BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                                                                  SB 195
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 30, 2013

                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                     SB 195 (Liu) - As Amended:  August 20, 2013 

          Policy Committee:                              Higher  

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:               


          This bill requires a working group to identify outcome, progress  
          and effectiveness metrics for California's higher education  
          segments. Specifically, this bill:

          1)States legislative intent that budget and policy decisions  
            regarding postsecondary education generally adhere to the  
            goals of: (a) improving student access and success; (b) better  
            aligning degrees and credentials with the state's economic,  
            workforce, and civic needs; and (c) ensuring the effective and  
            efficient use of resources.

          2)Requires a designee of the Governor to convene a working group  
            to develop performance metrics, as specified, for the purpose  
            of monitoring progress toward meeting the above goals. The  
            metrics are to be derived from publicly available data  

          3)Specifies that the working group will consist of:

             a)   One representative each from the University of  
               California, the California State University, the California  
               Community Colleges, the State Department of Education  
               (DOE), the independent institutions of higher education,  
               and the private postsecondary educational institutions.
             b)   One representative of the Department of Finance (DOF).
             c)   One to three members with similar expertise in state  
               accountability efforts.
             d)   One representative of the Legislative Analyst's Office  


                                                                  SB 195
                                                                  Page  2

          4)Requires the metrics to be submitted to the Legislature and  
            the Governor by December 31, 2014.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)Costs for the segments, DOE, DOF, and LAO to participate in  
            the workgroup should be minor and absorbable. 

          2)To the extent the metrics are derived from current data  
            sources as intended, the segments should not experience any  
            significant additional reporting costs.



              1)   Purpose  . According to the author, the goals established  
               by this legislation will be the basis for establishing  
               metrics and targets and for assessing progress in meeting  
               California's educational and workforce needs.  The author  
               notes that the current fiscal climate makes it especially  
               important that California be clear about priorities for the  
               use of the public funding provided to our institutions,  
               stating "If we are clear about the goals and the measures,  
               we can then be clearer about the budget and policy  
               decisions necessary to support our higher education system  
               in meeting our goals."

              2)   Prior Legislation  . This is the latest in a series of  
               legislative proposal seeking to establish an accountability  
               framework for higher education.

             a)   In 2012, SB 721 (Lowenthal), which established statewide  
               goals for guiding budget and policy decisions in higher  
               education, required the Legislative Analyst's Office to  
               convene a working group to develop and recommend specific  
               metrics, and outlined an ongoing reporting process on the  
               progress toward statewide goals, was vetoed, with the  
               Governor stating, "Questions about who should measure, what  
               to measure and how to measure what is learned in college  
               are way too important to be delegated to the Legislative  

             b)   In 2011, AB 2 (Portantino) was held on Suspense in  


                                                                  SB 195
                                                                  Page  3

               Senate Appropriations.

             c)   AB 1901 (Ruskin)/Chapter 201 of 2010, codified the  
               findings and principles of 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  

             d)   AB 218 (Portantino) of 2009, which was almost identical  
               to AB 2, was also held on Suspense in Senate  

             e)   SB 325 (Scott) of 2008, also similar to AB 2, was vetoed  
               by Governor Schwarzenegger, who stated the bill lacked  
               incentives and consequences related to meeting any state  
               policy objectives that would be established. 

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081