Video & Transcript Research : 'campus turnaround'

Page 4 of 240
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • The turnaround plans are part of this effort.
  • Now, I'll focus on the turnaround plans.
  • We reviewed CSU's turnaround plans, and as CSU just shared, the plans identify campus strategies for
  • And so every area of campus, academic affairs, student affairs, et cetera, will be The area of campus
  • or off campus.
Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard updates on higher education issues, beginning with California State University’s turnaround plans for seven campuses with enrollment declines. CSU said overall enrollment is growing systemwide, but some campuses, especially in Northern California, face structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. The plans focus on reengaging stopped-out and adult learners, expanding partnerships and guaranteed admissions, improving retention and student support, and reducing costs through program suspensions, hiring freezes, shared services, and procurement consolidation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the strategies were reasonable but urged regular legislative updates, and the Department of Finance had no additional comments. Committee members emphasized the need for implementation oversight, written updates, and attention to student outreach, financial aid, and privacy concerns around AI tools used in recruitment. The committee then reviewed the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s request for a $10 million General Fund appropriation to repay litigation-related borrowing. Department of Consumer Affairs and bureau staff said the bureau has a long-standing structural deficit, has already cut positions and shifted some costs, and that the General Fund backfill would reduce future fee increases on institutions. The LAO opposed the request, arguing the bureau can cover near-term costs with its existing loan and that litigation costs should remain the responsibility of the regulated entities through fees. Finance supported the one-time backfill as a unique situation that would lower fee increases and avoid passing litigation costs on to schools and students. Members asked about preventing a repeat of the problem, and bureau staff said they are pursuing fee increases through the sunset review and have strengthened internal policies and disability accommodation practices. The subcommittee also heard a broad update on Cal Grant funding and student aid. The California Student Aid Commission, UC, CSU, and the community colleges described Cal Grant as essential to affordability, but the LAO noted spending has grown faster than historical averages and said the state likely lacks capacity for major expansion in the near term. The segments highlighted the importance of state aid in covering tuition and living costs, and raised concerns about federal changes to student loans and Pell Grants, especially the elimination of Grad PLUS for some graduate students and limits on part-time borrowing. Committee members pressed for data on students who are eligible but not served by current Cal Grant rules, including adult learners and students affected by age and merit restrictions, and asked for analysis of phased-in implementation of the Cal Grant Equity Framework. Finance said full implementation would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and that affordability remains part of the state’s multi-year compact with the segments. Finally, the committee began discussion of the Middle Class Scholarship Program. CSAC and the UC and CSU said the program is a key part of affordability and debt reduction, especially after the 2022 reforms that expanded awards to total cost of attendance and improved administration. They warned that cutting funding by more than half would reduce award coverage from 35% to 17.5% of cost of attendance and could affect enrollment and persistence, particularly for middle-income students who do not qualify for other need-based aid. The segments also noted that recent administrative changes have reduced award revisions and campus workload, but that data exchange and award volatility remain challenges.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • The turnaround plans are part of this effort.
  • Now I'll focus on the turnaround plans.
  • We reviewed CSU's turnaround plans, and as CSU just shared, the plans identify campus strategies for
  • So this is a program that sort of actually predates the turnaround plan.
  • or off campus.
Keywords: 987, senate, all
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • As part of the turnaround plans, campuses are required to consult with the community and campus stakeholders
  • As part of the turnaround plans, campuses are required to consult with the community and campus stakeholders
  • “I don’t know if campus by campus that was different, but as a whole, that did not occur.
  • A key factor in our turnaround is becoming a first choice among students seeking a smaller public campus
  • One is on turnaround plans.
Summary: The joint Assembly Higher Education and Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the future of the California State University system, with opening remarks emphasizing CSU’s major role in California’s economy, workforce, and degree production. Chairs and members said the hearing was intended to inform 2026 budget decisions and to examine three main issues: declining enrollment at some campuses, cost controls and possible consolidation, and oversight of recent state investments at campuses such as Humboldt and Sonoma. The meeting was briefly delayed by microphone and sound problems before reconvening. The first panel featured CSU Academic Senate Chair Dr. Elizabeth Boyd and Cal State Student Association Vice President Katie Karam. Boyd urged the Legislature to protect academic freedom, strengthen faculty governance, provide stable ongoing funding, end unfunded mandates, support student food and housing security, fund flexible course schedules, improve transfer systems such as ASSIST, avoid over-centralizing academic programs, protect immigrant students, and expand intersegmental collaboration. Karam said students are feeling the effects of budget shortfalls through fewer course sections, reduced advising and services, longer time to degree, and tuition pressure, and she called for transparency, meaningful student involvement in budget decisions, and sustained state investment rather than cuts that harm the student experience. The second panel covered enrollment management and included CSU Chancellor’s Office and campus administrators from Chico State, Cal State L.A., and San Diego State. Dr. Delcy Perez said CSU Forward and the new systemwide enrollment plan are aimed at expanding access, aligning programs with workforce needs, and increasing resident enrollment; she reported systemwide enrollment gains and strong application numbers, including a direct-admissions pilot that expanded from Riverside to more campuses. Campus representatives described local recruitment and retention strategies, including early outreach to high school students, community college partnerships, guaranteed admission programs, and expanded advising and student support. San Diego State highlighted record enrollment and high demand, while Cal State L.A. described efforts to recover from impaction and rebuild enrollment. Members pressed CSU officials on the accuracy of enrollment data, the gap between funded targets and actual enrollment, and the system’s reallocation formula. CSU staff explained that campuses below target will see a 5% ongoing reallocation beginning in 2026-27, with one-time reserve funding also being directed to campuses that can grow, and that fiscal health reviews have been completed for 21 of 22 campuses. Legislators also asked about turnaround plans required by the budget act; CSU said those plans are being developed and will be shared in the spring after campus consultation. No formal votes were taken.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • I do want to provide some info on campus-by-campus enrollment.
  • I do want to provide some info on campus-by-campus enrollment.
  • The campus had a $20 million deficit in 2024-25. The campus had a $20 million deficit in 2024-25.
  • There are a few small ones that are at the campus level, including campus firefighters. Okay.
  • There are a few small ones that are at the campus level, including campus firefighters. Okay.
Keywords: 987, senate, all
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Austin campus here.
  • How many students are really going to have on campus?
  • It’s not just an automatic turnaround. No, I know it’s not.
  • And so that's what you are investigating on campus. Is that all on campus, or what? On campus.
  • That's about a mile north at our Discovery Park campus.
Summary: The Senate Committee on Higher Education met to review interim charges on the Permanent University Fund (PUF), the Available University Fund (AUF), the Higher Education Fund (HEAF), and the Texas University Fund (TUF). Legislative Budget Board staff outlined how each fund works, including PUF’s constitutional role for UT and Texas A&M, HEAF’s capital support for institutions outside those systems, and TUF’s research funding for eligible universities. They also described TUF’s growing corpus and distribution changes, and noted which institutions are nearing eligibility. Committee members asked about distribution formulas, comparisons to other states, and how funds are allocated among system institutions.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • I'm glad the turnaround plans and other things that are in place.
  • We would expect a 5% reallocation from their campus budget, right?
  • that campus is 10.4 million.
  • , for that student that's taking that course at that campus.
  • I assume there’d be some campus education.
Keywords: 988, house, all
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • I do want to provide some info on campus-by-campus enrollment.
  • I do want to provide some info on campus-by-campus enrollment.
  • Seven campuses will submit turnaround plans.
  • There are a few small ones that are at the campus level, including campus firefighters. Okay.
  • There are a few small ones that are at the campus level, including campus firefighters. Okay.
Summary: The subcommittee heard opening remarks and updates from UC President James Milliken and CSU Chancellor Mildred Garcia on the state of higher education, including federal funding losses, civil rights/Title IX compliance, enrollment, housing, and budget needs. Both leaders emphasized the value of UC and CSU to California’s workforce, research, and economic mobility, while warning that federal grant cancellations, investigations, and changes to student aid are creating major financial and operational strain. UC reported losing or having at risk more than 1,600 grants and over $1 billion in research activity, while CSU said it had lost more than 200 grants totaling about $161 million, including minority-serving institution grants that affected student support programs. Both systems said they are investing in civil rights services and trying to limit the release of personally identifiable information in response to federal requests. The committee then reviewed the higher education student housing grant program. Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office staff said the governor’s budget does not include major new changes but continues support for the program. CSU reported 12 approved projects that will add about 5,047 beds, with roughly 75% below market rate, and said it has about 68,000 beds systemwide, a 92% occupancy rate, and ongoing housing insecurity among students. UC said its housing projects have added more than 7,000 beds when reduced-rent and regular-rent units are combined, but nearly 10,000 students were on housing wait lists at the start of fall 2025. Both systems described rapid rehousing efforts, emergency beds, and partnerships with community colleges, and UC noted several joint housing projects, including at Riverside, Merced, and Santa Cruz. Members discussed whether future housing bonds and use of surplus school sites could help expand capacity. In the enrollment section, the LAO recommended maintaining UC’s 2026-27 resident undergraduate target, funding enrollment growth separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident reduction plan at the three highest-demand UC campuses, and holding UC enrollment flat in 2027-28. For CSU, the LAO recommended revising the 2026-27 enrollment expectation downward to reflect updated projections, while also funding enrollment growth separately and holding enrollment flat in 2027-28. CSU said it has rebounded from pandemic-era declines, is above its funded target by about 3,000 FTE, and is shifting about $89 million and 10,000 FTE from lower-demand campuses to higher-demand ones while developing turnaround plans for seven campuses with sustained enrollment declines, including Sonoma State. UC said it has already exceeded its compact enrollment goals and is planning continued growth, but that sustaining it depends on ongoing state support. Members raised concerns about campus-specific enrollment declines, nonresident caps at UC San Diego, and the need for stronger turnaround plans and teacher preparation pathways. The final section covered core operations and deferred payments: Finance said the governor proposes another one-year deferral of about $129.7 million for UC and $143.8 million for CSU, and the LAO recommended retiring the deferrals when one-time funds are available. CSU described rising compensation, financial aid, utilities, insurance, and deferred maintenance costs, and said it is pursuing cost-saving measures such as procurement alignment, campus integration, and shared administrative services.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • I do want to provide some info on campus-by-campus enrollment.
  • I do want to provide some info on campus-by-campus enrollment.
  • I do want to provide some info on campus-by-campus enrollment.
  • There are a few small ones that are at the campus level, including campus firefighters. Okay.
  • There are a few small ones that are at the campus level, including campus firefighters. Okay.
Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education held its first 2026 hearing on higher education, focusing on UC and CSU system updates, student housing, enrollment, and core operations. In opening remarks, the chair noted recent state fiscal stress, the prior rejection of proposed UC/CSU cuts, and the Governor’s proposed 5% ongoing compact increases. UC President James B. Milliken and CSU Chancellor Mildred Garcia described the systems’ public value, research and workforce roles, and the impact of federal actions on grants, financial aid, and campus operations. Both also emphasized Title IX and civil rights efforts; CSU said it had implemented nearly all state auditor recommendations and was on track to finish the remaining one, while UC highlighted its systemwide civil rights and Title IX offices. Both leaders said federal investigations, grant cancellations, and litigation demands were consuming staff time and money, with UC reporting more than 200 grants lost or affected and CSU citing more than $161 million in lost grants and more than 1,600 grants affected overall. The committee then heard on student housing. Finance and LAO staff said the Governor’s budget made no major new housing proposal but continued support for the Higher Education Student Housing Grant Program. CSU reported 12 supported projects that will add about 5,047 beds, most below market rate, with four already open and seven more expected this year; it also said it has about 68,000 beds systemwide, a 92% occupancy rate, and ongoing emergency housing support. UC said the program has supported seven UC projects and two joint community college projects, adding more than 7,000 beds total, but nearly 10,000 UC students were on housing waitlists at the start of fall 2025. UC asked for additional state support, including possible bond funding and a statutory change to allow UC participation in public-private partnership housing projects. Members discussed rapid rehousing, student homelessness, faculty and staff housing, and community college housing partnerships, with both systems describing existing emergency beds and support services. On enrollment, LAO recommended maintaining UC’s 2026-27 resident undergraduate target, funding enrollment growth separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident reduction plan, and holding UC flat in 2027-28. For CSU, LAO recommended revising the 2026-27 target downward to reflect current projections, funding growth separately, and holding 2027-28 flat. CSU said it had rebounded from COVID declines, now exceeds its funded target by about 3,000 FTE, and is shifting about $89 million and 10,000 FTE spots from lower-demand campuses to higher-demand ones while developing turnaround plans for seven campuses with sustained enrollment declines, including Sonoma State. CSU also described direct admissions, transfer success pathways, and new degree programs aimed at workforce needs. UC said it had surpassed its compact enrollment goals, planned to add 2,721 California undergraduates in 2026-27, and was seeking $5.5 million for health professional programs. Members raised concerns about underprepared freshmen, K-12 alignment, nonresident caps at UC San Diego, deferred maintenance, ROTC access, and the need for stronger turnaround plans and teacher preparation pipelines. The final item on core operations addressed the Governor’s proposal to defer 3% base funding again, moving the one-time deferral to 2027-28 and allowing short-term zero-interest loans to cover it.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • Any program located on a school campus and funded by an LEA is license exempt.
  • We would expect a 5% reallocation from their campus budget, right?
  • , for that student that's taking that course at that campus.
  • I assume there’d be some campus education.
  • faculty and staff, which we already have seen, especially on my campus.
Summary: The committee heard testimony on three education budget items: the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), differentiated assistance/statewide system of support, and universal school meals plus kitchen infrastructure grants. For ELOP, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to provide $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended instead fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579, and committee members questioned how the rate was determined, how much funding is actually spent, and whether overlapping funding from ELOP, ACEs, and 21st Century programs is being tracked. CDE said ELOP is showing positive attendance and math outcomes, but some requested data will not be available until mid-2027; members also raised concerns about double-funding, transparency, and whether middle and high school students are being equitably served. On differentiated assistance, CCEE outlined the statewide system of support and the various tiers of universal, targeted, supplemental, and intensive assistance. Finance explained the Governor’s proposal to replace the current DA structure with a more stable universal and targeted assistance model, funded at $131.9 million ongoing, with a three-year support cycle aligned to LCAP and ESSA timelines and broader State Board authority to revise eligibility criteria. The LAO objected to considering the proposal before the State Board finalizes the new performance criteria, and committee members expressed concern that moving to a three-year cycle could delay support for LEAs that newly fall into need mid-cycle. There was also discussion about whether the proposal would weaken subgroup-based equity guardrails or give the State Board too much discretion over who qualifies for support. For school meals and kitchen infrastructure, Finance proposed $1.8 billion ongoing for universal meals and an additional $100 million ongoing plus $100 million one-time for a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure and training grants. The LAO recommended rejecting the new kitchen grant round because prior rounds are still being spent and the unmet need is not yet clear. CDE said prior investments have improved meal participation, efficiency, and menu variety, but many schools still lack the facilities for scratch cooking and face construction, electrical, and procurement barriers. Members asked for more data on how prior grants were used, which schools are benefiting, and whether funds could also support lower-cost food access strategies such as pantries, while noting federal restrictions on some meal-service innovations.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • For example, campus...
  • After the second F rating, you have to do what's referred to as a turnaround plan.
  • There's one additional tool added to the turnaround plan.
  • It is the largest academic turnaround in the history of the United States.
  • This is the largest academic turnaround at that scale in the history of the United States.
Bills: SB8, SB 8
LA

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

Education Mar 31st, 2026

Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • By mandate of this bill, a student cannot return to the campus. ...and financial crisis for our district
  • By mandate of this bill, a student cannot return to the campus where the employee is assigned.
  • and now we have to bring them to Landry, there may be an opportunity for us to put them in the same campus
  • basically allows students to be able to have something that they may need for their self-defense on campus
  • Baham, I certainly like chemical spray better than allowing students to have guns on campus, so I appreciate
NM

New Mexico 2026 Regular Session

Senate - Finance Feb 12th, 2026

House Appropriations & Finance

Bills: SB190, HB247, HB2, HB8
Summary: The committee reviewed drafting instructions and spending sheets for House Bill 2, focusing on both recurring and nonrecurring appropriations, reserve levels, and several late changes. Staff explained that the package would leave reserves around 28% under the current scenario, with the possibility of rising to about 30% if a separate natural disaster reform bill is enacted. Members discussed how disaster funding would be handled through a replacement Section 8 and the appropriation contingency fund, and whether the operating reserve could be tapped with explicit authorization. There was also clarification on fund types, including other state funds and interagency transfers, and on how line items were reflected in the spreadsheets. A major point of debate was how to offset additions by reducing funding elsewhere. Members discussed shifting money from the state fair/multipurpose arena request, the Office of Natural Resources Trustee, and other capital items to accommodate changes. Several senators raised concerns about cutting the Office of Natural Resources Trustee too deeply and about the purpose of those funds, including possible land purchases and floodplain mitigation in Ruidoso. The committee also discussed whether the state fair money should be reduced, with some members supporting a $25 million restoration and others preferring to leave the executive’s request intact. Staff noted that some reductions were not true cuts but swaps or offsets, such as moving local road money and using excess capital outlay reserves. Other corrections and policy items were addressed, including an increase for UNM and NMSU stadium funding, a correction to a project distribution on line 105, and funding for the Health Council. Members also noted that the public employee 1% raise was no longer funded because recurring capacity was used elsewhere, and that no COLA was included. After discussion, Senator Woods moved to adopt the drafting instructions, Senator Gonzalez seconded, and the motion passed without objection. The committee then directed staff to prepare a catch-up cleanup version of House Bill 2 for later review and said House Bill 8 would be taken up the next morning.