The 2022-23 Budget

CCC Chancellor’s Office Staffing

Summary. The Governor’s budget proposes a total of 19 new permanent Chancellor’s Office positions and an associated $2.8 million ongoing non‑Proposition 98 General Fund augmentation spread over the next two fiscal years. We find the Governor’s proposal is a mixed bag. Specifically, two of the proposed positions are justified, though not as permanent positions. An additional two positions also are justified, though we recommend funding them beginning in 2022‑23 rather than waiting until 2023‑24. The Governor’s other proposed positions either are not justified or to date have not been sufficiently justified to warrant legislative approval. Rather than rejecting the latter group of proposed positions, the Legislature could give the administration an opportunity to submit improved proposals before the May Revision. Such proposals should include more details on the specific workload the proposed positions would undertake and why current staffing levels in those areas are insufficient.

Introduction

In this post, we provide background on the California Community Colleges (CCC) Chancellor’s Office, discuss the Governor’s proposal to add 19 new staffing positions and associated funding over a two‑year period, assess the proposal, and offer recommendations.

Background

Chancellor’s Office Has Several Key Systemwide Responsibilities. Located in Sacramento, the Chancellor’s Office is led by a Chancellor who has overall leadership and responsibility for the office. The Chancellor is appointed by the Board of Governors—the governing body entrusted with overseeing the CCC system. (The CCC system consists of 72 local districts and 115 local community colleges, along with the state‑level Calbright College.) The Chancellor continues to serve as long as he or she remains in good standing with the board. Key responsibilities of the Chancellor’s Office include:

• Setting and enforcing minimum standards for districts (such as student graduation requirements).
• Allocating state funds to districts and monitoring district fiscal health.
• Monitoring district compliance with state and federal law.
• Centrally collecting and reporting student data (such as enrollment and graduation rates).

Chancellor’s Office Is Organized Into Units by Programmatic and Functional Areas. The Chancellor’s Office is organized into nine divisions, each of which is led by a vice chancellor. The divisions are: (1) College Finance and Facilities Planning, (2) Communications and Marketing, (3) Digital Innovation and Infrastructure, (4) Educational Services and Support, (5) General Counsel, (6) Governmental Relations, (7) Institutional Effectiveness, (8) Internal Operations, and (9) Workforce and Economic Development.

Non‑Proposition 98 General Fund Is Chancellor’s Office’s Main Source of Support. In 2021‑22, the Chancellor’s Office is budgeted $30 million (all funding sources) for personnel and other operational expenses (including its office lease and supplies). The Chancellor’s Office’s largest single funding source for its operations is non‑Proposition 98 General Fund ($21 million in 2021‑22). (Historically, the Chancellor’s Office has not directly received Proposition 98 funds for its operations.) The Chancellor’s Office operating budget also relies on reimbursements from other departments (such as a contract with the California Department of Education to provide technical assistance for the federal Perkins program) as well as certain fee‑for‑service agreements with districts (totaling $6.8 million in 2021‑22). In addition, the Chancellor’s Office received $2.5 million from bond funds and one‑time funds for specified programs in 2021‑22.

Chancellor’s Office Staffing Has Increased Over Past Decade. Figure 1 shows that the Chancellor’s Office currently has 177 authorized positions. Staffing increased by 31 positions (21 percent) over the past decade. During this period, the Chancellor’s Office’s vacancy rate has ranged between 7 percent to 22 percent. As of December 31, 2021, 154 of its authorized positions were filled, reflecting a 13 percent vacancy rate.

Chancellor’s Office Workload Has Been Increasing. The increase in workload is primarily due to the Chancellor’s Office having to administer the many new programs the state has established for community colleges. For example, the state has funded the Guided Pathways initiative, which creates a comprehensive framework for colleges to improve student outcomes. The Chancellor’s Office assists colleges in implementing this initiative by running workshops and reviewing college improvement plans, among other activities. The state also approved a complex new general‑purpose funding formula (known as the Student Centered Funding Formula) and many new categorical programs (including basic needs, mental health, and various other student support programs) that require administrative support from the Chancellor’s Office. The Legislature also has passed policy legislation requiring the Chancellor’s Office to participate in certain systemwide improvement efforts. For example, Chapter 566 of 2021 (AB 928, Berman) requires the Chancellor’s Office to do certain things relating to improving the transfer process for students.

State Has Provided Chancellor’s Office With Some Additional Staff to Address Higher Workload. To help with general office support, the state has provided the Chancellor’s Office new attorney and accountant positions, among others. The state also has provided the Chancellor’s Office with additional programmatic support upon creating or expanding certain categorical programs. For example, the Legislature authorized an additional administrator position at the Chancellor’s Office to oversee the Guided Pathways initiative. In other cases, the state has created a new program but not authorized any new positions at the Chancellor’s Office. For example, in 2021‑22, the state provided ongoing funding for the CCC basic needs program without authorizing any additional positions at the Chancellor’s Office.

Proposal

Governor Proposes Two‑Year Staffing Plan. As Figure 2 shows, the Governor proposes a total of 19 new permanent Chancellor’s Office positions and an associated $2.8 million ongoing non‑Proposition 98 General Fund augmentation spread over the next two fiscal years. Of the new positions, the Governor proposes adding nine in 2022‑23 and ten in 2023‑24. In 2023‑24, Chancellor’s Office staffing would be 11 percent higher than in 2021‑22. As the figure shows, the new positions would be added within several divisions of the Chancellor’s Office. The Governor’s Budget Summary indicates that the administration and Chancellor’s Office are considering requesting further positions, with additional proposals potentially made as part of the May Revision.

New Positions Are Associated With Various Workload. According to the administration, the new positions are intended to accommodate new workload demands and enhance the office’s leadership so as to improve the functioning of the CCC system. Figure 3 describes the main responsibilities for each proposed position.

Assessment and Recommendations

Proposal Has Some Merit and Some Shortcomings. As described below, the Governor’s proposal to fund 19 new positions over the next two years is a mixed bag. We find a few of the proposed positions to be justified, though not as permanent positions or in the fiscal year proposed by the Governor. The Governor’s other proposed positions either are not justified or to date have not been sufficiently justified to warrant legislative approval. Figure 4 summarizes our recommendations.

Two Positions Justified but Not as Permanent, Recommend Making Limited Term. We find that the two Specialist positions proposed in 2022‑23 for supporting implementation of certain transfer reforms (as required by Chapter 566) are justified. Figure 5 highlights the new workload stemming from the legislation. In particular, the new positions would support the Chancellor’s Office in chairing the first two years of a statutorily required transfer‑reform implementation committee, as well as provide assistance to colleges on complying with the legislation. Although we think the positions are needed given the additional workload stemming from the legislation, we do not think permanent authority is justified. Statute requires the relevant activities be completed by July 2025, with Chapter 566 sunsetting at that time. For these reasons, we recommend the Legislature approve these positions and the associated funding but only on a three‑year, limited‑term basis (through 2024‑25).

Two Proposed 2023‑24 Positions Are Justified, but Recommend Funding in Budget Year. We see merit for two of the proposed positions in the Educational Services and Support Division. Specifically, the two Specialist positions proposed for 2023‑24 would help the Chancellor’s Office administer the recently created ongoing basic needs program and other student service programs. Because these programs are already authorized and currently being developed by community colleges, we are unclear as to why the administration postpones funding the associated staffing positions until 2023‑24. We recommend the Legislature modify the Governor’s proposal by approving these positions and the associated funding beginning in 2022‑23.

Given Chancellor’s Office Existing Staff, Recommend Rejecting Two Positions. The Governor’s budget proposes two other positions—a Program Assistant II and a Specialist—in the Educational Services and Support Division that would work on ethnic studies curriculum and competency‑based education. Chancellor’s Office documentation provided to our office shows that the agency already assigns two staff to overseeing those issues. Given the Governor’s proposal appears to duplicate already authorized and assigned positions, we recommend the Legislature reject these proposed positions.

Insufficient Detail on Remaining Positions, Withhold Recommendation. The Chancellor’s Office may need some of the remaining requested positions but without better back‑up and justification, the Legislature is unable to make this determination. For example, a proposed Information Technology Specialist II position would support “critical upgrades” to CCC’s centralized data system. The administration, however, has provided no information on what the critical upgrades are, how long they will take, and how often they need to occur. Similarly, a proposed Staff Services Analyst position in the Educational Services and Support Division would “provide administrative and staff support services associated with the entire division’s workload.” No detail, however, is provided on current unmet workload needs in the division and what workload the proposed position would cover. In the case of the attorney position, the administration identifies the general nature of the work the attorney is to undertake but provides no backup information suggesting that the current number of attorneys in the Chancellor’s Office is insufficient given workload. Rather than rejecting the remaining positions at this time given this lack of specificity and justification, the Legislature could give the administration an opportunity to submit improved proposals before the May Revision. Such proposals should include more details on the specific workload the proposed positions would undertake and why current staffing levels in those areas is insufficient. Until such proposals are provided, we withhold recommendation on the associated positions.