Saturday, December 30, 2017
A second LAO report finds UC "reasonable"
...No Notable Concern With Overall Approach at Universities. Compared to CCC’s complex and overlapping approach to serving low‑income and first‑generation students, CSU and UC have a much simpler, streamlined approach. The segments generally operate one primary systemwide supplemental program. We believe having one umbrella program but giving campuses flexibility to design student support services is a reasonable approach given each campus’s different student population.
Programs Lack Transparency. Although CSU’s and UC’s overall approach to providing support services for low‑income and first‑generation students seems reasonable, the state budget does not contain clear fiscal information about these services. Moreover, neither segment regularly tracks funding and spending for supplemental support programs. Furthermore, only some enrollment and outcome data are available for certain programs. For example, in most years, CSU reports the number of students who participate in EOP and their graduation rates. These outcome data, however, do not compare EOP students with students of similar academic standing who do not participate in the program. As a result, the Legislature lacks sufficient data to evaluate the effectiveness of the EOP program in boosting student outcomes. For UC, outcome data is even more limited, with no regular UC or state monitoring and evaluating of these services...
Full report at http://lao.ca.gov/reports/2017/3724/Funding-Supplemental-Services-Low-First-122017.pdf