(1)Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law imposes numerous duties on the board of governors with respect to these administrative responsibilities, including a requirement to review the accreditation status of community colleges in certain circumstances.

This bill would add to the duties of the board of governors by requiring it to conduct a survey of the community colleges, including consultation with representatives of both faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria used to determine an accreditors status.

(2)Existing law requires the accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, to report any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a community college.

This bill would require the regional accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the board of governors as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity has notified the regional accrediting agency of the date by which the agencys application for continued recognition is due.

(1)Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law imposes numerous duties on the board of governors with respect to these administrative responsibilities, including a requirement to review the accreditation status of community colleges in certain circumstances.

This bill would add to the duties of the board of governors by requiring it to conduct a survey of the community colleges, including consultation with representatives of both faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria used to determine an accreditors status.

(2)Existing law requires the accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, to report any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a community college.

This bill would require the regional accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the board of governors as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity has notified the regional accrediting agency of the date by which the agencys application for continued recognition is due.

(1)Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law imposes numerous duties on the board of governors with respect to these administrative responsibilities, including a requirement to review the accreditation status of community colleges in certain circumstances.

This bill would add to the duties of the board of governors by requiring it to conduct a survey of the community colleges, including consultation with representatives of both faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria used to determine an accreditors status.

(2)Existing law requires the accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, to report any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a community college.

This bill would require the regional accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the board of governors as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity has notified the regional accrediting agency of the date by which the agencys application for continued recognition is due.

(1)Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law imposes numerous duties on the board of governors with respect to these administrative responsibilities, including a requirement to review the accreditation status of community colleges in certain circumstances.

This bill would add to the duties of the board of governors by requiring it to conduct a survey of the community colleges, including consultation with representatives of both faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria used to determine an accreditors status.

(2)Existing law requires the accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, to report any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a community college.

This bill would additionally require the regional accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the board of governors as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity has notified the regional accrediting agency of the date by which their the agencys application for continued recognition is due.

(1)Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law imposes numerous duties on the board of governors with respect to these administrative responsibilities, including a requirement to review the accreditation status of community colleges in certain circumstances.

This bill would add to the duties of the board of governors by requiring it to conduct a survey of the community colleges, including consultation with representatives of both faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the accrediting agency based on the criteria used to determine an accreditors status.

(2)Existing law requires the accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, to report any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a community college.

This bill would additionally require the accrediting agency for the community colleges to report to the board of governors as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity has notified the accrediting agency of the date by which their application for continued recognition is due.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 404

Author:(Chiu)

As Amended Ver:June 10, 2015

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.

SUMMARY: Requires the regional accrediting agency for the California Community Colleges (CCC) to report to the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NICIQI) has notified the agency of the date by which their application for continued recognition is due; and, requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of the CCC, including faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education (USDE) and NICIQI that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the agency based on criteria used to determine an accreditor's status.

The Senate amendments add coauthors and make non-substantive changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the BOG to provide general supervision over the CCC and requires the BOG to prescribe minimum standards for CCC formation and operation (Education Code (EDC) Section 66700);

2. Requires the BOG to develop minimum standards governing academic standards, employment policies and shared governance; evaluate CCC fiscal and educational effectiveness and provide assistance when districts encounter management difficulties; administer state funding and establish minimum conditions entitling CCC districts to receive state funds; requires the CCC BOG, in determining if a CCC district satisfies the minimum conditions for receipt of apportionment funding, to review the accreditation status of the CCCs within that district review and approve educational programs (EDC Section 70901);

3. Requires the accrediting agency for CCCs to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a CCC; and, requires the CCC Chancellor's Office to ensure that the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees are provided the aforementioned required information (EDC Section 72208);

4. BOG regulations (5 California Code of Regulations Section 51016) require CCCs to be accredited by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC). However, BOG recently approved regulatory changes that would continue the requirement for accrediting, but remove the explicit requirement of accreditation by the ACCJC.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office indicates that this bill would require 0.5 position and $55,000 General Fund.

COMMENTS: Background. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings. Under federal law, the USDE establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions. Institutional accreditation is a requirement for participation in federal financial aid programs. Under federal regulations, accrediting agencies are required to meet general outlined standards, but specific processes and quality standards are left to each accrediting agency to determine.

USDE relies on NACIQI, an 18-member committee appointed equally by the United States Secretary of Education, United States House of Representatives, and the United States Senate, to review accrediting agencies and advise the Secretary on whether an accrediting agency is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions it accredits. NACIQI is charged with determining whether an accrediting agency complies with various criteria for recognition, which include, among other requirements: appropriate accreditation standards; fair and consistent application of accreditation standards; proper monitoring and reevaluation of accredited institutions; and, immediate enforcement to ensure compliance with standards. During the initial application or continued recognition review process, USDE staff publishes a notice in the Federal Register, inviting the public to comment on the agency's compliance with the criteria for recognition and establishing a deadline for receipt of public comment. Public comments are reviewed by NICIQI and USDE staff prior to the USDE decision regarding initial or continued recognition of the accrediting agency. USDE determines the recognition period, up to five years.

Purpose of this bill. According to the author, "there has been a historical lack of accountability for an accrediting agency overseeing the CCCs. This deficiency is due to fear of retribution, scarce local resources, and the absence of a pathway for CCC and other local stakeholders to provide meaningful feedback during an accrediting agency's performance review process for continued accreditation recognition." The author notes that in past NACIQI reviews of ACCJC, there has not been a strong voice for the CCC system as a whole; further, the CCC system does not currently have a method for soliciting feedback from colleges, faculty, and other stakeholders. The author believes that increasing participation in the review process will increase accrediting agency accountability.

Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0001843

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 404

Author: Chiu (D), et al.

Amended: 6/10/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/1/15

AYES: Liu, Runner, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan, Vidak

NO VOTE RECORDED: Block, Hancock

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Community colleges: accreditation

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires the regional accrediting agency for the California Community Colleges (CCC) to report to the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) the date by which the agency’s application for continued recognition is due and requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of community colleges, as specified, to develop a report, transmitted to specified entities, that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency.

ANALYSIS: Existing law confers upon the CCC BOG 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 (Title 5 California Code of Regulations § 51016) 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.

This bill:

1. Requires the regional accrediting agency for the community colleges to report, as specified, to the CCC BOG the date by which the agency’s application for continued recognition is due.

2. Requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of community colleges including faculty and classified personnel to develop a report that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria use to determine an accreditor’s status.

3. Specifies that the report shall be transmitted to the United States Department of Education (USDE) and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI).

Comments

1. Need for the bill? According to the author, existing law provides no mechanism for a CCC system-wide performance review of the CCC’s regional accrediting body and providing the overseeing federal entities with such a review increases accountability of the accrediting agency and improves participation by CCC faculty and personnel in the process. This bill seeks to provide a method for collecting stakeholder feedback during an accrediting agency’s performance review.

2. Accreditation, how it works. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings.

Under federal law, the USDE establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions. There are three basic types of accreditation:

1. Regional accreditation. There are six USDE-recognized regional accrediting agencies. Each regional accreditor encompasses public, the vast majority of non-profit private (independent), and some for-profit postsecondary educational institutions in the region it serves. California's regional accrediting agency is separated into two commissions: the ACCJC and the Senior College and University Commission.

2. National accreditation. National accreditation is not based on geography, but more focused to evaluate specific types of schools and programs. National accreditation is designed to allow nontraditional colleges (trade schools, religious schools, certain online schools) to be compared against similarly designed institutions. Different standards and categories are measured, depending on the type of institution.

3. Specialized/programmatic accreditation. Offered by accrediting agencies that represent specific fields of study, these agencies do not accredit entire colleges but instead accredit the programs within colleges that prepare students for the specific field or industry. In most cases, specialized accreditation alone does not enable participation in state and federal financial aid programs.

3. Accreditation of California community colleges. 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 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 ACCJC. 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.

Many California community colleges have faced various levels of accreditation sanctions. Most recently, the sanctions imposed on City College of San Francisco have drawn attention to ACCJC and its accreditation process. The heightened attention lead to an audit by the California State Auditor, who on June 26, 2014, issued a report on California Community Colleges Accreditation. This audit report provided both a review of the ACCJC and the accreditation process in general, as well as a more in-depth examination of recent events related to City College of San Francisco. The report raised some concerns of the ACCJC and the accreditation process and made a series of recommendations to address the identified concerns. After the release of the State Auditor’s report, the Chancellor’s Office reconvened its Accreditation Task Force consisting of community college stakeholders. The Accreditation Task Force is charged with providing input through a report to the Chancellor’s Office regarding the accreditation process, including addressing the State Auditor’s recommendations. The Accreditation Task Force held its final meeting at the end of May and is expected to release the final report at the end of August. Arguably, the information gathered by the provisions in this bill may compliment the work of the Accreditation Task Force.

4. National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity. NACIQI advises the USDE on matters related to postsecondary accreditation and the eligibility and certification process for higher education institutions to participate in Federal student aid programs. Its primary function is to provide recommendations to the U.S. Secretary of Education concerning whether accrediting entities’ standards are sufficiently rigorous and effective in their application to ensure the entity is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions or programs it accredits. To meet that standard, accrediting entities must demonstrate compliance with all the criteria for recognition. Once a recommendation is made, this process allows for public comment. This bill seeks to provide CCC faculty and personnel a method for providing feedback and remain anonymous during the accrediting agencies performance review.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 1385 (Ting, 2015) requires notification to the CCC BOG before an accrediting agency increases membership fees, special assessments, or other payments charged to a community college. AB 1385 is pending in the Senate Education Committee.

AB 1397 (Ting, 2015) requires the accrediting agency for the CCC to meet specified operational standards. AB 1397 is pending in the Senate Education Committee.

SB 1068 (Beall, 2014) would have required the CCC BOG, by January 1, 2016, to report on the feasibility of creating an independent accrediting agency to accredit the CCC and other two-year private postsecondary educational institutions, and to make recommendations relative to CCC accreditation. SB 1068 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• CCC Chancellor’s Office indicates that this bill requires 0.5 position and $55,000 General Fund.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/27/15)

American Federation of Teachers, Local 2121

California Community College Independents

California Federation of Teachers

California School Employees Association

California Teachers Association

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges

San Francisco Community College Federation of Teachers

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/27/15)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 5/14/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NO VOTE RECORDED: Gipson, Roger Hernández

Prepared by: Olgalilia Ramirez / ED. / (916) 651-4105

8/30/15 19:42:09

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 404 (Chiu) - Community colleges: accreditation.

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

This bill requires the California Community Colleges (CCC) Board of Governors (Board) to conduct a survey of community colleges, as specified, and to develop a report to be transmitted to specified entities, that reflects a system-wide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency.

Fiscal Impact:

• The California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office indicates that this bill would require 0.5 position and $55,000 General Fund.

Background:

State regulations require each community college within a district to be an accredited institution – with the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) determining accreditation. (Title 5 California Code of Regulations (CCR) § 51016)

Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings.

Under federal law, the United States Department of Education (USDE) establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions.

After an initial accreditation, colleges must have their accreditation reaffirmed every six years. In addition, colleges must submit a midterm report every three years and annual progress reports. The college or district may also have to submit follow-up reports and host visits as required by the accrediting agency. Follow-up reports and accreditation visits are required to retain full accreditation. There are three levels of sanctions prior to termination of accreditation: Warning, Probation, and Show Cause.

Most recently the sanctions imposed on City College of San Francisco have drawn attention to ACCJC and its accreditation process which led to an audit conducted by the California State Auditor. The audit raised some concerns about the ACCJC and the accreditation process and made a series of recommendations to address the identified concerns.

The National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) advises the USDE on matters related to postsecondary accreditation and the eligibility and certification process for higher education institutions to participate in federal student aid programs. The primary function of the NACIQI is to provide recommendations to the U.S. Secretary of Education concerning whether accrediting entities’ standards are sufficiently rigorous and effective in their application to ensure the entity is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions or programs it accredits.

According to the author, current law provides no mechanism for a CCC system-wide performance review of the CCC’s regional accrediting body and providing the overseeing federal entities with such a review increases accountability of the accrediting agency and improves participation by CCC faculty and personnel in the process.

Proposed Law:

This bill requires the Board to conduct a survey of the community colleges, including consultation with representatives of both faculty and classified personnel, and to develop a report to be transmitted to the USDE and the NACIQI that reflects a system-wide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria used to determine an accreditor’s status.

This bill also requires the regional accrediting agency to report to the Board after the NACIQI has notified the regional accrediting agency of the date by which the agency’s application for continued recognition is due.

Related Legislation:

AB 1385 (Ting, 2015) requires notification to the Board before an accrediting agency increases membership fees, special assessments, or other payments charged to a community college. AB 1385 is pending in the Senate Education Committee.

AB 1397 (Ting, 2015) requires the accrediting agency to meet specified operational standards. AB 1397 is pending in Senate Education Committee.

Staff Comments:

• The California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office indicates that this bill would require 0.5 position and $55,000 General Fund. Workload would include survey development and implementation; gathering and analyzing data; and completing the report.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Carol Liu, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 404

Subject: Community colleges: accreditation

SUMMARY

This bill requires the regional accrediting agency for the California Community Colleges (CCC) to report to the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) the date by which the agency’s application for continued recognition is due and requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of community colleges, as specified, to develop a report, transmitted to specified entities, that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency.

BACKGROUND

Existing law confers upon the CCC BOG 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 (Title 5 California Code of Regulations (CCR) § 51016) 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.

ANALYSIS

This bill:

1. Requires the regional accrediting agency for the community colleges to report, as specified, to the CCC BOG the date by which the agency’s application for continued recognition is due.

2. Requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of community colleges including faculty and classified personnel to develop a report that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the regional accrediting agency based on the criteria use to determine an accreditor’s status.

3. Specifies that the report shall be transmitted to the United States Department of Education (USDE) and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI).

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, current law provides no mechanism for a CCC system-wide performance review of the CCC’s regional accrediting body and providing the overseeing federal entities with such a review increases accountability of the accrediting agency and improves participation by CCC faculty and personnel in the process. This bill seeks to provide a method for collecting stakeholder feedback during an accrediting agency’s performance review.

2. Accreditation, how it works. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings.

Under federal law, the United States Department of Education (USDE) establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions. There are three basic types of accreditation:

1. Regional Accreditation. There are six USDE-recognized regional accrediting agencies. Each regional accreditor encompasses public, the vast majority of non-profit private (independent), and some for-profit postsecondary educational institutions in the region it serves. California's regional accrediting agency is separated into two commissions: the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) and the Senior College and University Commission (WASC-Sr.).

2. National Accreditation. National accreditation is not based on geography, but more focused to evaluate specific types of schools and programs. National accreditation is designed to allow nontraditional colleges (trade schools, religious schools, certain online schools) to be compared against similarly designed institutions. Different standards and categories are measured, depending on the type of institution.

3. Specialized/Programmatic Accreditation. Offered by accrediting agencies that represent specific fields of study, these agencies do not accredit entire colleges but instead accredit the programs within colleges that prepare students for the specific field or industry. In most cases, specialized accreditation alone does not enable participation in state and federal financial aid programs.

3. Accreditation of California community colleges. 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.

Many California community colleges have faced various levels of accreditation sanctions. Most recently the sanctions imposed on City College of San Francisco have drawn attention to ACCJC and its accreditation process. The heightened attention lead to an audit by the California State Auditor, who on June 26, 2014, issued a report on California Community Colleges Accreditation. This audit report provided both a review of the ACCJC and the accreditation process in general, as well as a more in-depth examination of recent events related to City College of San Francisco. The report raised some concerns of the ACCJC and the accreditation process and made a series of recommendations to address the identified concerns. After the release of the State Auditor’s report, the Chancellor’s Office reconvened its Accreditation Task Force consisting of community college stakeholders. The Accreditation Task Force is charged with providing input through a report to the Chancellor’s Office regarding the accreditation process, including addressing the State Auditor’s recommendations. The Accreditation Task Force held its final meeting at the end of May and is in the process of finalizing and submitting its final report later this year.

This bill collects and processes information that may compliment the work of the Accreditation Task Force.

4. National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI). NACIQI advises the United State Department of Education on matters related to postsecondary accreditation and the eligibility and certification process for higher education institutions to participate in Federal student aid programs. Its primary function is to provide recommendations to the U.S. Secretary of Education concerning whether accrediting entities’ standards are sufficiently rigorous and effective in their application to ensure the entity is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions or programs it accredits. To meet that standard, accrediting entities must demonstrate compliance with all the criteria for recognition. Once a recommendation is made, this process allows for public comment. This bill seeks to provide California Community College (CCC) faculty and personnel a method for providing feedback and remain anonymous during the accrediting agencies performance review.

5. Related and prior legislation.

AB 1385 (Ting, 2015) requires notification to the California Community College (CCC) Board of Governors (BOG) before an accrediting agency increases membership fees, special assessments, or other payments charged to a community college. AB 1385 is pending in this Committee.

AB 1397 (Ting, 2015) requires the accrediting agency for the CCC to meet specified operational standards. AB 1397 is pending in this Committee.

SB 1068 ( Beall, 2014) would have required the BOG CCC, by January 1, 2016, to report on the feasibility of creating an independent accrediting agency to accredit the California Community Colleges (CCC) and other 2-year private postsecondary educational institutions, and to make recommendations relative to CCC accreditation. SB 1068 was held on the Senate Appropriations suspense file.

SUPPORT

American Federation of Teachers, Local 2121

California Community College Independents

California Federation of Teachers

California School Employees Association

California Teachers Association

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges

OPPOSITION

None received.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 404

Author:(Chiu)

As Amended Ver:April 13, 2015

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Requires the regional accrediting agency for the California Community Colleges (CCC) to report to the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NICIQI) has notified the agency of the date by which their application for continued recognition is due; and, requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of the CCC, including faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education (USDE) and NICIQI that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the agency based on criteria used to determine an accreditor's status.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the BOG to provide general supervision over the CCC and requires the BOG to prescribe minimum standards for CCC formation and operation (Education Code (EDC) Section 66700);

2. Requires the BOG to develop minimum standards governing academic standards, employment policies and shared governance; evaluate CCC fiscal and educational effectiveness and provide assistance when districts encounter management difficulties; administer state funding and establish minimum conditions entitling CCC districts to receive state funds; requires the CCC BOG, in determining if a CCC district satisfies the minimum conditions for receipt of apportionment funding, to review the accreditation status of the CCCs within that district review and approve educational programs (EDC Section 70901);

3. Requires the accrediting agency for CCCs to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a CCC; and, requires the CCC Chancellor's Office to ensure that the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees are provided the aforementioned required information (EDC Section 72208);

4. BOG regulations (5 California Code of Regulations Section 51016) require CCCs to be accredited by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC). However, BOG recently approved regulatory changes that would continue the requirement for accrediting, but remove the explicit requirement of accreditation by the ACCJC.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor one-time General Fund cost (around $50,000) for the Chancellor's Office of the CCC to develop and conduct the survey, summarize the survey data, and prepare the required report.

COMMENTS: Background. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings. Under federal law, the USDE establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions. Institutional accreditation is a requirement for participation in federal financial aid programs. Under federal regulations, accrediting agencies are required to meet general outlined standards, but specific processes and quality standards are left to each accrediting agency to determine.

USDE relies on NACIQI, an 18-member committee appointed equally by the United States Secretary of Education, United States House of Representatives, and the United States Senate, to review accrediting agencies and advise the Secretary on whether an accrediting agency is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions it accredits. NACIQI is charged with determining whether an accrediting agency complies with various criteria for recognition, which include, among other requirements: appropriate accreditation standards; fair and consistent application of accreditation standards; proper monitoring and reevaluation of accredited institutions; and, immediate enforcement to ensure compliance with standards. During the initial application or continued recognition review process, USDE staff publishes a notice in the Federal Register, inviting the public to comment on the agency's compliance with the criteria for recognition and establishing a deadline for receipt of public comment. Public comments are reviewed by NICIQI and USDE staff prior to the USDE decision regarding initial or continued recognition of the accrediting agency. USDE determines the recognition period, up to five years.

Purpose of this bill. According to the author, "there has been a historical lack of accountability for an accrediting agency overseeing the CCCs. This deficiency is due to fear of retribution, scarce local resources, and the absence of a pathway for CCC and other local stakeholders to provide meaningful feedback during an accrediting agency's performance review process for continued accreditation recognition." The author notes that in past NACIQI reviews of ACCJC, there has not been a strong voice for the CCC system as a whole; further, the CCC system does not currently have a method for soliciting feedback from colleges, faculty, and other stakeholders. The author believes that increasing participation in the review process will increase accrediting agency accountability.

Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0000320

Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Jimmy Gomez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 404

Author:(Chiu) – As Amended Ver:April 13, 2015

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill:

1. Requires the regional accrediting agency for the California Community Colleges (CCC) to report to the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NICIQI) has notified the agency of the date by which the its application for continued recognition is due.

2. Requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of the CCC, including faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report—reflecting a systemwide evaluation of the accrediting agency based on criteria used to determine an accreditor's status—to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education (USDE) and NICIQI.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Minor one-time General Fund cost (around $50,000) for the Chancellor's Office of the CCC to develop and conduct the survey, summarize the survey data, and prepare the required report.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author, "there has been a historical lack of accountability for an accrediting agency overseeing the CCCs. This deficiency is due to fear of retribution, scarce local resources, and the absence of a pathway for CCC and other local stakeholders to provide meaningful feedback during an accrediting agency's performance review process for continued accreditation recognition." The author notes that in past NACIQI reviews of CCC's accrediting agency, there has not been a strong voice for the CCC system as a whole; further, the CCC system does not currently have a method for soliciting feedback from colleges, faculty, and other stakeholders. The author believes that increasing participation in the accrediting agency review process will increase accrediting agency's accountability.

2. Background. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings. Under federal law, the USDE establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions. Institutional accreditation is a requirement for participation in federal financial aid programs. Under federal regulations, accrediting agencies are required to meet general outlined standards, but specific processes and quality standards are left to each accrediting agency to determine.

USDE relies on NACIQI, an 18-member committee appointed equally by the Secretary of Education, House of Representatives, and the Senate, to review accrediting agencies and advise the Secretary on whether an accrediting agency is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions it accredits.

There are six USDE-recognized regional accrediting agencies. Each regional accreditor encompasses public, the vast majority of non-profit private (independent), and some for-profit postsecondary educational institutions in the region it serves. California's regional accrediting agency is separated into two commissions; The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) is the regional accrediting agency for community colleges in the western region (California, Hawaii, and U.S. territories).

Between 2003 and 2008, ACCJC had placed 37% of CCCs on "sanction" (at risk of losing accreditation). A study of other regional accreditors showed that during this same time, the percentage of community colleges being sanctioned ranged from 0 to 6%. The large number of penalties for community colleges under ACCJCs jurisdiction led community college leaders, faculty, and staff to, through the CCC Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) Consultation Council, review and make recommendations regarding ACCJC's actions.

In June of 2014, the BSA released an audit of ACCJC's application of the accreditation process. The audit was conducted at the request of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) following concerns among several legislators over the ACCJC decision to terminate accreditation for City College of San Francisco (CCSF). The BSA audit includes a series of recommendations to improve CCC accreditation; among the recommendations supported by CCCCO, BSA recommended the CCCCO facilitate improved communication between CCCs and ACCJC. BSA also recommended allowing CCCs flexibility to choose an accrediting agency; the CCCCO responded that this recommendation should not be pursued as it could lead to reduced transparency, reduced employee mobility within CCCs, and added challenges in overseeing colleges effectively. The CCC BOG took action to remove ACCJC from the regulatory requirement for CCC accreditation, but will still require a single accreditor for all colleges.

3. Related Legislation. AB 1397 (Ting), pending in Assembly Higher Education, requires the accrediting agency for CCC to provide an opportunity for public comment prior to taking action related to the accreditation status of a community college.

Analysis Prepared by: Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 7, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION

Jose Medina, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 404

Author:(Chiu) – As Introduced Ver:February 19, 2015

SUBJECT: Community colleges: accreditation

SUMMARY: Requires the accrediting agency for the California Community Colleges (CCC) to report to the CCC Board of Governors (BOG) as soon as practicable after the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NICIQI) has notified the agency of the date by which their application for continued recognition is due; and, requires the CCC BOG to conduct a survey of the CCC, including faculty and classified personnel, to develop a report to be transmitted to the United States Department of Education (USDE) and NICIQI that reflects a systemwide evaluation of the agency based on criteria used to determine an accreditor's status.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the BOG to provide general supervision over the CCC and requires the BOG to prescribe minimum standards for CCC formation and operation (Education Code Section 66700);

2. Requires the BOG to develop minimum standards governing academic standards, employment policies and shared governance; evaluate CCC fiscal and educational effectiveness and provide assistance when districts encounter management difficulties; administer state funding and establish minimum conditions entitling CCC districts to receive state funds; requires the CCC BOG, in determining if a CCC district satisfies the minimum conditions for receipt of apportionment funding, to review the accreditation status of the CCCs within that district review and approve educational programs (EDC Section 70901);

3. Requires the accrediting agency for CCCs to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a community college and, on a biannual basis, any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a CCC; and, requires the CCC Chancellor's Office to ensure that the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees are provided the aforementioned required information (EDC Sections 72208);

4. BOG regulations (5 CCR Section 51016) require CCCs to be accredited by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC). However, BOG recently approved regulatory changes that would continue the requirement for accrediting, but remove the explicit requirement of accreditation by the ACCJC.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS: Background on Accreditation. Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to determine academic quality. Accrediting agencies are private organizations that establish operating standards for educational or professional institutions and programs, determine the extent to which the standards are met, and publicly announce their findings. Under federal law, the USDE establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality of education provided by their accredited institutions. Institutional accreditation is a requirement for participation in federal financial aid programs. Under federal regulations, accrediting agencies are required to meet general outlined standards, but specific processes and quality standards are left to each accrediting agency to determine.

Role of NACIQI. USDE relies on NACIQI, an 18-member committee appointed equally by the Secretary of Education, House of Representatives, and the Senate, to review accrediting agencies and advise the Secretary on whether an accrediting agency is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education provided by the institutions it accredits. NACIQI is charged with determining whether an accrediting agency complies with various criteria for recognition, which include, among other requirements: appropriate accreditation standards; fair and consistent application of accreditation standards; proper monitoring and reevaluation of accredited institutions; and, immediate enforcement to ensure compliance with standards.

Role of public comment. During the initial application or continued recognition review process, USDE staff publishes a notice in the Federal Register, inviting the public to comment on the agency's compliance with the criteria for recognition and establishing a deadline for receipt of public comment. Public comments are reviewed by NICIQI and USDE staff prior to the USDE decision regarding initial or continued recognition of the accrediting agency. USDE determines the recognition period, up to five years.

CCC accrediting agency. There are six USDE-recognized regional accrediting agencies. Each regional accreditor encompasses public, the vast majority of non-profit private (independent), and some for-profit postsecondary educational institutions in the region it serves. California's regional accrediting agency is separated into two commissions; ACCJC is the regional accrediting agency for community colleges in the western region (California, Hawaii, and U.S. territories). ACCJC membership consists of the institutions ACCJC has accredited in California, Hawaii and numerous Pacific island nations and territories; the 19 ACCJC commissioners are elected by a vote of the presidents of the member-colleges and serve up to two three-year terms. ACCJC bylaws govern, among other areas, commission meetings, responsibilities of commissioners, and the appeal process for institutions appealing a denial or termination of accreditation. ACCJC bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the Commissioners. Under ACCJC bylaws, the president, appointed by the Commissioners, is responsible for general supervision, direction, and control of ACCJC operations.

ACCJC controversy. Between 2003 and 2008, ACCJC had placed 37% of CCCs on "sanction" (at risk of losing accreditation). A study of other regional accreditors showed that during this same time, the percentage of community colleges being sanctioned ranged from 0 to 6%. The large number of penalties for community colleges under ACCJCs jurisdiction led community college leaders, faculty, and staff to, through the CCC Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) Consultation Council, review and make recommendations regarding ACCJC's actions. Under the leadership of then-Chancellor Jack Scott, the group made a series of recommendations largely designed to focus ACCJC on institutional improvement rather than compliance. In a written response to Chancellor Scott's recommendations, ACCJC defended current standards and practices and made suggestions of how the CCCCO could assist colleges in meeting ACCJC's requirements.

Bureau of State Audits (BSA) review of ACCJC. In June of 2014, the BSA released an audit of ACCJC's application of the accreditation process. The audit was conducted at the request of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) following concerns among several legislators over the ACCJC decision to terminate accreditation for City College of San Francisco (CCSF). The BSA audit includes a series of recommendations to improve CCC accreditation; among the recommendations supported by CCCCO, BSA recommended the CCCCO facilitate improved communication between CCCs and ACCJC. BSA also recommended allowing CCCs flexibility to choose an accrediting agency; the CCCCO responded that this recommendation should not be pursued as it could lead to reduced transparency, reduced employee mobility within CCCs, and added challenges in overseeing colleges effectively.

Purpose of this bill. According to the author, "there has been a historical lack of accountability for an accrediting agency overseeing the CCCs. This deficiency is due to fear of retribution, scarce local resources, and the absence of a pathway for CCC and other local stakeholders to provide meaningful feedback during an accrediting agency's performance review process for continued accreditation recognition." The author notes that in past NACIQI reviews of ACCJC, there has not been a strong voice for the CCC system as a whole; further, the CCC system does not currently have a method for soliciting feedback from colleges, faculty, and other stakeholders. The author believes that increasing participation in the accrediting agency review process will increase accrediting agency accountability.

Regional and national accreditation. In response to the BSA audit recommendation regarding allowing CCCs to choose an accrediting agency, the CCC BOG took action to remove ACCJC from the regulatory requirement for CCC accreditation. The change initially proposed to authorize the Chancellor to approve only a regional accrediting agency recognized by USDE. However, the regulation approved by the BOG did not include the requirement for a regional accrediting agency. The CCCCO argued that the term "regional" had no meaning because accrediting agencies are nationally recognized by USDE and can either be national or regional. However, as noted by NACIQI, because regional commissions have accredited under one tent, research universities, state colleges, liberal arts institutions, community colleges, and special purpose institutions. This system keeps these very different institutions accountable to a single set of standards within each region, promoting mobility for transfer students, and students seeking a higher degree, as well as reasonable consistency for the various degree levels.

Further, the universities that primarily receive CCC transfer students have largely established a standard of requiring regional accreditation for transfer credits. For example, according to the California State University (CSU) website, generally college level credits earned from an institution of higher education accredited by a regional accrediting agency are accepted for transfer to campuses. CSU specifies that "campuses may enter into course-to-course or program-to-program articulation agreements with other CSU campuses and any or all of the California community colleges, and other regionally accredited institutions." According to the University of Southern California website, coursework completed at, or degrees from, U.S. institutions accredited by the six regional accrediting agencies are generally accepted for transfer.

Moving forward, the author may wish to consider clarifying that the accrediting agency of community colleges, with which the CCC, the CCCCO, and the campus community must engage, review, and provide feedback regarding, must be a regional accrediting agency.

Related legislation.

AB 1385 (Ting) is pending in the Assembly Higher Education Committee. This bill would require notification to the CCC BOG before an accrediting agency increases membership fees, special assessments, or other payments charged to a community college.

AB 1397 (Ting) is pending in the Assembly Higher Education Committee. This bill would require the accrediting agency for CCC to provide an opportunity for public comment prior to taking action related to the accreditation status of a community college.

Prior legislation.

AB 1942 (Bonta), Chapter 382, Statutes of 2014, required the CCC BOG, in determining if a CCC district satisfies the minimum conditions for receipt of apportionment funding, to review the accreditation status of the CCCs within that district; required the accrediting agency for CCCs to report to the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees of the Legislature upon the issuance of a decision that affects the accreditation status of a CCC and, on a biannual basis, any accreditation policy changes that affect the accreditation process or status for a CCC; and, required the CCCCO to ensure that the appropriate policy and budget subcommittees are provided the aforementioned required information.

AB 2247 (Williams), Chapter 388, Statutes of 2014, required all campuses serving California students of public and private postsecondary educational institutions that receive state or federal financial aid funding to post institutional accreditation documents on the institution's website.

SB 1068 (Beall) of 2014, which was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee, would have required CCC BOG, by January 1, 2016, to report on the feasibility of creating an independent accrediting agency to accredit the CCCs and other 2-year private postsecondary educational institutions, and to make recommendations relative to CCC accreditation.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Federation of Teachers

Faculty Association of California Community Colleges

Opposition

None on File

Analysis Prepared by: Laura Metune / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960