LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
                          Austin, Texas

                           FISCAL NOTE
                       74th Regular Session

                           May 15, 1995



 TO:     Honorable Bill Ratliff, Chair          IN RE:  House BillNo. 2309,
         Committee on Education                               as engrossed
         Senate                                         By: Rangel
         Austin, Texas








FROM: John Keel, Director

In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on House Bill No.
2309 (Relating to the basic skills assessment of students at
institutions of higher education and to programs for students in
need of enrichment in those basic skills) this office has
determined the following:

The bill would change the Texas Academic Skills Program (TASP)
from a testing instrument for remedial needs to an assessment and
enrichment program. It would require the Higher Education
Coordinating Board to develop an assessment procedure that would
be administered to all incoming students in higher education.  It
would provide certain exemptions, including students pursuing
certificates.  It would specify that the costs of administering
the assessment procedures be borne by the students taking it. 
Based on the results of the assessment, institutions could
require students to take enrichment courses.  A student
identified as needing enrichment may enroll in upper division
courses but must successfully complete enrichment in each
deficiency not later than the junior year or 90 semester credit
hours.  Finally, the bill would also require the Coordinating
Board to develop formulae which provide augmented funding for
courses with higher than average student failure rates.  The bill
would be effective September 1, 1995 but for purposes of this
fiscal note it is presumed that the major provisions could not be
implemented until FY 1997.

Local community/junior college taxing districts would have
savings due to decreased enrollment in remedial (enrichment)    




courses.  Most certificate programs are currently TASP exempt and 
only about 1,500 students enrolled in certificate programs are
required to participate in TASP.  It is estimated that the bill
would result in a decreased enrollment of 85 full-time equivalent
students (FTE).

Abolishment of retesting would decrease the number of semester
credit hours of remedial instruction by 10 percent, or 2,400 FTE. 
A substantial amount of enrichment courses would replace remedial
courses based on local diagnostic assessments.  The cost per FTE
to the community/junior colleges is about $1,300.

For purposes of this fiscal note it is assumed that existing
assessment instruments could be used to implement the provisions
of the bill.  The bill would result in general revenue savings
due to decreased enrollments in remedial (enrichment) courses in
both community/junior colleges and universities.  As indicated
above, enrollments at community/junior colleges would decline by
2,485 FTE at an average cost to the state of approximately
$1,300.  As a result of not allowing retesting, there would be an
estimated 10 percent decrease in enrollment of remedial
(enrichment) courses at the university level totaling some 500
FTE.  The cost to the state for each university FTE is
approximately $4,700.


The probable fiscal implication of implementing the provisions of
the bill during each of the first  five years following passage
is estimated as follows:
     



          Fiscal  Probable Savings     Probable Savings 
          Year         to the                 to        
                   General Revenue    Community College 
                        Fund              Districts     
                   (FTE Decrease)                       
                                                        
          1996                    $0                  $0
          1997             5,500,000           3,200,000
                                                        
          1998             5,500,000           3,200,000
                                                        
          1999             5,500,000           3,200,000
          2000             5,500,000           3,200,000
                                                        
                                                        
                                                        
       Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as the
provisions of the bill are in effect.    




Source:   Higher Education Coordinating Board
          LBB Staff: JK, MK, WRR