BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 2617
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 9, 2012

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                 AB 2617 (Blumenfield) - As Amended:  April 23, 2012 

          Policy Committee:                              Education 
          Vote:7-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          No     Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction 
          (SPI), on or before May 31, 2012, and in cooperation with the 
          State Board of Education and the Legislative Analyst Office, to 
          examine the adequacy of funding for dropout recovery programs in 
          the state.  Further requires the SPI to publish a report with 
          recommendations.  Specifically, this bill:  

          Requires the SPI to review successful dropout recovery programs 
          in other states and include the following: 

          1)An inventory of existing dropout recovery programs. 
          2)The effectiveness of these programs.  
          3)The funding streams used for purposes of these programs.  
          4)The types of services that these programs provide.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          GF costs likely between $250,000 and $450,000 to the SPI to 
          complete a report to determine the adequacy of funding for 
          dropout programs in the state.  The requirements of this bill 
          would likely necessitate the SPI to contract out to complete 
          this report.  For example, this measure requires the report to 
          include information on the effectiveness of dropout recovery 
          programs.  In order to meet this requirement, outcome measures 
          would need to be developed and field research would likely need 
          to be conducted.  

           COMMENTS

            1)Purpose  .  According to the California Dropout Research Project 








                                                                  AB 2617
                                                                  Page  2

            report: The Economic Losses of High School Dropouts in 
            California (Belfield and Levin, August 2007), California 
            experiences $46.4 billion in total economic losses from each 
            cohort of 120,000 20- year-olds who never complete high 
            school. This is the equivalent of 2.9% of the annual state 
            gross product. The authors state that the average high school 
            graduate earns $290,000 more over a lifetime than a high 
            school dropout and pays $100,000 more in federal, state, and 
            local taxes. Likewise, more the two-thirds of high school 
            dropouts will use food stamps during their working lifetime 
            and a high school graduate is 68% less likely to be on any 
            welfare program. 

            According to the author, "Students who drop out of high school 
            do so at great cost to themselves and to the community. A 
            number of states have developed funding models to encourage 
            schools to recover students who have dropped out. California 
            has worked to prevent dropouts, but has not made significant 
            efforts to reengage actual dropouts.  By incentivizing dropout 
            recovery, California can provide schools and districts the 
            resources to recover out-of-school youth and bring substantial 
            growth to the state's economy and to the students' 
            communities. AB 2617 would take an important first step to 
            measure the effective of California's dropout recovery 
            programs, and bring focus to this underserved community."


           2)Background  .  K-12 pupils have several alternative education 
            options available to them other than traditional public 
            schools, including independent study, continuation education, 
            community day schools, juvenile court schools, and dropout 
            recovery schools.  Many of these alternative education options 
            have specified requirements that cause the pupil to attend one 
            of these programs.  For example, pupils in the criminal 
            justice system are educated in a juvenile court school.  

            AB 180 (Carter), Chapter 669, Statutes of 2011, defines 
            "dropout recovery high school" as a high school offering 
            instruction in grades 9-12 in which 50% or more of its pupils 
            are designated as dropouts pursuant to the exit and withdrawal 
            codes developed by the State Department of Education (SDE), 
            and which provides instruction in partnership with any of the 
            following: 

             a)   The federal Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). 








                                                                  AB 2617
                                                                  Page  3

             b)   Federally affiliated Youthbuild programs. 
             c)   Federal job corps training or instruction provide 
               pursuant to a memorandum of understanding with the federal 
               provider. 
             d)   The California Conservation Corp (CCC) or local 
               conservation corps certified by the CCC, as specified. 

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916) 
          319-2081