BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 160 (Portantino)
Hearing Date: 08/15/2011 Amended: 07/06/2011
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Education 8-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 160 authorizes the governing board of a
California community college (CCC) district to enter into a
concurrent enrollment partnership with one or more school
districts within its immediate service area to allow secondary
school pupils to attend a CCC if they have exhausted all
opportunities to enroll in an equivalent course at the high
school of attendance, adult education program, continuation
school, regional occupational center or program, or school
district programs. This bill also permits a school district to
authorize a pupil, upon the recommendation from a CCC
administrator, as specified, to take career technical education
(CTE) courses at a CCC.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Concurrent enrollment Substantial on-going cost
pressure General*
*Counts toward meeting the Proposition 98 minimum funding
guarantee.
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Under existing law, high school pupils may be granted admission
to CCC courses as special part-time or full-time students with
the authorization of the K-12 district governing board, a
principal's permission, and parental consent. Authorized
students are those who would benefit from "advanced scholastic
or vocational work." Current law limits a school principal from
recommending more than 5% of a school's students at any grade
level from attendance at a CCC summer session.
AB 160 (Portantino)
Page 1
This bill would authorize a CCC district to enter into a formal
agreement with local school districts to set their own terms for
concurrent enrollment of high school pupils at the CCC, in order
to expand concurrent enrollment. This bill establishes minimum
requirements and guidelines for such agreements, and exempts
those entering into local agreements from current statutory
restrictions on concurrent enrollment to allow for greater use.
For example, CCC districts and school districts which enter into
concurrent enrollment agreements are exempt from the requirement
that a pupil receive authorization from the school district
governing board to become eligible to concurrently enroll.
Participant districts would also be exempt from the 5% limit on
the number of high school pupils who can enroll in CCC summer
courses.
This bill has significant fiscal and policy implications for the
state. By removing restrictions on summer sessions, this bill
will allow CCCs to claim greater reimbursements for course
enrollments. In the 2009-10 fiscal year, the CCCs reported
31,500 FTES related to concurrent enrollment in summer session
courses, with the 5% cap in place.
Every 10% increase in participation (in FTES) in summer courses
would result in costs of $14,379,750 (assuming the CCC for
credit rates of $4,565 per FTES). Actual costs would depend on
participation, and the courses taken. If agreements are adopted,
summer participation is likely to substantially increase,
because K-12 budget reductions have limited or eliminated summer
school offerings at high schools. Because summer school
offerings have been scaled back statewide, more school districts
are likely to enter into these agreements with CCC districts,
increasing enrollment over time.
In order to avoid issues of double funding, this bill would
prohibit a CCC from receiving an allowance or an apportionment
for summer session instruction for which a school district is
also paid. It allows, however, for apportionments that are not
also given to school districts; summer session would be one such
apportionment, and represent a unique cost to this bill.
AB 160 (Portantino)
Page 2