BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Carol Liu, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 965
AUTHOR: Leno
AMENDED: April 10, 2014
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: April 24, 2014
URGENCY: Yes CONSULTANT:Daniel Alvarez
SUBJECT : Community colleges funding: San Francisco
Community College
District.
SUMMARY
This bill, an urgency measure, provides the San Francisco
Community College District with a revenue stream, in an
attempt to stabilize and maintain a predictable funding
base, over the next four years as the college works to
restore student enrollment and maintain accreditation.
BACKGROUND
Existing law confers upon the Board of Governors of the
California Community Colleges the ability to prescribe
minimum standards for the formation and operation of
community colleges and exercise general supervision over
the community colleges (Education Code � 66700 and �
70901). As such, regulations have been adopted to require
each community college within a district to be an
accredited institution - with the Accrediting Commission
for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) determining
accreditation.
Existing law requires the Board of Governors (BOG) to
develop criteria and standards, in accordance with
specified statewide minimum requirements, for the purposes
of making the annual budget request for the CCC to the
Governor and the Legislature and allocating state general
apportionment revenues, among other things, a requirement
that the calculations of each district's revenue level for
each fiscal year be based on specified criteria with
revenue adjustments being made for increases or decreases
in full-time equivalent students (FTES) for specified
SB 965
Page 2
purposes.
Existing law provides a year of stabilization funding,
during which the district receives at least the same
funding for enrollment as the previous year (even if
enrollment declines) or higher funding (up to an allowable
cap) if enrollment increases. This is because a district
usually does not know that its full-time equivalent student
(FTES) count has declined until it begins its enrollment
counts, which occur at the same time the state is
disbursing funds and after the district has hired faculty
and determined its class schedules. If enrollment declines
beyond just one year, the district's revenues are reduced
by the decrease in its full-time equivalent students
(FTES). However, those reductions are restored if
enrollments increase during the subsequent three years,
providing a district with a buffer against fluctuating
enrollments.
(Education Code � 84750.5 et.seq.)
ANALYSIS
This bill, an urgency measure, provides the San Francisco
Community College District (SFCCD) with a revenue stream,
in an attempt to stabilize and maintain a predictable
funding base, over the next four years as the college works
to restore student enrollment and maintain accreditation.
More specifically, this bill:
1) Requires as a condition of receiving additional
revenue the following conditions are satisfied:
a) The community college district or a
campus of the community college district is in
imminent jeopardy of losing its accreditation.
b) The Board of Governors (BOG) of the
California Community Colleges has exercised its
authority under current law, as specified and
under Title 5 of the California Code of
Regulations.
1) Requires the BOG to provide revenues to SFCCD if the
number of FTES decreases from the number in the
2013-14 fiscal year as follows:
SB 965
Page 3
a) For the 2014-15 fiscal year, an amount
not less than the total amount that was received
by the community college district for the
attendance of FTES in the 2013-14 fiscal year.
b) For the 2015-16 fiscal year, an amount
not less than 95 percent of the amount received
for the attendance of FTES in 2013-14.
c) For the 2016-17 fiscal year, an amount
not less than 90 percent of the amount received
for the attendance of FTES in 2013-14.
d) For the 2017-18 fiscal year, an amount
not less than 85 percent of the amount received
for the attendance of FTES in 2013-14.
1) Requires the amount determined in #2 above be adjusted
by the chancellor to reflect cost-of-living
adjustments, deficit apportionments, or both, as
appropriate for the applicable fiscal years.
2) Requires the formula prescribed in #2 above be used
only to determine the apportionment funding to be
allocated to the SFCCD. The bill further requires
that SFCCD shall not be credited with more FTES than
were actually enrolled and in attendance when
computing statewide entitlements of funding based on
attendance of FTES.
3) Specifies legislative intent that any amounts,
necessary to make the apportionments required under #2
above, be drawn from the state general apportionment
revenues for community college districts.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . According to the author's office
accreditation challenges at City College of San
Francisco (CCSF) have raised serious concerns at the
college and in the community. The CCSF is an
essential provider of higher education in San
Francisco, and for many students it represents the
only point of access to a college degree, certificate
or workforce training. Although the CCSF is making
SB 965
Page 4
significant progress to fully meet accreditation
standards, a significant number of students have opted
not to enroll or re-enroll due to uncertainty about
the CCSF's long-term survival. In the past year alone,
enrollment has declined by approximately 13 percent;
without immediate corrective action, this downward
trend of enrollment and funding will force deep
programmatic reductions, in turn leading to further
loss of enrollment, and posing a major threat to the
CCSF's survival.
2) Accreditation is required to receive state
appropriations and to be eligible for federal and
state financial aid programs. Accreditation is a
method used in this country to generally: (1) assure
quality, (2) provide access to government funding, (3)
generate stakeholder support, and (4) facilitate
credit transfer for and to educational institutions.
After an initial accreditation, colleges must have
their accreditation reaffirmed every six years. This
process includes a self-study, a site visit by a team
of peers, a recommendation by the visiting team and an
action by the Accrediting Commission for Community and
Junior Colleges (ACCJC). In addition to these core
components, colleges must submit a midterm report
every three years and annual progress reports. The
college/district may also have to submit follow-up
reports and host visits as required by the Commission.
There are three levels of sanction prior to
termination of accreditation: Warning, Probation, and
Show Cause. Follow up reports and accreditation
visits are required to retain full accreditation.
a) Warning occurs when the accrediting
Commission finds that an institution has pursued
a course deviating from the Commission's
eligibility requirements, accreditation
standards, or Commission policies to an extent
that gives concern to the Commission, it may
issue a warning to the institution to correct its
deficiencies, refrain from certain activities, or
initiate certain activities. The accredited
status of the institution continues during the
SB 965
Page 5
warning period.
b) Probation occurs when an institution
deviates significantly from the commission's
eligibility requirements, accreditation
standards, or commission policies, but not to
such an extent as to warrant a Show Cause order
or termination of accreditation, or fails to
respond to conditions imposed by the commission,
including a warning. During the probation
period, the institution will be subject to
reports and visits at a frequency determined by
the commission. The accredited status of the
institution continues during the probation
period.
c) Show Cause occurs when the commission finds
an institution to be in substantial
non-compliance with its eligibility requirements,
accreditation standards, or commission policies,
or when the institution has not responded to
conditions imposed by the commission, the
commission will require the institution to Show
Cause why its accreditation should not be
withdrawn at the end of a stated period by
demonstrating that it has corrected the
deficiencies noted by the commission. In such
cases, the burden of proof will rest on the
institution to demonstrate why its accreditation
should be continued. The commission will specify
the time which the institution must resolve
deficiencies. While under Show Cause order, the
institution will be subject to reports and visits
at a frequency to be determined by the
commission. The accredited status of the
institution continues during the period of the
Show Cause order.
Many California community colleges have faced various
levels of accreditation sanctions, including Show
Cause. With the exception of Compton College in 2004,
all have retained accreditation. As of February 2014,
there were 12 California community colleges on Warning
status, one community college (Hartnell College) on
Probation status and one community college on Show
SB 965
Page 6
Cause status-City College of San Francisco.
3) City College of San Francisco (CCSF) . In July 2012,
the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior
Colleges (ACCJC) identified numerous deficiencies at
CCSF and moved the district directly to the most
severe level of sanction-"Show Cause." The ACCJC
identified numerous deficiencies covering a range of
district operations. The most substantive findings
focus on failures in the areas of fiscal planning,
fiscal integrity, governance and administration, as
well as failure to completely address eight
recommendations from a 2006 ACCJC evaluation team. In
June 2013, the ACCJC moved to terminate the
accreditation of CCSF. Community College San
Francisco has appealed that action and is working
diligently to correct the deficiencies identified by
the ACCJC.
4) Even with additional stability funding, improved
accreditation status isn't assured . Though the bill
provides longer term funding stability, the outcome of
acquiring a positive accreditation status is highly
uncertain. The California Community College
Chancellor's Office indicates improvement on both
fronts - funding stability and accreditation retention
- is necessary. The approach in this measure is to
(1) acknowledge that CCSF is in imminent jeopardy of
losing its accreditation status, and (2) stabilize
overall district funding which will be negatively
impacted after 2013-14 due to unprecedented enrollment
declines at CCSF.
Yet, staff could not analytically reconcile the need
for four years of stabilization funding. It is an
equally unfortunate after-effect that the current and
future students of CCSF are the real victims of the
mismanagement of the college's fiscal resources;
however, other colleges that may be on the brink of
encountering similar accreditation circumstances have
addressed the timely and painful local decision-making
necessary to lift them from their unfortunate fiscal
and management situation while maintaining their
educational programs and resolving accreditation
SB 965
Page 7
issues. In light of other community colleges with
declining enrollment, but still in good accreditation
standing, not enjoying the fiscal benefits that this
measure would provide, staff recommends amendments
that:
a) On page 2, line 15 before the period insert:
as this regulation read on April 15, 2014.
b) provide two years, not four years, of
stabilization funding - on page 3, strike lines 5
through 12; and
c) consistent with current law, require that
CCSF must be an accredited institution to enjoy
any benefit of funding stabilization -- on page
3, after line 22, insert: (e) Subdivision (b)
shall only be in affect if the community college
district or campus is in compliance with Section
51016 of Title 5 of the California Code of
Regulations as this regulation read on April 15,
2014.
5) Report to the Legislature is in order . This measure
provides an extraordinary funding approach for CCSF;
however, there are no reporting requirements back to
the Legislature to ascertain if key programmatic and
fiscal issues are being addressed and improved. As
such, staff recommends amendments to require the
Chancellor of the City College of San Francisco, by
April 15, 2015, to submit to the appropriate policy
and fiscal committees of the Legislature, the
Governor's Office, the Legislative Analyst, and the
Department of Finance, a report containing, at a
minimum, the following:
a) An overview of the college's current
accreditation status, including a description of
any identified accreditation deficiencies and
activities underway to address those
deficiencies;
b) Enrollment totals for the current and prior
years;
c) Updated enrollment projections for the two
following years;
SB 965
Page 8
d) The number of course sections offered in the
current and prior years;
e) A thorough explanation of the districts level of
budgetary reserves
and sources of revenue; and
f) A thorough multi-year budget plan -
explaining, at a minimum, both
revenue sources and areas of expenditures.
The college shall then submit updates to this report
every six months through the period for which the
funding provisions of this bill are in effect.
6) Past legislation .
AB 1199 (Fong), an urgency measure, essentially
establishes a loan program for community colleges
under specified accreditation sanctions. This bill
requires the Board of Governors (BOG) of the
California Community Colleges (CCC) to adopt a revenue
funding formula that provides CCC districts under
specified accreditation status ("probation" or "show
cause"), a second year of declining enrollment revenue
relief, provided certain conditions are met, and the
district must pay back the second year of declining
enrollment revenue in equal installments over the
following two years. The bill was set for hearing in
this committee in July 2013, but was pulled at the
request of the author.
AB 318 (Dymally, Chapter 50, Statutes of 2006)
provided for a bond-financed loan to restore fiscal
solvency to the Compton Community College District and
made provisions for the continuation of services in
the event the district lost its accreditation.
SUPPORT
Chinese for Affirmative Action
Office of the Mayor, City and County of San Francisco
SEIU California
San Francisco Unified School District
SB 965
Page 9
OPPOSITION
None on file.