Students who take time off after high school or enter college later than the typical freshman would find it easier to obtain aid under new legislation co-sponsored by University of California and California State University student organizations.

Critics of the present Cal Grant system believe the state’s financial aid program discriminates against older individuals and those with families or children, and are looking for ways to make current allocation methods more fair by ensuring that the neediest students receive funding.

Established in 2000, the Cal Grant program allocates financial aid using one of two methods. One pool of money is known as the Entitlement Program, which serves all needy students who apply for aid within 18 months of high school graduation and meet other corresponding requirements relating to family income and grades. The second and smaller category, the Competitive Program, consists of all other eligible applicants competing for 22,500 annual awards. It also allows older students to compete against other needy students enrolled at UC, CSU and California community college campuses and private institutions.

The bill, sponsored by the UC Students Association and the California State Student Association, calls for the elimination of the 18-month post-graduation time limit.

“While everyone who receives a Cal Grant from the Entitlement Program is needy, some are less needy than those in the Competitive Program,” CSSA Director of Government Relations Laura Kerr said. “This currently discriminates based on an applicant’s age, and it’s not fair.”

Introduced in February by Assemblyman Jerome Horton (D-Inglewood), the bill would allow independent students, defined by the federal government as any students 24 years of age or over, to compete for both funds. These students are now disqualified from the entitlement pool because most graduated from high school more than a year and a half before they apply for aid.

People denied aid under current rules are the very students who should be encouraged in their pursuit of education, the CSSA has argued. Of qualified non-recipients who receive competitive Cal Grant awards, 60 percent are women, with an average age of 27 and annual income of $18,000.

“It is in the state’s interest to provide needy women with families with the opportunity to go to school — it’s an investment for the long-term result,” Kerr said.

UCSA President Jennifer Lilla said that the educational interest of all Californians must be supported, regardless of age.

“The typical California State University student isn’t 20, but more like 26 or 27 years old,” Lilla said. “In a time of decreasing institutional and federal aid, we are doing anything we can to increase the access of education to everyone.”

In the applicant pool of 136,200 eligible students in 2003-04, only 16 percent, or about one in six, received competitive awards, according to the California Student Aid Commission. Approximately 114,000 qualified students did not receive needed funding.

A spokesman for the CSAC declined to comment on the proposal.

“It’s time for us to start talking about these issues and reform the current system,” Kerr said. “First, we need to use state dollars wisely. Second, we need to ensure that there aren’t barriers to needy folks, and not discriminate based on age.”

If passed, the bill would be implemented in 2006. Kerr said she acknowledges that, while the process is in its early stages, sponsors and legislators are looking at implementing the current bill in multiple phases to deal with costs.

“By gradually expanding the deadline to apply [for the funds] from 18 to 24 to 36 months, the financial impact can be softened and qualified students can hopefully receive their funding,” Kerr said.

Lilla said she has no doubts the plan will be expensive, but she also believes the program to be well worth it.

“There have been several years when the Cal Grant program has been threatened, and that generally corresponds with these fiscal crises,” Lilla said. “Increasing the amount of money in the pool is up to the legislators, but the money required to implement this will be negligible in the long run … and will support the long-advocated variety of undergraduate financial need.”