BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 404| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- THIRD READING Bill No: AB 404 Author: Chiu (D), et al. Amended: 6/10/15 in Senate Vote: 21 SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/1/15 AYES: Liu, Runner, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan, Vidak NO VOTE RECORDED: Block, Hancock SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/27/15 AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15 - See last page for vote SUBJECT: Community colleges: accreditation SOURCE: Author DIGEST: This bill requires the regional accrediting agency for the California Community Colleges (CCC) to report to the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) the date by which the agency's application for continued recognition is due and requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of community colleges, as specified, to develop a report, transmitted to specified entities, that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency. ANALYSIS: Existing law confers upon the CCC BOG the ability to prescribe minimum standards for the formation and operation of community colleges and exercise general supervision over the community colleges. (Education Code § 66700 and § 70901) AB 404 Page 2 As such, regulations (Title 5 California Code of Regulations § 51016) have been adopted to require each community college within a district to be an accredited institution - with the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) determining accreditation. This bill: 1)Requires the regional accrediting agency for the community colleges to report, as specified, to the CCC BOG the date by which the agency's application for continued recognition is due. 2)Requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of community colleges including faculty and classified personnel to develop a report that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria use to determine an accreditor's status. 3)Specifies that the report shall be transmitted to the United States Department of Education (USDE) and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI). Comments 1)Need for the bill? According to the author, existing law provides no mechanism for a CCC system-wide performance review of the CCC's regional accrediting body and providing the overseeing federal entities with such a review increases accountability of the accrediting agency and improves participation by CCC faculty and personnel in the process. This bill seeks to provide a method for collecting stakeholder feedback during an accrediting agency's performance review. 2)Accreditation, how it works. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings. Under federal law, the USDE establishes the general standards AB 404 Page 3 for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions. There are three basic types of accreditation: a) Regional accreditation. There are six USDE-recognized regional accrediting agencies. Each regional accreditor encompasses public, the vast majority of non-profit private (independent), and some for-profit postsecondary educational institutions in the region it serves. California's regional accrediting agency is separated into two commissions: the ACCJC and the Senior College and University Commission. b) National accreditation. National accreditation is not based on geography, but more focused to evaluate specific types of schools and programs. National accreditation is designed to allow nontraditional colleges (trade schools, religious schools, certain online schools) to be compared against similarly designed institutions. Different standards and categories are measured, depending on the type of institution. c) Specialized/programmatic accreditation. Offered by accrediting agencies that represent specific fields of study, these agencies do not accredit entire colleges but instead accredit the programs within colleges that prepare students for the specific field or industry. In most cases, specialized accreditation alone does not enable participation in state and federal financial aid programs. 3)Accreditation of California community colleges. After an initial accreditation, colleges must have their accreditation reaffirmed every six years. This process includes a self-study, a site visit by a team of peers, a recommendation by the visiting team and an action by the ACCJC. In addition to these core components, colleges must submit a midterm report every three years and annual progress reports. The college/district may also have to submit follow-up reports and host visits as required by the ACCJC. There are three levels of sanction prior to termination of accreditation: Warning, Probation, and Show Cause. Follow up reports and accreditation visits are required to retain full AB 404 Page 4 accreditation. Many California community colleges have faced various levels of accreditation sanctions. Most recently, the sanctions imposed on City College of San Francisco have drawn attention to ACCJC and its accreditation process. The heightened attention lead to an audit by the California State Auditor, who on June 26, 2014, issued a report on California Community Colleges Accreditation. This audit report provided both a review of the ACCJC and the accreditation process in general, as well as a more in-depth examination of recent events related to City College of San Francisco. The report raised some concerns of the ACCJC and the accreditation process and made a series of recommendations to address the identified concerns. After the release of the State Auditor's report, the Chancellor's Office reconvened its Accreditation Task Force consisting of community college stakeholders. The Accreditation Task Force is charged with providing input through a report to the Chancellor's Office regarding the accreditation process, including addressing the State Auditor's recommendations. The Accreditation Task Force held its final meeting at the end of May and is expected to release the final report at the end of August. Arguably, the information gathered by the provisions in this bill may compliment the work of the Accreditation Task Force. 4)National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity. NACIQI advises the USDE on matters related to postsecondary accreditation and the eligibility and certification process for higher education institutions to participate in Federal student aid programs. Its primary function is to provide recommendations to the U.S. Secretary of Education concerning whether accrediting entities' standards are sufficiently rigorous and effective in their application to ensure the entity is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions or programs it accredits. To meet that standard, accrediting entities must demonstrate compliance with all the criteria for recognition. Once a recommendation is made, this process allows for public comment. This bill seeks to provide CCC faculty and personnel a method for providing feedback and remain anonymous during the accrediting agencies performance review. AB 404 Page 5 Related/Prior Legislation AB 1385 (Ting, 2015) requires notification to the CCC BOG before an accrediting agency increases membership fees, special assessments, or other payments charged to a community college. AB 1385 is pending in the Senate Education Committee. AB 1397 (Ting, 2015) requires the accrediting agency for the CCC to meet specified operational standards. AB 1397 is pending in the Senate Education Committee. SB 1068 (Beall, 2014) would have required the CCC BOG, by January 1, 2016, to report on the feasibility of creating an independent accrediting agency to accredit the CCC and other two-year private postsecondary educational institutions, and to make recommendations relative to CCC accreditation. SB 1068 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:YesLocal: No According the Senate Appropriations Committee:CCC Chancellor's Office indicates that this bill requires 0.5 position and $55,000 General Fund. SUPPORT: (Verified8/27/15) American Federation of Teachers, Local 2121 California Community College Independents California Federation of Teachers California School Employees Association California Teachers Association Faculty Association of California Community Colleges San Francisco Community College Federation of Teachers OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/27/15) AB 404 Page 6 None received ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15 AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins NO VOTE RECORDED: Gipson, Roger Hernández Prepared by:Olgalilia Ramirez / ED. / (916) 651-4105 8/30/15 19:42:09 **** END ****