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