Month: November 2018

‘Tis the Season for College Applications

Across the nation, millions of high school seniors are in the process of completing college applications. Friday is the deadline to submit applications for freshmen admission to the fall 2019 term to California’s public universities (the University of California and the California State University); most private colleges have January deadlines. The number of applications this year should be staggering—in California most of all. But the state is having difficulty keeping up with demand.

Recent years have seen all-time records in freshman applications. In fall 2016 (the year of most recent nationwide data), more than 10 million applications went to more than 1,500 four-year colleges and universities, leading to 5.7 million admittances and 1.5 million enrolled freshmen. Ten years earlier, just over 6 million applications were submitted, leading to 3.6 million admittances and 1.3 million enrolled freshmen.

Significant growth has occurred in California, too. In fall 2016, 1.5 million applications went to 110 four-year colleges and universities, leading to more than 600,000 admittances and 139,000 enrolled freshmen. Ten years earlier in the state, 800,000 applications were submitted, leading to slightly more than 400,000 admittances and 104,000 enrolled freshmen.

California colleges and universities garner the most applications in the nation. Of the top 10 most popular schools, eight are in California (six UC campuses and two CSU campuses), as are 11 of the top 20. UCLA has led the nation in applications every year for at least the past 17 years, and in 2017 it became the first college in the country to receive more than 100,000 freshmen applications.

The popularity of UC campuses has surged over the past 10 years, with UC Irvine moving from 8th in 2006 to 4th in 2016, UC Davis moving from 11th to 6th, and UC Santa Cruz moving from 30th to 15th. In the CSU system, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo has moved from 25th to 18th. And even though other CSU campuses fell in the rankings, they still experienced large increases in applications.

Of course it makes sense that California colleges would lead the nation: the state has more high school graduates than any other and offers a robust system of public universities. And students are applying to more colleges than they did in the past, which is part of the growth in applications. But much of the increase is attributable to improvements in college preparation. Between 2006 and 2016, the number of California high school graduates completing the courses required for UC and CSU eligibility increased by almost 60% (compared to a decline of 1% in the number of high school graduates who do not complete the college prep courses).

Unfortunately, California’s public universities have not been able to accommodate all qualified applicants. Indeed, California universities lead the nation in rejecting applicants. Each of the UC campuses except Merced are unable to admit all of the eligible students who apply. Six CSU campuses (including Long Beach, San Diego, and San Luis Obispo) are impacted for all undergraduate programs, meaning they cannot admit all qualified applicants, and most of the other campuses are impacted in certain majors. Both UC and CSU refer qualified applicants to campuses that have more room, but more needs to be done to expand capacity at campuses with high demand.

2020 Census: Counting the Sacramento Area

The decennial census plays an essential role in American democracy. Our series of blog posts examines what’s at stake for California and the challenges facing the 2020 Census, including communities that are at risk of being undercounted.  

PPIC’s interactive census maps are an important tool for Californians working to ensure an accurate census count. Using estimates from the Census Bureau and the Federal Communications Commission, they highlight hard-to-count communities across the state and pinpoint reasons why certain areas may be hard to reach.

Home to about 2.5 million people, the Sacramento area includes the counties of El Dorado, Placer, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba, in addition to Sacramento. Within this region, Yuba has the highest share of very hard-to-count areas (21%)—in the top fifth of hardest-to-count counties across the state—and Sacramento has the second highest (10%). Households in these very hard-to-count areas are less likely to respond initially to census forms and are therefore at risk of being undercounted, according to Census Bureau estimates that draw on local demographic characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity, age, citizenship, and housing conditions) and historical trends.

Some highlights:

  • Legislative districts that include the fast-growing city of Sacramento will likely be the hardest to count. In Congressional District 6 (Matsui), Senate District 6 (Pan), and Assembly District 7 (McCarty), between 14% and 19% of neighborhoods are considered very hard to count. Other legislative districts in the region tend to cover more suburban or rural areas and have much smaller shares of very hard-to-count communities.
  • There are small pockets of hard-to-reach areas across the region. Within Sacramento County, hard-to-reach areas are concentrated in the city of Sacramento, as well as around Rancho Cordova and Folsom. In some neighborhoods, 30% or more of households are predicted to not respond initially to the census. Other relatively hard-to-reach areas include Yuba City and Marysville at the border of Sutter and Yuba Counties, Davis and Woodland in Yolo County, and the eastern border of Placer and El Dorado Counties, directly north and south of Lake Tahoe.
  • Local population trends can help guide effective outreach. African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans have historically been undercounted in the census. Overall, these groups make up a lower share of the population in the Sacramento area compared to the rest of the state. However, in much of the city of Sacramento, around Woodland and northwest Yolo County, and in South Yuba City and northeastern Sutter County, more than half of residents are from historically undercounted communities—primarily African American and Latino. Some of these areas have relatively high shares of noncitizens as well. Noncitizens may be less likely to respond to the 2020 Census because of the planned addition of a citizenship question and concerns about deportation and privacy.
  • Parts of the Sacramento area have high shares of young children. Young children are historically underrepresented in the census. In census tracts in the eastern parts of Sutter County and southern Yuba County, in the city of Sacramento and surrounding suburbs, and the southwestern tip of Placer County, 9% or more of residents are children under five years old, compared to 6.5% statewide.
  • Housing conditions may make an accurate count challenging. High shares of rentals, overcrowded rental units, and mobile homes can make it more difficult to count residents accurately. Around Yuba City and Marysville, all of these factors are prevalent: in some neighborhoods, more than 65% of housing units are rented, about a quarter of those are overcrowded, and 15% of households live in mobile homes. In the city of Sacramento, housing conditions vary, with some neighborhoods seeing high rates of overcrowding but low rates of mobile homes, while others see the reverse. Reaching residents in nontraditional housing will be critical to an accurate count—and will depend on local knowledge of how families make ends meet.
  • Limited internet access may be an issue in rural areas throughout the region. The Census Bureau plans to collect the majority of responses online in 2020—a change from previous practice. Each county in the region has some census tracts with minimal residential high-speed connectivity, with the lowest access outside of the city of Sacramento, Lake Tahoe, Yuba City, and Marysville. Outside of these areas, it may be harder to collect responses online, and participation will rely more heavily on in-person census takers or internet provided by local institutions.

We hope these maps serve as a starting point to help local, regional, and state leaders think about which activities, resources, and partnerships—including language assistance, awareness raising, and community outreach—might be most effective for accurately counting different parts of California. Stay tuned for future posts that examine hard-to-count communities in other regions of the state.

 

Testimony: Career Education Is Key to Meeting California’s Workforce Needs

Sarah Bohn, research director and senior fellow at PPIC, testified today, November 27, 2018, before the Assembly Select Committee on Career Technical Education and Building a 21st Century Workforce. Here are her prepared remarks.

Thank you for convening this informational hearing on higher education and the workforce. PPIC recently surveyed Californians on these topics and a large majority (75%) view the state’s higher education system as very important to the quality of life and economic vitality of California. Not surprisingly, the same share say that the higher education system should be a high or very high priority for the new governor. So this hearing is extremely timely and I’m so pleased to share PPIC research on education and workforce needs.

Most jobs require some college training

The majority of jobs today and in the future will require education beyond high school—split about equally between jobs that require a four-year college degree and those that require education or credentials provided at community colleges. Only about one-third of new jobs created in California over the next decade or so will be available to workers with no more than a high school diploma. These workforce needs are the result of long-term shifts toward a knowledge-based economy. It’s not just that there are new jobs that require more postsecondary education, but the need for credentials within professions has grown as well. For example, more office administrators now have a college education than in the past.

Better-paying jobs are more likely to need college training

College credentials are also the route to accessing better-paying jobs. With the trend toward a knowledge-based economy comes an increasingly wide gap in terms of earnings between jobs that require a college education and those that don’t. Among the top ten occupations in terms of job growth you find many service sector jobs that pay less than $35,000 in annual earnings (personal care aides, food preparation, freight/stock movers, medical assistants) and do not require a college education. And you find a handful of jobs at the opposite extreme—which pay three to four times as much and require a college education (registered nursing, software developers, managers). This trend is likely to continue and might become more extreme with additional pressures like AI (artificial intelligence) and further automation.

California’s community college system is key to meeting state workforce needs

Ensuring we have the workforce to meet these demands—and ensuring future workers can access higher-paying jobs—requires a higher education system that is responsive to student and economic needs. The young workers of today and tomorrow are much more diverse than the current workforce, comprised of demographic groups with historically lower levels of college attainment (including racial/ethnic minorities and first-generation college students). And though we’ve made progress, there’s still room to broaden access to college—and narrow achievement gaps.

For that reason, community colleges—and career education programs in particular—are critical to educating our future workforce. The community colleges are the most common entry point to higher education for Californians, serving almost three times as many students as CSU and UC combined. They also serve a more diverse mix of students. In career education (or CTE) programs, the majority of students are nonwhite and low income. Students range from recent high school graduates to stranded workers (who lack the skills needed to succeed in the job market) to older workers in need of retraining. And these programs provide opportunities in a wide spectrum of careers. As just one mission of the community colleges, CTE is so consequential for meeting workforce needs and improving economic outcomes because it is often the fastest route to new and better careers.

Career education programs can pay off for students

Earning credentials in CTE pays off for students. Those who earn an associate degree see a 20–35% increase in their wages. The payoff wanes for shorter credentials but remains positive even for certificates that can be earned in less than a year (certificates of 6–18 units). But the choice of program or career matters a lot. If health programs are excluded from these calculations, the payoff is much lower on average (4–7% for an associate degree). The health field offers the highest returns across all broad program types. But there’s even variation in which health programs pay off (e.g., registered nursing is more remunerative than medical assisting).

Because CTE credentials vary so much in terms of what they offer in the labor market, the choice of what to study can be as important as the choice to go to college. That information is critical for policymakers evaluating effectiveness and especially for students choosing programs. I commend the community colleges in sharing earnings potential data on their website through tools like Salary Surfer.

Some students may need new job skills to move along a career pathway to higher-paying jobs

Instead of pitting one type of credential or program against another, what we should be thinking about is improving long-term economic mobility for students. A lot of CTE students start by earning a short-term credential, which offers the lowest earnings bump, on average. But those credentials might help an individual switch to an industry with more opportunity in the long run or to start an educational career pathway toward higher-level achievement (i.e., earning “stackable” credentials). Unfortunately our research shows that only a small share of CTE programs (at most 18%) have well-defined career pathways and less than one-quarter of students who start with short-term certificates take additional steps toward broader career options.

But there’s great promise in improving those career pathways. We found that students who “stack” credentials—in this example, in a health field—eventually catch up in earnings to those who started on a high-return pathway like registered nursing. Students who earn a single health credential (mostly high-return associate degrees) see a marked improvement in their earning trajectory. Those who complete a lower-value credential but then return and complete a second one later do nearly as well. Of course this takes time (which is not free), but it’s a reminder that a single credential is not the end of the road. Effective CTE programs can connect students to in-demand and high-return careers in many ways.

In closing, this research suggests state investments in CTE are worthwhile, both for improving student career outcomes and meeting workforce needs. But the state and colleges can’t operate alone; partnership with businesses will be key to making sure that programs address workforce needs and adjust as those needs change. Only then can the state be deliberate in its investments to make sure that CTE programs improve long-term outcomes for students and the state’s economy.

Local Measures Address Water, Fire in the Midterm Elections

The biggest water news from the recent election was the failure of the $8.9 billion statewide water bond, Proposition 3. This was the first time voters have rejected a statewide water bond since 1990. But this wasn’t the only story for water-related measures on Californians’ ballots. The midterms saw 33 local measures go to the voters that addressed issues ranging from flood protection to fire resilience. Here we summarize a few key votes.

In Los Angeles County, Measure W passed. This measure allows the county to collect a parcel tax of 2.5 cents per square foot of impermeable surfaces (such as concrete sidewalks and pavement) to fund rain and stormwater capture and clean-up projects, in addition to projects addressing water quality and groundwater recharge. The measure exempts permeable surfaces from the tax, which could incentivize developers to incorporate more green solutions into development and renovation projects.

In the Bay Area, San Francisco and San Jose both passed local bonds to modernize infrastructure. San Francisco easily passed Measure A, which will issue $425 million in bonds to strengthen the Embarcadero seawall to better withstand earthquakes and rising sea levels. San Jose’s Measure T will allocate $650 million in bonds to repair the city’s aging infrastructure. Although almost half of this bond is dedicated to repaving streets, the measure also includes $85 million for flood protection—a response to the 2017 Coyote Creek flood that caused $100 million in property damage. The bond will fund “green infrastructure” projects in the local floodplain to reduce the risks of future floods and groundwater contamination.

Across the state, the rise in devastating wildfires resulted in nine measures addressing fire protection and intervention services in communities, to be paid for through utility taxes, sales taxes, and parcel taxes. Four of these measures passed, while five failed.

Sonoma County’s newly adopted park and ecosystem restoration bill―Measure M, a one-eighth cent sales tax increase―will collectively fund wildfire prevention, ecosystem restoration, and projects to safeguard water supplies, including rivers and streams. Measure FF passed in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties; it extended an existing parcel tax to fund wildfire prevention and water quality activities on East Bay Regional Park District lands, as well as park maintenance. But voters didn’t approve Measure P in Laguna Beach (Orange County), which proposed a sales tax to pay for wildfire safety measures. It would have funded projects such as undergrounding overhead power lines.

Although the failure of Proposition 3 caught some by surprise, it’s important to remember that state bonds play a relatively minor role in funding California’s water needs. Local revenues—from water and sewer bills to taxes—provide 85% of water funding. The newly passed ballot measures carry on that tradition, with Californians across the state voting to address their communities’ needs and priorities for water, fire safety, and the environment.

Videos: Higher Education Priorities

Last week in Sacramento, PPIC researcher Lunna Lopes outlined key findings from the latest PPIC Statewide Survey, which focuses on higher education. The following day in San Francisco, PPIC president Mark Baldassare and Monica Lozano, president of the College Futures Foundation, talked about the survey’s implications for governor-elect Gavin Newsom.

The survey finds that most Californians think public higher education should be a high priority for the next governor. For Monica Lozano, this is a key takeaway: “Overwhelmingly, Californians said that a four-year degree is essential to the economic vitality of the state. And, as much as we have considered Jerry Brown a real progressive on lots of issues, there is a sense that he did not do enough on higher education.”

Lozano also noted that Californians are focused on helping students succeed. Their concerns are less about access and enrollment capacity and more about student support: student debt, financial aid, and academic and other kinds of support. “The public is putting students at the center of this equation,” she said.

A majority of Californians see affordability as a big problem. In a state with one of the highest costs of living in the country, residents are divided on whether tuition and fees or housing and living expenses are the bigger burden: 45% say tuition and fees, 34% say housing and living expenses, and 17% volunteer that the two are equally burdensome. As Baldassare put it, “There’s more to affordability than tuition and fees.”

Noting that governor-elect Newsom has an ambitious agenda for “cradle to career” education, Baldassare asked how higher education advocates and experts could help the new administration move forward.

Lozano replied, “Our challenge is to actually help them think about the fundamental issues that surfaced in this survey.” For example, most Californians think state higher education funding is inadequate and many support a funding guarantee for UC and CSU. “If the system of financing higher education has to change so that it’s more predictable—so that there’s some sort of a dedicated revenue stream that’s tied to some accountability measures—how would you actually do that?”

More generally, Lozano and Baldassare agreed that the survey shows how highly Californians value higher education; as Lozano put it, “This survey gives the next governor permission to be bold.”

Working with California Tribes on Upper Watershed Restoration

“Fish are very important to me, to my family, my culture.”

“It’s surprising how much you rely on traditional foods if you’re in a community like we are. You don’t necessarily realize it until you don’t have it . . . especially salmon.”

“If the water quality got better, rivers and creeks would be much better and it would bring back the fish.”

These are the voices of youth from the Karuk tribe in the Klamath River watershed, as heard in a new video that explores the connections between ecosystem health and tribal well-being. Healthy local waterways and the traditional foods they support are considered irreplaceable by indigenous peoples. A new program is seeking to tap into tribal understanding of natural resources to ensure their voices are being heard and to provide a more expansive approach to how state and tribal programs can align in the management of rivers, fisheries, and forests.

As part of this effort, the state is participating in a series of “forest gatherings,” which bring people working on natural resource issues to local watersheds in events hosted by a tribe from that place. “Place matters,” said Debbie Franco, community and rural affairs advisor in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. “Gathering in a watershed with tribal people who have been managing that place for thousands of years is a way to more deeply understand their perspective that forests, fish, water, and food are by nature integrated and connected.”

The gatherings are an opportunity for those in attendance to explore questions such as: How can the traditional land management practices of indigenous peoples inform how we can work better together in managing the land? What ecological ideal should we strive for? How do we connect the work of indigenous peoples with statewide policy discussions?

Each gathering is designed by a team with members from local NGOs, county and US Forest Service representatives, state representatives, and the host tribe. Invitees have included academics, policy experts, local governments, indigenous people, logging interests, and regional and state agencies.

“The idea is to find the people whose relationships are necessary to do good upper watershed management and to bring them together to build relationships and create a voluntary learning environment,” said Franco.

In addition to sharing ideas, participants may find themselves physically connecting with the watershed. An upper watershed gathering this August, for example, had participants rafting the Klamath River with a tribal person and stopping at a tributary along the way to help create better environmental conditions for spawning salmon.

Franco noted that indigenous knowledge can bring new solutions to problems facing watersheds today. “It goes well beyond what we know from our 150 years here. These forest gatherings are bringing more people to the understanding that the answers to our water challenges lie in the connections between us and our natural systems.”

Commentary: A Chance to Solve the Delta Quandary

This commentary was published in CALmatters on November 18, 2018.

It is imperative to improve the health of the greater Delta watershed, a major source of water for cities and farms across the state. And various stakeholders have a chance to achieve that goal in the coming weeks while protecting important economic interests. A delay in setting new water quality standards for the San Joaquin River will give time to develop voluntary agreements regarding the amount of water to be allocated to protect fish.

Read the full commentary on calmatters.org

Californians’ Priorities for the Next Governor

Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO and director of the PPIC Statewide Survey, spoke to the Sacramento Press Club on November 19, 2018 in a post-election discussion with Mark DiCamillo, director of the Berkeley IGS Poll. Here are his prepared remarks.

While we are still counting votes in California, the 2018 election can be called a sweeping success for Democratic candidates in the statewide races. Democrats also won the coveted two-thirds majorities in the state senate and state assembly, and increased their dominance of the California congressional delegation. The Republican Party’s efforts to stem their losses by getting behind what they hoped would be a popular gasoline tax repeal stalled as Proposition 6 fell short (57% no).

In the governor’s race, Democrat Gavin Newsom defeated Republican John Cox by a double-digit margin that was similar to the re-election win of Governor Jerry Brown over Neil Kashkari in 2014 (60% to 40%). Newsom was the leader in eight PPIC Statewide Surveys on the governor’s race conducted since last December. Cox surged to second place after President Trump endorsed him in the June primary, but he was unable to expand his base much beyond the president’s approval rating (39%, October PPIC survey).

What are Californians’ priorities for Governor-elect Newsom? California voters mentioned health care, immigration, the economy, the environment, and gun policy when asked to choose the most important issues facing the country in the exit polls (CNN poll, Fox poll). This list covers most, though not all, of the most important state issues mentioned in 2018 PPIC surveys. It also offers a good starting point for identifying issues that will shape the Newsom era. Here is what the 2018 PPIC surveys have to say about each one:

Health Care. A record-high 59 percent of Californians have a favorable view of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in the October PPIC survey. While 65 percent think it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure that all Americans have health coverage, just 34 percent say it should be provided via a single government program instead of the current mix of private and public programs. While 64 percent of adults favor a single-payer state government health plan, support drops to 41 percent if it means raising taxes, according to the May PPIC survey. In the wake of ACA repeal and replace efforts, California’s health insurance exchange and MediCal expansion seem to be generating more public support, while the desire for wholesale change are tempered by concerns about choices and costs.

Immigration. Seventy-four percent of Californians believe that immigrants are a benefit to the state, while 85 percent say that there should be a way for undocumented immigrants to stay in the country legally, according to the May PPIC survey. About three in four (74%) oppose building a wall along the border with Mexico in the October PPIC survey. Nearly six in 10 (58%) favor state and local governments taking action, separate from the federal government, to protect the legal rights of undocumented immigrants in California in the October PPIC survey. Given the large immigrant population and strongly held public views, the next governor will be expected to lead the resistance against federal policies.

The Economy. About half of Californians say they expect good times financially for the state (48%) and the nation (48%) over the next 12 months, according to the October PPIC survey. Still, jobs and the economy tops their list when asked to name the most important issue facing the state in the September PPIC survey. Related to this concern, 60 percent say that the state government should be doing more to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor in California. At least half across demographic groups and regions say the state should do more. The next governor’s challenge in meeting this expectation will be the ambivalence about footing the bill. Fifty percent say they prefer to pay higher taxes and have a state government that provides more services, and 77 percent of them say the state should do more. But of the 44 percent of Californians who would rather pay lower taxes and have fewer services, just 42 percent hold this view.

Environment. A record-high 56 percent of likely voters say that the gubernatorial candidates’ positions on the environment are very important in determining their vote, according to the July PPIC survey. Many Californians say they are concerned about the personal impact of global warming in the wake of a prolonged drought and in the face of growing evidence that extreme weather from climate change is resulting in more severe wildfires. As the federal government has dramatically changed course on environmental issues, most Californians say they want the state government to make its own policies to address global warming, and many say that it is important for California to act as a world leader in fighting climate change. Californians will be looking to the next governor to build on the work in progress, while dealing with environmental crises like the wildfires this fall and with legal challenges from the Trump Administration.

Gun Policy. Most Californians (64%) say the laws covering the sale of guns should be made stricter, according to the October PPIC survey. The belief that gun laws should be stricter was at a record-high 73 percent in the March PPIC survey, shortly after the devastating high school shooting in Parkland, Florida. In the wake of the recent tragic shooting in a bar in Thousand Oaks, California, the public’s belief that gun laws should be made stricter may climb higher. And with the absence of new federal legislation to address gun violence, the governor-elect will be asked to find ways to improve the current laws restricting guns in California.

Californians’ priorities also include big-ticket items such as universal preschool and tuition-free community college that would add up to “cradle to career” education, initiatives to tackle housing affordability and homelessness, and adequate water and transportation infrastructure. The next governor will also be tested by a Democratic-controlled legislature with pent-up demand for spending after eight years of fiscal caution under Governor Brown. The October PPIC survey offers this guidance if voter approval is needed: a majority of California adults prefer a bigger government with more services to a smaller government with fewer services (54% to 39%); however, a majority of likely voters prefer a smaller government with fewer services to a bigger government with more services (53% to 41%).

As the priorities, plans, and programs of the new governor take shape in the next year, the mission of the PPIC Statewide Survey—­­ to provide a voice for all adults and likely voters— is one that we take very seriously during this critical moment of policy development. And as we look to 2020, it’s important to remember that California will be playing an early and outsized role in the presidential election, with an early March 3 primary. PPIC will host a series of one-on-one public forums next year with state and national leaders, to discuss their leadership style and to explore their vision for the state’s and nation’s future.

Video: Water Priorities for California’s Next Governor

California’s many water challenges are complex, with many possible solutions and even more opinions about best approaches. How can a new governor forge a path forward in this critical area?

The PPIC Water Policy Center assembled a group of 16 experts this week for a half-day workshop in Sacramento to discuss how the new administration can promote water policies and practices that benefit the state’s people, economy, and environment. Lively discussions addressed three overarching topics: how local and state water policies intersect with California’s most pressing economic issues; innovations in policy, practice, and technology that offer better solutions for key water problems; and steps needed to adapt the state’s water systems to a changing climate.

Ellen Hanak, director of the PPIC Water Policy Center, summarized some major water challenges the new administration will face, including increased risks of drought and floods; poor water quality and drying wells in disadvantaged rural communities; and finding durable ways to pay for needed water system improvements. Leadership will be key to advancing solutions, she said.

“California has been a leader both nationally and internationally” on climate change mitigation and reducing emissions, Hanak said. “We think California has the potential to be a leader when it comes to climate adaptation as well.” She noted that water is a lynchpin issue for addressing the effects of a changing climate.

The first panel shed light on the links between water and the state’s leading economic challenges, from housing affordability to jobs. For example, growing water scarcity in the San Joaquin Valley—one of California’s fastest-growing areas―will affect plans to build new housing there. And regulation can complicate efforts to build affordable housing. Dan Dunmoyer of the California Building Industry Association noted that some water-related regulations—such as strict rules to prevent runoff from construction sites during the rainy season—can significantly increase building costs. Panelists agreed that better coordination could help open up many of these bottlenecks.

Denise Fairchild of Emerald Cities Collaborative highlighted the potential for job training programs in the water sector—which is grappling with the “silver tsunami” of an aging workforce—to create economic opportunities for low-income communities. “If we take this opportunity to rebuild California’s water infrastructure, it has great job generation potential” in communities affected by a historical lack of water sector investment.

The next panel looked at technical and policy-related innovations that can improve water management, such as weather forecasting tools that enable more nimble water management in dams—key to adapting to an increasingly volatile climate. Also, better information on agricultural water use can “empower communities to stop arguing about numbers and start working on solutions,” said Robyn Grimm of Environmental Defense.

The final panel explored opportunities to modernize the state’s water “grid”—its vast network of reservoirs, aquifers and conveyance systems—to make it more resilient in the face of five climate pressures: warming temperatures, shrinking snowpack, shorter and more intense wet seasons, more volatile precipitation, and rising seas. Improving water conveyance and reworking the current system would enable the state to “take advantage of bigger storms” linked to climate change by capturing their water for recharge, said Ashley Boren of Sustainable Conservation.

Each panel discussion included a quick round of “elevator pitch” advice for the governor-elect. Jennifer Pierre of the State Water Contractors captured the mood of the group with her pitch: “In water, flexibility is the name of the game—we need it for managing the existing grid, and for grid improvements. Don’t wait for the perfect plan; we’ll suffer every year that we delay.”

We invite you to watch the videos from this event and hope you find the discussions helpful:

Gender Differences in Higher Education Start Early

Female students in California tend to have stronger high school records and greater rates of college attendance and completion than male students do. At the same time, there are large gender differences in many college majors, with some majors (e.g., computer science) predominantly male and others (e.g., liberal arts) predominantly female.

New data on high school courses shows that gender divides in college are already evident by high school. For example, only 31% of high school students in AP computer science courses are girls, while only 38% of students in AP English courses are boys. AP courses provide college-level curricula to high school students and are an important indicator of student pathways to college.

Mirroring differences by college major, AP course enrollments are also notably unbalanced in art, psychology, and foreign languages—all have large majorities of girls. In contrast, physics has a large majority of boys. But in other cases, gender differences in AP courses are not reflected in college majors. For example, in high school more female students take history and math AP classes, but in college more male students major in these subjects.

The low share of girls and women in computer science has been a particular cause for concern. But there is some good news. The share of girls in computer science AP courses has increased markedly in just five years (from 23% in 2012–13 to 31% in 2017–18).  Across the state, some high schools have achieved near gender parity in their AP computer science courses. For example, at Troy High School in Fullerton, a magnet school with the largest AP computer science enrollment in the state, 45% of students are girls.

Overall, female students in California are doing well. Female students make up 57% of enrollment in AP courses and a similar majority of college students. But the lack of women in some key fields is a concern. Colleges should do more to increase enrollment and access for women in subjects like engineering and computer science. High schools also have an important role to play—encouraging more girls to take AP classes in these subjects in high school could help pave the way for more women to pursue them as college majors and careers.