Community Colleges and Career Technical Education

The governor’s January budget proposal allocates increased funding to support the Strong Workforce Program, which will enable California’s community college system to expand access to career technical education (CTE), commonly referred to as vocational education.

This proposal comes at a time of renewed attention to CTE. The federal 2014 Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act focuses in part on improving community colleges’ engagement in workforce training. In California, in addition to the investment proposed by the governor, the California Career Pathways Trust—a pilot program created by 2014 legislation—aims to ensure the development and strengthening of career pathway training programs.

California’s community colleges have always played a key role in providing CTE training opportunities. While CTE training can start as early as high school, CTE at the community colleges provides a closer tie to workforce opportunities—to meet both student and employer needs. For-profit colleges, which offer a number of CTE programs, are under increased scrutiny due to poor graduation rates, mounting student debt, and questions about the value of their degrees—putting even more focus on the state’s public two-year colleges to provide training opportunities in high-demand programs.

Training programs in the health care field are a prime example. The health care sector in California is large and growing, providing essential services to the state’s population as well as employment opportunities to a wide variety of workers. And according to our recent report, nearly 200,000 new health care jobs over the next decade will require some college training but not a bachelor’s degree. Given the state’s interest in serving employment needs and diversifying the health care workforce, it is crucially important to understand the ability of California’s community colleges to effectively train health workers for needed jobs.

Beyond meeting the state’s workforce needs, career technical education also has the potential to substantively improve labor market outcomes for a wide range of students. Research has identified sizable labor market returns to obtaining a career technical credential, and the California Community College Chancellor’s Office makes this information publicly available through its Salary Surfer web tool. But much remains unknown, especially why economic returns vary across programs and student groups and why more students do not complete a credential at all. To ensure recent state and federal investments—and future reforms—are effective, it is important to fill the knowledge gaps on the student, institutional, and policy choices that lead to optimal outcomes.

Perhaps more importantly, if vocational training is to be a viable mechanism for improving economic mobility, especially for disadvantaged groups, we need a better understanding of the most promising pathways. Upcoming PPIC research will examine this very issue, looking at student success at California’s community colleges across health CTE programs and student demographic groups to provide a clearer picture of effective career technical education.

Making Federal Farm Support Drought-Smart

A new initiative launched by President Obama in March seeks to better coordinate federal drought-management efforts at the basin scale, and ensure that key federal farm programs are in alignment with watershed conservation objectives developed by state and local partners. Making federal farm-program dollars work better and go farther will be key to this effort’s success.

The critical role of US Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs in managing water scarcity is often overlooked. But as we document in our recent report on the federal role in western water, USDA’s programs represent the lion’s share of federal water- and drought-related funding in the region. Given farming’s large water footprint in the West, even small changes in farm practices can have broad effects on water supplies and ecosystem health.

The agricultural water and land stewardship programs run by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the Farm Service Agency are singularly important, due to their size and reach. These programs provide farmers with technical and financial support to improve water use efficiency and conserve soils, water, and wildlife habitat through on-farm investments. In addition, easement programs pay farmers to convert environmentally sensitive lands to wetland or cover crops—or to keep their lands in production rather than allow it to be developed.

Practical reforms in easement programs could yield drought-management results. The wetland recovery program pays farmers to permanently restore fields to wetlands, and the conservation reserve program pays them to convert fields to cover crops for 10–15 years. But such long-term commitments to fallow lands are unappealing to many farmers.

These programs could be more effective by allowing shorter easements and working with groups of farmers rather than individuals. For instance, paying farmers to create temporary wetlands during droughts can stretch scarce water and dollars while supporting waterbirds. Similarly, paying a group of farmers to do rotational fallowing—which means they take turns temporarily fallowing fields—can reduce overall water use while keeping farms in production. Meanwhile, other incentives could focus on farmers who commit to maintaining land in field crops rather than permanent crops—a change that could boost drought resilience in places like California, which has seen a big expansion of tree crops that are harder to fallow.

USDA programs represent the lion’s share of federal water- and drought-related funding in the West.

Another important change involves the popular NRCS subsidies to support efficiency investments on farms. The problem is that reducing the amount of water needed to grow specific crops does not usually translate into more water in the system, since newly available water is often used to increase production. And this water can be vital to downstream users and the recharge of groundwater.

To make sure these subsidies don’t conflict with basin management goals, USDA efficiency programs should seek to maintain or enhance water to meet environmental needs, and prevent harm to groundwater basins. Solutions could include expanding and improving temporary, strategic flows to meet habitat needs, and dedicating water created through efficiency programs to environmental uses or groundwater recharge.

Many of these changes could occur under existing statutory authority, and some program updates could be included in the 2019 Farm Bill. To be more effective in managing western drought, future farm bills should also put relatively more emphasis on easements and less on efficiency-oriented subsidies.

These changes would make federal support programs a better fit for many farmers, while supporting basin-level drought management goals of improving conditions for fish and wildlife, recharging groundwater, and reducing overall water use in areas grappling with water scarcity.

Learn more

Read a summary of policy recommendations from Improving the Federal Response to Western Drought (February 2016)
Read the federal action plan on improving long-term drought resilience
Watch a video on “Reforming Federal Drought Management”
Visit the PPIC Water Policy Center

Video: Californians Weigh in on Presidential Race

The strong partisan divisions prominent in the nation this election year are also evident in California, the latest PPIC Statewide Survey shows. As the primary nears, Democrats and Republicans are deeply divided in their views about the appropriate role and size of government. Dean Bonner, the PPIC survey’s associate director, presented these and other key survey findings in Sacramento last week.

Bonner noted that preferences among California’s likely voter in the upcoming presidential primary are similar to those seen in many states that have already voted. Among Democratic likely voters—including independents who say they will vote in the Democratic primary—48% support Hillary Clinton and 41% support Bernie Sanders. Most young voters support Sanders and most over age 45 support Clinton. Clinton leads among Latinos, women, and those who describe themselves as politically middle of the road, while Sanders leads among men and voters who describe themselves as very liberal.

Donald Trump leads the Republican field with 38%, followed by Ted Cruz with 27% and John Kasich with 14%. Bonner noted evidence in the survey of discontent with the status quo in the nation—signs that may have fueled the candidacies of “outsiders” in both major parties. A majority of likely voters—63%—say the nation is going in the wrong direction and 47% say the US will have bad times financially in the coming year. And Congress’ job performance gets a very low rating—across party lines. Notably, Republicans are more likely to approve of President Obama (20%) than they are to approve of the Republican-led Congress (11%).

Safeguarding Groundwater for a Drier Future

California is not alone in facing serious groundwater challenges—overuse is causing water tables to fall in many parts of the globe. Sharing ideas on how to protect and restore this important resource is the theme of a special opinion forum on the global groundwater crisis in The Desert Sun. Ten experts from the US West, Ethiopia, South Africa, India, and Peru weighed in.

My commentary focused on groundwater’s role as an “unsung hero” in California’s latest drought, and the need to manage it more carefully to ensure its critical role in getting agriculture through future droughts. This doesn’t mean restricting pumping in the midst of the drought—as tempting as that might be—because that could worsen the economic impacts of water shortages. Instead, it means rolling up our sleeves to develop and implement long-term management plans—a path made easier by the passage of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act in 2014.

Here’s my contribution to the opinion forum:

Most Californians have first-hand experience with our record-breaking drought. Far fewer understand the role that groundwater has played in easing the drought’s impact on our cities and farms. Groundwater typically provides about a third of total water supplies, with the balance coming from rivers and lakes. Last year, its share was closer to two-thirds. Extra groundwater pumping bolstered the state’s urban economy and kept thousands of acres of valuable orchards, vines, and vegetables in production.

Many of California’s urban areas planned ahead to build their underground drought reserves. Since the last major drought (1987–92) they made large investments in groundwater storage as part of a strategy to diversify their water sources. In Southern California and Silicon Valley, locals also adopted management systems that facilitate water banking—which requires putting more water into the ground and pumping less in wet and normal years so that it’s available during droughts.

Most of California’s farming areas have less-robust groundwater oversight, and one consequence is long-term declines in water tables. The extra pumping during the drought is compounding this problem, causing some wells to go dry and some lands to sink. The good news is that many farmers now recognize the importance of managing groundwater as a drought reserve. And the state’s 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act gives them the tools to make this happen.

It’s tempting during a drought to call for pumping restrictions, but this can worsen economic impacts, especially on the farm sector. Now is a good time to take actions that ensure groundwater is available for future droughts.

Learn more

Read “Reforming California’s Groundwater Management” (PPIC fact sheet)
Read “The Coming Groundwater Revolution” (PPIC blog, January 6, 2016)
Read “Getting to Groundwater Sustainability” (PPIC blog, June 16, 2015)
Visit the PPIC Water Policy Center’s water supply resource page

Federal Drought Management: It’s Complicated

More than two dozen federal departments and agencies engage in some facet of water resource management in the West. This complex institutional landscape is a big obstacle to effective management of western droughts.

The wildly differing jurisdictions of federal agencies across the West provide a striking illustration of this complex landscape. While these boundaries were created with the individual agencies’ missions and objectives in mind, the resulting jigsaw puzzle complicates efforts to address the varied objectives of sustainable water management.

During the latest drought, the federal government made noteworthy attempts to improve how agencies work together—for example, the White House established the National Drought Resilience Partnership, which aims to strengthen coordination of federal drought policies and programs in support of state, tribal, and community efforts. Yet the federal response to drought is fragmented, with imprecise definition of authorities and poorly aligned missions.

A major challenge to better coordination lies in the diverse, and occasionally conflicting, roles and responsibilities of different federal agencies. For example, in basins where farmers rely on the federal government for water supply but where there is also a need to protect the environment, the missions of the various federal agencies can be in direct conflict. This lack of clarity impedes federal efforts to help the West manage drought and adapt to a changing climate.

A recent report by the PPIC Water Policy Center, Improving the Federal Response to Western Drought, recommends that federal agencies better coordinate actions among themselves and with state and local partners. Coordination will work best when multi-agency efforts are aligned at the scale of large river basins and the watersheds within those basins. Federal drought response also needs to shift away from a centralized, Washington, DC-based approach to a more distributed authority, using interagency teams with basin-level expertise to address priority actions and help balance competing needs.

The federal government is an instrumental partner in western water management, but its complexity and disparate missions limit its ability to respond creatively to water scarcity. Taking steps now to make federal policies and practices more nimble will help the West better manage the inevitable droughts of the future.

Video: Congressman Kevin McCarthy in Conversation

The majority leader of the US House of Representatives ticked off the issues in an ambitious agenda that he and Congressman Paul Ryan, the House Speaker, are working on in Congress. Congressman Kevin McCarthy told a Sacramento audience that they include national security, the economy, tax reform, poverty, regulatory reform, innovation in government, and water.

McCarthy shares a sense of urgency with Senator Dianne Feinstein about getting a water bill through Congress this year. But he made clear in his conversation with Mark Baldassare, president and CEO of PPIC, that he and the senator—who spoke to a PPIC audience last month—differ in their policy priorities. His include building more water storage and pumping more water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

McCarthy said he thought a water bill could be passed this year, perhaps in a bill that addresses the water problem in Flint, Michigan.

“I think there’s a window of opportunity,” he said.

When the conversation turned to the presidential race, McCarthy was asked to compare two political outsiders—presidential candidate Donald Trump and former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. McCarthy said both tapped frustration in the electorate and both brought new voters to the process.

“When I went to the rallies with Arnold it was amazing,” he said. “There’d be 7,000 people in Bakersfield. Lived there my whole life, but I’d see people I’d never met before.”

Today, he said, “the country feels as though the government is not listening to them, they’re divided on all sides, and they’re just not going to take it anymore.”

“I don’t believe it’s a bad thing at all. I believe it’s good.”

Video: California’s Voter Turnout Problem

Voter turnout in California has been declining—it reached record lows last year, raising concerns about the state’s democratic process. PPIC research fellow Eric McGhee told a Sacramento audience last week that turnout in California has not only dropped in absolute terms but has fallen behind that of other states. While participation in fall presidential elections has been holding steady, turnout is on the decline in midterm elections—when the state elects a governor and other statewide officials—and, to some extent, in presidential primaries.

A big part of the problem is California’s voter registration rate, said McGhee, who coauthored the new report Putting California’s Voter Turnout in Context. It has not changed significantly, though it should have been climbing, as it has in other states.

California has been working hard to make the voting and registration processes as easy as possible, and other policy changes are under discussion. Will they result in higher turnout? They may help, but they aren’t panaceas, McGhee said. Ongoing mobilization efforts will be needed to motivate more people to cast a ballot.

California’s Farmers Adapt to Drought (in English and Spanish)

California’s drought has caused significant damage to the most important agricultural region in the United States. Half a million acres had to be fallowed, causing the loss of thousands of jobs in rural communities. The proportion of farmland planted to permanent crops has risen, making it harder to use fallowing as a drought strategy. Much of the shortage in surface water has been alleviated by pumping groundwater. But going forward, this practice will be increasingly challenged by the considerable drop in the water table in some areas, and management practices that will be required by the new statewide groundwater law adopted in late 2014.

We interviewed Josué Medellín-Azuara—a researcher at the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences and a member of the PPIC Water Policy Center’s research network—about how the agricultural sector has been coping with drought, and practices and technologies that can help farmers weather future droughts. As Medellín-Azuara says, “There isn’t a simple solution to this problem—the strategy will be to implement a mix of the actions that are available to us.” This video is in Spanish only.

_____________________________

Video: La adaptación a la sequía del sector agrícola de California

La sequía que ha sufrido California en estos últimos años ha causado daños significativos en la región agrícola más importante de Estados Unidos. Se estima que medio millón de acres se han tenido que dejar en barbecho, propiciando la pérdida de miles de puestos de trabajo sobretodo en comunidades rurales. Pero la tendencia durante estos últimos años ha sido la de aumentar la proporción de cultivos perennes, reduciendo la flexibilidad del sistema para disminuir la demanda durante sequías. Por suerte, parte de la escasez de agua superficial se ha paliado bombeando agua desde los acuíferos, aunque esta práctica está cada vez más cuestionada por la disminución considerable del nivel freático en algunas zonas, que la implementación de la nueva ley estatal de gestión sustentable de los acuíferos aprobada en 2014 tratará de paliar.
Entrevistamos a Josué Medellín-Azuara —investigador del Center for Watershed Sciences de la Universidad de California, Davis, y miembro de la red de investigadores del PPIC Water Policy Center—sobre cómo el sector agrícola ha respondido a la sequía, sobre qué podemos esperar en el futuro. Como dice el Medellín-Azuara, “No existe un solución única a todos los problemas—la estrategia será la de implementar una combinación de las todas las acciones disponibles.”
Aprende más 
Lee nuestro informe Qué Pasaría Si la Sequía de California Continuara? (Agosto de 2015) (versión original en inglés)

Testimony: Closing California’s Degree Gap

PPIC senior fellow Hans Johnson testified at a joint hearing of the Assembly Higher Education Committee and Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance yesterday (March 2, 2016). The topic was “Closing California’s Certificate and Degree Attainment Gap.” Here are his prepared remarks.


Thank you for organizing this joint hearing on such an important topic. My name is Hans Johnson. I am a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. PPIC is a nonpartisan, independent research institute and as such does not take positions on bills before the legislature. My testimony today is based on a recently released PPIC report, Will California Run Out of College Graduates?, which I authored with my colleagues Marisol Cuellar Mejia and Sarah Bohn.

Educational attainment is the single most important determinant of economic well-being for individuals, for states, and for countries. As the California economy continues to change, becoming more technical and requiring more skills of workers, a key question is whether the state’s workforce will be ready to meet these future challenges.

To answer this question, PPIC has developed projections of California’s workforce skills through 2030, focusing on the supply and demand for workers with a bachelor’s degree. We find that the state will fall about 1.1 million college graduates short of economic demand if current trends persist—a problem we call the workforce skills gap. We project that 38 percent of all jobs will depend on workers with at least a bachelor’s degree, but only about 33 percent of workers will have one in 2030. These projections are based on recent economic trends and on forecasts that show a continued increase in the demand for highly educated workers, a demand that is not going to be met by expected increases in the supply of college graduates. So the challenge is clear: either improve educational outcomes for Californians or face a future that has relatively dim economic prospects.

Already we see evidence of strong and increasing demand for highly educated workers. In today’s labor market, workers with a bachelor’s degree have better economic outcomes than those with less education, and that advantage is at or near all-time highs. Over time, college graduates have seen lower rates of unemployment and higher wages than other workers—even through the Great Recession and certainly in the recovery—illustrating that college degrees have become increasingly valuable in California’s labor market.

Future Jobs

To assess California’s future job market, we rely on long-term occupational projections from the state’s Employment Development Department (EDD). Here, we are concerned not just with changes in the state’s overall occupational mix but also with changes in skill requirements within occupational categories. Understanding these changes helps to provide a clearer picture of where the growth in demand for college degrees is likely to occur. To do so, we look at both broad occupational categories, such as business operations, and jobs within those categories, such as marketing specialists.

The projections suggest that the mix of occupational categories in California’s labor market is not going to change drastically over the next decade or so. The fastest-growing categories will include both high and low skills. Among the ten fastest-growing categories, five require high levels of educational attainment and five do not. This means that the bifurcation of California’s occupational mix, an important component of wage inequality, is expected to continue.

Because the demand for highly educated workers within occupational categories has been growing over the past decade, even though the mix of these categories is not shifting much, we expect the economy to require a higher share of educated workers by 2030. In most occupational categories, the share of workers holding at least a bachelor’s degree is projected to increase by 2030.

These increases are projected to occur in most occupational categories, from those regarded as high skill (such as management) to those regarded as low skill (food preparation). Some of this increase will be caused by a shift toward specific occupations within broader occupational categories. But the larger shift is likely to be an increase in educational attainment within specific occupations themselves.

Business operations is a case in point. In 2000, about half of the workers in the business operations occupational category held a bachelor’s degree; by 2013, this share had increased to 60 percent. If these trends continue, 74 percent will have a bachelor’s degree in 2030—a 14 percentage point increase over 17 years. But as an overall occupational category, business operations will make up a similar share of the economy as it does today—3.0 percent in 2030, compared with 2.7 percent in 2013.

The increase in educational attainment within this occupational category is occurring because its fastest-growing specific occupations include some with high levels of education—for example, market research analysts and marketing specialists, 75 percent of whom hold at least a bachelor’s degree. In addition, some specific occupations have seen a large increase in the share of workers with college degrees—for example, the share of fundraisers with a bachelor’s degree increased from 44 percent in 2000 to 84 percent in 2013.

Overall, there are no indications that the rocky economic landscape of the recent recession has shifted the trend in demand for highly educated workers. In the past, a strong demand for highly educated workers occurred as the economy shifted toward occupational categories and industries that demanded these workers. But in the 1990s and—based on our current analysis—through the 2000s, the strong demand for highly educated workers has reflected growth in education levels within industries and occupations.

Do these projections indicate a real demand, or are they simply evidence of a trend toward overeducating the workforce? One way to distinguish between these two possibilities is to examine the wage premium paid to college workers—that is, the extra wages employers are willing to pay college workers compared with less educated workers in the same occupational category. Positive and increasing wage premiums for college-educated workers reflect the economic demand for high skills. In general, the college wage premium is large and increasing economy-wide; moreover, we find that within occupational categories, the same is generally true. College-educated workers enjoy positive and significant wage premiums within almost every occupational category. These findings indicate that the strong demand for highly educated workers is likely to continue because employers and the economy require the skills associated with more highly educated workers.

Of course, the labor market does not value all college degrees equally. For degrees in highly lucrative fields, such as engineering and computer science, the lifetime wage premium—that is, the expected present value of the gain in wages by completing college, even after accounting for college costs—can total more than $1 million; but even for degrees with the lowest economic returns, the lifetime wage premium totals more than $200,000.

Future Educational Attainment

The share of adults in the workforce with a bachelor’s degree or more will increase only slightly—about 1 percent—by 2030. To a great extent, this slow growth stems from the retirement of the numerous and very highly educated members of the baby boom generation. Today, the best-educated age group in California consists of adults age 60 to 64. By 2030, these adults will be retired.

In the past, retirees tended to be less educated and relatively few in number—and they were replaced by younger, more-numerous, and more-educated adults. In the future, this will no longer be the case. Indeed, the retirement of the baby boomers represents the first time in California’s history that such a large and well-educated generation is exiting the labor force. This loss helps to explain the size of the skills gap we see in 2030.

California is unlikely to attract enough highly educated migrants from elsewhere to close the skills gap. For a long time, the state has relied on migrants to supply employers with the college graduates they need. Until recently, more of California’s college graduates, by percentage, were born elsewhere in the United States. And since 1980, the share of college graduates from other countries has increased quickly, a reflection of the globalization of the state’s economy—and we expect this to continue. Were it not for these increases, the size of the skills gap would be even larger.

California residents are making slight improvements in educational attainment. Indeed, in 2010, for the first time in the state’s history, more of California’s college graduates were born in the state (37%) than in other states (33%) or internationally (30%). Going forward, California’s best approach to closing its skills gap will be to concentrate on improving the educational attainment of its residents.

Policy Implications

We believe that the most promising approach to closing the workforce skills gap is to concentrate on improving the educational attainment of California residents. Here, I will outline four key strategies for the state and its colleges and universities to pursue. Implementing these strategies—which should be the core of a new state plan for higher education—would require increased coordination across institutions.

First, increase access. Research shows that students are much more likely to earn a bachelor’s degree if they first enroll in a four-year college, rather than in a community college—even when we account for differences in academic preparation. This means that increasing the share of high school graduates eligible for the University of California and California State University would be an important step toward increasing the number of college graduates. It would also improve access for students from low-income families and other underrepresented groups.

Second, improve completion rates and time to degree. Despite progress by both university systems to address these issues, only 19 percent of students at CSU and 60 percent of those at UC earn a bachelor’s degree in four years. Current strategies to graduate more students more quickly should be assessed to identify which are most effective. And new approaches—such as offering colleges fiscal incentives to increase the share of students taking a full, 15-unit course load—should be considered.

Third, expand transfers to four-year colleges. Improving transfer pathways from community colleges to four-year institutions is essential because California relies heavily on its two-year institutions. Currently, the vast majority of community college students do not earn degrees or certificates. Associate degree programs guaranteeing that qualified community college students can transfer to CSU should be expanded. These programs now depend on individual agreements between specific campuses and apply only to specific majors; expanding them to include more majors and transfers to UC is likely to increase the number of students who ultimately earn bachelor’s degrees.

Finally, be smart about aid. Grant and aid programs mean that most low-income and even some middle-income students do not have to pay tuition at the state’s public colleges and universities. But other educational costs are not well covered and student debt has been rising, raising questions about whether state Cal Grants should cover more than tuition. The state should also consider increasing the size of Cal Grants to students attending private colleges that have good graduation rates and low loan-default rates.

In summary, a state plan for higher education should ensure that enough high school graduates are ready for college, enough slots are available for new college students, more community college students are able to transfer to four-year institutions, and more students complete college in four years. Of critical importance, California and its higher education institutions must strengthen access to and success in college for low-income and underrepresented students, who make up an increasing share of the state’s population. Ultimately, closing the workforce skills gap will result in a more productive economy, higher incomes, greater tax revenues, less pressure on the social safety net—and a brighter future all Californians.

Video: Farming’s Water Future

The latest drought has roiled the state’s agricultural heartland, causing job losses in rural communities, fallowed fields, and dropping groundwater levels. Increased groundwater pumping helped minimize economic losses for many farmers, but this could prove unsustainable in some areas during longer droughts.

We interviewed Richard Howitt—professor emeritus of agricultural and resource economics at the University of California, Davis, and a Steyer Fellow with the PPIC Water Policy Center—on what can be done to make California’s agricultural economy more resilient to future droughts.

Learn more

Read our report What If California’s Drought Continues? (August 2015)
Read an interview with Howitt on Water Deeply (February 26, 2016)
Visit the PPIC Water Policy Center