and a ward of the court pursuant to this subdivision unless and until the required protocol has been created and entered into. This protocol shall include all of the following:

1. (1) A description of the process to be used to determine whether the child is eligible to be designated as a dual status child.
2. (2) A description of the procedure by which the probation department and the child welfare services department will assess the necessity for dual status for specified children and the process to make joint recommendations for the court’s consideration prior to making a determination under this section. These recommendations shall ensure a seamless transition from wardship to dependency jurisdiction, as appropriate, so that services to the child are not disrupted upon termination of the wardship.
3. (3) A provision for ensuring communication between the judges who hear petitions concerning children for whom dependency jurisdiction has been suspended while they are within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court pursuant to Section 601 or 602. A judge may communicate by providing a copy of any reports filed pursuant to Section 727.2 concerning a ward to a court that has jurisdiction over dependency proceedings concerning the child.
4. (4) A plan to collect data in order to evaluate the protocol pursuant to Section 241.2.

5. (5) Counties that exercise the option provided for in this subdivision shall adopt either an “on-hold” system as described in subparagraph (A) or a “lead court/lead agency” system as described in subparagraph (B). There shall not be any simultaneous or duplicative case management or services provided by both the county probation department and the child welfare services department. It is the intent of the Legislature that judges, in cases in which more than one judge is involved, shall not issue conflicting orders.

   1. (A) In counties in which an on-hold system is adopted, the dependency jurisdiction shall be suspended or put on hold while the child is subject to jurisdiction as a ward of the court. When it appears that termination of the court’s jurisdiction, as established pursuant to Section 601 or 602, is likely and that reunification of the child with his or her parent or guardian would be detrimental to the child, the county probation department and the child welfare services department shall jointly assess and produce a recommendation for the court regarding whether the court’s dependency jurisdiction shall be resumed.
   2. (B) In counties in which a lead court/lead agency system is adopted, the protocol shall include a method for identifying which court or agency will be the lead court/lead agency. That court or agency shall be responsible for case management, conducting statutorily mandated court hearings, and submitting court reports.

(f) Whenever the court determines pursuant to this section or Section 607.2 or 727.2 that it is necessary to modify the court’s jurisdiction over a dependent or ward who was removed from his or her parent or guardian and placed in foster care, the court shall ensure that all of the following conditions are met:

1. (1) The petition under which jurisdiction was taken at the time the dependent or ward was originally removed is not dismissed until the new petition has been sustained.

2. (2) The order modifying the court’s jurisdiction contains all of the following provisions:

   1. (A) Reference to the original removal findings and a statement that findings that continuation in the home is contrary to the child’s welfare, and that reasonable efforts were made to prevent removal, remain in effect.
   2. (B) A statement that the child continues to be removed from the parent or guardian from whom the child was removed under the original petition.
   3. (C) Identification of the agency that is responsible for placement and care of the child based upon the modification of jurisdiction.