BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2216
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Joan Buchanan, Chair
AB 2216 (Muratsuchi) - As Amended: March 28, 2014
SUBJECT : Regional occupational centers and programs: funding
SUMMARY : Requires that specified regional occupational centers
and programs (ROC/Ps) shall receive an annual appropriation from
the General Fund (Proposition 98) and make various findings and
declarations. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires that an ROC/P established and maintained by local
education agencies (LEAs) or a joint powers authority (JPA)
shall receive an annual appropriation from the General Fund
for purposes of providing high-quality career technical
education (CTE) services.
2)Requires that the funds shall be apportioned directly to the
ROC/P based on a formula agreed upon by participating LEAs.
3)Makes findings and declarations regarding the importance and
current status of CTE programs.
4)States the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to
promote and support high-quality CTE programs, including, but
not limited to, ROC/Ps, linked learning, partnership
academies, and career pathways, to help prepare and engage
pupils for transition to postsecondary educational
opportunities and the workforce.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : California has several state-funded programs that
support CTE, including the following:
ROC/Ps provide regional CTE during the school day,
after school, and in the evening in high schools and
regional centers. As a categorical program, ROC/Ps were
last funded at $384 million per year. From 2008-09 to
2012-13, districts were given flexibility over the use of
these funds. In 2010, approximately 42% of districts
responding to a survey by the Legislative Analyst's Office
reported using at least some of their ROC/P funds to
AB 2216
Page 2
support other programs. In 2013-14, ROC/P funds were
rolled into the local control funding formula (LCFF).
However, districts are required to maintain their 2012-13
level of ROC/P funding through 2014-15. This provides
ROC/Ps with some short term certainty during the transition
to the LCFF.
Career Pathways Trust provides $250 million in one-time
funding in 2013-14 for competitive grants to improve
linkages between CTE programs at schools, community
colleges, and local businesses. These funds are available
for expenditure through 2015-16.
CTE Pathways Initiative provides $48 million for
purposes similar to the Career Pathways Trust. This
initiative, which sunsets at the end of 2014-15, also
provides support for California Partnership Academies and
Linked Learning, which support small learning cohorts that
integrate a career theme with academic education.
Specialized Secondary Programs provide $4.9 million in
competitive start-up grants for pilot programs that prepare
students for college and careers in specialized fields,
including math, science, and the arts.
Agricultural CTE Incentive Program provides $4.1 million
in ongoing funding for the purchase of non-salary items,
such as equipment and field trips, for agricultural
education.
The Governor has proposed to roll funding for Specialized
Secondary Programs and Agricultural Education into the LCFF.
Districts currently receiving those funds would continue to
receive them, but they would be counted toward achievement of
their LCFF funding targets.
In addition to the programs listed above, the LCFF includes a
2.6% "add-on" for the 9-12 grade span funding for "college and
career readiness." Based on a target funding level of $8,289
for this grade span, that is about $215 per average daily
attendance for these programs.
Double funding . Because ROC/P funding was rolled into the LCFF,
districts continue to receive it. This bill provides a
separate apportionment for ROC/Ps that would be in addition to
AB 2216
Page 3
the ROC/P funds that districts continue to get as part of their
LCFF apportionment, thereby double funding them.
The method of allocating funds is unclear . The bill provides
that "appropriated funds shall be apportioned directly to the
regional occupational center or program based on a formula
agreed upon by the local educational agencies participating in
the regional occupational center or program." This appears to
mean that each ROC/P could-in collaboration with its member
LEAs-establish its own apportionment formula. It is not clear
how the CDE would apportion funds if locally-developed formulas
require factors that are not reported to or collected by the
state and if different ROC/Ps develop different formulas.
Alternative approach. After rolling ROC/P funding into the
LCFF, the Legislature imposed a maintenance of effort
requirement on districts, requiring them to spend at least as
much on ROC/Ps in 2014-15 and 2015-16 as they did in 2012-13.
The purpose was to protect existing ROC/P investments and
infrastructure while an alternative model (if any) was
developed. However, no agency was assigned the responsibility
of making recommendations for an alternative model. According
to the author's office, the uncertainty surrounding the future
of ROC/Ps undermines program quality and planning for the
future. Therefore, staff recommends that the bill be amended to
delete its current contents and instead (1) extend the
maintenance of effort through 2016-17 and (2) require the
Superintendent of Public Instruction to convene a task force to
study funding models for ROC/Ps and to report recommended
options to the Legislature and Director of Finance on or before
September 1, 2016.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Association of Regional Occupational Centers and
Programs
City of Hermosa Beach
City of Torrance
Napa County Office of Education
Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District
Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce
South Bay Cities Council of Governments
Numerous individuals
AB 2216
Page 4
Opposition
None received
Analysis Prepared by : Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087