AB 969 rewrites California’s CalWORKs family violence protections. It mandates that counties grant case-by-case waivers of program requirements for applicants and recipients identified as past or present victims of domestic abuse when compliance would hinder escaping or staying safe, and it requires counties to provide written reasons when denying or terminating waivers.
The bill also tasks the State Department of Social Services with producing statewide, stakeholder-informed written materials and a standardized waiver request form, requires counties to deliver those materials confidentially in the recipient’s preferred language, and links full implementation to the Statewide Automated Welfare System (SAWS). The statute contains procedural protections — reevaluation timelines, limits on relying on service participation to deny waivers, and authority for the department to issue all-county letters pending formal regulations — that will reshape county operations, reporting, and IT workstreams.
At a Glance
What It Does
AB 969 requires counties to waive CalWORKs program requirements for applicants or recipients identified as domestic abuse survivors when compliance would impede safety or escape, and to provide written notifications explaining denials or terminations. The department must create statewide written guidance and a standardized waiver form and may use all-county letters until regulations are adopted.
Who It Affects
CalWORKs applicants and recipients who are current or former victims of domestic abuse, county human services agencies and caseworkers who must adopt new protocols, and the State Department of Social Services and SAWS vendors responsible for developing materials and implementing automation.
Why It Matters
The bill shifts from county discretion to a stronger, statewide baseline for survivor protections, standardizes how counties inform and process waiver requests, and ties operational rollout to SAWS—creating a significant administrative and IT agenda for counties and the state while changing how welfare-to-work rules interact with survivor safety.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 969 tightens and clarifies how CalWORKs treats people who are subject to domestic abuse. Rather than limiting the waiver regime to recipients and leaving much to local practice, the law requires counties to waive program requirements for applicants or recipients on a case-by-case basis whenever complying would make it harder to escape abuse, keep someone safe after leaving, or would unfairly penalize a survivor.
The bill sets a low threshold for issuing waivers: an applicant’s attestation that compliance would cause harm is generally sufficient unless contradicted by evidence. Counties must not use participation in domestic violence, mental health, or substance use services as a reason to deny a waiver, nor may they discontinue waivers simply because a survivor opts into voluntary welfare‑to‑work activities.
The department must develop operational protocols by January 1, 2027, defining domestic abuse, establishing confidentiality and notice procedures, and setting training standards and individualized assessment processes. It must also produce a single, statewide set of written materials — translated as required — that lists local and statewide resources, explains confidentiality limits, lays out which program requirements may be waived, and includes a standardized waiver request form that allows applicants to seek retroactive relief.
Counties must provide these materials confidentially and supplement them with local contact information.Procedurally, counties must give applicants and recipients a written notice of whether a waiver is granted by the time the application is approved and must explain the reasons for any denial or later termination; they may not take adverse action for noncompliance while a waiver request is pending. Waivers are subject to reevaluation at least every six months, though counties may reassess more often if circumstances change.
The statute also directs the department to report annually to the Legislature on appraisal-identified potential victims and actions taken to meet survivors’ needs.Finally, AB 969 phases in most operational requirements: the substantive waiver and materials provisions become operative January 1, 2028, or when SAWS can support necessary automation, whichever is later. The department may use all-county letters to implement these provisions immediately while regulations are pending, so counties should expect interim written guidance before formal rules are in place.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires counties to grant case‑by‑case waivers of CalWORKs requirements for applicants or recipients identified as domestic abuse survivors when compliance would make escaping or staying safe more difficult.
An applicant’s sworn attestation that compliance would harm their safety is presumptively sufficient for a waiver unless contradicted by documented evidence; counties must document any denial.
The State Department of Social Services must produce a uniform statewide packet of written materials and a standardized waiver request form that includes the ability to request retroactive waivers.
Counties must reevaluate granted waivers at least every six months, may not deny waivers based on participation in domestic violence or behavioral health services, and cannot take adverse action while a waiver request is pending.
Key provisions become operative January 1, 2028, or on the date SAWS automation is available; until regulations are adopted, the department can issue all‑county letters with the force of regulation.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Legislative intent to protect survivors
The amended intent provision reiterates that CalWORKs must not place survivors at greater risk or create incentives to remain with abusers. Practically, this frames all subsequent operational rules: counties and the department must bend administrative processes toward safety and nonpunitive treatment of survivors, and that policy lens can be used to interpret ambiguous program rules.
Department protocols and federal alignment
The department must align state practice with the federal family violence option and, by January 1, 2027, produce protocols covering identification, confidentiality, referrals, case assessment, and notice. The provision preserves a federal-safety check — waivers that would trigger federal penalties for work participation or time-limit exemptions cannot be implemented — forcing the department to monitor federal guidance and potentially limit certain waivers to avoid fiscal penalties.
Mandatory waiver standard and procedural safeguards
The prior version is repealed and replaced to require counties to find good cause and issue waivers when compliance would impede safety. The new section defines the evidentiary posture (survivor attestation generally sufficient), prohibits relying on participation hours in supportive services as a denial reason, mandates prompt written notifications and timelines, protects against adverse actions during pendency, and authorizes interim all-county guidance. Operationally, counties must adopt documentation practices and staff training to implement this lower-threshold, survivor-centered process.
Statewide written materials and standardized waiver form
The department must develop a single statewide information packet and a standardized waiver request form with an option for retroactive waivers. Counties must provide these materials confidentially, in the applicant’s preferred language, and add local resources. The requirement standardizes messaging across counties and reduces variation in what survivors receive, but leaves room for local augmentation to reflect services and contacts.
Annual reporting on identified survivors
The department must update the Legislature during budget hearings on the number of CalWORKs recipients flagged through the online appraisal as potential victims and on survivors of nondomestic stalking, sexual abuse, and harassment, plus a summary of department actions. This creates a formal reporting loop that can track uptake, identify gaps, and potentially justify future funding for services or systems changes.
SAWS trigger, operative dates, and interim implementation
Most of the new operative requirements (waiver mechanics, materials, forms) are delayed until January 1, 2028, or until SAWS automation is ready; the department can issue all-county letters until regulations are adopted. This dual trigger ties policy change to IT readiness and gives the department authority to provide legally binding interim guidance, which reduces legal uncertainty but places pressure on SAWS timelines and vendor work.
Mandated local program and reimbursement rule
Because the bill imposes new duties on counties, it invokes the state-mandated local program mechanism; if the Commission on State Mandates finds costs, reimbursement will follow existing statutory procedures. Counties should track implementation costs closely in case of a future mandate claim.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Social Services across all five countries.
Explore Social Services in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- CalWORKs applicants and recipients who are domestic abuse survivors — they gain a lower-threshold, presumptive waiver process, timely written notices, confidential access to standardized information, and protection from adverse actions while a waiver is pending.
- Children of survivors — by enabling waivers that remove barriers to escaping abusive situations, the law reduces enforced family separation decisions driven by welfare‑to‑work requirements and may improve child safety and stability.
- Domestic violence and victim service advocates — standardized statewide materials, a uniform waiver request form, and mandated referrals create clearer pathways for coordination and reduce variation in county practices, improving advocacy effectiveness.
Who Bears the Cost
- County human services agencies and caseworkers — they must adopt new intake protocols, provide confidential materials in multiple languages, document waiver decisions, conduct six‑month reevaluations, and train staff on the new presumptive-attestation standard.
- State Department of Social Services and SAWS vendors — the department must develop protocols, statewide materials, and a standardized form and coordinate SAWS changes; vendor and integration costs for automating waiver workflows and notices fall to the state/county technology programs.
- Local budgets if federal rules restrict waivers — if certain waivers would cause federal penalties for work participation or time‑limit exemptions, counties and the state may need to limit waivers or absorb program changes, creating budgetary and compliance choices.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is protecting survivors by removing administrative barriers and lowering proof thresholds versus preserving program integrity and federal funding requirements: faster, attestation‑based waivers improve safety access but increase administrative discretion and potential federal compliance exposure, forcing counties and the state to balance safety, uniformity, and fiscal risk.
AB 969 prioritizes survivor safety and administrative consistency, but implementation raises several hard questions. First, the bill’s evidentiary approach—where an applicant’s attestation is generally sufficient—favors rapid access to waivers but gives counties discretion to find statements not credible when there are ‘‘contradictory statements or other supporting documentation.’' That invites variability and potential appeals unless the statewide standards tightly define what counts as contradiction and how to document credibility determinations.
Second, the statute attempts to thread a needle with federal rules: it instructs counties to grant waivers broadly but bars implementation of waiver types that would trigger federal penalties for work participation or the 20-percent hardship cap. That creates operational complexity for the department and counties, which must map waiver types to federal compliance outcomes and may need to limit waivers in practice.
Third, the SAWS-dependent operative date reduces legal risk from implementing changes too quickly but concentrates implementation risk in IT project timelines and increases costs; until SAWS is ready, counties will rely on all-county letters, producing a two-track universe of practice.
Finally, confidentiality and mandatory reporting can clash. The statewide materials must explain when disclosure is required, but front-line workers will need clear instruction about balancing safety, mandated reporting, and information sharing with immigration or law enforcement.
The law improves access to standardized information, but without additional funding for local victim services and staff capacity, counties may struggle to translate waivers and notices into meaningful safety plans and referrals.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.