Report 2015-107 Recommendation 24 Responses

Report 2015-107: The University of California: Its Admissions and Financial Decisions Have Disadvantaged California Resident Students (Release Date: March 2016)

Recommendation #24 To: University of California

To ensure that its rebenching efforts lead to equalized per-student funding among the campuses, the university should include stakeholders such as students, legislative and executive branch staff, and student groups in future discussions of rebenching to ensure that it considers their viewpoints and to increase transparency regarding its funding decisions.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2017

The University will include students and other interested stakeholders in future deliberations about significant changes to its State funding allocation methodology, consistent with the following provision of the Systemwide Budget Manual:

"V. Modifications to University practices regarding systemwide State General Fund allocations.

A. The Office of the President will consult with appropriate campus representatives prior to adopting any material change to the underlying goals, policies, or practices regarding State General Fund allocations described in this manual."

  • Completion Date: March 2017

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented


1-Year Agency Response

As previously noted, the original recommendation from the State Auditor did not include a recommendation to adopt a formal policy regarding the inclusion of students and other stakeholders in discussions of its state funding allocation methodology. Moreover, the more recent statement by CSA that the University should develop a policy that it will include students and other interest stakeholders "in any future discussions of its state funding allocation methodology" is unworkable on its face, as ad hoc "discussions" related to the methodology occur on a nearly daily basis in the course of the University's operations. However, the University will include students and other interested stakeholders in future deliberations about significant changes to its State funding allocation methodology, consistent with the following provision of the Systemwide Budget Manual:

"V. Modifications to University practices regarding systemwide State General Fund allocations.

A. The Office of the President will consult with appropriate campus representatives prior to adopting any material change to the underlying goals, policies, or practices regarding State General Fund allocations described in this manual."

  • Completion Date: March 2017
  • Response Date: March 2017

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Partially Implemented

We look forward to reviewing how the university involves stakeholders in any future formal discussions related to the state funding allocation methodology.

  • Auditee did not substantiate its claim of full implementation

6-Month Agency Response

The University will include students and other interested stakeholders in any future discussions of its State funding allocation methodology.

  • Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing
  • Response Date: August 2016

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Partially Implemented

In order for this recommendation to be fully implemented, we would expect the University to develop a policy that it will include students and other interested stakeholders in any future discussions of its state funding allocation methodology.


60-Day Agency Response

The University will include students and other interested stakeholders in any future discussions of its State funding allocation methodology.

  • Estimated Completion Date: Ongoing
  • Response Date: May 2016

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

We asked the university when there would be another discussion of its state funding allocation methodology and what steps the university planned to take in order to include students and other interested stakeholders. The university subsequently stated that its initial 60-day response provided sufficient information. Because the university did not provide any specific details, we consider the university to have taken no action on this recommendation.


All Recommendations in 2015-107

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.


Report type

Report type
















© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader