Intersegmental Coordinating Committee

Intersegmental Coordinating Committee
Name	Intersegmental Coordinating Committee
Type	Coordinating body
Founded	20th century
Headquarters	Multiple jurisdictions
Area served	National and regional
Leaders	Various officials

Contents

Intersegmental Coordinating Committee The Intersegmental Coordinating Committee is a coordinating body that facilitates collaboration among public institutions, state agencies, and regional entities, linking actors such as California State University, University of California, City College of San Francisco, Los Angeles Community College District, and California Community Colleges with state offices like the California State Legislature, Governor of California, California Department of Education, California State Board of Education, and California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. It operates at the nexus of major policy actors including U.S. Department of Education, National Governors Association, American Association of Community Colleges, Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, and regional consortia such as the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, coordinating initiatives with stakeholders like Student Aid Commission, K–12 districts, labor unions, and philanthropic organizations including the James Irvine Foundation and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

Overview

The committee serves as a forum where representatives from institutions such as Stanford University, University of Southern California, California Institute of Technology, San Diego State University, and San Francisco State University convene with policy actors from UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Irvine, and UC Santa Barbara alongside administrators from City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, San Diego County, Sacramento County, and San Francisco County to align priorities across sectors represented by organizations like the Lumina Foundation, Pell Grant program, College Board, ACT, Inc., and the Institute of Education Sciences. It emphasizes crosswalks among professional accreditation bodies such as the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, workforce intermediaries like Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act partners, and social service entities including CalWORKs and Medicaid administrators.

Origins trace to collaborative efforts among entities including the California Master Plan for Higher Education, Higher Education Coordinating Commission (Oregon), California Postsecondary Education Commission, and initiatives inspired by interstate models like the Southern Regional Education Board and the New England Board of Higher Education. Development has involved partnerships with national programs such as G.I. Bill, Higher Education Act of 1965, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and task forces convened by actors like the Brookings Institution, RAND Corporation, Pew Charitable Trusts, and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Reforms aligned with policy shifts from the No Child Left Behind Act, Every Student Succeeds Act, and state-level measures championed by figures such as Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom influenced its mandate and structure.

Membership typically comprises representatives from public systems including California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, California State University Chancellor's Office, and the University of California Office of the President, alongside leaders from independent institutions like Pepperdine University, Occidental College, and Claremont Colleges. Appointments often involve nominations from legislative committees such as the California State Assembly, California State Senate, gubernatorial appointments from the Office of the Governor of California, and stakeholder seats reserved for organizations like the California Federation of Teachers, United States Student Association, and local workforce boards modeled after Los Angeles Workforce Development Board. Administrative support may come from research units like the Public Policy Institute of California or data partners such as the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System.

Key responsibilities include aligning transfer pathways between systems like California Community Colleges and California State University, coordinating admissions practices akin to those used by University of California, harmonizing financial aid policy with Federal Student Aid, and integrating workforce training influenced by California Employment Development Department and California Workforce Development Board. The committee develops frameworks comparable to articulation agreements used by Massachusetts Board of Higher Education and performance metrics influenced by reports from National Center for Education Statistics, Education Commission of the States, and the California Basic Educational Data System.

The committee liaises with federal entities such as the U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on cross-cutting programs, and coordinates with state agencies like the California Department of Social Services, California Health and Human Services Agency, and California Employment Development Department to align supports for students and workers. It engages municipal partners including the City of San Diego, City of Los Angeles Board of Education, and county offices and collaborates with national networks like the National Association of State Directors of Community Colleges and the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association.

Initiatives often mirror statewide efforts such as the California College Promise, transfer reforms reminiscent of the Associate Degree for Transfer program, dual enrollment collaborations with districts like Los Angeles Unified School District, and guided pathways projects influenced by the American Association of Community Colleges. Programs include data-sharing pilots with agencies such as the California Department of Education, apprenticeship partnerships modeled on Department of Labor Registered Apprenticeship, and equity-focused strategies aligned with recommendations from the Campaign for College Opportunity, Educational Opportunity Program, and civil rights organizations like the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Critiques echo concerns raised in analyses by California State Auditor, Legislative Analyst's Office (California), and policy scholars at University of California, Irvine and UC Berkeley about governance complexity, competing interests like those represented by California Teachers Association and business groups such as the California Chamber of Commerce, data transparency debates involving Privacy laws and interoperability issues highlighted by Center for Digital Government, and resource allocation disputes similar to those adjudicated in cases before the California Supreme Court. Observers from think tanks like the Hoover Institution, PolicyLink, and The Century Foundation have noted tensions between centralized coordination and institutional autonomy.