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 ****