BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 1391
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1391 (Hancock and Wyland)
As Amended August 18, 2014
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :35-0
HIGHER EDUCATION 12-1 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Williams, Ch�vez, Bloom, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Fong, Jones-Sawyer, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Levine, Linder, Medina, | |Calderon, Campos, |
| |Olsen, Quirk-Silva, | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| |Weber, Wilk | |Holden, Jones, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, |
| | | |Weber |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Fox | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Allows California Community Colleges (CCCs) to receive
full funding for credit-course instruction offered in
correctional institutions and seeks to expand the offering of
such courses. Specifically, this bill :
1) Waives "open course" provisions for community college
courses offered in state correctional facilities, thus
conforming to current allowances for CCC courses in local
or federal correctional facilities, for which the colleges
receive funding even though the courses are not open to the
general public.
2) Allows attendance hours generated by credit courses at
all correctional facilities to be funded at the
corresponding rates for those types of courses rather than
at the lower, non-credit rate.
3) Prohibits districts from claiming state apportionments
for instruction in correctional facilities if the district
is fully compensated by another entity for the costs of
direct instructional services, and requires districts to
deduct any partial compensation for correctional facility
SB 1391
Page 2
education from their apportionment.
4) Requires the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the CCC Chancellor's Office, by
March 1, 2015, to enter into an interagency agreement to
expand access to courses leading to degrees,
certifications, or transfer to four-year degrees. Courses
are to supplement, not supplant adult education courses
offered by CDCR's Office of Correctional Education.
5) Requires CDCR and the Chancellor's Office to develop
metrics for evaluating the success of 4) above, and report
their findings to Legislature and the Governor by July 31,
2018.
EXISTING LAW prohibits CCCs from claiming state funding for
classes that are not open to the public; however an exemption is
allowed for inmate education in city, county and federal
correctional facilities. Such courses are funded at non-credit
rates. Under the exemption, funding is not allowed for CCC
classes in state correctional facilities.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Ongoing General Fund (GF) (Proposition 98 of 1988) cost
pressure for converting qualified existing courses to the full
credit rate at local and federal institutions.
Currently, credit funding per FTES is $4,636, career
development and college preparation course funding is $3,283,
and non-credit funding is $2,788. According to the CCC
Chancellor's Office, in 2006-07 (most recent data available)
districts provided credit courses for 1,769 FTES in local and
federal correctional facilities. The majority (1,588
full-time equivalent students (FTES)) already received full
credit funding as distance education courses open to the
public. Under this bill, the remaining FTES (181) would have
received full credit apportionment at a cost of $335,000.
In addition to the above costs for existing courses, the
higher funding rates could result in increased course
SB 1391
Page 3
offerings at local and federal facilities, with resulting
state costs.
2)Additional costs would depend on the number of FTEs taking
classes in state correctional facilities. For every 100
for-credit FTEs, annual GF (Proposition 98) costs would
increase by $464,000. Community colleges are limited to
enrollment caps that arguably would make this a zero sum
change, but not all colleges are at their caps, thus expanding
access and funding rates creates enrollment and funding
pressure.
3)Costs for CDCR and the CCC to enter into the interagency
agreement should be absorbable. One-time costs to develop
metrics, conduct and evaluation and provide the required
report should not exceed $200,000.
4)To the extent this bill leads to increased education
programming for inmates, the state and local governments could
realize unquantifiable savings associated with decreased
recidivism.
COMMENTS : In 2013, the Rand Corporation released a study
entitled: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Correctional
Education. According to the report, a common thread among
instructional delivery methods is that programs with courses
taught by college instructors, programs with courses taught by
instructors external to the correctional facility, and programs
that have a post-release component can connect inmates both
directly and indirectly with the outside community. In
addition, college instructors and instructors external to the
correctional facility can potentially infuse the program with
approaches, exercises, and standards being used in more
traditional instructional settings. Programs with post-release
components can provide continuity of support that can assist
inmates as they continue on in education and/or enter the
workforce in the months immediately after they are released.
According to the author, CCCs have a great deal of experience
with career technical education; faculty is both experienced in
the field and classroom. Career technical education faculty
have established programs and a good understanding of the work
world, the economic needs of the communities and a wide network
of workforce development/economic development contacts. In many
SB 1391
Page 4
cases, CCCs are closely aligned with Workforce Investment Act
funded one-stop shops and will also be linked with the 13 new
pre-release centers developed as part of the realignment effort
and early release to ease the overcrowding.
Analysis Prepared by : Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960 FN:
0004797