BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                         SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
                              Gloria Romero, Chair
                           2009-2010 Regular Session
                                        

          BILL NO:       AB 1901
          AUTHOR:        Ruskin
          AMENDED:       June 23, 2010
          FISCAL COMM:   No             HEARING DATE:  June 30, 2010
          URGENCY:       No             CONSULTANT:    Kathleen  
          Chavira

           SUBJECT  :  California Master Plan for Higher Education
           
          KEY POLICY ISSUE
           
          Do the findings in the report of the Joint Committee on the  
          Master Plan for Higher Education reflect the Legislature's  
          intent regarding the needs of the state and its people from  
          the public system of higher education?
           
          SUMMARY
           
          This bill codifies the findings and principles that emerged  
          from the 2010 Review of the Master Plan for Higher  
          Education and declares the Legislature's intent to outline  
          in statute the clear, concise statewide goals and outcomes  
          for effective implementation of the Master Plan for Higher  
          Education, the expectation of the higher education system  
          as a whole to be accountable for attaining those goals.

           BACKGROUND
           
          Current law establishes the Donahoe Higher Education Act  
          which outlines the laws under which postsecondary  
          educational institutions operate in California. (Education  
          Code Title 3, Division 5, Part 40)

          Within the Donahoe Act, current law establishes findings  
          and declarations based on the periodic review of the Master  
          Plan by the Legislature and declares the intent of the  
          Legislature to statutorily outline broad policy and  
          programmatic goals of the Master Plan which the higher  
          education segments are responsible for attaining.  Current  








                                                               AB 1901
                                                                Page 2

          law also declares the intent that the governing boards be  
          given ample discretion in implementing policies and  
          programs to attain those goals.  (EC  66002, 66003)

           ANALYSIS
           
           This bill  :

          1)   Acknowledges the findings of the 2010 Committee for  
               the Review of the Master Plan that the Master Plan is  
               a living document, reaffirms the essential tenets of  
               universal access, affordability and high quality, and  
               identifies the need for an overarching policy  
               framework of statewide public policy goals based upon  
               outcomes, increased fiscal and programmatic  
               accountability and more effective coordination and  
               articulation.

          2)   Makes a number of related findings including:

                    a)   That as we continue to experience  
                    unprecedented growth and extraordinary social and  
                    economic changes in the 21st century the ability  
                    of the state's public higher education system to  
                    carry out the master plan is at risk.

                    b)   That California requires a higher education  
                    system that meets 21st century needs which  
                    include:

                           i)                  A system to provide  
                         statewide goals for higher education attuned  
                         to the public interest of the people and  
                         State that will enable increased fiscal and  
                         programmatic accountability, across and  
                         within systems.

                           ii)     Affordability, with shared cost  
                         between the students who benefit directly  
                         and the public, for whom the student's  
                         education is an investment for the public  
                         good.

                           iii)    Clear metrics for measuring  








                                                               AB 1901
                                                                Page 3

                         whether affordability is achieved by  
                         financial aid policies.

                           iv)     A new focus on completion and  
                         results.

                           v)                  Simultaneous  
                         commitment to high-quality higher education.

                           vi)     Coordination and efficiency in the  
                         delivery of higher education with a  
                         coordinating board that has sufficient  
                         authority, and creation of a system of  
                         articulation across segments grounded in a  
                         transfer associate degree.

                           vii)    Closure of the achievement gap  
                         without diminishing access.

                           viii)   Utilization of technology to meet  
                         fiscal and programmatic changes.

                           ix)     Increased transparency as part of  
                         an accountability system focused upon  
                         meeting statewide goals.

                           x)                  The advancement of  
                         career technical education in both K-12 and  
                         higher education. 

                           xi)     Establishing and articulating the  
                         nexus between public financing and the  
                         economic benefit to the state. 
                     
                           xii)    The support of the people of  
                         California.

          3)   Declares the Legislature's intent:

                    a)   That the work completed by Master Plan  
                    review committees be used to guide higher  
                    education policy.

                    b)   To outline in statute the clear, concise  








                                                               AB 1901
                                                                Page 4

                    statewide goals and outcomes for effective  
                    implementation of the master plan for higher  
                    education, and the expectation that the higher  
                    education system as a whole be accountable for  
                    attaining those goals

           STAFF COMMENTS
           
              1)   Origin of the bill  .  ACR 65 (Ruskin, Resolution  
               Chapter 106, Statutes of 2009) created a joint  
               committee to review the Master Plan for Higher  
               Education.  The Committee held several informational  
               hearings and convened working groups to identify  
               potential legislative solutions to issues raised in  
               these hearings. This bill updates the Legislature's  
               findings and intent for the Donahoe Higher Education  
               Act to reflect the work of the 2010 Joint Committee on  
               the Master Plan for Higher Education. 

              2)   Less is more  .  Notwithstanding the thoughtful  
               deliberation of the Joint Committee, unlike prior  
               reviews of the Master Plan that have been acknowledged  
               in statute, this bill much more extensively codifies  
               the findings contained in the final report of the 2010  
               Committee.  The work of prior committee reviews have  
               been summarized in a single paragraph.  

               Staff recommends the bill be amended to delete lines  
               28-39 on page 4, to delete page 5, and to delete lines  
               1-4 on page 6, to ensure that the work of the Master  
               Plan review committee is acknowledged in a manner  
               consistent with prior Master Plan reviews.  
           
             3)   Master Plan for Higher Education  .  The original  
               Master Plan was approved in principle by the Regents  
               and the State Board of Education (which at that time  
               governed the CSU and the Community Colleges) on  
               December 18, 1959 and was submitted to the Legislature  
               in February 1960. A special session of the 1960  
               Legislature passed the Donahoe Higher Education Act,  
               which included many of the Master Plan  
               recommendations. For various reasons, many of the key  
               aspects of the Master Plan were never enacted into law  
               although agreed to by the public higher education  








                                                               AB 1901
                                                                Page 5

               segments and the State. 

               Key elements of the original Master Plan included the  
               differentiation of mission and functions of the  
               State's three public postsecondary education segments,  
               its differentiation of their admissions pools, its  
               affirmation of California's commitment to the  
               principle of tuition-free education to residents of  
               the State and the need for a statutory coordinating  
               body for the public segments of higher education.  
               Reviews of the Master Plan have been conducted by the  
               Legislature (and occasionally by blue-ribbon  
               commissions) about once a decade since the 1970s.   
               Major legislative reviews of the Master Plan were  
               conducted in the early 1970s and the late 1980s.  A  
               more recent legislative review of the Master Plan,  
               encompassing both K-12 and higher education (as well  
               as Pre-K education), began in 1999 and recommendations  
               were adopted in 2002.

           SUPPORT
           
          California Postsecondary Education Commission

           OPPOSITION

           None received.