BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                            Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair


          SB 1369 (Block) - Community Colleges: Disability Services  
          Program
          
          Amended: May 1, 2014            Policy Vote: Education 8-0
          Urgency: No                     Mandate: Yes
          Hearing Date: May 12, 2014      Consultant: Jacqueline  
          Wong-Hernandez
          
          This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. 

          
          Bill Summary: SB 1369 requires that the Board of Governors (BOG)  
          rules and regulations provide for the use of Disability Service  
          Program (DSP) funds to ensure students receive academic  
          adjustments, auxiliary aids, and services required by federal  
          and state nondiscrimination laws, clarifies the educational  
          programs for which the funding can be used, expands program  
          evaluation requirements, and requires the California Community  
          Colleges Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) to request annual budget  
          funding for the DSP sufficient to meet the requirements  
          established by the bill on a statewide basis. 

          Fiscal Impact: 
              Program evaluation expansion: Up to $250,000 in CCCCO  
              personnel costs for 2 PYs to conduct the required  
              evaluations, and annual travel costs of approximately  
              $25,000 (General Fund).
              Local "costs": Setting a statutory minimum (of .5%) that  
              the CCCCO must spend on evaluations, could result in reduced  
              discretionary funding (within the DSP program) for CCDs. See  
              staff comments.  
              Cost pressure: Codifying legislative intent that adequate  
              finding be provided in the annual Budget Act for each CCC to  
              provide specified services and for the CCCCO to request  
              annual funding, as specified, creates substantial cost  
              pressure to fund the DSP accordingly.

          Background: Existing law requires the BOG of the California  
          Community Colleges (CCC) to adopt rules and regulations for the  
          administration and funding of educational programs and support  
          services to be provided to disabled students by community  
          college districts (CCDs). These regulations are required to  








          SB 1369 (Block)
          Page 1


          provide for the apportionment of funding to districts to offset  
          the direct excess cost of providing specialized support services  
          or instruction, or both, to disabled students enrolled in state  
          supported educational programs or courses.  

          Existing law defines "direct excess costs" as those which exceed  
          the combined total of the average cost to the district of  
          providing services to non-disabled students times the number of  
          students served in the disabled students program, the indirect  
          cost of providing facilities and administrative support, the  
          revenue from ADA in special classes, and other funds received  
          from federal, state or local sources. The BOG is authorized to  
          allow the CCC Chancellor to designate up to 3% of the funds  
          allocated for this purpose for program development and program  
          accountability.  (Education Code � 84850)

          Proposed Law: This bill renames the program for serving students  
          with disabilities as the "Disability Services Program," makes  
          corresponding changes throughout the bill, and makes the  
          following additional changes to the current program:

             1)   Changes the purpose of the funds provided to each  
               district from offsetting the direct excess cost of  
               "providing specialized support services and instruction" to  
               "ensuring that these students receive academic adjustments,  
               auxiliary aids, and services required under federal and  
               state non-discrimination laws" including, among others, the  
               Americans with Disabilities Act.  

             2)   Enhances the definition of direct excess costs to be  
               those exceeding the cost of the district to provide  
               "comparable" services to nondisabled students and replaces  
               "special classes with "educational assistance courses."

             3)   Modifies the types of services and courses for which  
               this funding can be used.  

             4)   Modifies program evaluation, development, and  
               accountability authorities and requirements, by: a)  
               requiring the CCCCO to use at least half of a percent of  
               the allocated funds for purposes of conducting, or  
               contracting to conduct, an evaluation of program  
               effectiveness, as specified; b) requiring each CCC  
               operating a DSP to participate in a peer-based onsite  








          SB 1369 (Block)
          Page 2


               evaluation during the self-study year of each accreditation  
               cycle; c) authorizing the use of these funds to compensate  
               and reimburse onsite evaluation teams; and, d) reducing the  
               maximum amount that the CCCCO is authorized to designate  
               for program development and accountability from 3% to 2.5%.  


             5)   Requires the CCCCO to annually request sufficient budget  
               funding for the Disability Services Program to carry the  
               purposes and requirements outlined by the bill on a  
               statewide basis.

             6)   Declares the Legislature's intent that adequate funding  
               be provided through the annual budget process to the DSP to  
               ensure each college can provide students with the services  
               needed to meet federal and state nondiscrimination law  
               requirements and to further their participation in the  
               Student Success and Support Program. 

          Related Legislation: SB 705 (Block) 2013 would have appropriated  
          $50 million, from an unspecified source, to the California  
          Community Colleges to be allocated: $25 million for Disabled  
          Students Programs and Services, and $25 million for Extended  
          Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS). That bill was held  
          under submission in this Committee.

          Staff Comments: Under existing law, the CCCCO can spend up to 3%  
          of the total DSPS appropriation on "special projects" which  
          include accountability and program development. The CCCCO  
          indicates, however, it is currently only spending 1.3%, and  
          passing through the remaining 1.7% to CCDs in the local  
          apportionments. This bill creates a required "floor" for  
          evaluation spending that is $450,000 higher than what the CCCCO  
          currently spends on special projects (which evaluations could be  
          a part of). The CCCCO has made the decision to give more money  
          to CCDs to provide services instead of conducting evaluations.  
          If the CCCCO were required to spend .5%, that decreases by  
          $450,000 the amount that goes to the college through the  
          allocation process.  
          
          Staff notes that there is an existing state mandate and  
          BOG-adopted regulations to establish a program of DSP  
          evaluations in which every CCC is evaluated at least once every  
          five years. However, the CCCCO has indicated it is not meeting  








          SB 1369 (Block)
          Page 3


          that mandate because of its budget limitations.