An act to add Article 7.6 (commencing with Section 66077) to Chapter 2 of Part 40 of Division 5 of Title 3 of the Education Code, relating to postsecondary education.
AB 2374 would create a new California designation for colleges and universities that demonstrate strong support for Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander students. The bill establishes the “Designation of California Asian American- and Native American Hawaiian Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions” and authorizes qualifying campuses in the University of California, California State University, California Community Colleges, and independent higher education sectors to apply for recognition. To qualify, an institution must submit an application showing a commitment to student success, academic goals, equity goals, a strategic plan, and data on retention, completion, graduation, transfer, and related outcomes.
The designation would be awarded by a new governing board and administered through a separate managing entity. Initial and renewal designations would last five years, and renewal applicants would have to show progress toward prior goals and implementation of their strategic plans. The bill also requires applicants to post their applications publicly and encourages consultation with the academic senate. For renewal applications, the bill expands expectations to include curriculum, research, data disaggregation, and intersegmental collaboration aimed at improving outcomes for diverse Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander subgroups.
The bill would add a new article to the Education Code governing a state-level recognition program for postsecondary institutions serving Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander students. It would not directly mandate funding or impose broad regulatory requirements on all campuses, but it would create a formal application, review, and designation process tied to institutional performance, planning, and public reporting. The bill also establishes a new governing board subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act and a managing entity responsible for processing applications and issuing insignia for approved institutions.
The available voting history suggests generally favorable committee sentiment toward the bill. It advanced with a majority vote in committee and was reported out “do pass and re-refer,” indicating support for the policy concept while still requiring further fiscal review. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to show broader public or stakeholder reaction beyond the vote pattern.
The main points of potential contention appear to be administrative structure, implementation details, and fiscal oversight rather than the underlying goal of supporting AANHPI students. The bill leaves the “managing entity” unspecified in the text, which may raise questions about which office or organization would run the program and what resources would be needed. Because the bill creates a new board, requires data reporting, and sets up a recurring application and renewal process, concerns may focus on workload, governance, and whether campuses would face added administrative burdens. The fact that it was re-referred to Appropriations also suggests that cost and implementation issues remain relevant.