BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 721
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 19, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Marty Block, Chair
SB 721 (Lowenthal) - As Amended: June 12, 2012
SENATE VOTE : 35-0
SUBJECT : California postsecondary education: state goals.
SUMMARY : Establishes statewide goals for guiding policy and
budget decisions in higher education and requires the
Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) to convene a working group to
develop metrics to measure progress toward those goals.
Specifically, this bill :
1)States legislative intent that budget and policy decisions
regarding higher education generally adhere to the following
goals:
a) Improve student access, which shall include, but not be
limited to, greater participation by demographic groups
that have historically participated at lower rates, greater
completion rates by all students, and improved outcomes for
graduates.
b) Better align the types of degrees and credentials with
the state's economic, workforce, and civic needs.
c) Ensure the effective and efficient use of resources in
order to increase high-quality postsecondary educational
outcomes and maintain affordability.
2)States legislative intent that metrics be identified and
defined in order to monitor the achievement of the goals in
(1) above that take into account the distinct missions of the
different segments of postsecondary education, and to
establish interim targets for those metrics be achieved by
2025.
3)Requires that metrics toward these goals and any recommended
interim targets for those metrics be developed with the
assistance of a working group to be convened by the LAO, as
follows:
SB 721
Page 2
a) The working group shall include representatives from the
postsecondary education segments, as specified; the
California Department of Education; the Department of
Finance (DOF); one to three members with expertise in state
accountability who are unaffiliated with any of the
segments of higher education; and other relevant state
agency representatives, as identified by the LAO.
b) The working group shall develop at least six and no more
than 12 measures derived from publicly available data
sources, and requires that these measures be able to be
disaggregated and reported by gender, race/ethnicity,
income, age group, and full-time/part-time enrollment,
where appropriate and applicable.
c) A report on the recommended metrics to be collected
shall be submitted by LAO, in consultation with DOF, and
reported to legislative policy and budget committees and
the Governor by January 31, 2013.
4)Requires the LAO to do the following:
a) Beginning September 30, 2013, to annually and publicly
report statewide performance on each of the measures
adopted by the Legislature.
b) Beginning January 2014, to annually report and present,
as part of the budget hearing process, its own assessment
of progress toward the statewide goals and recommendations
for legislative action. Specifically, it requires the LAO
to:
i) Assess the level of progress and outcomes achieved;
ii) Identify significant factors that may explain the
level of progress/outcomes; and,
iii) Identify higher education policy and funding issues
suggested by the measures for consideration by the
Governor and Legislature.
5)States that the segments of postsecondary education shall have
the opportunity to annually provide their own assessment of
progress toward achieving the goals specified in this bill.
SB 721
Page 3
6)Defines the segments of postsecondary education, for purposes
of the bill, to include the California Community Colleges
(CCC), the California State University (CSU), the University
of California (UC), the independent institutions of higher
education, as defined, and proprietary postsecondary
institutions.
7)Declares the Legislature's intent to:
a) Identify, define and formally adopt appropriate metrics,
based upon the LAO recommendations, to be used for the
purpose of monitoring progress toward the state goals.
b) Promote progress toward the goals through budget and
policy decisions within higher education.
c) Use the reporting system established per this bill's
provisions to help ensure the effective and efficient use
of state resources available to higher education.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the Donahoe Higher Education Act, which outlines
the laws under which postsecondary educational institutions
operate in California. (Education Code Title 3, Division 5,
Part 40)
2)Establishes, within the Donahoe Act, findings and declarations
based on the periodic review of the Master Plan for Higher
Education by the Legislature and declares the intent of the
Legislature to outline in statute, clear, concise, statewide
goals and outcomes for effective implementation of the Master
Plan, attuned to the public interest of the people and State
of California, and to expect the system as a whole and the
higher education segments to be accountable for attaining
those goals. Consistent with the spirit of the original master
plan and subsequent updates, it is the intent of the
Legislature that the governing boards be given ample
discretion in implementing policies and programs necessary to
attain those goals. (Education Code � 66003)
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, costs are minor and absorbable. However, there could
be increased General Fund cost pressure to the extent the
metrics change funding priorities.
SB 721
Page 4
COMMENTS : Background . According to the Public Policy
Institute of California (PPIC), while the demand for workers
with a bachelor's degree has grown significantly in recent
decades, the share of workers with a college degree has only
increased from 28% in 1990 to 34% in 2006. PPIC estimates that,
without a dramatic increase in college attendance and
graduation, by 2025 only 37% of workers and 35% of all adults in
California will have a college degree. Yet, the projected
demand for college-educated workers will be equivalent to 41% of
California workers. PPIC estimates that California needs to
produce almost one million more college educated workers by
2025.
Need for this bill . According to the author, "The current
fiscal climate makes it especially important that we be clear
about our priorities for the use of the public funding we
provide to our institutions. If we are clear about the goals
and the measures, we can then be clearer about the budget and
policy decisions necessary to support our higher education
system in meeting our goals." To this end, this bill
establishes three statewide goals and a process for measuring
how institutions are meeting these goals through specific
metrics. The metrics would be developed by a workgroup that
includes the institutions, relevant state entities, and national
experts in accountability systems, as determined by the LAO.
National perspective . Nationwide, states are struggling with
ways to meet the growing workforce skills demand. There is a
growing national trend toward state accountability systems for
higher education, using different approaches and indicators.
Nearly all states have some form of mandated statewide
accountability program for higher education. California has
relied upon segmental accountability, reflecting the missions
and functions outlined in the California Master Plan for Higher
Education. None of these efforts combine to measure how
California's students perform as a whole nor does California
engage in a statewide approach to higher education policy
planning.
The National Governors Association, a bipartisan organization of
the nation's governors that identifies priority issues and deals
collectively with matters of public policy and governance at the
state and national levels, recently adopted its "Complete to
Compete Initiative" that proposes to:
SB 721
Page 5
1)Raise national awareness of the need to increase college
completion and productivity.
2)Create a set of common higher education completion and
productivity measures for governors to use to monitor state
progress.
3)Develop a series of best practices and a list of policy
actions governors can take to achieve an increased college
completion.
4)Provide grants to states to design policies and programs that
increase college completion and improve higher education
productivity.
California perspective . The Legislature has been considering
statewide higher education goals for a decade, beginning with a
study commissioned by the Senate in 2002 that served as the
basis for several legislative efforts (see Related Legislation
below). As part of its recent reports on higher education
oversight, the LAO has recommended that the Legislature and the
Administration establish a clear public agenda for higher
education, including specific and focused statewide goals that
could serve as the framework for an accountability system
designed to align higher education performance with the state's
needs. The most recent Master Plan review, as reflected in ACR
184 (Ruskin), Chapter 163, Statues of 2010, noted the lack of
public policy goals based upon the outcomes required to meet
California's needs and found the establishment of statewide
goals will enable increased accountability across the entire
higher education system and within segments. Finally, the
Governor's proposed 2012-13 Budget notes that one significant
component of the Administration's long-term plan for higher
education involves annual General Fund augmentations contingent
upon each institution achieving the Administration's priorities,
including improvements in specific accountability metrics such
as graduations rates, time to completion, transfer students
enrolled, faculty workload, and for community colleges,
successful credit and basic skills course completion.
Segmental efforts . Previously, UC and CSU have entered into
system-specific "compacts" then "partnerships" with California's
governors in an effort to ensure stable multi-year funding in
exchange for a commitment to deliver on specific performance
SB 721
Page 6
measures developed by the segments and the administration. In
recent years, each of the segments has undertaken efforts to
ensure its ability to meet future student and state needs as
follows:
1)In 2010, the UC Regents adopted a report by its Commission on
the Future to address how UC can maintain access, quality and
affordability in a time of diminishing resources.
2)In 2009, CSU adopted a ten-year strategic plan-Access to
Excellence-that identifies priorities for attention for
policymakers and the broad public in order to meet
California's educational needs.
3)In 2010, The Community College League of California's
Commission on the Future issued its "2020 Vision for Student
Success." The CCC Board of Governors, pursuant to SB 1143
(Liu), Chapter 409, Statutes of 2010, adopted the
recommendations of the Task Force for Student Success. Both
efforts identify policy, statutory, and regulatory changes
that can promote the success of CCC students.
Author's amendments . The author has agreed to accept the
following technical amendments:
Page 3, line 34: (b) Better align the types of degrees and
credentials with the state's economic, workforce, and civic
needs.
Page 5, line 38: The Legislative Analyst's Office's assessment
and recommendations, and along with any assessments of progress
programs from the segments of postsecondary education, shall be
provided as part of the budget hearing process.
Related legislation . As noted previously, there have been
numerous efforts to establish a higher education accountability
structure, including:
AB 1901 (Ruskin), Chapter 201, Statutes of 2010, codified the
findings and principles that emerged from the 2010 Review of the
Master Plan for Higher Education and declared the Legislature's
intent to statutorily outline clear, concise, statewide goals
and outcomes for effective implementation of the Master Plan for
Higher Education and the expectation of the higher education
system as a whole to be accountable for attaining those goals.
SB 721
Page 7
AB 2 (Portantino, 2011) and AB 218 (Portantino, 2009),
essentially identical bills, required that the state establish
an accountability framework to biennially assess and report on
the collective progress of the state's system of postsecondary
education in meeting specified educational and economic goals.
Both bills were held under submission in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
SB 325 (Scott, 2008), also nearly identical to AB 2 and AB 218,
was passed by the Legislature and vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger. The Governor's veto message read:
While I respect the author's intent to establish a
statewide system of accountability for postsecondary
education and a framework to assess the collective
contribution of California's institutions of higher
education toward meeting statewide economic and educational
goals, this bill falls short in providing any framework for
incentives or consequences that would modify behavior to
meet any policy objectives. I believe our public education
systems should be held accountable for achieving results,
including our higher education segments, and would consider
a measure in the future that provides adequate mechanisms
that will effectuate tangible gains in student outcomes and
operational efficiencies.
SB 1331 (Alpert, 2004) passed by the Legislature and vetoed by
Governor Schwarzenegger, would have established a California
Postsecondary Education Accountability (CPSEA) structure to
provide an annual assessment of how the state is meeting
identified statewide public policy goals in higher education.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Association of University Women
California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office
California State University
Campaign for College Opportunity
University of California
Opposition
SB 721
Page 8
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Sandra Fried / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960