ACR 27 is a California concurrent resolution recognizing the public‑health problem of teen dating violence and setting aside a month for awareness and prevention activities. The text summarizes research and CDC recommendations, documents prevalence across demographic groups, and urges communities to run programs that teach healthy relationship skills and support survivors.
The measure is symbolic — it does not appropriate funds or create regulatory duties — but it signals legislative alignment with comprehensive, data‑driven prevention strategies and gives schools, local governments, and community groups an explicit legislative reference for organizing outreach and programs.
At a Glance
What It Does
Summarizes public‑health findings and CDC prevention strategies and asks Californians — including schools, community groups, families, and youth — to observe a designated month with programs and activities that raise awareness and teach safe relationship skills. The resolution includes a transmittal instruction for the Chief Clerk to distribute copies to the author.
Who It Affects
Youth‑serving institutions (K‑12 systems, community colleges, campus services), local public‑health departments, nonprofit shelters and advocacy groups, youth commissions, and community education providers are the primary audiences for the resolution's call to action. Survivors and at‑risk young people are the intended beneficiaries of the outreach it encourages.
Why It Matters
Though nonbinding, the resolution aligns state legislative messaging with CDC models and gives advocates a legislative citation to solicit partnerships or funding. It also consolidates demographic data and prevention benchmarks in one place, which practitioners can use to design or justify programming.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The resolution compiles findings and public‑health recommendations to frame teen dating violence as a preventable problem that requires coordinated, long‑term approaches across schools, families, and communities. The bill text cites the CDC’s comprehensive prevention model — including teaching healthy relationship skills, engaging adults and peers, disrupting pathways toward partner violence, creating protective environments, strengthening economic supports for families, and supporting survivors — as the conceptual framework for local activities.
The text collects specific prevalence data across age ranges and demographic groups to justify the awareness month: it cites multiple CDC and survey metrics on verbal, emotional, physical, and sexual dating abuse, and highlights disparities by race, sexual orientation, and gender identity. The resolution also links teen dating violence to other adverse outcomes — truancy, dropout, teen pregnancy, substance use, and long‑term health consequences for survivors — to underscore why prevention efforts should be comprehensive rather than piecemeal.Practically, the resolution asks community actors to observe the month with programs and outreach; it names community partners already planning events in San Francisco as examples of local activity.
Because the measure is a concurrent resolution, it creates no spending authority, enforcement mechanisms, or new legal requirements; its practical effect will depend on whether schools, local governments, and nonprofits use the designation to coordinate campaigns, training, or resource development.For practitioners, the most actionable material in the text is the explicit list of prevention strategies and the demographic snapshots: organizations planning programming can map those strategies to their existing prevention curricula, target outreach to disproportionately affected groups identified in the resolution, and cite the legislative language in grant applications or partnership requests.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The resolution incorporates the CDC’s recommended multi‑strategy prevention approach (teaching relationship skills, engaging adults/peers, creating protective environments, economic supports, survivor services).
It explicitly defines the youth population of interest to include people aged 12 to 24, inclusive.
The text compiles prevalence data: it cites 'one in three' teens reporting some form of dating abuse and provides subgroup statistics (e.g.
higher rates among LGB and transgender youth and varying rates across racial groups).
The resolution references specific community partners planning local events — Black Women Revolt Against Domestic Violence, the Asian Women’s Shelter, and the San Francisco Youth Commission — as examples of on‑the‑ground activity.
ACR 27 contains no funding, enforcement language, or regulatory directives; its effects are persuasive and programmatic rather than legal or fiscal.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Findings, data, and rationale for prevention
This section aggregates public‑health and survey statistics to build the case for prevention efforts: CDC prevalence estimates, subgroup disparities (race, sexual orientation, gender identity), and long‑term health correlations. From a practical perspective, these clauses function as the Legislature’s statement of policy intent and supply users with consolidated citations they can use when designing targeted outreach or seeking funding.
Affirmation of an awareness and prevention month
The core operative language directs the Legislature to proclaim February 2025 as the month for awareness and prevention activities. While this is a formal proclamation, it does not create statutory duties or appropriations; rather, it sets a legislative frame that local actors can employ to amplify prevention messaging and coordinate community events.
Call to action for communities and institutions
This clause specifically calls upon schools, community groups, families, and youth to observe the month through programs and activities that raise awareness and teach skills. In effect, the resolution creates expectations that youth‑serving institutions will develop programming or partnerships; compliance is voluntary, so implementation will vary by locality based on capacity and existing priorities.
Transmittal instruction
The final clause instructs the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies of the resolution to the author for distribution. This is a low‑level administrative step that aids dissemination but does not require state agencies to take action or report back, meaning there is no built‑in monitoring or evaluation requirement tied to the awareness month.
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
- Survivors and at‑risk youth: The resolution elevates visibility for groups that experience disproportionate rates of dating violence (LGB, transgender youth, some racial groups), which can increase outreach and survivor support options.
- Schools and campus programs: K‑12 and higher‑education prevention programs gain an explicit legislative reference to justify events, curriculum time, or partnership requests tied to the awareness month.
- Nonprofit shelters and advocacy groups: Local organizations can leverage the resolution as a publicity and fundraising tool to expand or coordinate prevention and survivor services.
- Public‑health and research organizations: Consolidated citations and endorsement of CDC strategies provide a policy anchor for program design, evaluation planning, and grant proposals.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local schools and districts: Organizing events, trainings, and curricula changes during the month will create staff time and logistical costs without new state funding.
- Small community nonprofits: The expectation to participate or lead activities may require resource allocation (staff, materials) that some groups will need to absorb or fundraise for.
- Local governmental offices and youth commissions: If these bodies take on convening roles, they will incur administrative burdens for coordinating events and partners.
- State legislative staff: Minimal administrative tasks for dissemination and recordkeeping fall to the Legislature without dedicated funding, though these are routine and limited in scope.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between recognition and resourcing: the resolution raises the profile of teen dating violence and endorses comprehensive prevention strategies, but it stops short of providing funding, mandates, or evaluation mechanisms—leaving voluntary actors to translate policy language into practice, often with little additional capacity.
The resolution endorses an explicit list of CDC prevention strategies while offering no funding, implementation guidance, or accountability measures. That creates a practical gap: organizations are encouraged to adopt comprehensive, multi‑strategy approaches but receive no direction on prioritization, fidelity, or measurement.
Small districts and nonprofits with limited capacity face a tension between responding to a high‑profile legislative call and lacking the resources to implement evidence‑based programming at scale.
The document’s epidemiological snapshots are useful but also static: they draw on national and survey figures without prescribing how local agencies should tailor interventions to community context or measure outcomes. Naming specific community partners and highlighting San Francisco activity can be helpful as examples but raises questions about whether statewide promotion will be equitable; rural or underresourced areas may not see parallel investment.
Finally, by designating an age range up to 24, the resolution spans adolescence and young adulthood, which could complicate program targeting since prevention strategies and service needs differ across that range.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.