BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Senator Jerry Hill, Chair 2015 - 2016 Regular Bill No: SB 1059 Hearing Date: April 4, 2016 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Author: |Monning | |----------+------------------------------------------------------| |Version: |February 16, 2016 | ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- |Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes | ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Consultant|Sarah Mason | |: | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Postsecondary education: Title 38 awards SUMMARY: Exempts law schools accredited by the State Bar of California Committee on Bar Examiners from requirements that they be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education in order to receive Title 38 veterans benefits. Existing law: 1) Establishes the Title 38 Funding Program (Title 38 Program) under the administration of the California State Approving Agency for Veterans Education (CSAAVE) and requires CSAAVE to approve qualifying institutions desiring to enroll veterans or persons eligible for Title 38 awards. In order to be a qualifying institution, requires an institution offering degrees to comply with the following requirements: a) Provide information (including via a website link) on where to access California license examination passage rates for the most recent available year from graduates of its undergraduate programs leading to employment for which passage of a California licensing examination is required, if that data is electronically available through the website of a California licensing or regulatory agency. b) Provide evidence of accreditation by an accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of SB 1059 (Monning) Page 2 of ? Education (USDE) of the institution and of all degree programs. For unaccredited degree granting institutions participating in the Title 38 Program as of January 1, 2015, obtain and provide evidence to CSAAVE of its candidacy or preaccreditation status, with an accrediting agency recognized by USDE by January 1, 2016 in order to maintain eligibility for the program and obtain and provide evidence to CSAAVE of accreditation from the accrediting agency with which it had candidacy or preaccreditation status by January 1, 2017 in order to maintain eligibility. (Education Code (EDC) §§ 67100, 67101, 67102) 1) Authorizes the Board of Trustees of the State Bar of California (Board) to establish an examining committee (Committee of Bar Examiners, CBE) to examine all applicants for admission to practice law, administer the requirements for admission to practice law and certify to the Supreme Court for admission to the bar those applicants who fulfill the requirements. (Business and Professions Code (BPC § 6046) 2) Provides that subject to the approval of the Board, the CBE may adopt such reasonable rules and regulations as may be necessary or advisable for the purposes of making effective the qualifications for admission to the practice of law in California. (BPC § 6047) 3) In order to be to be certified to the Supreme Court for admission and a license to practice law, requires a person, who has not been admitted to practice law in a sister state, United States jurisdiction, possession, territory, or dependency or in a foreign country to, among other requirements: (BPC § 6060) a) Before beginning the study of law, complete at least two years of college work, attained in apparent intellectual ability the equivalent of at least two years of college work by taking any examinations in subject matters and achieving the scores as are prescribed by the CBE. b) Register with the CBE as a law student within 90 days after beginning the study of law. SB 1059 (Monning) Page 3 of ? c) Have been conferred a juris doctor (J.D.) degree or a bachelor of laws degree by a State Bar accredited law school or American Bar Association (ABA) accredited law school or studied law diligently and in good faith for at least four years in a law school that is authorized or approved to confer professional degrees and requires classroom attendance of its students for a minimum of 270 hours a year or demonstrates education, experience and qualifications based on a legal education in a foreign state or country or studied law in a law office in California and under the personal supervision of a member of the State Bar who is, and for at least the last five years continuously has been, engaged in the active practice of law or studied law in the chambers and under the personal supervision of a judge of a court of record of this state or studied law at a correspondence law school authorized or approved to confer professional degrees by this state, which requires 864 hours of preparation and study per year for four years or any combination of these methods. 1) Requires the CBE to adopt rules for the regulation and oversight of unaccredited law schools that are required to be authorized to operate as a business in California and to have an administrative office in California, including correspondence schools, that are not State Bar accredited or ABA accredited with the goal of ensuring consumer protection and a legal education at an affordable cost. (BPC § 6046.7) 2) Provides that the CBE is responsible for the approval, regulation, and oversight of degree-granting law schools that exclusively offer bachelor's, master's, or doctorate degrees in law, such as a J.D. (BPC § 6060.7) 3) Requires a law school that is not State Bar accredited to provide students with a disclosure statement signed by the student containing all of the following information: a) The school is not accredited. However, in addition, if the school has been approved by other agencies, that fact may be so stated. SB 1059 (Monning) Page 4 of ? b) Where the school has not been in operation for 10 years, the assets and liabilities of the school unless the school has had prior affiliation with another school that has been in operation more than 10 years, has been under the control of another school that has been in operation more than 10 years, or has been a successor to a school in operation more than 10 years. c) The number and percentage of students who have taken and who have passed the first-year law student's examination (Baby Bar) and the final bar examination in the previous five years, or since the establishment of the school, whichever time is less, which shall include only those students who have been certified by the school to take the examinations. d) The number of legal volumes in the library. e) The educational background, qualifications, and experience of the faculty, and whether or not the faculty members and administrators (e.g., the dean) are members of the California State Bar. f) The ratio of faculty to students for the previous five years or since the establishment of the school, whichever time is less. g) Whether or not the school has applied for accreditation, and, if so, the date of application and whether or not that application has been withdrawn, is currently pending, or has been finally denied. h) That the education provided by the school may not satisfy the requirements of other states for the practice of law. (BPC § 6061) 1) Exempts law schools that are ABA accredited and State Bar accredited from the California Private Postsecondary Education Act (Act) and oversight by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE). (EDC § 94874 (g)) 2) Requires unaccredited degree granting institutions currently approved by BPPE to submit an accreditation plan to the Bureau by July 1, 2015, to obtain preaccreditation by July 1, SB 1059 (Monning) Page 5 of ? 2017, to obtain accreditation by July 1, 2020, and to comply with various student disclosure and visiting committee review requirements. (EDC § 94885.1) 3) Prohibits an institution approved by BPPE from offering an associate, baccalaureate, master's, or doctoral degree without disclosing to prospective students prior to enrollment whether the institution or the degree program is unaccredited and any known limitation of the degree, including, but not limited to, whether a graduate of the degree program will be eligible to sit for the applicable licensure exam in California and other states, a statement that reads: "A degree program that is unaccredited or a degree from an unaccredited institution is not recognized for some employment positions, including, but not limited to, positions with the State of California." And that a student enrolled in an unaccredited institution is not eligible for federal financial aid programs. (EDC § 94897 (p)) This bill: Exempts law schools that are State Bar accredited from having to receive accreditation by an accrediting agency recognized by USDE in order to participate in the Title 38 Program. FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed "fiscal" by Legislative Counsel. COMMENTS: 1.Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the Association of California Accredited Law Schools . According to the Author, SB 1059 will reestablish the ability of California law schools that are State Bar accredited to receive GI Benefits from veteran students seeking a legal education. The Author states that these schools have been eligible to serve veteran students for over four decades, until an oversight in legislation in 2014 which rendered the schools ineligible to receive Title 38 benefits. The Author states that the pool of 19 schools which are not ABA accredited tend to serve a student population made up of older, working students with families. According to the Author, the ABA's stringent SB 1059 (Monning) Page 6 of ? facility and faculty requirements for accreditation are often cost-prohibitive for these smaller, regionally based law schools and notes that as a result, these schools are subsequently forced to seek accreditation through either private accrediting bodies or the State Bar. The Author is concerned that without a correction to the law, working veterans and veterans with families will be restricted from attending a law school in their region. The Author cites the example of Monterey College of Law, and its branch in San Luis Obispo, as the only options for veterans who want to pursue a legal education on the Central Coast and would not be able to without the necessary amendment to current law contained in this bill. According to the Author, the Monterey area has a huge veteran population due the number of military installations in the county, and veterans seeking a local and less-expensive option for a legal education will be forced to uproot their lives and families, and move to an area where a more expensive ABA accredited institution or one accredited by a USDE recognized accrediting agency that can accept their Title 38 benefits. The Author also notes the experience of veterans attending Northern School of Law based in Chico which is one of the only law schools in the area from Sacramento to the Oregon border that can accommodate the population of students balancing legal studies with work and other aspects of their life. The Author notes that veterans who live in Northern California would almost certainly be forced to move to receive a legal education, if this school lost its Title 38 eligibility. 2.Title 38. The GI Bill, signed in 1944 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt gave "servicemen and women the opportunity of resuming their education or technical training after discharge, or of taking a refresher or retrainer course, not only without tuition charge up to $500 per school year, but with the right to receive a monthly living allowance while pursuing their studies." Educational benefits are currently available both to active duty personnel and veterans through two key programs: the Tuition Assistance program administered and run by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics during FY 2011, 923,836 U.S. service members received over $10 billion in assistance from educational benefit programs administered by SB 1059 (Monning) Page 7 of ? the VA, with 88.420, or 9.6 percent, living in California. The former Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education (BPPVE) used to serve as the approval agency for California institutions attended by veterans using Title 38 monies under a contract with the VA. When BPPVE expired, these duties were transferred to the California Department of Veterans Affairs (Cal-Vets) which now provides oversight of postsecondary education programs through CSAAVE. CSAAVE is federally funded and operates under an annual reimbursement contract with the VA. In its role as the approval agency, the primary function of CSAAVE is to review, evaluate and approve quality educational and training programs for veteran's benefits. CSAAVE is intended to approve colleges and universities, vocational schools, business schools, professional schools, and licensing and certification training and tests, all of which must lead to an educational, professional or vocational objective. Stemming from concerns about the experience of veterans at private for-profit institutions and multiple reports and hearings highlighting false and predatory advertising to veterans and the potential lack of accountability for the millions of dollars administered by the federal Veterans Administration (VA) and Department of Defense (DOD) spent at private postsecondary education institutions in California if schools are not regulated, the Legislature took steps in 2014 to increase accountability and program quality of institutions receiving Title 38 monies. AB 2099 (Frazier, Chapter 676, Statutes of 2014) stipulated new Title 38 veterans funding eligibility standards for postsecondary institutions in California. All institutions now must provide license examination passage rates to students, and institutions that offer degrees must have institutional and programmatic accreditation in order to receive Title 38 monies. The bill also provided that, in order for a postsecondary institution to be determined eligible to accept Title 38 monies, determined by CSAAVE, the postsecondary institution, whether it offers degrees or not, must either be a public school, a nonprofit school, approved by the Bureau or be regionally accredited. SB 1247 (Lieu, Chapter 840, Statutes of 2014) prohibited an institution, beginning January 1, 2016, from claiming an exemption from the California Private Postsecondary Education Act and Bureau oversight if the SB 1059 (Monning) Page 8 of ? institution is approved to participate in the Title 38 Program. 3.Law School Approval by the State Bar. Most law schools in California are approved by the ABA, which also deems them State Bar accredited. The State Bar also "accredits" 20 law schools that are neither ABA accredited nor accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by USDE pursuant to rules adopted by the CBE and approved by the Board of the State Bar. The role of the State Bar in accrediting law schools goes back some 80 years when the Board first evaluated the program of legal education at "fixed-facility" law schools in the state at that time. Legislation in 1937, known as the Act Governing Admission to Practice, subsequently established the educational requirements for admission to the Bar which included graduation from a law school accredited by the CBE that required substantially the full-time of its students for three years, graduation from a law school accredited by the CBE that required only a portion of full-time students or studying law diligently and in good faith for at least four years. The Legislation also created the requirement that students who did not attend a CBE accredited law school, had to pass a preliminary examination as determined by the CBE during the course of their law studies. The State Bar enacted rules to implement the new authorities for the CBE, relying primarily on cumulative Bar passage rate of a specified percent to determine eligibility for State Bar accreditation. However, CBE also retained the option to grant accreditation, and could continue a law school's accreditation, even if the school did not meet the standard (60 percent was the last rate before CBE began relying on ABA passage rate requirements), if a law school could demonstrate that it was maintaining substantially the same standards of instruction, facilities for study, admission requirements, and curriculum as were maintained by CBE accredited law schools that met the CBE's cumulative Bar examination pass rate standard. CBE further attempted to enhance its accreditation standards beyond just reliance on cumulative Bar passage rate to include quantitative standards (that an accredited law school maintain a certain minimum number of books in its law library, employ a minimum of 3 full-time instructors, and admit no more than 10 percent of its student body as students who did not have at least two years of college education), but SB 1059 (Monning) Page 9 of ? was met with opposition from State Bar accredited law schools. CBE's final rules then required a CBE accredited law school to have an adequate library, have an adequately trained faculty devoting sufficient time to teaching and consultation with students to ensure adequate personal acquaintance and influence with the students and special students could constitute up to one-third of its enrollment. Concerns about the quality of the legal education being offered by California's unaccredited and correspondence law schools resulted in the adoption of a Supreme Court Rule (former Rule 957), which required unaccredited and correspondence law schools to register with CBE, comply with specified requirements, and file specified reports. Continuing concerns about the quality of education at unaccredited and correspondence law schools led to further study of this issue and a report recommending that only CBE and ABA school graduates be allowed to qualify to take the Bar examination, however the recommendation was never formally pursued in terms of statutory or CBE rules. The State Bar further found in the mid 1980s that some ABA-approved law schools and many CBE accredited law schools faced declining Bar examination pass rates, declining numbers of applicants for admission as well as serious financial problems. These State Bar accredited law schools were exempt from any other regulation and oversight in California. When the Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education Reform Act of 1989 (Former Act) took effect, only ABA approved law schools and State Bar law schools that were also WASC accredited were authorized to continue an exemption from state regulation. Beginning January 1, 1990, most State Bar accredited law schools were subject to concurrent regulation by the California Council for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education (Council) and the CBE. The Council promulgated regulations applicable to all private postsecondary institutions, including private law schools. The CBE and Council then worked together, given the role CBE had in accrediting law schools, to ensure that CBE focused on curriculum approval and content while the Council focused on student protections and fair business practices. State Bar accredited law schools were then specifically exempted from oversight under the BPPVE in 1997 in the Education Code through language that mirrors current BPC § 6060.7 referenced SB 1059 (Monning) Page 10 of ? above. When the Former Act and BPPVE expired, BPC § 6060.7 took effect and subsequently § 6046.7 gave CBE the express authority, on and after January 1, 2008, to regulate and oversee unaccredited law schools, including correspondence law schools, that are neither ABA or State Bar accredited. The current rules governing State Bar accreditation of law schools, which took effect in 2009, are contained in Division 2, Accredited Law School Rules of Title 4, of the Admissions and Educational Standards and provide the guidelines for the governance, administration, curriculum requirements, academic and admission policies a school must abide by. They include: Acknowledgement that CBE does not intervene in disputes between a student and law school. The ability of CBE to provide information publicly, upon written request (Rule 4.108 outlines that certain portions of applications, summaries of inspection reports and portions of annual reports may be made available upon written request). Application requirements, including an inspection visit. Annual compliance report requirements. Self-study prior to a periodic inspection. Notification to CBE of a major change. Actions taken for noncompliance and action for termination of accreditation. 1.Evaluating Institutional and Program Quality. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Under federal law, USDE establishes the general standards 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. While accredited and unaccredited education and training programs are currently allowed to operate in California, only accredited institutions are authorized to participate in SB 1059 (Monning) Page 11 of ? federal and state financial aid programs. Degrees earned from institutions that are not accredited additionally may limit a student's career options and opportunities to receive reciprocity from other state licensing boards. There are two different types of accreditation, regional and national. Each of the six USDE-recognized regional accrediting agencies oversees public and the vast majority of non-profit private (independent) postsecondary educational institutions in the region it serves. California's regional accrediting agency is the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). National accreditation is not based on geography, but more focused to evaluate specific types of schools and colleges. For example, the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges examines career-focused programs. The Distance Education and Training Council accredits colleges that offer distance education. The idea behind national accreditation is 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 school in question. Accreditation is the accepted standard for educational degrees. Accrediting bodies, as pointed out in a 2013 report issued by the Legislative Analyst's Office, 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. While the accrediting process is not perfect, as highlighted by the unlawful activities of institutions accredited by some accrediting agencies, and does not focus on fair business practices that can impact a student's success, accreditation is designed to provide a baseline measure of the quality of a particularly educational program. To ensure protections for students attending educational and training programs in California, the Act provides that if an institution offers an educational program in a profession, occupation, trade, or career field that requires licensure in California, the institution must have educational program approval from the appropriate state licensing agency for any SB 1059 (Monning) Page 12 of ? student who completes that program to sit for any required licensure exam. The law is intended to deal with the issue of students completing an educational program specifically designed to prepare them for certain occupations that in reality may not meet any requirements for education required for licensure. In many instances, the BPPE approves institutions that may also be subject to program approval by other regulatory entities. The Board of Barbering and Cosmetology (BBC) for example, approves curriculum, facilities, equipment and textbooks for schools offering training programs for eventual licensees, but schools must also be approved by BPPE, as BBC has no statutory authority or experience to uphold student protections like disclosures and fair business practices. The California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC), which provides for voluntary certification of massage therapists in California, now requires applicants to have completed education at a school that is recognized by another state agency (most rely on BPPE) and is also approved by the CAMTC. While some boards and agencies are required to review the curriculum, and sometimes even the actual institutions offering programs, others require only BPPE approval in order to meet educational requirements to sit for licensure, certification or registration. The Bureau approves institutions that offer degrees or programs intended to lead to licensure or recognition where that regulatory agency has no formal role in providing institutional or programmatic approval. For example, the Board of Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric Technicians (BVNPT) staff grants approval to vocational nursing and psychiatric technician programs but does not have oversight of institutions offering these programs in terms of an ability to approve or disapprove a certain institution. The Board of Behavioral Sciences (BBS) accepts graduates with degrees from BPPE-approved institutions and programs to sit for licensure in some of the BBS' licensing categories. BBS does not require institutional accreditation by a USDE approved accrediting agency, nor does BBS have approval for the institutions and programs training its eventual licensees. The Board of Psychology also accepts graduates with degrees from BPPE-approved institutions to sit for licensure but has no approval over the schools and does not rely on an institutional accrediting agency to measure institutional quality. The Board of Registered Nursing (BRN), on the other SB 1059 (Monning) Page 13 of ? hand, has complete authority to regulate nursing schools in California, following years of extremely comprehensive standards BRN required for nursing schools, like the administration and organization of a program, faculty qualifications, faculty responsibilities, curriculum, clinical facilities and assurances of a procedure for resolving student grievances. However, some schools may offer a nursing program approved by BRN but that same school may also offer training programs in other professions, for which BPPE approval of that institution would still be required. ABA accredited and State Bar accredited law schools are specifically exempt from having to be approved by BPPE. Students attending law schools in California are not subject to any of the student protections under the Act and any recourse provided by the Act and Bureau oversight. 2.Related Legislation This Year. SB 1281 (Block) requires law schools that are not ABA approved to publicly disclose on its website, with a link on its home page under "Admissions" information the institution, including, among other items, outcomes for graduates and bar passage data. Requires the information to be complete, accurate and not misleading. ( Status: The bill is currently pending in the Senate Committee on Judiciary.) AB 1835 (Holden) exempts institutions that grant doctoral degrees in psychoanalysis from the provisions of the Act requiring unaccredited degree granting institutions to be accredited if all of the institution's students hold master's or doctoral degrees before enrollment in the institution and the institution has obtained accreditation from, or has submitted a self-study application to, the Accreditation Council for Psychoanalytic Education on or before July 1, 2017. ( Status: The bill is currently pending in the Assembly Committee on Higher Education.) AB 1996 (Gordon) exempts a nonprofit institution that is accredited by WASC, does not award degrees or diplomas, and is paid from state or federal student financial aid programs for fewer than 20 percent of its students who receive vocational training from the Act. ( Status: The bill is currently pending in the Assembly Committee on Higher Education.) SB 1059 (Monning) Page 14 of ? 3.Prior Related Legislation. SB 1247 (Lieu, Chapter 840, Statutes of 2014) prohibited an institution, beginning January 1, 2016, from claiming an exemption from the California Private Postsecondary Education Act and Bureau oversight if the institution is approved to participate in the Title 38 Program. AB 2099 (Frazier, Chapter 676, Statutes of 2014) stipulated new Title 38 veterans funding eligibility standards for postsecondary institutions in California. All institutions now must provide license examination passage rates to students, and institutions that offer degrees must have institutional and programmatic accreditation in order to receive Title 38 monies. The bill also provided that, in order for a postsecondary institution to be determined eligible to accept Title 38 monies, determined by CSAAVE, the postsecondary institution, whether it offers degrees or not, must either be a public school, a nonprofit school, approved by the Bureau or be regionally accredited. SB 1568 (Dunn, Chapter 534, Statutes of 2006) transferred regulation and oversight of unaccredited law schools and correspondence law schools from the BPPVE to the State Bar CBE. The bill also required correspondence law schools to be required to disclose their faculty-to-student ratio and their Baby Bar and general bar exam passage rates to prospective students in the same manner required of unaccredited schools. 4.Arguments in Support. The Association of California Accredited Law Schools (CALS), comprised of the State Bar accredited law schools, writes that this bill will cure the injustice and apparent unintended consequences of AB 2099 and notes that in order to become accredited, the schools must establish that their paramount objective is to provide a sound legal education. CALS notes that it certainly understands the need to monitor schools our veterans attend to ensure the education they are receiving is beneficial and cost effective and states that accreditation by the State Bar provides that assurance. According to CALS, its schools must maintain a sound program of legal education and adhere to carefully drawn rules that regulate all aspects of the institution. CALS states that working men and women, many of whom are veterans, are able to realize their aspirations because of these SB 1059 (Monning) Page 15 of ? programs located in areas unserved by other law schools and that are affordable and offer day and night programs. Cal Northern School of Law supports this bill and cites its 5-year cumulative bar passage rate of 82 percent, one of the highest pass rates out of all the State Bar accredited schools, noting that through its graduates' success, the school has demonstrated that a small school with dedicated faculty and motivated students can provide a quality legal education at a fraction of the cost of larger law programs and provide a benefit to the surrounding communities the school serves. Cal Northern School of Law believes that by not correcting the requirements in AB 2099, veterans are subject to harm by preventing them from using benefits to receive a quality legal education at a reasonable cost. According to Lincoln Law School of Sacramento , AB 2099 prevents veterans wishing to use their Title 38 benefits from attending the school and that since 2005, 30 students receiving Title 38 benefits have been enrolled, with seven of the nine who have graduated also passing the Bar, for a 77.7 percent passage rate. Lincoln Law School adds that its graduates have excelled in the legal field and that veterans attending the school are able to use their benefits there to further education and become successful members of the Bar. The Monterey Business Council supports this bill and states that it is crucial California veterans and their dependents continue to be eligible to use GI Bill education benefits to attend law schools accredited by the State Bar. The Monterey Business Council states that without SB 1059, for the first time in four decades, California veterans who live and work along the Central Coast wishing to pursue a graduate education in law will be forced to quit their jobs, move their families, and relocate out of the region in order to utilize the educational benefits they have earned. 5.Suggested Enhancements and Efforts. Law schools have come under scrutiny throughout the nation for high costs resulting in large amounts of student debt and low Bar passage rates. A 2015 Los Angeles Times investigation found that nearly 9 out of 10 students attending unaccredited law schools drop out and that many are unable to pass the Baby Bar, let alone complete the program to sit for the Bar examination. These SB 1059 (Monning) Page 16 of ? schools are not subject to Bar passage requirements, nor are required to meet program quality, student disclosure or student protection standards but have been eligible to enroll students utilizing Title 38 benefits. While the State Bar accreditation process may align with other standards used for verification of law school program quality and integrity, such as those by the ABA, the issue of student protections at law schools remains, as well as the ability of the State Bar to provide quality oversight of schools. The Author may wish to outline further criteria demonstrating program quality to define law schools eligible for continued participation in the Title 38 Program and may wish to include a sunset date on these schools' continued eligibility in order to allow the Legislature to further review the performance and level of quality oversight of these institutions receiving veterans financial aid benefits. The Committee may also wish to further evaluate the role for appropriate oversight of law schools that are not accredited by ABA or the State Bar, including whether students attending unaccredited law schools are deserving of protections and prevention from unlawful business practices within the Act. NOTE : Double-referral to Senate Committee on Rules, second. SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION: Support: Association of California Accredited Law Schools Cal Northern School of Law City of Seaside Mayor Ralph Rubio Leon Panetta, Panetta Institute for Public Policy Lincoln Law School of Sacramento Monterey Business Council Santa Cruz County Supervisor Ryan Coonerty Trinity Law School Numerous individuals Opposition: None on file as of March 30, 2016. SB 1059 (Monning) Page 17 of ? -- END --