BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 42| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- VETO Bill No: SB 42 Author: Liu (D) Amended: 9/2/15 Vote: 21 SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 8-0, 3/25/15 AYES: Liu, Huff, Block, Hancock, Leyva, Mendoza, Pan, Vidak SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 5/28/15 AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza NOES: Nielsen SENATE FLOOR: 38-1, 6/1/15 AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk NOES: Nielsen NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner SENATE FLOOR: 38-0, 9/10/15 AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Monning, Moorlach, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Runner, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk NO VOTE RECORDED: Mitchell, Morrell ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-4, 9/8/15 - See last page for vote SUBJECT: Postsecondary education: Office of Higher Education Performance and Accountability SB 42 Page 2 SOURCE: Author DIGEST: This bill establishes the Office of Higher Education Performance and Accountability as the statewide postsecondary coordination and planning entity, outlines its responsibilities, functions and authorities, and establishes an advisory board to the office (comprised of legislative appointees) to examine and make recommendations regarding its functions and operations, and to review and comment on the office's recommendations to the Governor and Legislature. ANALYSIS: Existing law: 1)Establishes the CPEC to be responsible for coordinating public, independent, and private postsecondary education in California and to provide independent policy analysis and recommendations to the Legislature and the Governor on postsecondary education policy. (Education Code § 66900 et. seq.) 2)Prescribes the composition of CPEC to include the following 17 members: a) One representative from each of the following bodies: i) The University of California (UC) Regents. ii) The California State University (CSU) Trustees. iii) The California Community Colleges (CCC) Board of Governors. iv) The Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. b) The chair or designee of the Council for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education. c) The President or designee of the State Board of SB 42 Page 3 Education. d) Nine representatives of the general public, with three appointed by the Governor, three by the Senate Rules Committee, and three by the Speaker of the Assembly. e) Two student representatives. (EC § 66901) This bill establishes the OHEPA as the statewide postsecondary education planning and coordination entity. It: 1)Establishes the OHEPA within the Governor's Office and: a) Places the OHEPA under the direct control of an Executive Director appointed by the Governor and subject to Senate confirmation. b) Provides that the Executive Director is responsible for all duties, powers, and responsibilities vested in the OHEPA, including contracting for relevant professional or consultant services c) Requires the Director to appoint any staff positions authorized by the Governor. 2)Establishes an Advisory Board to the OHEPA, and: a) Requires that the Board: i) Meet at least quarterly, ii) Be subject to open meeting requirements. SB 42 Page 4 iii) Review and comment on any recommendations made by the OHEPA to the Governor and the Legislature. iv) Develop an annual report on the condition of California higher education. v) Issue an annual performance review of the Director. b) Provides that Board members shall serve without compensation, except reimbursement for expenses. c) Prescribes its membership as follows: i) Three members with experience in postsecondary education appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules; ii) Three members with experience in postsecondary education appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly; and, iii) The chair of the Senate Committee on Education and the chair of the Assembly Committee on Higher Education to serve as ex officio members. 3)Requires the OHEPA to actively seek input from and consult with the advisory board and higher education segments and stakeholders, as appropriate, in the conduct of its duties and responsibilities. 4)Declares that the OHEPA exists for the purpose of advising the Governor, the Legislature and other appropriate government officials and institutions of postsecondary education and SB 42 Page 5 outlines its functions and responsibilities. It: a) Requires, through its use of information and its analytic capacity, that it inform the identification and periodic revision of state goals and priorities for higher education consistent with the existing goals and metrics outlined in statute by SB 195 (Liu, Chapter 367, Statutes of 2013) and in the 2013-14 and 2014-15 Budget Acts, and that it biennially evaluate both statewide and institutional performance in relation to these goals and priorities. b) Requires that it review and make recommendations regarding cross-segmental and interagency initiatives and programs in areas that include, but are not limited to, efficiencies in instructional delivery, financial aid, transfer, and workforce coordination. c) Requires that it advise the Legislature and the Governor regarding the need for, and location of, new institutions and campuses of public higher education. d) Requires that it review proposals by the public segments for new programs, as specified, and make recommendations regarding those proposals to the Legislature and the Governor. e) Requires that it act as a clearinghouse for postsecondary education information and as a primary source of information for the Legislature, the Governor, and other agencies. f) Requires that it develop and maintain a comprehensive database that ensures data compatibility, supports longitudinal studies, is compatible with K-12 data systems, provides Internet access to data for the sectors of higher SB 42 Page 6 education in order to support statewide, segmental and individual campus educational research needs. g) Requires that it review all proposals for changes in eligibility pools for admission to public institutions and segments of postsecondary education and that it periodically conduct eligibility studies. h) Requires that it manage data systems and maintain programmatic, policy, and fiscal expertise to receive and aggregate information reported by the institutions of higher education in this state. 5)Authorizes the OHEPA to require the governing boards and the institutions of public postsecondary education to submit data to the office on plans, programs, costs, student selection and retention, enrollments, and other specified information, and requires the Office to furnish information concerning these matters to the Legislature and Governor as requested by them. 6)Requires the OHEPA to annually report to the Legislature and the Governor regarding its progress in achieving the aforementioned objectives and responsibilities by December 31st of ear year. 7)Requires the LAO to review and report to the Legislature regarding the performance of the OHEPA in fulfilling its functions and responsibilities.by January 1, 2020. 8)Sunsets these provisions on January 1, 2021. Comments SB 42 Page 7 1)Need for the bill. California's education and workforce needs cannot be addressed by any single segment. According to the author, the state's approach to higher education must become more comprehensive if it is to ensure state-level workforce needs and priorities are being met. Numerous reports, including legislative reviews of the Master Plan for Higher Education and more recent reports from higher education experts, have called for California to establish a central higher education body. This central body is an important element of the state's ability to honor its promise of affordable, high quality postsecondary education for all high school graduates and adults who could benefit from instruction offered at California's colleges and universities. Without such an entity, California cannot systematically plan to address the current and future needs of all its students and the overall economy. This bill represents the next necessary step in establishing greater clarity and accountability for our higher education system's performance in meeting the statewide goals for postsecondary education (SB 195, Liu, Chapter 367, Statutes of 2013) of equity, access, and success; alignment with workforce needs; and the effective and efficient use of resources. This bill reflects national trends, recommendations from several recent reports, and recommendations by the Legislative Analyst. 2)Related reports/recommendations. A number of recent reports have cited the need for an independent body to steward a public agenda for higher education. These include the following: a) Improving Higher Education Oversight (Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), January 2012) - In this report, the LAO raised concerns that in the wake of CPEC's closure, the future of higher education oversight was unclear. The LAO noted that while the public segments had stepped in to assume some roles previously performed by CPEC, they expressed concerns about how institutional and public interests would be balanced. The LAO also noted that while CPEC's performance had been problematic, several important functions performed by CPEC had been lost. Among other SB 42 Page 8 things, the LAO recommended the Legislature re-establish an independent oversight body and increase the body's independence from the public higher education segments, assign the body with limited and clear responsibilities, and develop a more unified governing board appointment process. b) Charting a Course for California's Colleges: State Leadership in Higher Education (California Competes, February 2014) - The report noted that California is one of only two states nationwide (the other being Michigan) without comprehensive oversight or coordination of higher education. The report opined that the state needs an independent agency to develop a public agenda for higher education that links the needs of the state's economy to the degree attainment outputs of the state's institutions. Further, that independence means that the entity would not have representatives of the segments on its decision-making body to allow it to maintain its impartiality. Finally, the report recommended that the state's priorities be focused on the goals of access to quality programs and outcomes from those programs; that the entity should be a coordinating agency and the segments should remain autonomous; and that its primary functions should be planning and policy development, data collection, analysis and monitoring, and administration of state financial aid programs. c) A New Vision for California Higher Education: A Model Public Agenda (Institute for Higher Education Leadership and Policy, March 2014) - The report highlights the challenges faced by California and offers a model public agenda centered on these goals: addressing access and attainment; equity, affordability and efficiency; and state policy leadership. As regards policy leadership, the report opines that this function is best filled by an executive branch entity, such as a California Office of Higher Education, that reports to the Governor. The responsibilities of this office would be to, among other things, provide policy leadership and advise the Governor on higher education budget and policy development, administer financial aid programs, manage a coordinated SB 42 Page 9 higher education data system that allows for analysis of enrollments, progression, and completion across all public segments, manage a higher education accountability process, and conduct analysis of goals and targets to assess how well regional efforts aggregate to meet statewide goals. FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.:YesLocal: Yes According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, in its last full year of operation, CPEC's General Fund operating budget was $1.9 million for the equivalent of 18 positions. The new office established in this bill would likely have a somewhat smaller budget. In addition, the office would incur one-time information technology costs and other start-up costs in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars. The three public higher education segments report the following costs to work with the new office and to respond to data requests: 1)UC. Ongoing costs of $50,000 for one-half position. 2)CSU. Ongoing costs of $110,000 for one position. 3)CCC. Estimates ongoing costs of up to $440,000 for four positions, based on prior workload demands involving CPEC. SUPPORT: (Verified11/9/15) California Competes California Faculty Association Campaign for College Opportunity Little Hoover Commission OPPOSITION: (Verified11/9/15) SB 42 Page 10 None received GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE: I am returning Senate Bill 42 without my signature. This bill would establish an Office of Higher Education Performance and Accountability to advise the Governor and Legislature on state goals and priorities for higher education. The bill would also create an advisory board consisting of legislators and others to be appointed by the Legislature to annually review the performance of this office, which would sunset by the end of 2020. The call to improve postsecondary educational outcomes is laudable. The goals established by SB 195 in 2013 - improving access and success, aligning degrees and credentials with the state's economic, workforce and civic needs, and ensuring the effective and efficient use of resources - are still important measures that should guide us in developing higher education policies for the state. While there is much work to be done to improve higher education, I am not convinced we need a new office and an advisory board, especially of the kind this bill proposes, to get the job done. ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-4, 9/8/15 AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd, Frazier, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, SB 42 Page 11 Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins NOES: Beth Gaines, Gatto, Levine, Melendez NO VOTE RECORDED: Chávez, Dahle, Eggman Prepared by:Kathleen Chavira / ED. / (916) 651-4105 11/13/15 16:03:40 **** END ****