BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1059
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 14, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Jose Medina, Chair
SB
1059 (Monning) - As Amended April 18, 2016
[Note: This bill is double referred to the Assembly Veterans'
Affairs Committee and will be heard as it relates to issues
under its jurisdiction.]
SENATE VOTE: 36-0
SUBJECT: Postsecondary education: Title 38 awards
SUMMARY: Would authorize unaccredited law schools, as
specified, to participate in federal veteran's education
benefits. Specifically, this bill:
1)Would authorize an institution that obtains and provides
evidence to the California State Approving Agency for
Veteran's Education (CSAAVE) that it has been "accredited" by
the Committee of Bar Examiners, to receive approval from
CSAAVE for participation in Title 38 veteran's education
benefits, provided the institution does both of the following:
a) Provides disclosures to applicants of the school who are
SB 1059
Page 2
eligible for federal Title 38 awards of the institution's
tuition costs, refund policies, class sizes, number of
faculty, attrition rates, bar passage data, and employment
outcomes of graduates; and,
b) Is in compliance with all applicable CSAAVE rules and
regulations and is in good standing with the Committee of
Bar Examiners.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires the Committee of Bar Examiners (CBE) of the State Bar
of California to be responsible for the approval, regulation,
and oversight of degree-granting law schools, as specified;
and provides, among other outlined requirements, a person that
is authorized to practice law in California to complete an
educational component, which can be met through any of the
following (Business and Professions Code 6060 et. seq.):
a) Receipt of a juris doctor degree or a bachelor of laws
degree by a law school accredited by the CBE or by the
American Bar Association (ABA).
b) Studied law diligently and in good faith for at least
four years in any of the following manners:
i) 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.
ii) In a law office in this state and under the personal
SB 1059
Page 3
supervision of a member of the State Bar of California
who is, and for at least the last five years continuously
has been, engaged in the active practice of law. It is
the duty of the supervising attorney to render any
periodic reports to the examining committee as the
committee may require.
iii) In the chambers and under the personal supervision
of a judge of a court of record of this state. It is the
duty of the supervising judge to render any periodic
reports to the examining committee as the committee may
require.
iv) By instruction in law from 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.
v) By any combination of the aforementioned methods.
2)Requires CSAAVE, a federally funded agency that operates under
an annual reimbursement contract with the United States
Veteran's Affairs (VA), to review, evaluate and approve
educational and training programs for veteran's benefits.
Among other requirements for approval by CSAAVE, California
law requires an institution which grants academic degrees to
be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the U.S.
Department of Education (USDE). (Education Code Sections
67100, 67101, 67102).
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. Negligible fiscal impact according to
the Senate Rule 28.8.
SB 1059
Page 4
COMMENTS: Background. In response to concerns that
unscrupulous for-profit colleges were targeting veteran students
in order to access federal Title 38 education benefits, and
leaving students with high debt levels and low-value degrees or
certificates, the Legislature enacted AB 2099 (Frazier), Chapter
676, Statutes of 2014.
AB 2099 required colleges approved by CSAAVE to (1) be
accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the USDE, if
the institution grants academic degrees; (2) disclose
information regarding licensure examination passage rates to
prospective students, if applicable; and, (3) to be approved by
the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (thereby making
their students eligible for a series of consumer protections,
including disclosures, complaint resolution, and access to a
tuition recovery fund) if the institution is a for-profit
college.
Purpose of this bill. According to the author, most law schools
in California are approved by the ABA, which is a
USDE-recognized accrediting agency. Due to the cost-prohibitive
nature of ABA's approval requirements, 19 law schools in
California, both non-profit and for-profit, have instead opted
to become accredited by the CBE. According to the author,
CBE-accredited law schools tend to attract a different student
population, including older, working students, students with
families, or those seeking a second career and require part-time
night courses in order to achieve a juris doctorate. The author
notes, as further outlined below, CBE-accreditation provides for
review and oversight of quality standards. CBE, however, is not
recognized by the USDE, and therefore CBE-accredited
institutions do not met the CSAAVE accreditation requirements
established in AB 2099. This bill would authorize
CBE-accredited law schools to be approved by CSAAVE for purposes
of Title 38 veterans' education benefits.
SB 1059
Page 5
CBE accreditation requirements. CBE-accreditation of law
schools is governed by Division 2, Accredited Law School Rules,
of Title 4, the Admissions and Educational Standards. These
Standards and their implementing Guidelines provide for the
governance, administration, curriculum requirements, and
academic and admission policies with which a school must comply.
The Standards and Guidelines include all of the following
provisions and requirements:
1)Acknowledgement that CBE does not intervene in disputes
between a student and law school. However, CBE retains
complaints about a law school and considers those complaints
in assessing the law school's compliance with the rules.
2)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).
3)Application requirements and procedures, including an
inspection visit for every applicant for accreditation in
order to verify the information submitted by the school. The
team inspecting the institution must provide an inspection
report.
4)Standards governing CBE-accredited law schools covering
institutional integrity, governance, deans and faculty,
educational and scholastic standards, admissions, libraries,
financial resources, and records.
5)Institutions are required to exceed a minimum cumulative bar
pass rate (MPR), which is currently set at 40%. According to
information on the CBE website, two institutions do not meet
the MPR: Southern California Institute of Law has an MPR of
25.32, and Pacific Coast University School of Law has a pass
rate of 28.20.
6)An annual compliance report is required. Institutions are
SB 1059
Page 6
also subject to periodic inspection and are required to submit
a self-study prior to a periodic inspection.
7)Rules also require notification to CBE of a major change,
which includes various changes in the academic program, change
of location, ownership, name, from a for-profit to non-profit,
or other change as outlined.
8)Noncompliance actions by CBE can include termination of
accreditation; schools are provided a hearing and appeal
process prior to accreditation termination.
Bar rates by law school type. The following table represents
the pass rates for the general bar examination, by law school
type, for the July 2015 bar examination.
--------------------------------------------------
| First-Timers | Repeaters | All Takers |
| | | |
| | | |
--------------------------------------------------
|---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------|
| |Took |Pass | Pass |Took |Pass | Pass |Took |Pass | Pass |
| | | | Rate | | | Rate | | | Rate |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
|---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------|
|ABA-Appro|3535 |2411 | 68.2% |823 |194 | 23.6% |4358 |2605 | 59.8% |
|ved | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
|---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------|
|CBE-Accre|335 |71 | 21.2% |469 |37 | 7.9% |804 |108 | 13.4% |
|dited | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
SB 1059
Page 7
| | | | | | | | | | |
|---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------|
|CBE-Unacc|73 |16 | 21.9% |207 |15 | 7.2% |280 |31 | 11.0% |
|redited | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure requirements. This bill would require, for purposes
of CSAAVE-approval, CBE-accredited law schools to provide
specified disclosures to applicants of the school who are
eligible for federal Title 38 awards. Committee staff
recommends this provision be amended to require this disclosure
be provided to all prospective students. Specified disclosures
contained in this bill include tuition, refund policies, class
sizes, number of faculty, attrition rates, bar passage data, and
employment outcomes of graduates. However, language in the bill
does not specify how this data would be calculated. Committee
staff understands the author's intent is that data would be
reported consistent with the reporting requirements contained in
SB 1281 (Block), currently pending in the Assembly Judiciary
Committee, which would amend the Business and Professions Code
to require disclosure from all non-ABA approved law schools.
Committee staff recommends incorporating and/or cross
referencing those reporting definitions and requirements in the
Education Code section amended by this bill.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Alton & Allen, Inc.
SB 1059
Page 8
American G.I. Forum of California
AMVETS-Department of California
Association of California Accredited Law Schools
California Association of County Veterans Service Officers
California State University, Monterey Bay
Cal Northern School of Law
City of Seaside, California - Office of the Mayor
Hartnell Community College District
Law Office of Michael Sampson
Lincoln Law School of Sacramento
Monterey College of Law
Monterey County Business Council
Panetta Institute for Public Policy
SB 1059
Page 9
Trinity Law School
Veterans Tranisition Center of Monterey County
VFW-Department of California
13 Individuals
Opposition
None on File
Analysis Prepared by:Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960