2018-13: Residency Logic Changes to Support California Homeless
Request No. | 2018-13 |
---|---|
Date of Request | 3.02.18 |
Requester | Michael Q. |
Application(s) | CCCApply Noncredit Promise Grant |
Section / Page | Account Information & Mailing / Residency Logic |
Steering Hearing Date | August 2019 |
Steering Approval | Pending |
Proposed Change to Download File | TBD |
Proposed Change to Residency Logic | Yes / Proposed change to Area B / Res status |
Problem / Business Need
The current implementation for identifying homeless students in OpenCCCApply has some flaws that have created barriers for homeless students who are otherwise California residents.
This change proposal pertains to all homeless - regardless of age - and there are no changes being made to the "Homeless Youth" question, logic, or data field.
Currently in CCCApply, applicants who indicate they are homeless (regardless of age) and have no permanent address, and/or current mailing address, are being flagged as "possible residents, documentation required" in the residency algorithm (residency status = 2) - regardless of whether they are legitimately California residents or not. The flag is being set in Area B of the logic which looks at the student's addresses and if the permanent address state is not California, and/or the current mailing address state is not California, then a Class B2 status is set, integrity flags are triggered, and ultimately the applicant's residency status requires proof of California residency for the tuition purposes.
Ultimately, this added burden of providing additional proof of California residency (to determine tuition purposes) is creating a barrier for homeless students who are already dealing with challenges. Removing this barrier supports the student success and streamlines the application and matriculation process for homeless students.
Proposed Solution
According to a legal opinion provided by Mr. Peter Khang of the Office of General Counsel, CCCCO, residency cannot be based on address alone, and should not be the determining indicator for residency determination if the applicant has indicated they are currently homeless.
Therefore, the most straight-forward solution to this issue includes adding a change to Steps 8 & 9 of the Area B logic - to ensure the student is not homeless when their address "State" is NOT California. This additional IF statement will continue to flag students who are not California residents, who are not homeless.
In addition, a new integrity flag will be added to the Table F. Integrity Flags that will alert the Admissions Office that the student is currently homeless.
- Homeless students who are NOT California residents will still be flagged for residency based on the other residency questions that will determine their residency status for tuition purposes.
- Homeless youth - students who are 25 years old or younger at the time of application will continue to see the "Homeless Youth" question, will not be affected by the proposed changes, and will continue to be eligible for priority registration based on whether they have been homeless any time within the last 24 months
Note: 11.05.19: Patty met with Colleen Ganley, CCCCO, and Debbie Raucher, John Burton Foundation to discuss and approve following solution:
Change Requirements
Story: As an applicant who is currently homeless, completing the CCCApply application, I need my residency determination status - for the purpose of determining my tuition - to NOT be based on my physical address or my mailing address because I am currently homeless so that I am not burdened with providing additional documentation proof of my California residency.
- Revise Step 8 of the Area B residency logic to ensure homeless applicants (regardless of age) are not flagged if they have no current mailing address because they are currently homeless:
Revise the Evaluation Statement language in Step 8 from: "Is the applicant’s current address outside of California?"
TO: “Is the applicant’s current mailing address blank or outside of California and she/he is NOT homeless?”Revise the Data Elements & Logic statement in Step 8 from: ‘Mailing address – state’ != CA
TO:
'Mailing address - state DOES NOT EQUAL California AND <no_current_mailing_homeless> is EMPTY.Keep existing "If Yes" statement: "If Yes = Set Class B2, and trigger Integrity (flag 01) and go to Step 9"
Keep existing "If No" statement: "If No = Go to step 9"
- Revise Step 9 of the Area B residency logic to ensure homeless applicants (regardless of age) are not flagged if they have no permanent address because they are currently homeless:
- Revise the Evaluation Statement in Step 9 of Area B to read:
”Is the applicant’s permanent address outside of California and he or she is NOT homeless?” - Revise the Data Elements & Logic statement in Step 9 from: ‘Permanent address – state’ != CA
TO:
'Permanent address - state DOES NOT EQUAL = California AND <no_perm_address_homeless> is EMPTYKeep existing "IF Yes" statement: = "If Yes = Then, Set Class B2, and trigger integrity (flag 02), and go to step 10"
Keep existing "If No" statement: "If No" = Go to step 10
- Revise the Evaluation Statement in Step 9 of Area B to read:
Acceptance Criteria:
Applicants that have <no_current_mailing_homeless> = True should not be flagged with Integrity Flag 01
Applicants that have <no_perm_address_homeless> = True should not be flagged with Integrity Flag 02
Current Residency Logic Specification
Table B. Outline of Area B (Stay and Intent)
# | Evaluation Statement | Data Elements & Logic | If Yes | If No |
1 | Do out-of-state indicators support intent? | ca_outside_tax = 0 AND ca_outside_voted = 0 AND ca_outside_college= 0 AND ca_outside_lawsuit = 0 | Go to step 2 | Class B2 (flag 30) |
2 | Has the applicant lived in California for two years prior to RDD? | ca_res_2_years = 1 | Go to step 5 | Go to step 3 |
3 | Has the applicant been resident in CA for over a year prior to RDD? | ca_date_current ! = null AND ca_date_current < RDD minus 1 year | Class B2 | Go to step 4 |
4 | Is the applicant a current or former foster youth, under age 20, and now residing in California? | foster_youth_status is != 0 | Class B2 go to step 5 (flag 70) | Class B0 |
5 | Has the applicant completed HS outside CA in last 2 years? | education: hs_state ! = CA AND education: hs_comp_date RDD minus 2 years | Class B2 | Go to step 6 |
6 | Is the applicant in military with non CA home of record? | military_status = 2 AND ( military_home_state != CA OR military_legal_residence!= CA) | Class B2 | Go to step 7 |
7 | Is the applicant under the care and control of a guardian, under 19 and unmarried? | ‘over19OrMarried’= 0 AND ‘guardianOrParentRelation’ = G | Class B2 | Go to step 8 |
8 | Is the applicant’s current address outside of California? | ‘Mailing address – state’ != CA | Class B2 | Go to step 9 |
9 | Is the applicant’s permanent address outside of California? | ‘Permanent address – state’ != CA | Class B2 | Go to step 10 |
10 | Is the applicant under 19 as of RDD with last high school out-of-state? | RDD minus19 years > personal_info: birthdate AND education: hs_state != CA | Class B2 | Go to step 11 |
11 | Was the applicant enrolled in an out-of-state college with a ‘To Date’ within the year previous to the term start date? | In any row of colleges_attended table: If state != CA AND to_date is greater than the term start date minus 1 year. | Class B2 | Go to step 12 |
12 | Has Class B0 been set? | Class B0 has been set | Class B0 | Go to step 13 |
13 | Has Class B2 been set? | Class B2 has been set | Class B2 | Class B1 |
Highlighted Changes to Residency Logic: Area B
Table B. Outline of Area B (Stay and Intent
# | Evaluation Statement | Data Elements & Logic | If Yes | If No |
1 | Do out-of-state indicators support intent? | ca_outside_tax = 0 AND ca_outside_voted = 0 AND ca_outside_college= 0 AND ca_outside_lawsuit = 0 | Go to step 2 | Class B2 (flag 30) |
2 | Has the applicant lived in California for two years prior to RDD? | ca_res_2_years = 1 | Go to step 5 | Go to step 3 |
3 | Has the applicant been resident in CA for over a year prior to RDD? | ca_date_current ! = null AND ca_date_current < RDD minus 1 year | Class B2 | Go to step 4 |
4 | Is the applicant a current or former foster youth, under age 20, and now residing in California? | foster_youth_status is != 0 | Class B2 go to step 5 (flag 70) | Class B0 |
5 | Has the applicant completed HS outside CA in last 2 years? | education: hs_state ! = CA AND education: hs_comp_date RDD minus 2 years | Class B2 | Go to step 6 |
6 | Is the applicant in military with non CA home of record? | military_status = 2 AND ( military_home_state != CA OR military_legal_residence!= CA) | Class B2 | Go to step 7 |
7 | Is the applicant under the care and control of a guardian, under 19 and unmarried? | ‘over19OrMarried’= 0 AND ‘guardianOrParentRelation’ = G | Class B2 | Go to step 8 |
8 | Is the applicant’s current address outside of California and she/he is not homeless? | ‘Mailing address – state’ != CA AND <no_current_mailing_homeless> is EMPTY | Class B2 | Go to step 9 |
9 | Is the applicant’s permanent address outside of California and he/she is not homeless? | ‘Permanent address – state’ != CA AND <no_perm_address_homeless> is EMPTY | Class B2 | Go to step 10 |
10 | Is the applicant under 19 as of RDD with last high school out-of-state? | RDD minus19 years > personal_info: birthdate AND education: hs_state != CA | Class B2 | Go to step 11 |
11 | Was the applicant enrolled in an out-of-state college with a ‘To Date’ within the year previous to the term start date? | In any row of colleges_attended table: If state != CA AND to_date is greater than the term start date minus 1 year. | Class B2 | Go to step 12 |
12 | Has Class B0 been set? | Class B0 has been set | Class B0 | Go to step 13 |
13 | Has Class B2 been set? | Class B2 has been set | Class B2 | Class B1 |
Supporting Documentation
AB 806 Law
(Defines priority registration and other eligibilities for homeless youth and foster youth under age 25.
Question still remains about 'who is residency determined if the homeless student doesn't have an address?"