The 2018-19 Budget: Adult Education Analysis

The 2018-19 Budget: Adult Education Analysis MAC TAYLOR LEGISLATIVE ANALYST FEBRUARY 2018 Summary Recommend Revamping Funding for Adult Education and Aligning Certain Policies. The state restructured its adult education system in 2013-14 with the intent of fostering greater coordination among providers—primarily community colleges and adult schools. After five years, several key fiscal and policy inconsistencies remain across the two sets of providers. Most notably, adult programs offered by community colleges and adult schools have different funding rules, different fee policies, different instructor qualifications, and different student identifiers. The Governor’s budget provides $5 million ongoing to improve data alignment between community colleges and adult schools. The administration, however, does not address the other areas of misalignment. To address these areas, we recommend the Legislature set a uniform per-student funding rate for adult education providers, establish a consistent fee policy (having all providers charge no fee or a nominal fee), and eliminate certain qualifications for adult education instructors. We recommend approving the Governor’s proposed $5 million augmentation for data alignment but modifying the proposal to require each segment to assign and share student identifiers. This would allow the state and providers to see how students move between the K-12 system, adult schools, and community colleges. In this report, we first provide background on end, most adult education course offerings are in three adult education and review the restructuring of adult instructional areas: basic math and English, English as a education that the state embarked on in 2013-14. second language (ESL), and career technical education We then describe the Governor’s two 2018-19 adult (CTE). For CTE, adult education providers tend to offer education proposals. Next, we assess those proposals programs that are one year or less in length. and examine various unresolved issues relating to State Embarked on Major Adult Education the alignment of adult education policies among Restructuring in 2013-14. Community colleges and community colleges and adult schools. Lastly, we make school districts (through their adult schools) are the recommendations relating to the Governor’s proposals primary providers of adult education. In addition, and policy alignment. various other entities provide adult education, including community-based organizations, libraries, Background and jails. Due to longstanding concerns with a lack of Adult Education Has Multiple Purposes. The coordination among providers, the 2013-14 budget primary purpose of adult education is to provide adults package mapped out a new state strategy for funding with the precollegiate knowledge and skills they need and operating adult education. Specifically, the budget to participate in civic life and the workforce. Toward this provided limited-term grants to adult education analysis full gutter 2018-19 BUDGET providers to form consortia and develop regional college programs. The higher rate is in recognition delivery plans. The 2015-16 budget created the that the program did not receive a COLA the past few Adult Education Block Grant (AEBG), which provided years. (Specifically, the 4.1 percent increase equates $500 million in ongoing funding to the consortia to to a 2.5 percent COLA associated with 2018-19 and serve adults according to their plans. The amount of a 1.6 percent COLA associated with 2017-18.) The AEBG funding that a consortium receives is based administration proposes to distribute the augmentation primarily on its 2012-13 adult education spending level, to consortia based on their current allocations. with a smaller portion distributed based on a calculation Provides $5 Million Ongoing to Support Data of regional need. Consortia have received the same Projects. The budget proposes $5 million for the CCC funding amounts annually since 2015-16. In addition Chancellor’s Office to undertake several data-related to AEBG funding, the state continues to provide about projects. Specifically, the $5 million would be used to $300 million annually in noncredit apportionment (1) continue support of a data sharing platform that funding for community college adult education tracks student outcomes across providers and into programs. (We estimate that community colleges spend the workforce by linking student information between another $2 billion on CTE programs that are longer than adult schools, CCC, and the Employment Development one year in length. These programs generally are not Department (EDD); (2) provide training and technical included as part of consortia planning activities.) assistance to local providers on data submission and State Left Some Alignment Areas Unaddressed, using data to inform local programming; and (3) collect Tasked Agencies With Addressing Them. While survey data on the outcomes of AEBG participants the 2013-14 legislation creating the AEBG aimed to whose employment outcomes currently cannot be have adult education providers in each region of the tracked because they do not have a Social Security state coordinate their program offerings, it did not Number (SSN). These efforts build upon the $25 million address inconsistencies in certain fiscal and policy one-time funding the state provided in 2015-16 to areas. Separate legislation enacted that year tasked initiate development of the data sharing platform. the California Department of Education (CDE) and the Assessment California Community Colleges (CCC) Chancellor’s Office with submitting recommendations pertaining to Below, we first assess the Governor’s adult (1) a consistent fee policy, (2) common assessment education COLA proposal, along with unresolved policies for adult education students, and (3) a funding and fee alignment issues. We then assess comprehensive accountability system (including the the Governor’s data alignment proposal. Next, we use of a single student identifier). It also required the assess unresolved alignment issues relating to student Commission on Teacher Credentialing and the CCC placement policies, faculty qualifications, and the Academic Senate to make recommendations pertaining delineation between noncredit and credit instruction. to qualifications for adult education instructors in both The first four columns of Figure 1 summarize all of segments. The agencies ultimately were unable in most these unresolved alignment issues. cases to agree on recommendations for alignment Providing the AEBG Program a COLA Would between the two systems. As a result, our office was Treat It Similarly to Several Other Education tasked with providing recommendations on these Programs. The Governor’s budget funds a COLA issues as part of our 2018-19 budget analysis. for many K-12 and community college programs in 2018-19. This is consistent with state action Governor’s Proposals the past few years to fund COLAs for many Provides AEBG 4.1 Percent Cost-of-Living Proposition 98 programs. For some major education Adjustment (COLA). Since the first $500 million programs, including the Local Control Funding Formula AEBG appropriation in 2015-16, the state has not and community college apportionments, recent provided a COLA to the program. The Governor state budgets have provided augmentations notably proposes a $20.6 million (4.1 percent) increase in in excess of inflation. The AEBG, however, has not 2018-19. This increase is higher than the increase received these COLAs. (Since 2015-16, the only AEBG the Governor proposes for certain other community 2 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full gutter 2018-19 BUDGET Figure 1 Summary of Unresolved Adult Education Alignment Issues California Community Issue Colleges (CCC) Adult Schools Problem LAO Recommendation Student identifiers Use Social Security Varies. Few collect • Difficult to track students • Require adult schools to Number (SSN) or SSN or assign within and across segments assign an SSID to students assigned ID number if no Statewide Student and into the workforce. without an SSN and share SSN. Identifier (SSID). the SSIDs with CCC. • Require CCC to use and maintain SSIDs. State funding $300 million CCC $440 million AEBG. • Existing funding rules likely • Set uniform CCC and adult noncredit apportionments No established per- lead to different access, school per-student funding ($5,310 per student for student rate. services, and quality for rate. most noncredit courses students. and $3,300 for remaining noncredit courses). $60 million AEBG. Course fees No course fees for Fees may be charged • Depending on provider, • Eliminate adult school fees noncredit instruction. for CTE courses, but adults may or may not be or require all providers no other courses. charged course fees. to charge a nominal enrollment fee. Accountability State requires regional consortia to report • Limited incentives to improve • Base a portion of state outcomes on specified performance measures. student outcomes. funding on performance. Some mention of performance funding in statute, but not operational. Coordination — — • Other entities receiving state • Require entities receiving with other adult and federal adult education funds to document that they education funds funds are encouraged but participate in their regional not required to coordinate consortia. with their consortia. Student Use multiple measures Same as CCC. • Depending on provider, • Segments are in midst of assessment for initial placements. students with same aligning assessment and and placement Measures can include demonstrated skill level placement policies. Have policies locally set cut scores on may be placed into different segments finish this work state-approved tests. courses. and revisit issue next year. Minimum instructor Bachelor’s degree with Bachelor’s degree with • Higher requirement can • No longer require adult qualifications coursework in certain coursework in certain make hiring instructors at school instructors with a areas. areas plus adult adult schools more difficult bachelor’s degree to hold a education teaching than at CCC. teaching credential. credential. • CCC instructors without a teaching credential cannot teach at adult schools. Credit versus Definition of credit versus All noncredit. • Depending on provider, • Restrict credit instruction noncredit noncredit is unclear students may receive credit at CCC to college-level courses and inconsistent across or noncredit for similar coursework. colleges. courses and colleges may or may not include similar courses in adult education plans. AEBG = Adult Education Block Grant and CTE = career technical education. www.lao.ca.gov 3 analysis full gutter 2018-19 BUDGET augmentation has been $5 million one time in 2016-17 additional support for adult students and for consortia for technical assistance and professional development.) coordination activities. State Lacks Data to Help It Set Overall AEBG . . . And Another Set of Funding Rules for Adult Funding Level. Currently, the state lacks much key Schools. By comparison, adult schools do not receive data that could help it determine how much to provide apportionment funding, with their sole source of state annually for adult education in California. Most notably, funding being AEBG. Currently, adult schools receive the state currently does not know the extent of the about $440 million in AEBG funding annually. As with current unmet need in the state, how much providers community colleges, adult schools use a part of their are spending on services, and the quality of those AEBG funding for planning and coordination activities. services. Without this basic information, the Legislature They use the bulk of their AEBG funding for direct cannot have confidence it knows what it is getting for instruction. The state, however, has no set per-student any particular state appropriation level (with or without funding rate, so each adult school determines for itself a COLA). how much to spend per student. The state currently Existing State Funding Rules Are Inconsistent does not have data on per-student spending by adult and Exacerbate Differences in Access and Quality. school, but providers indicate that spending varies In addition to being concerned that the state lacks across the state. (AEBG administrators indicate that the basic data required to help it set the annual they are beginning to collect this data in 2017-18.) adult education appropriation level, we have serious Without a set per-student funding rate, some adult concerns about the overall way adult education is schools may be offering much richer programs to a funded. Most notably, the state has one set of rules for much smaller group of students. community colleges and a different set of rules for adult Differences in Fee Policies Make Matters Worse. schools. The result of having different sets of funding Inconsistencies exist not only in state funding but rules means some providers likely are receiving and also in state fee policies. Statute prohibits community spending substantially more on adult education services colleges from charging any fees for adult education (or than other providers. These funding and spending any noncredit instruction), whereas statute prohibits differences, in turn, likely are contributing to widening adult schools from charging fees for basic math and differences in levels of access and quality for adults English courses as well as ESL courses but permits across the state. Below, we describe funding rules for them to charge fees for CTE courses (which typically community colleges, then describe the rules for adult are more expensive). CTE fees vary among adult schools. schools and type of CTE program, with fees reaching One Set of Funding Rules for Community the thousands of dollars for some programs. Based Colleges . . . Currently, community colleges annually on self-reported school district accounting data, we receive about $60 million in AEBG funding and about estimate that adult schools collected about $40 million $300 million in noncredit apportionment funding to statewide in fee revenue in 2015-16. The rationale for provide adult education. (The amount of apportionment different CTE fee policies appears to be that community funding going for adult education is likely higher than colleges can claim apportionment funds to cover $300 million because the lines between noncredit their costs, but adult schools only have their AEBG and credit instruction are blurred at the community allocations, which might be insufficient to cover their colleges, an issue we discuss later in this section.) The costs. By allowing adult schools to collect fees for CTE apportionment funding community colleges receive courses, they therefore could maintain courses they equates to $5,310 per full-time equivalent student for might otherwise have to cancel due to a lack of state most noncredit courses (including basic math and funding. English, ESL, and CTE) and $3,300 for remaining Limited Incentives to Improve Student noncredit courses (including citizenship and parenting). Outcomes. Though the state continues to lack some Whereas community colleges use their apportionment basic adult education data, statute authorizing AEBG funding for direct adult education instruction, requires regional consortia to report outcomes on they typically use their AEBG funding to provide several performance measures and specifies that some funding is to be based on consortia’s performance 4 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full gutter 2018-19 BUDGET on these measures. To date, however, the state has an SSN to ask them about their employment outcomes. not distributed any AEBG or noncredit apportionment Such surveys might help address the issue of missing funding based on performance. While data collection employment data for these students. still is being refined, we have concerns that without Proposal Does Not Address Even More performance-based funding or some other form of state Fundamental Issue. When students attending accountability for student outcomes, consortia will have community college adult programs do not have an weak incentives to improve their programs. SSN, CCC assigns them a CCC identifier. When Adult Education Providers Receiving Other students attending adult schools do not have an SSN, Funds Are Not Required to Coordinate With CDE will sometimes assign them a Statewide Student Consortia. In addition to community colleges and adult Identifier, or SSID. (Every K-12 student in the state’s schools, several other entities—including libraries and public schools is assigned an SSID when they enroll.) community-based organizations—receive various pots Currently, the state does not require CCC to share its of state and federal funding for adult education. These student identifiers with CDE or vice versa. As a result, other fund sources include federal Workforce Innovation the state is not able to systematically analyze how and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Title II funds, state funding adult students move from the K-12 system into adult for jail education, and California State Library literacy schools and community colleges or between adult funds. State law encourages but does not require schools and community colleges. This is a particularly providers receiving these pots of funds to coordinate notable shortcoming given one of the key points of their adult education course offerings with their regional having a regional approach to adult education is better consortia. Not requiring such coordination weakens coordination. the primary goal of the adult education restructuring— No Consistent Way to Assess Students’ Skill better coordination. Without coordinating funds and Level. Both community colleges and adult schools may program offerings, providers could continue offering use scores on skill assessments as one consideration courses that are not aligned to regional workforce when they place students into adult education courses. needs, are duplicative, or are of lower priority. (In addition, providers consider other factors, like a Funding Data Alignment Efforts Could Improve student’s educational goals and high school grade point Quality and Value of Data. Helping providers submit average.) The assessments and cut scores, however, consistent and accurate data would benefit all users are set locally and differ from provider to provider. As of the data platform—both providers themselves and a result, different providers may place students with policymakers. Improving providers’ understanding of similar skill levels into different courses. For students how data can benefit them also could result in the who need to change providers within or outside of their data being used more frequently to inform program consortium—for example to take a more advanced decisions, particularly around program redesigns and class—these differences in placement policies can improvements. Moreover, continuing to develop AEBG’s result in confusion and potentially duplication in course data linking platform would allow for more seamless taking. The differences in placement policies also sharing and dissemination of data. Many of these mean that some students may take longer to complete improvements could help policymakers adopt more their program, as their providers require them to take informed adult education policies. additional classes. Governor’s Data Proposal Tries to Deal With One Adult Education Instructors Held to Different Major Existing Data Issue. The current data linking Qualification Requirements. Despite teaching similar platform has great potential in that it is intended to be content, instructors from community colleges and adult able to follow students throughout their educational schools are subject to different minimum qualifications programs and into the workforce. A major data hurdle, for employment. Whereas both community colleges however, is that many adult students do not have an and adult schools generally require instructors to SSN—the primary method state agencies have of have a bachelor’s degree or higher, statute places tracking adult students’ educational and EDD workforce higher requirements on adult school instructors. outcomes. The Governor’s proposal seeks to address Specifically, adult school instructors also must have a this shortcoming by funding surveys of students without state-approved teaching credential. This inconsistency www.lao.ca.gov 5 analysis full gutter 2018-19 BUDGET results in instructors who can teach at one segment but education would have a funding and accountability not the other. It also can make hiring instructors at adult system separate from community college credit schools more difficult than at community colleges. instruction. If the Legislature reviewed both the Definition of Credit Versus Noncredit Coursework noncredit and credit funding rules in 2018-19, it Is Unclear and Inconsistent Across Community would have greater assurance that the new rules Colleges. Though many of the state’s current problems were coherent, coordinated, and had fewer, if any, with adult education stem from inconsistent policies unintended consequences. across community colleges and adult schools, some Begin by Setting Uniform Adult Education problems stem from inconsistent policies within the Per-Student Funding Rate. We think the most community colleges themselves. Generally, CCC important first step in any restructuring of adult noncredit courses are considered adult education education funding rules is to set a uniform rate per (precollegiate) while credit courses generally are full-time equivalent student. That is, we recommend considered college level. The state, however, has no the state provide the same base per-student funding standard definition of noncredit and credit coursework, rate for adult schools and community college noncredit with colleges making such determinations themselves. courses. Providing a uniform base per-student funding For example, some colleges offer certified nursing rate would result in more consistent services across assistant courses for credit, whereas others offer California and enhance the state’s ability to monitor the the same courses on a noncredit basis. Three major adult education system. It also would allow the state to problems result from lack of clear delineations: (1) the establish a corresponding fee policy that was rationale state does not know how much funding community and consistent (as discussed below), treating providers colleges are providing for adult education; (2) students and students the same across the state. In doing may or may not receive credit for the same or similar so, the state would no longer allow some providers course depending upon the college they attend; to charge hefty fees for the same courses that other and (3) community colleges may or may not include providers offer free of charge. Depending upon the similar courses as part of their adult education regional distributional effects of the base per-student rate, the consortia planning. That is, some colleges coordinate state might wish to phase in the new rate over a few certain courses with other adult education providers, years. whereas other colleges do not coordinate those course Consider Building Performance Component Into offerings. New Funding System. As the Legislature considers developing new funding rules, it could build off of Recommendations recommendations we have made in previous years Below, we discuss our recommendations relating as well as the administration’s 2018-19 community to the Governor’s two adult education proposals and colleges apportionment proposal to include a adult education alignment. The last column of Figure 1 performance component. By examining adult/noncredit summarizes our alignment recommendations. rules separately from credit rules, the Legislature could Timely Opportunity to Revamp Adult Education ensure that the performance measures built into the Funding Rules. While the Governor’s proposal to funding system were appropriate for adult education. provide AEBG with a COLA treats AEBG similarly It also could ensure that associated planning and to some other education programs, we believe the accountability requirements were seamlessly integrated state’s overall approach to funding adult education into the regional consortia system. By building a is fundamentally flawed and in need of revamping. performance component into the funding system, The coming year could be a particularly good the state could create a strong incentive for regional opportunity to undertake such restructuring, as consortia to work together to identify strategies that the Governor simultaneously is proposing major improve student learning and workforce outcomes. changes to community college apportionment funding Make Fees Consistent Using One of Two rules. (We discuss this proposal in our report, The Approaches. We recommend the Legislature make 2018-19 Budget: Higher Education Analysis.) Under fee policies consistent by either eliminating adult our recommended approach, all of adult/noncredit school fees entirely or charging students a nominal 6 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE analysis full gutter 2018-19 BUDGET fee at both community colleges and adult schools. however, that the Legislature also require the CCC Under our recommendation to provide a uniform state Chancellor’s Office and CDE to use a portion of the funding rate per student, most, if not all, adult schools $5 million augmentation to collect or assign an SSID likely could eliminate their CTE fees and still operate to adult students without an SSN and for CCC to use their programs. This is because the state funding rate and maintain these SSIDs in the adult education data would cover all, or almost all, of their program costs. platform. This would allow the state and providers to Even if state funding were to cover virtually the full assess how students move between the K-12 system, cost, the state nonetheless might want to institute a adult schools, and community colleges. nominal enrollment fee that would apply to all students Wait for Segments to Finish Work Aligning enrolled in adult education courses regardless of Assessment and Placement Policies. The CDE and provider. Requiring all students to pay a small fee CCC Chancellor’s Office are in the midst of working could foster positive behavioral tendencies—such as to crosswalk between currently used adult education making students more deliberate in their selection of assessments, scoring, and placement policies. The courses and more purposeful about holding campuses segments indicate that providers will be able to start accountable for providing high-quality services. That is, using the new crosswalk policies in 2018-19. We rather than being a barrier, the fee would be intended recommend waiting for the segments to complete this to ensure students are serious about their studies and work in 2018-19. Were the Legislature still to have campuses are serious about offering quality programs concerns with inconsistencies in assessment and aligned with students’ interests. If the Legislature were placement policies after this work has been completed, to institute a fee, we recommend setting the fee amount it could revisit the issues in 2019-20. low given the vast majority of adult students are low No Longer Require Adult School Instructors to income. Hold a Credential. We recommend the Legislature Require All Providers to Coordinate With amend statute so that individuals no longer need a Regional Consortia. We recommend that as a teaching credential to serve as instructors at adult condition of receiving state or federal funds, adult schools. By aligning qualifications for instructors, education providers document that they participate in instructors could readily teach adult education courses their regional planning consortia. Participation would at both community colleges and adult schools. include reporting of adult education services and Moreover, the change could help adult schools in hiring funding. By requiring all providers of adult education teachers. If the state has concerns about the quality to participate in their consortia’s regional efforts, the of adult education instructors, it could encourage state could ensure that consortia get a full picture of the consortia to provide professional development as services and funding available to adult learners in their needed. region. Establish Clear Definition of CCC Noncredit Approve Funding to Support Data Projects, Instruction. We recommend the Legislature create With Additional Requirement. We believe that having consistent rules that clearly distinguish adult education accurate program outcome data is essential if the coursework in math, English, ESL, and CTE from Legislature is to monitor adult education in California in collegiate coursework. The delineation between meaningful ways. Such data can help the Legislature precollegiate and collegiate coursework already is make informed and strategic decisions about how much clearer for other subjects, such as history and much to spend for adult education, how to allocate science. Similar to the delineations made for these such funding among providers, and how to change other subjects, we recommend the Legislature restrict programmatic requirements to help ensure providers credit instruction in math, English, ESL, and CTE to offer effective and efficient programs. We also believe college-level coursework. Though the state does not providing local providers access to data can allow collect data on how many precollegiate courses in them to better tailor their course offerings. We think these areas are now being offered for credit, the impact the Governor’s data alignment proposal helps foster of this recommendation could be significant, with accurate and meaningful data. For these reasons, we colleges needing to reclassify many courses. recommend the Legislature approve it. We recommend, www.lao.ca.gov 7 analysis full gutter 2018-19 BUDGET SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS • Revamp adult education funding rules. Begin by setting a uniform per-student funding rate and consider building a performance component into the new funding system. • Establish a consistent fee policy using one of two approaches—either eliminating fees or charging a nominal fee for all adult education courses. • Require all adult education providers to coordinate with their adult education regional consortia. • Approve Governor’s proposal to support data projects, but additionally require school districts to assign student identifiers and community colleges to use and maintain the identifiers. • Wait for the California Department of Education and California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office to complete planned 2018-19 work on aligning assessment and placement policies. If inconsistencies remain, revisit assessment and placement polices in 2019-20. • Amend statute so that adult education instructors at adult schools no longer need a teaching credential. If the Legislature has concerns with instructor quality, encourage consortia to provide professional development as needed. • Create clear definitions that distinguish credit and noncredit instruction at community colleges. LAO PUBLICATIONS This report was prepared by Natasha Collins and reviewed by Jennifer Kuhn. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) is a nonpartisan office that provides fiscal and policy information and advice to the Legislature. To request publications call (916) 445-4656. This report and others, as well as an e-mail subscription service, are available on the LAO’s website at www.lao.ca.gov. The LAO is located at 925 L Street, Suite 1000, Sacramento, CA 95814. 8 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE