Updated February 8th, 2013

Adult Education and Apprenticeship Realignment

ACSA opposes the governor’s proposal to shift responsibility for delivering adult education services from K-12 and community colleges to only community colleges. ACSA recognizes that historically there has been an ongoing lack of a definition of educational responsibilities between the two education systems at the state level. However, over the years both segments have collaborated to serve adult learners in successful means throughout the state at the local level. This includes the establishment of the Delineation of Function between K-12 school districts and community colleges. While this mandate has been eliminated, a number of school districts and community colleges continue to enter into these agreements and the statute is still in the Education Code even if unfunded and not enforced. Therefore it is false to state that there is no coordination between the two systems.

The services that are provided locally do not fit nicely into boxes easily understood at the state policy or fiscal level. There continues to be a lack of understanding as to the different students who are being served, the challenges of reaching California’s divergent population, and the programs offered to maximize the economic return on investment the state benefits from the two Adult Education systems. For example, there are many adults who need basic skills who will never attend a community college without going to a K-12 Adult Education school first. In addition, adult education programs are offered locally to the students and at any time of the year.

A major concern with the community college structure is the approval process, conducted through the Academic Senate that needs to approve the classes prior to their enactment. Classes in the K-12 setting can be offered at any time, in any place and without tremendous complications in order to meet the needs of the students as quickly as possible. Further, it is unclear whether the community college system can transition quickly enough to offer courses by July 1 or have the capacity to offer adult education courses. ACSA recommends that the Legislature and Governor build on the strengths of the two Adult Education systems including strengthening the delineation of functions and building partnerships that work best for local communities.

Governor Appoints Stapf-Walters as Executive Director of SBE

Karen Stapf Walters, 55, of Sacramento, has been appointed education policy advisor to the Governor, and nominated executive director of the California State Board of Education. She has worked at the Association of California School Administrators as interim executive director since 2012, assistant executive director of governmental relations since 2003 and was an advocate from 1999 to 2003. Stapf Walters was director of the Education Seminar Programs for the Institute for Fiduciary Education from 1996 to 1998. She was a California Senate Fellow for State Senator Lucy Killea from 1990 to 1991 and continued to serve the Senator as a committee consultant and senior staff from 1991 until 1996. She earned a social studies teaching credential and taught social studies and English in both middle and high schools in California and Ohio from 1979 to 1990. This position does not require Senate confirmation. Stapf Walters is a Democrat.

Budget Hearings

Over the coming months, legislative budget committees will be meeting to discuss the Governor’s budget proposal and determine if changes need to be made to address legislative priorities and concerns. In this regard, the first two overview hearings on education have been scheduled by the Senate Budget Committee for mid-February. Because these hearings will be merely an opportunity to hear from the Administration on their education plan from a high level perspective, we do not at this time believe it is critical for the field to engage and attend. That said, as the budget subcommittees begin to meet and discuss the specifics it is very likely we will call upon the adult education field to attend and speak up regarding the Governor’s plan to move adult education to the community college system. In the meantime, please know that I, as your legislative advocate, will attend and provide brief comment as allowable at both overview hearings. I will be sure to follow-up once the subcommittee meetings are scheduled for a deeper dive on the issues.

Thursday, February 14^th 9:30 a.m. State Capitol, Room 4203 Senate Hearing – Overview of 2013–14 Higher Education Budget

Thursday, February 28^th 9:30 a.m. State Capitol, Room 4203 Senate Hearing – Overview of the 2013–14 K–12 Education Budget

To monitor the hearings on your computer, please see http://senate.ca.gov/todaysevents the day of the hearing.

Finding Clarity & Pushing Advocacy – Governor’s Education Finance Reform Proposal

As more information become available regarding the Governor’s education finance reform proposal, many education stakeholders are left with more questions than answers. Less than two weeks in from the release of the budget plan, confusion seems to be commonplace. Nevertheless, as I indicated in my last update, I believe the Governor’s proposal provides a great starting point for moving adult education forward. Unlike the past five years, we are not in a position of having to impose additional cuts to education that would undoubtedly continue to erode adult education programs statewide. Further, unlike the Governor’s proposal last year that ignored the needs of our adult learner population, he has proposed maintaining adult education programs in to the future. And as if that weren’t enough, he provided dedicated revenue to support the programs.

Now of course the details of the proposal that would push the responsibility of adult education to the community college system and provide only $300 million versus the $650 million that we were allocated prior to flexibility aren’t ideal, they are a starting point and a much better one for long-term viability. As was the case during the Weighted Student Formula (WSF) discussions of last year, the Legislature is continuing to push the Administration to put their “Local Control Funding Formula” and other education reforms in to a policy bill versus a trailer bill (budget). This is critically important to ensuring that the proposals are fully vetted and that we have the opportunity to have our voices heard on the proposals. A few members critical to moving such reforms forward have even suggested that reforms at the level the Governor has proposed are more of a two-year endeavor. Whether or not this plays out over two years or just this year, the bottom line is that we have time to work out the details and ensure the proposal put forth is one that is workable and accessible to the students we serve.

At this point, what we know about the Governor’s proposal is as follows:

- Local Control Funding Formula (formerly called the “Weighted Student Formula”) – aims to increase local control, reduce state bureaucracy, reduce inequities, reflect student needs, transparency

- Base Grant; Supplemental Grant (weighted); Concentration Grant (weighted); Augmentation to Base Grant (K-3 CSR; CTE 9-12); Add-ons to Formula (Transportation; TIIG); Separately Funded Programs (Federally-Funded Programs; QEIA; Special Education; After School Ed & Safety; Child Nutrition; Preschool); Hold-Harmless and Transition

- 7 Year Phase-In

- Adult Education would be the responsibility of the community college system and funded by a $300 million new Adult Education Block Grant (new revenue); the program would no longer be separately funded under K-12 – all current AE funds would be swept and could be used flexibly by the district, as such, a K-12 district could opt to continue its AE program or could be in a position to have the community college system contract with the K-12 system to provide adult education.

- While provided $300 million to fund Adult Education through the Community College system, the funds would be allocated based on the number of students served and only for core instructional areas (vocational education, ESL, elementary and secondary education, and citizenship); funding levels would be reassessed in the future based on program participation – an incentive measure by the Administration to leverage the community college system to provide and expand these programs.

In an effort to ensure we are all on the same page as you engage locally with your newly elected legislators, CAEAA and CCAE have prepared some talking points (below) to begin the discussions. In addition to sharing these talking points with the field, CAEAA and CCAE’s leadership will be meeting in Sacramento next week over two days with key elected officials and stakeholders to discuss adult education’s future and the Governor’s reform proposals. Stay tuned for updates on these important meetings….

Governor’s Proposal for Adult Education – A Good Starting Point (Talking Points)

- The California Adult Education Administrators Association (CAEAA) and California Council for Adult Education (CCAE) commend Governor Brown for his proposal to save adult education programs and providing dedicated revenue to fund the program.

- This proposal is a good starting point to move adult education forward and out of the tenuous circumstances it has found itself in as a result of categorical flexibility since 2008. Such flexibility has decimated adult education programs that once served over 1.5 million students statewide, largely through the K-12 system. The Governor’s proposal recognizes the detrimental effects of such flexibility and has suggested adult education be pulled out of categorical flexibility going forward to ensure the programs aren’t further decimated.

- Further, the Governor provides $300 million in new revenue to support adult education programs specifically. This dedicated funding – while less than half of the $650 million allocated to adult education prior to categorical flexibility – is a good starting point. With the addition of federal funds derived for adult education programs, this amount is a good starting point to ensure the highly successful adult education programs can continue to provide programming and services for students in need of basic skills.

- Adult education students are often faced with intergenerational inequalities in education and economics. Further, they are often lacking in the transfer of important non-cognitive skills that are often pervasive from generation to generation. Adult education programs help bridge the gap of education and economic inequality by providing basic skills, GEDs and high school diplomas, English for non-native speakers and citizenship classes, vocational education/workforce training, and more.

- Adult education also provides intervention opportunities for at-risk high school students, credit recovery, dropout prevention and dropout recovery. Adult education tied to the K-12 system is best suited for such intervention.

- As the debate heats up around immigration reform, adult education tied to the K-12 system is prepared and has the capacity to handle the influx of people needing basic education, English literacy and citizenship preparation. With the Governor’s strong stance on needing to move reforms forward and being part of the effort, now more than ever the K-12 system should be bolstered to meet the needs of a growing population of students they are already experienced with helping.

- Importantly, there is logic and rationale in the placement of adult education under the K-12 system rather than with the community college system. Specifically, the most marginalized and in-need adult education students are often the parents of K-12 students. As such, access to programs is critical and the best access is more often than not tied to the K-12 schools. Further, the K-12 system has expertise in basic skills, lower literacy instruction, and more at community-based locations that ensures access to those most in need.

- Moving adult education away from a system (K-12) that is working and inventing/initiating a delivery system that doesn’t already exist is fiscally irresponsible. Not only would the start-up costs take away from the availability of programs at the community college level, the K-12 system is a more cost effective delivery model.

- The mere age of the student shouldn’t dictate the delivery system for adult education programs. Rather, it should be based on the needs of and access for the population to be served. Moving adult education to the community college system doesn’t meet this standard, proven by the Student Success Taskforce that has proposed moving community colleges systemically away from adult education students. Additionally, research shows students who are “referred to remediation” in the community college system never get out; whereas students arriving to community colleges “prepared” for post-secondary achieve at much higher rates – adult education under the K-12 system serves to bridge the skills gap and avoid such remediation.

- Ultimately, there is logic in both systems providing some semblance of adult education – a fact highlighted by the recent Legislative Analyst (LAO) report that acknowledges the strong points of both systems. The need to educate locally through the existing infrastructure of the adult schools throughout the state should be considered and addressed in the Governor’s proposal.

Do you have additional talking points or feedback from a meeting with a legislator or staff member that would be helpful to CAEAA and CCAE’s efforts? Please share them with us. CCAE: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CCAELegislativeInteractionLog or membership@ccaestate.org CAEAA: bharper@cuhsd.org CAEAA and CCAE will be updating our talking points as we move forward to ensure that we are addressing the points most salient to the member and/or staff we are speaking with in and around the Capitol. Give us your feedback today!

Dawn Koepke

Partner

McHugh, Koepke & Associates

1121 L Street, Suite 103

Sacramento, CA 95814

(916) 930-1993

(916) 930-0580 Fax

Governor Releases FY 13-14 Budget Plan

This week, Democratic Governor Jerry Brown introduced his budget proposal for FY 2013-2014 detailing a $97.7 billion General Fund (GF) spending plan – a 5% increase from the previous budget largely in education and health care spending. Upon its release, the Governor announced that the state is no longer facing a budget deficit and that the previously estimated $1.9 billion budget shortfall by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) was “gone.” The result is a budget situation that has eluded the state for more than a decade – a budget plan absent severe cuts. In his letter to the Legislature, the Governor noted the favorable position was a result of the massive budget reductions over the past couple of years coupled with the passage of Proposition 30.

After years of decline, the Governor was proud to share that the proposed budget significantly increases state funding per student in K-12 schools – $2,700 by 2016-2017. Under his plan, funding for K-12 and community colleges is projected to increase by $2.7 billion next year and by $19 billion by 2016-2017. Consistent with what the education community expected, he proposed a revised Weighted Student Formula-type proposal that provides additional funding to those school districts serving the students with the greatest challenges but does so flexibly so that local decisions can be made best suited to their student population.

As it relates specifically to adult education, the plan notes that K‑12 school districts and community colleges are authorized to provide adult education instruction. That said, it also highlights the lack of coordination between these two delivery systems. The Administration claims that the result is an inefficient and redundant system that is not always structured in the best interest of adult learners. In this regard and to purportedly create a more accountable and centralized adult education learning structure, the Governor’s plan proposes $300 million in new Proposition 98 General Fund revenues to fund a comparable K‑12 adult education service delivery system within the community college system. This funding would be allocated from a new adult education block grant based on the number of students served with the colleges being encouraged to leverage the capacity and expertise currently available at the K‑12 district adult schools. Additionally, the proposal would only fund core instructional areas such as vocational education, ESL, elementary and secondary education, and citizenship. Courses outside of the core areas would require payment in full by students for participation.

While I am intensely aware of the significant concerns within the field of hearing the Governor propose a shift of adult education responsibilities to the community colleges, let me suggest to you that this proposal is an incredibly positive outcome from the hard work we’ve all put in over the last year. When I look at the proposal, I see the Governor and his Administration coming around about adult education – a shift that is in and of itself a HUGE victory! To put it in to perspective, the Administration last year refused to acknowledge that adult education needed a different path rather than merely providing flexibility to the locals to make adult education a priority. And to take it a step further, providing a dedicated funding source was a nonstarter.

Look where we are now – the Governor has proposed a budget plan that acknowledges the importance of adult education, the need to sustain it going forward, the need and allocation of a dedicated funding source. 180 degree turn – AWESOME! Now, of course the details of the delivery model are incredibly concerning. Shifting to the community colleges doesn’t make sense for a host of reasons as follows:

1. The Community Colleges’ (CC) Student Success Taskforce moves the CC systemically away from our students. Implementing the plan as the Governor’s laid out would require the Legislature and CC system to go back to the drawing board on the issue and reframe the CC goals going forward – not happening, especially when the Taskforce and its recommendations are just now being implemented.

2. San Francisco City College as an example – running a scale of adult education programs in the city at “community college costs” – both personnel and facilities – was unsustainable financially.

3. There is an irony that the Weighted Student Proposal (WSF) seeks to serve students more equitably, directing more resources to those most marginalized and at risk, yet shifting services to adults away from community-based locations under the K – 12 system, with expertise in lower literacy instruction, takes funding away from the most marginalized to enhance post-secondary. Ethnically and linguistically compare the community college system with adult education – we serve communities of color, lower SES, and marginalized linguistically at much higher percentages. The impact will be exactly the opposite of the intent of WSF – it will further diminish what’s available to those most in need.

4. “Shifting” in most places in the state means closing a system that is working and inventing/initiating a delivery system that doesn’t exist. It is fiscally irresponsible to provide “startup costs” to build in one system what already exists more cost-effectively in K-12.

5. Strong body of research exists showing students “referred to remediation” in CC system never get out. Students arriving to CC “prepared” for post-secondary achieve at much higher rates.

6. “Shifting” makes sense ONLY if community-based portals to education are still maintained. K-12 has those sites already.

7. Accessibility is an issue that the LAO addresses in that it acknowledges the strong points of both systems. The need to educate locally through the existing infrastructure of the adult schools throughout the state should be considered. CC Chancellor Brice seems to be leaning in this direction based on his initial comment in the press.

8. The bifurcated mission exists with CC as it does with districts. Their noncredit course funding is sacrificed to fund the CC mission of their credit and degree programs. The flexibility in K-12 with adult education funds is similar. Thus shifting the funds would not guarantee that the CC system would ensure the literacy needs are met. Further, there isn’t clarity that the CCs couldn’t take the additional dedicated revenue and use it to fund current noncredit courses at the expense of expanding program offerings.

9. The population served is significant. When they look at those enrolled at CC they are all adults. However, looking at literacy, citizenship, high school diploma, and short term career training prior to flexibility adult schools served a significantly larger population than CC.

10. The LAO report specifically identifies adult schools as serving a much larger population of the millions in dire need of literacy services.

It’s important to keep this all in perspective. The Governor’s budget plan will be debated by the Legislature and stakeholders over the next six months and is likely to change – especially with our efforts to put them on the right track relative to the delivery system. But at the end of the day those are details that can be worked out over the next few months as we continue our work with the Legislature. Fortunately, we have done a lot of leg work to date and have a lot of positives on our side as we go into these debates.

For one, we will be working with Senator Carol Liu – the Chair of the Senate Education Committee and former Chair of the Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education – on our bill. We have a strong ally in her and a leader that is committed to addressing the needs of adult education this year, with our bill to be used as the vehicle around which to have that discussion. The budget plan will feed directly in to and overlap the discussion. Further, the Governor has proposed re-focusing the adult education core program areas – a move that based on our Strategic Plan and the LAO report we were prepared to do this year under our bill with Senator Liu. The Governor and Administration should look favorably on this important point of agreement and alignment.

Further, we have strong allies in the Legislature – new and incumbent – that will help us resolve this in the manner that is best suited to the needs of our students. As a matter of fact, we began working ahead of the announcement upon getting a tip from a reliable source to squash the CC approach – our work has already begun in full force and I am confident that the stars are aligning for us this year. The fight is far from over and we have a few months to work the details out – we have our work cut out for us. We have an unprecedented opportunity within the framework the Governor’s offered to close out flexibility for adult education with a commitment to sustain adult education and provide a dedicated funding source. It doesn’t get much better than this in January – we’ve already won the biggest battle of all – getting the Governor and his Administration on our side and supporting adult education going forward. Appropriate and workable details will come… In the meantime, let’s celebrate our second victory for the New Year!

For more information, please see http://www.dof.ca.gov/documents/FullBudgetSummary_web2013.pdf.

Dawn Koepke

Partner

McHugh, Koepke & Associates

1121 L Street, Suite 103

Sacramento, CA 95814

(916) 930-1993

(916) 930-0580 Fax

Save the Date!

February 6-8, 2013

Join us in beautiful Long Beach, California for the 16th annual CAEAA Conference. With all the critical issues facing adult education, you will not want to miss this valuable opportunity to connect with colleagues, learn about legialtive impacts on education, and participate in productive dialogue toward the future of Adult Education in California.

Together we make known... Adult Education Matters!

Watch for additional information on the CAEAA Website and emails.

Check out the registration form for our annual conference February 6-8, 2013 here.

Make reservations at Long Beach Hyatt Regency here.

Please take the time to take this brief survey for adult education administrators: For Survey Click Here.

October Legislative Update

Important Information on Proposition 30

THE 2012 INIATIATIVE FOR ACTION BY ADULT EDUCATORS

Proposition 30: THE SCHOOLS AND SAFETY PROTECTION ACT

IMPORTANCE OF PROPOSITION 30 TO ADULT EDUCATION: Without its passage, the Governor will pull the triggers and public education immediatley would face a $6 billion cut. This reduction would be imposed midyear to the 2012-2013 budget and to the entire 2013-14 fiscal year. With these potential cuts, local adult education programs would face further reductions since their funding is flexible as determined by boards of education and superintendents.

BACKGROUND: On Tuesday, November 6, 2012, California voters will be asked to decide on the passage of Proposition 30. It is important for Adult Educators and voters to understand the benefits of the measure passing and the consequences of its failure. Adult Education's current status as a budget flexible program would be wither slightly improved or vastly worsened depending on the success of the initiative.

SUMMARY: Proposition 30 increases sales tax by 1/4 cent for four years, and raises personal tax on annual earning over $250,000 for seven years. It allocates temporary tax revenues, 89% to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges. It guarantees funding for public safety services realigned from state to local governments.

POTENTIAL REVENUES: The Office of the State Legislature estimates that revenue increases vary from $6.8 billion to $9 billion for 2012-2013 and $5.4 billion to $7.6 billion, on average, in the following five years. These revenues would allow the state budget to address budget shortfalls and ultimately increase funding to schools.

WHAT TO DO? Adult educators need to inform all potential voters of the importance of the measure and get out the "yes" vote. Conferences, meeting, and rallies are ideal settings for sharing information on Proposition 30. The Adult Education community-all staff members and students-comprise a voting block that can get this done.

CAEAA Membership Brochure Available
Click here for Membership Brochure

CAEAA Board of Directors

President

Cyndi Parulan-Colfer

Hacienda La Puente Adult and Continuing Education

cpcolfer@hlpusd.k12.ca.us

Immediate Past Presidents

Cherise Moore, Ph.D.

CALPRO

cherise143@ymail.com

Dwayne Robinson, Retired

Oroville Adult Education

poppie.dr@gmail.com

Vice President/Membership

JoDee Guerard

Corona-Norco Adult School

jguerard@cnusd.k12.ca.us

Vice President/Legislation

Bob Harper, Ed. D.

Campbell Adult and Community Education

bharper@cuhsd.org

Vice President/Communications

Rocky Bettar

Rowland Adult and Community Education

rbettar@rowland.k12.ca.us

Treasurer

Veronica Montes

Culver City Adult School veronicamontes@ccsd.org

Secretary

Jodi Loeffler

Bakersfield Adult School

jodi_loeffler@khsd.k12.ca.us

Members at Large

Holda Dorsey, Retired

Hacienda La Puente Adult and Continuing Education

holdae@hotmail.com

Joanne Durkee

Mt. Diablo Adult and Career Education

durkeej@mdusd.k12.ca.us

Dan Garcia

Ford Park Adult School

Garcia_Dan@montebello.k12.ca.us

Nancy George

New Haven Adult School

ngeorge@nhusd.k12.ca.us

Burr Guthrie

Berkeley Adult School

Burrguthrie@berkeley.net