BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 1835 Page 1 GOVERNOR'S VETO AB 1835 (Holden) As Enrolled August 22, 2016 2/3 vote ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes | | | | | | | | | | | |----------------+------+--------------------+--------------------| |EDUCATION |13-0 |Medina, Baker, | | | | |Bloom, Chávez, | | | | |Irwin, | | | | |Jones-Sawyer, | | | | |Levine, Linder, | | | | |Low, Olsen, | | | | |Santiago, Weber, | | | | |Williams | | | | | | | | | | | | |----------------+------+--------------------+--------------------| |BUSINESS & |16-0 |Salas, Brough, | | |PROFESSIONS | |Baker, Bloom, | | | | |Campos, Chávez, | | | | |Dahle, Dodd, | | | | |Eggman, Gatto, | | | | |Gomez, Holden, | | | | |Jones, Mullin, | | AB 1835 Page 2 | | |Ting, Wood | | | | | | | | | | | | |----------------+------+--------------------+--------------------| |APPROPRIATIONS |20-0 |Gonzalez, Bigelow, | | | | |Bloom, Bonilla, | | | | |Bonta, Calderon, | | | | |Chang, McCarty, | | | | |Eggman, Gallagher, | | | | |Eduardo Garcia, | | | | |Chau, Holden, | | | | |Jones, Obernolte, | | | | |Quirk, Santiago, | | | | |Wagner, Weber, Wood | | | | | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |76-0 |(May 19, 2016) |SENATE: |38-0 |(August 15, | | | | | | |2016) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED. SUMMARY: Provides an exemption for five years from accreditation requirements for approval by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) to institutions that grant doctoral degrees in psychoanalysis, if all of the institution's students hold master's or doctoral degrees before AB 1835 Page 3 they enroll in the institution and if all of the institution's students, other than research students regulated by the Medical Board of California, hold a valid professional license authorizing the individual to practice psychotherapy. EXISTING LAW: 1)Establishes the BPPE, under the California Private Postsecondary Education Act (Act), until January 1, 2017; and, provides for the oversight and regulation of private postsecondary educational institutions (institutions) to ensure protection of the public and students. 2)Requires an institution seeking BPPE approval to operate and to offer a degree to either: a) Be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education (USDE) to offer the degree(s); or b) Have an accreditation plan, approved by BPPE, for the institution to become fully accredited within five years of the BPPE issuance of a provisional approval to operate. An institution in this category must comply with specified student disclosure, visiting committee review and degree limitation requirements. 3)Requires an unaccredited institution that is approved to operate and to offer degree programs by BPPE prior to January 1, 2015, to submit an accreditation plan to BPPE, to obtain pre-accreditation by July 1, 2017, to obtain accreditation by July 1, 2020, and to comply with various student disclosure and visiting committee review requirements. FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, negligible fiscal impact. AB 1835 Page 4 COMMENTS: Background. According to BPPE, California is one of few states to continue to allow unaccredited degree granting programs. This issue was raised during the 2013 Sunset Review of the BPPE; according to BPPE, "unaccredited degree-granting postsecondary educational institutions are a global concern. Students often choose unaccredited institutions because they are usually less expensive and frequently provide a degree with less rigorous work on the part of the student. While some students may be aware of the possible issues associated with attending an unaccredited institution and remain complacent throughout the process, other students, often from developing countries, enter unaccredited programs simply because they do not understand the difference between approval and accreditation. Credits and degrees earned at unaccredited institutions are unlikely to be recognized by licensing entities, accredited institutions for purposes of transfer, or many employers. So, while the initial cost of the educational program may be less than that of an accredited institution, the potential that the degree may not provide the consumer the anticipated benefits is high. "According to BPPE, accreditation is the accepted standard for educational degrees. Accrediting bodies, as pointed out in a 2013 report issued by the Legislative Analyst's Office's, are good at assessing the quality of educational programs and gathering knowledgeable subject matter experts to assess content, rigor, currency, and delivery of educational programs. They have also been good at keeping up with emerging trends in education and incorporating them into their reviews. BPPE specifically noted in its response to the 2013 Sunset Review that "requiring accreditation would provide a much higher level of consumer protection to students in the state and ensure that California students would have the option of applying for federal financial aid. Additionally, by requiring accreditation for approval to operate in California, the state will save money by not forcing the Bureau to act in the place of an accrediting body for unaccredited institutions." AB 1835 Page 5 In response to these concerns and as a means of better serving students while aiming to decrease the Bureau's significant workload associated with reviewing unaccredited degree granting institutions, SB 1247 (Lieu), Chapter 840, Statutes of 2014, amended the Act to require that degree granting programs be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education (USDE). Institutions offering a degree that seek BPPE approval are now required to either be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the USDE to offer the degree(s) or have an accreditation plan, approved by BPPE, for the institution to become fully accredited within five years of the BPPE issuance of a provisional approval to operate. SB 1247 also outlined a process for institutions that are currently approved by BPPE and offer degrees to submit an accreditation plan to the Bureau by July 1, 2015, to obtain pre-accreditation by July 1, 2017, to obtain accreditation by July 1, 2020, and to comply with various student disclosure and visiting committee review requirements. According to BPPE, as of August 1, 2015, there are approximately 107 unaccredited institutions offering degrees that are approved by the Bureau or have applied for approval. These 107 institutions submitted plans to the Bureau outlining how they will achieve accreditation by July 1, 2020. BPPE is currently in the process of training staff to organize site visits to verify that progress is being made toward accreditation. Purpose of this bill. According to the author, AB 1835 is attempting to assist credible, nonprofit graduate level psychoanalysis programs that were inadvertently caught up in the reforms targeting for-profit, low-quality, degree-granting institutions. AB 1835 will provide a narrow exception to the accreditation requirements contained in SB 1247 for institutions offering qualified students doctoral degrees in psychoanalysis, provided that the institution seeks accreditation from the AB 1835 Page 6 Accreditation Council for Psychoanalytic Education before July 1, 2018; this exemption would sunset on January 1, 2021. GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE: This bill exempts institutions that award doctoral degrees in psychoanalysis from the requirement to be accredited by a U.S. Department of Education-recognized accreditor. I am not convinced that conferring special treatment on this one subset of professionals is warranted, when other means exist to comply with state law. Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0005088