BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 195|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 195
Author: Liu (D)
Amended: 5/24/13
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 8-1, 4/17/13
AYES: Liu, Wyland, Block, Correa, Hancock, Hueso, Jackson,
Monning
NOES: Huff
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-1, 5/23/13
AYES: De Le�n, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NOES: Walters
SUBJECT : Postsecondary Education Statewide Goals
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill establishes statewide goals for guiding
budget and policy decisions in higher education, requires an
appropriate educational administrative body, determined by the
Governor, to convene a working group, as specified, to develop
and recommend specific metrics for measuring progress toward
these goals, and requires the administrative body to report its
recommendations for statewide metrics to the appropriate
legislative policy and fiscal committees, and the Governor, by
January 31, 2014.
ANALYSIS : Existing law establishes the Donahoe Higher
Education Act which outlines the laws under which postsecondary
CONTINUED
SB 195
Page
2
educational institutions operate in California.
Within the Donahoe Act, existing law establishes findings and
declarations based on the periodic review of the Master Plan for
Higher Education (Master Plan) by the Legislature. Existing law
declares the intent of the Legislature to outline in statute,
clear, concise, statewide goals and outcomes for effective
implementation of the Master Plan, attuned to the public
interest of the people and State of California, and to expect
the system as a whole and the higher education segments to be
accountable for attaining those goals. Additionally, consistent
with the spirit of the original master plan and subsequent
updates, existing law declares the intent of the Legislature
that the governing boards be given ample discretion in
implementing policies and programs necessary to attain those
goals.
This bill establishes statewide goals for guiding budget and
policy decisions in higher education. More specifically it:
1. Outlines the following three goals for guiding budget and
policy decisions in higher education:
A. Improved student success, to include, but not be
limited to, greater participation by demographic groups
that have participated at lower rates, greater completion
by all students, and improved outcomes for graduates.
B. Better alignment of degrees and credentials awarded
with the state's economic, workforce and civic needs.
C. Effective and efficient use of resources in order to
increase high-quality postsecondary educational outcomes
and maintain affordability.
2. Requires that metrics to measure progress toward these goals
be developed with the assistance of a working group to be
convened by the administrative body determined by the
Governor as follows:
A. Outlines the make-up of the working group to include
postsecondary education segment representatives, the
Department of Finance (DOF), one to three members with
expertise in state accountability who are unaffiliated
CONTINUED
SB 195
Page
3
with any of the segments of higher education, a
representative of the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO)
and other relevant state agency representatives.
B. Requires the working group to develop at least six and
no more than 12 measures derived from publicly available
data sources that these measures be able to be
disaggregated and reported by gender, race/ethnicity,
income, age group, and full-time/part-time enrollment,
where appropriate and applicable, and that metrics take
into account the distinct missions of each postsecondary
segment.
C. Requires the metrics to be used for the purposes of the
annual reporting requirements for institutions that
participate in the Cal Grant program.
D. Requires the administrative body, in consultation with
DOF and the LAO, to submit the recommended metrics
developed by the working group to the appropriate
legislative policy and budget committees and the Governor
by January 31, 2014.
3. Defines the segments of postsecondary education, for purposes
of the bill, to include the California Community Colleges,
the California State University, the University of
California, the independent colleges and universities, and
proprietary postsecondary institutions.
4. Declares the Legislature's intent to:
A. Identify, define and formally adopt appropriate metrics
to be used for the purpose of monitoring progress toward
the state goals.
B. Promote progress toward the goals through budget and
policy decisions within higher education.
C. Use the reporting system established per this bill's
provisions to help ensure the effective and efficient use
of state resources available to higher education.
Comments
CONTINUED
SB 195
Page
4
According to the Senate Education Committee:
History/need for this bill . There has been a growing trend
toward state accountability systems for higher education using
different approaches and indicators. Nearly all states
(including Tennessee, Texas, Illinois, Ohio, Florida and
Washington) have some form of mandated statewide accountability
program for higher education that includes goals, performance
measures, and various degrees of performance funding.
In the past decade, the Senate has engaged in the following
activities relative to higher education accountability:
1. In 2002, the Senate commissioned a study of national trends
in higher education accountability. The resulting report,
"An Accountability Framework for California Higher Education:
Informing Public Policy and Improving Outcome," provided the
initial framework for developing an integrated system of
accountability for higher education in California and was the
basis for several legislative efforts to implement such a
framework from 2004 to 2011.
2. On January 31, 2007, the Senate Education Committee held an
informational hearing on Higher Education Accountability.
National experts testified on trends in higher education
accountability as well as California's specific challenges in
meeting the educational and economic needs of its citizenry.
3. On March 20, 2013, the Senate Education Committee held an
informational hearing on Higher Education Accountability:
Statewide Goals and Metrics. National experts testified
about various state efforts to implement goals and metrics;
using progress outcome, efficiency and effectiveness metrics
to measure performance; potential data sources, models for
implementation and oversight, and the roles of both the
Governor and Legislature in developing goals and metrics.
According to a 2010 LAO publication, "The Master Plan at 50:
Greater than the Sum of its Parts," California, which set the
gold standard for higher education planning in 1960, now stands
alone among sizeable states in its lack of established goals, a
statewide plan, and an accountability system for higher
education.
CONTINUED
SB 195
Page
5
Prior Legislation
AB 1901 (Ruskin, Chapter 201, Statutes of 2010) codified the
findings and principles that emerged from the 2010 Review of the
Master Plan for Higher Education and declared the Legislature's
intent to statutorily outline clear, concise, statewide goals
and outcomes for effective implementation of the Master Plan and
the expectation of the higher education system as a whole to be
accountable for attaining those goals.
AB 2 (Portantino, 2011) and AB 218 (Portantino, 2009),
essentially identical bills, would have required that the state
establish an accountability framework to biennially assess and
report on the collective progress of the state's system of
postsecondary education in meeting specified educational and
economic goals. Both bills were held under submission in the
Senate Appropriations Committee.
SB 325 (Scott, 2007), also nearly identical to AB 2 and AB 218,
was passed by the Legislature and vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger in 2008. The Governor's veto message read,
"While I respect the author's intent to establish a statewide
system of accountability for postsecondary education and a
framework to assess the collective contribution of California's
institutions of higher education toward meeting statewide
economic and educational goals, this bill falls short in
providing any framework for incentives or consequences that
would modify behavior to meet any policy objectives. I believe
our public education systems should be held accountable for
achieving results, including our higher education segments, and
would consider a measure in the future that provides adequate
mechanisms that will effectuate tangible gains in student
outcomes and operational efficiencies."
SB 1331 (Alpert, 2004), passed by the Legislature and vetoed by
Governor Schwarzenegger in 2004, would have established a
California Postsecondary Education Accountability structure to
provide an annual assessment of how the state is meeting
identified statewide public policy goals in higher education.
The Governor's veto message read in pertinent part, "While I
favor accountability for all levels of education, this bill
mainly establishes only a reporting structure for four broad
policy goals rather than providing for outcomes, such as
performance based measures, historically associated with
CONTINUED
SB 195
Page
6
accountability systems."
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the direct
fiscal impact of this bill is unknown, because this bill assigns
primary responsibility for its requirements to an appropriate
administrative body of the Governor's choosing.
Working group: Participation by various entities will
likely result in minor workload increases. Without knowing
what entity is ultimately responsible for the requirements of
this bill, convening the working group and reporting the
recommendations, it is impossible to determine direct costs
for the lead agency/entity.
Cost pressure: Potentially substantial cost pressure, to
the extent the metrics change funding priorities.
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/24/13)
Campaign for College Opportunity
Valley Industry and Commerce Association
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/24/13)
Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the Campaign for College
Opportunity, this bill establishes statewide goals for guiding
budget and policy decisions in higher education in California,
to be developed by a working group of state postsecondary
experts led by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research.
This bill tasks the workgroup to define and identify goals that
improve student access and success, better align degrees and
credentials with the state's needs, and ensure the effective and
efficient use of resources in order to increase high-quality
outcomes and maintain affordability. As part of these goals,
the workgroup of the state's progress toward meeting each goal.
These metrics would be further disaggregated and reported by
gender, race or ethnicity, income, age group, and full-time or
part-time enrollment status in order to properly assess if
California is meeting the needs of the state.
CONTINUED
SB 195
Page
7
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents argue regarding the
structure of the working group, which would be represented by
each of the four higher education institutions, and dedicates a
space for up to three representatives from outside of the field,
but does not include representatives from the faculty or student
organizations. Leaving out the critical voice of the faculty
and students is akin to creating a working group on health care
reform that does not include patients or doctors; it completely
ignores the role of those who are teaching and those who are
learning yet would set goals and metrics without their
considerations.
PQ:k 5/25/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED