California Assembly Bill (AB) 705 authored by Irwin and passed on October 13, 2017, requires colleges to "maximize the probability that a student will enter and complete transfer-level coursework in English and math within a one-year timeframe" and use high school background data in placement processes. To implement this new law and develop guidelines based on the best available evidence, the California Community College Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) created the AB 705 Implementation Committee (Committee). One key request from the Committee was to focus on students historically placed into below transfer-level courses and compare transfer-level success rate estimates if they were placed directly into transfer-level coursework to the estimates for those who started one level below transfer-level using data from the Multiple Measures Assessment Project (MMAP). Compared to students who were placed directly into transfer level courses, students with similar high school backgrounds but who had not historically been placed in transfer-level coursework may have had lower placement test scores or high school performance, so theoretically might not perform as well if placed there directly. A series of regressions using high school grade point average (HSGPA) and ACCUPLACER scores were used to adjust direct transfer-level placement success rates for three gatekeeper classes: transfer-level English, statistics, and pre-calculus. These estimated success rates were then compared to estimated "throughput" rates (the percentage of students completing transfer-level English or math in a given time frame) of students placed one level below to determine if such remediation would result in higher transfer-level completion or throughput than direct placement into transfer-level coursework. The regression-adjusted success rates were indeed lower than the original success rates of students who had been placed directly into a transfer-level course in the MMAP decision rules data. However, for all HSGPA performance levels in all three gatekeeper courses, the adjusted success rates for students placed directly into transfer-level courses exceeded adjusted throughput rates for students placed one level below transfer. This result suggests that even without any additional supports or course redesigns, the lowest performing high school students would have been more likely to complete transfer-level English, statistics, or pre-calculus if placed directly into these courses as compared to taking below transfer-level remediation. We were unable to identify any group of students who complete the transfer-level English, statistics, or pre-calculus course at a lower rate when placed directly there as opposed to being first placed in courses that are below transfer-level. It is recommended that each college conduct its own analysis to compare throughput rates below transfer-level to success rates at transfer-level at each level of high school achievement. These analyses should also be disaggregated by gender and ethnicity, both with and without specialized support, such as co-requisites, to ensure that local data align with the statewide findings. Further, colleges are encouraged to evaluate and assess their placement processes, curricular design, concurrent supports, and non-curricular supports, as well as determine and address disproportionate outcomes for historically underrepresented populations. These findings were used to inform guidance memos from the AB 705 Implementation Committee. This document provides details on how these adjustments were made, including the analytical code to transparently document methods and support local replication. [This report was co-written with Educational Results Partnership (ERP).]