Senator Jack Scott held an informational hearing on outreach, with his stated goal of being better prepared for the 2007-08 budget. He also noted that while he believes outreach works, he wants to understand what works best.

Senator Scott noted that within the last 5 years the University of California (UC) had improved numbers for Latino students (from 13.8% to 16%), and stayed constant with African-American students (3.1%). The CSU’s Latino student population meanwhile increased from 26.7% to 34% and African American students went from 6.7 % to 7.1%. Senator Alex Padilla also mentioned his desire to look at how the community colleges work with CSU and UC and mentioned his Select Committee on Outreach.

Anthony Simbol of the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) then provided a quick review of previous cuts to CSU/UC programs. He mentioned that there is not a clear understanding of the success of these outreach programs and mentioned that the UC had received $10 million to evaluate its programs. He noted that the LAO does not support restoring the Governor’s proposed cut to CSU outreach of $7 million and suggested two proposals on this matter:

1. Require an external vendor to review success, and involve the LAO, the Department of Finance, legislative staff, CSU and UC in the search to find a vendor.
2. Create a college prep block grant for schools with low turn out, possibly in place of cuts to the CSU/UC for outreach ($26 million). These grants would be provided for all students, not just those attending CSU/UC.

Senator Tom Torlakson asked in comparison to UC, what monies does the CSU get for an evaluation of outreach programs? Mr. Simbol responded that the CSU does not receive funding and suggested that, because its evaluation is self funded, it is not as rigorous as it should be. Senator Torlakson asked about a comparison of the two system’s programs. Mr Simbol suggested that it is still not clear what is effective, but that CSU’s Early Assessment Program (EAP), a nationally recognized program, is just starting to receive positive data. Assembly member Gene Mullin suggested that the LAO’s proposals made sense.

Judy K. Sakaki, Vice President–Student Affairs for the University of California, thanked the committee for its generous offer to help the UC find funding for outreach and went on to provide an overview of their program. Senator Scott interrupted and suggested that the UC stop providing rhetoric, stop telling the committee how wonderful the UC is and give the committee data. He went on to note that the system has only increased the African American population by 21 students and 280 Latino students.

The UC highlighted its work with EAOP, MESA, and PUENTE and how they increase population. The UC argued that they have strong evidence that these programs work, despite what the LAO has stated. Jack Scott noted that Puente is a great program, no argument, but we need to evaluate it because there is no evidence of success for the UC. Maybe the UC is preparing students for college, but they are going to the CSU. Mr. Simbol suggested that the CSU and UC have different goals, with the CSU preparing students for college and the UC trying to make them eligible for college.

Senator Torlakson asked how much of UC money is going to get students into the UC and not just into higher education. How can we show this? How can we work with synergy and not duplicity? Senator Scott suggested that if this was a football game, the UC would not be doing well on the scoreboard. Senator Cedillo then came to testify in his support of outreach, citing his own experience with UCLA. While his statements of support were uniform, he spoke specifically about his alma mater and the UC system.

Mr. Allison Jones, Assistant Vice Chancellor for the CSU testified about the system’s approach toward outreach by providing a quick overview of the EAP. He also noted the CSU’s community group outreach efforts by highlighting the Chancellor’s Super Sunday event, which brings the CSU to African-American churches in Los Angeles and the Bay area. He estimated that this program reached 30,000 families and could be attributed to have assisted the 15-20% increase in minority enrollments the CSU has recently seen. He also noted that the system has 13 system wide outreach programs and 169 campus-based outreach programs that the CSU is involved in without General Fund support.

Senator Torlakson commended the CSU for Super Sunday and for EAP. He asked specifically how much money was the EAP program saving the system by cost avoidance. Mr. Jones responded that they are asked that often and have no numerical value, but did note that the EAP speeds up the process for graduation and frees up seats. Senator Torlakson also suggested that the UC should use EAP as well and coordinate resources. Mr. Jones noted that the system favors rigorous curriculum and has been involved in the A-G standard and its standard use through out the state.

Senator Alex Padilla noted his involvement in Upward Bound both at his Alma Mater, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, but also at the University of Pacific and asked Mr. Jones for a description of what the CSU is doing with Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE). Mr. Jones notes that each campus receives $25,000 in matching funding for the program and provided a quick review program and how it targets parents, who play a pivotal part on a student going to college. Mr. Jones also notes that 1.3 million posters on how to get to college have bee produced and distributed and offered these posters to members of the committee.

Senator Mark Wyland agreed that early parent involvement was important and encouraged the CSU not to pursue a requirement for A-G for all high school students. He said it was a "terrible idea." Finally Senator Scott complemented the CSU for going into the communities with programs like Super Sunday.