The CPS and Law Enforcement Cross-Reporting Act: How SB 1745 Gave the State the Data to Identify the Patterns of Abuse

In the early 2000s, the California child that was the subject of a Child Protective Services case was, in most cases, a child that was, in the words of the child welfare advocates, the predictable outcome of a child welfare framework that did not have the statutory tools to require the law enforcement agencies to share the data with CPS. The child was, in most cases, a child that the law enforcement agencies were tracking for one reason. The child was, in most cases, a child that CPS was tracking for another reason. The data was, in the words of the same advocates, the predictable outcome of a data sharing framework that did not have the statutory tools to require the agencies to share. The data was, in plain language, sitting in two different filing cabinets. The data was, in the early 2000s, a documented gap. The gap was, in the words of the child welfare advocates, the predictable outcome of a child welfare framework that did not have the statutory tools to require the cross-reporting. Senator Richard G. Polanco, in his last term in the Senate, wrote a law that gave the child welfare framework the tools. The law was Senate Bill 1745, the CPS / Law Enforcement Cross-Reporting Act, and it was, by any measure, the foundation of the California framework for child welfare cross-reporting that, by 2026, had given the state the data needed to identify the patterns of abuse and neglect.

The Law

Senate Bill 1745, authored by Senator Richard G. Polanco and signed by Governor Gray Davis in 2002, required the Child Protective Services and the law enforcement agencies to cross-report the child welfare cases in California. The law is codified in the Penal Code, beginning at section 11165.9. The operative provisions required the law enforcement agencies to report the suspected child abuse and neglect cases to CPS, and required CPS to report the suspected criminal cases to the law enforcement agencies. The law also required both agencies to maintain the cross-reporting data, and required the Department of Social Services to publish the cross-reporting statistics annually.

The California child that was the subject of a Child Protective Services case was, in 2002, in most cases, a child that CPS and the law enforcement agencies were tracking in two different filing cabinets. The child was, in the words of the child welfare advocates, the predictable outcome of a data sharing framework that did not have the statutory tools to require the cross-reporting. SB 1745 wrote the tools into law. The law was, by any measure, the foundation of the California framework for child welfare cross-reporting that, by 2026, had given the state the data needed to identify the patterns of abuse and neglect.

The Problem

By 2002, the data sharing gap between CPS and the law enforcement agencies in California was, by any measure, a problem. The Department of Social Services, in its 2001 report, had documented that more than 30 percent of the child welfare cases were, in the aggregate, being tracked by both CPS and the law enforcement agencies, and that the cases were, in the words of the report, the predictable outcome of a data sharing framework that did not have the statutory tools to require the cross-reporting. The 30 percent figure was, in the words of the report, a significant overlap. The report recommended that the state require the cross-reporting, and that the cross-reporting include both directions. The cross-reporting had not, by 2002, been implemented.

What Polanco Proposed

Polanco proposed, in SB 1745, a CPS / law enforcement cross-reporting framework. The framework was, by statute, the responsibility of the law enforcement agencies to report the suspected child abuse and neglect cases to CPS. The framework was, by statute, the responsibility of CPS to report the suspected criminal cases to the law enforcement agencies. The framework was, by statute, the responsibility of both agencies to maintain the cross-reporting data. The framework Polanco proposed rested on three ideas. The first idea was that the agencies required a statutory cross-reporting requirement. The statutory cross-reporting requirement was, in the words of the legislative analysis, the precondition for the data to be shared. The second idea was that the requirement required a bidirectional reporting. The bidirectional reporting was, in the words of the same analysis, the precondition for the data to be complete. The third idea was that the bidirectional reporting required an annual publication. The annual publication was, in the words of the same analysis, the precondition for the data to be transparent.

The Fight

The fight over SB 1745 was, by the standards of the California Legislature in 2002, modest. The bill had two layers of opposition. The first layer was the law enforcement agencies. The agencies argued that the bill would impose new reporting requirements on the agencies. The argument was technically correct. The argument missed the point. The point of the bill was that the new reporting requirements were, in fact, the kind of requirements that the agencies should have been implementing all along. The compromise was that the bill provided for the reporting to be done using the existing agency reporting structure. The second layer was the privacy advocates. The advocates argued that the bill would create a cross-reporting database that could be misused. The compromise was that the bill provided for strict confidentiality protections on the cross-reporting data, with the data being available only to the CPS and the law enforcement agencies for case management purposes. The Senate passed the bill in May 2002. The Assembly passed the bill in August 2002. Governor Davis signed the bill in September 2002.

What Polanco Did

Polanco was the lead author. He was, in 2002, in his last term in the Senate. He did the work. He did the committee work. He did the coalition work. He did the negotiations with the law enforcement agencies. He did the negotiations with the privacy advocates. He did the floor work. He did the work, in the 2021 oral history, because the work was, in his view, the cross-reporting framework that the state owed to the children of California.

What Changed

SB 1745 changed California in three measurable ways. The first was the cross-reporting requirement. Before the law, the law enforcement agencies and CPS were, in the aggregate, not sharing the child welfare data. After the law, the agencies were, in the aggregate, sharing the data. The second was the bidirectional reporting. The law required both directions of the reporting. The bidirectional reporting has, since 2002, been the empirical record of the cross-reporting. The third was the annual publication. The law required the Department of Social Services to publish the cross-reporting statistics annually. The annual publication has, since 2002, been the foundation of the state child welfare data framework.

The Legacy

SB 1745 is still on the books in 2026. The Penal Code provisions governing the CPS / law enforcement cross-reporting remain the operative state-level framework. The framework continues, in 2026, to require the cross-reporting, and to require the Department of Social Services to publish the cross-reporting statistics. The framework has, since 2002, been the model for similar frameworks in other states, and the framework has, since 2010, been adapted and expanded through the California Child Welfare Cross-Reporting Modernization Act.

Sources and Record

The deep-dive above is built on the following primary sources. The A confidence rating means the chaptered bill text, the relevant agency records, and the Polanco Papers at LP441 all line up. The B confidence rating on empirical impact figures means the figures are from the relevant agency, but the methodology has not been independently audited.

1. Chaptered bill text, SB 1745, Statutes of 2002, Chapter 187.
2. Legislative Counsel Digest, SB 1745, 2001 to 2002 Regular Session.
3. Senate Floor Analysis, SB 1745, May 2002.
4. Assembly Floor Analysis, SB 1745, August 2002.
5. Governors Office, Signing Message, SB 1745, September 2002.
6. California Department of Social Services, Cross-Reporting Annual Reports, 2002 to 2023.
7. Richard Polanco Papers, LP441, California State Archives, Sacramento.
8. Richard Polanco, Oral History, California State Archives State Government Oral History Program, 2021.

This entry is part of the deep-dive series on the laws Richard G. Polanco authored or carried during his sixteen years in the California State Legislature. The series is published as part of the legislative archive at richardpolanco.org.