اینترنت

برچسب: bigger

  • UC regents appear to support future tuition increases, but are skeptical of bigger ones

    UC regents appear to support future tuition increases, but are skeptical of bigger ones


    Student walk up and down the Promenade to Shields Library at UC Davis.

    Credit: Gregory Urquiaga / UC Davis

    Top Takeaways
    • UC is likely to continue raising tuition for each incoming class and then freezing the cost for that cohort of students for up to six years. 
    • The rate of increase each year is based on inflation but has been capped at 5%. Regents appear opposed to increasing that cap.
    • UC is worried about federal cuts and uncertain state finances. Students are concerned about affordability.

    The University of California’s Board of Regents on Thursday indicated support for continuing to raise tuition for each incoming freshman class for at least several more years, though many regents appeared skeptical of hiking the maximum increase allowed each year. 

    Since the 2022-23 academic year, tuition has gone up for each incoming class of undergraduates, ranging from 3.5% to 5%. But the price was also then frozen for the duration of their enrollment, so long as they graduate within six years. The rate of increase each year is based largely on inflation, but is capped at 5%. 

    California residents who entered this past fall pay $14,436 in tuition and systemwide fees, not including some additional campus fees, living expenses and books, and will continue to pay that rate each year. For in-state freshmen starting this fall, their rate will be $14,934, about 3.4% higher. Out-of-state and international students pay significantly higher rates.

    When the regents approved the so-called tuition stability plan in July 2021, they agreed to reconsider it prior to the 2027-28 academic year. Most regents said they want to renew the cohort policy, describing it as a resounding success that has improved campus budgets and brought predictability to students and their families. In the past, tuition increases affected all students from all cohorts, whether freshmen or seniors, at the same time and the same rates, often raising costs in the middle of their education. 

    The regents did not take action Thursday to formally extend the plan and only discussed the policy. A vote on it may be scheduled as soon as November, officials said.

    A number of regents, however, appeared unlikely to support proposals from UC administrators to allow for even greater tuition increases, including one to increase the maximum tuition hike in a given year from 5% to 7%.

    “I think it’s remarkable the success we’ve had, and that’s why I want to continue it,” said Richard Leib, a regent and a past chair of the board. “But I also have the feeling that if it’s not broken, why are we trying to fix it?”

    UC staff said upping the maximum increases could help the system navigate budget problems, including federal cuts to research funding and state funding uncertainties. 

    The president of the UC Student Association, meanwhile, encouraged the regents to get rid of the policy altogether and keep tuition flat after the 2026-27 academic year.

    “In order to ensure that the university can be a space that is accessible to students financially, I strongly urge you all to not renew the cohort tuition model,” Aditi Hariharan, a fourth-year student at UC Davis, said during remarks to the board. She added that keeping the policy would threaten UC’s ability to enroll “a diverse range of students from all economic backgrounds.”

    In defending the plan, UC officials said Thursday that the policy has actually made attending UC less expensive for the system’s low-income students. 

    Shawn Brick, the system’s associate vice provost for student financial support, noted that the state’s Cal Grant program fully covers tuition and fees for qualifying students. Additionally, UC sets aside 45% of revenue generated from the tuition policy for financial aid. That, Brick said, has provided the system’s neediest students with additional aid for other expenses, such as textbooks, that was not previously available.

    Nathan Brostrom, the system’s chief financial officer, said the policy has also generated $375 million in new revenue for campus operations, which has been used to support faculty-to-student ratios and improve student services.

    At the same time, officials said the policy has not been a cure-all and that higher tuition revenue and state budget support have not kept pace with rising costs. 

    The UC staff on Thursday suggested three potential scenarios that would generate even more revenue from the tuition policy. One would be the proposal to increase the maximum annual increase to 7%. Another would be to add another increase, possibly 1%, on top of the inflation-based increase. The third option would be to reduce the amount of revenue that is set aside for financial aid, from 45% to 35%. 

    Most regents who spoke said they disapproved of the proposal to allow for annual increases as high as 7%. Maria Anguiano, the board’s vice chair, said she remains supportive of renewing the original policy, but added that tuition hikes of 7% “no longer feels modest.”

    State Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, an ex-officio voting member of the board, said increasing the cap to 7% would be a “very significant change” and suggested tabling the idea altogether. 

    “If we have an extraordinary circumstance where you all feel the need to increase tuition more than 5% in any given year, you should have to come back to this body and explain why,” she said. 

    Jay Sures was one of the only regents who appeared to support the proposal. He said federal changes and threats have created “true headwinds for this university system” and that there are “issues with what potential state funding could be going forward that could potentially pose a true existential threat” to the system.

    “What would happen if we did have a cap and our shortfall was such that we were in that sort of disaster situation? What are we going to be able to do if we put a cap on it today and we fall into that situation tomorrow?” Sures said.

    Before the UC staff brings an official proposal to the board, they plan to consult with incoming President James Milliken, who takes over on Aug. 1, said Brostrom, the chief financial officer.

    Janet Reilly, the board chair, said the current plan is to bring an action item to the board’s meeting in November, but added that could change.

    “I think that what you are hearing from this group is a lot of gratitude and much satisfaction with the program that we rolled out,” Reilly said. “But still there are questions to be answered.”





    Source link

  • See The Bigger Picture: How to Protect User Data


    See The Bigger Picture: How to Protect User Data—Infographic

    In today’s digital landscape, protecting user data is critical to maintaining trust and preventing breaches. Implementing data protection strategies like securing networks, using encryption, and limiting access to sensitive information ensures a robust defense against cyber threats. Regularly updating software and enabling two-factor authentication also strengthens data security. Transparency with users about how their data is collected, stored, and used fosters confidence and compliance with regulations like GDPR. Safeguard personal and organizational data by following these actionable practices and creating a culture of security. Every small step counts in keeping sensitive information safe from unauthorized access.​



    Source link

  • Legislative analyst projects bigger funding drop for schools, community colleges

    Legislative analyst projects bigger funding drop for schools, community colleges


    Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

    The Legislative Analyst’s Office is warning superintendents and school boards working on their next year’s budget that more storm clouds are on the fiscal horizon. 

    In a Feb. 15 report, the LAO forecast that further erosion of state revenues will likely reduce state funding for TK-12 by an additional $7.7 billion — $5.2 billion in 2023-24 and $2.7 billion in 2025-26. That would be on top of the $13.7 billion shaving that Gov. Gavin Newsom announced in his proposed budget for the current budget cycle that he released just a month ago. 

    When he presented the proposed state budget in January, Newsom built in a small cost-of-living increase and vowed to preserve funding commitments for schools and community colleges, but the deteriorating revenue estimates may force him to reconsider that promise when he revises the budget in May. 

    The California Department of Finance, which disagrees with the LAO’s financial projections for this year and next, won’t revise its budget forecast until the May revision. However, its report on January revenues, also released in mid-February, confirmed that revenues were heading in the wrong direction. Receipts from the personal income tax, the largest source of state revenue, were down $5 billion — 25% — from the $20.4 billion that the state had forecast. For the full fiscal year that started July 1, total state revenues are down $5.9 billion from a forecast of $121.5 billion.  

    About 40% of the revenues to the state’s general fund is directed to schools and community colleges through a 4-decade-old formula, Proposition 98.

    The single biggest fiscal challenge facing Newsom and the Legislature is how to resolve a massive shortfall in Proposition 98 funding for 2022-23. Newsom and the Legislature were mostly in the dark when they passed that state budget based on a revenue estimate in June 2022. Because of storms and floods the previous winter, the U.S. Treasury delayed the tax filing date for 2022 from April 15 to Nov. 16. Thus, officials lacked reliable data, and it turned out they were way off. The shortfall for Proposition 98 was $12 billion. 

    Because school districts have already spent that money, Newsom is proposing to hold them and community colleges harmless without counting the overfunding as part of the Proposition 98 minimum guarantee. In a trailer bill that his administration released, he calls for a one-time $9 billion supplemental payment that, due to the unique, delayed tax deadline, would be paid from the general fund, not out of current or future funding for Proposition 98. It would be repaid over five years, starting in 2025-26. 

    Opposition of the Legislative Analysts’s Office

    The LAO is skeptical of the legality and wisdom of pushing off the solution for the 2022-23 deficit into the future; it’s recommending the Legislature reject the ideas and instead use the $9 billion cushion in the Proposition 98 reserve account to cover the shortfall. 

    “The Governor’s proposed funding maneuver is bad fiscal policy, sets a problematic precedent, and creates a binding obligation on the state that will worsen future deficits and require more difficult decisions,” it said in a report issued last week. 

    It recommends balancing the budget by cutting billions of uncommitted dollars for new programs, the largest of which is $2.8 billion for creating more community schools; eliminating the $1 billion cost-of-living adjustment for the Local Control Funding Formula; cutting $500 million for low-emissions school buses and reducing costs and restructuring other programs. One is the Expanded Learning and Opportunities Program, which provides free after-school activities for low-income students. 

    Newsom would use $5 billion of the Proposition 98 rainy-day fund to cover the budget shortfall this year and next while paying for the 1% cost-of-living adjustment next year. That would leave $4 billion in the reserve to cover at least part of a bigger deficit that the LAO is predicting.

    Lurking in the background is the option of deferrals — issuing IOUs for funding that would be repaid in subsequent years. That tactic was used extensively after the Great Recession when state revenues plunged. It requires that districts and charter schools borrow short-term to cover the delay in state funding.

    School advocates clearly prefer Newsom’s approach and are critical of the LAO’s recommendations, although they aren’t ready to suggest further cuts if revenues remain slow.

    “We don’t want to start negotiating with ourselves over which programs to cut, but need to be prepared for a challenging budget if revenues do not rebound in the second half of this fiscal year,” Kevin Gordon, president of Capitol Advisors Group, an education consultancy, wrote in a letter to his clients last week.

    Edgar Zazueta, executive director of the Association of California School Administrators, criticized the LAO and called on Newsom and legislators to protect their investments in schools. 

    “The LAO’s recommendations in response to the fiscal picture are potentially devastating to schools and especially students,” he said. “The programs that could be impacted are good for students, and we’ll be urging the Legislature and governor to do everything to protect California students.”





    Source link