Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9440

Bill Overview

Title: Protecting Students from Worthless Degrees Act

Description: This bill makes an institution of higher education (IHE) ineligible to receive federal student financial assistance if it fails to meet certain requirements. It also requires an IHE to make certain certifications about its gainful employment programs. Specifically, an IHE that offers a degree or certificate program to prepare students for entry into a profession that requires licensing or certification as a precondition for entry is not eligible to receive any federal student financial assistance unless (1) a student is fully qualified to take the required entry examination or be licensed or certified for the profession upon the successful completion of the program, and (2) the institution provides timely placement for all of the academically related pre-licensure requirements for entry into the profession (e.g., clinical placements or internships). An IHE must also certify that each eligible gainful employment program meets specified requirements, including approval or accreditation by a recognized agency and satisfaction of applicable educational prerequisites for professional licensure or certification. If an IHE does not satisfy such prerequisites, it must notify a student who intends to enroll in the program and obtain a handwritten acknowledgement from the student that they wish to enroll. Lastly, an IHE that offers distance education or correspondence courses must be legally authorized within each state in which its enrolled students are located.

Sponsors: Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8]

Target Audience

Population: People involved with institutions of higher education offering licensure or certification programs

Estimated Size: 20000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Student (California)

Age: 21 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried that if my program doesn't comply with the new policy, I'll lose my financial aid.
  • I believe the policy is good because it ensures my degree will actually help me get a job.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 8 6

Educational Administrator (Texas)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy will increase our administrative workload significantly, but it could improve the credibility of our programs.
  • I'm concerned about the initial costs we might incur to comply with the new requirements.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Licensed Professional Counselor (Florida)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • A reputable degree program is important for ensuring my interns are well-prepared for the profession.
  • It’s a great step towards improving educational standards, even if it makes entry to some programs tougher in the short term.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 9 8

Prospective Student (New York)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm relieved that this policy might help filter out low-quality programs.
  • I might decide against starting my studies if the program can’t guarantee positive outcomes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Policy Analyst (Illinois)

Age: 50 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The Act is necessary to improve program quality, but it needs careful implementation to avoid unnecessary student burdens.
  • It's likely to change the landscape of higher education funding significantly.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Professor (Georgia)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy may pressure universities to ensure all licensing or certification programs are fully effective.
  • I worry about bureaucratic delays in state authorizations affecting student enrollments.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 9 8

Graduating Student (Ohio)

Age: 24 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy reassures me that my program is legitimate and will help in career advancement.
  • There’s some anxiety around whether my school can keep up with all compliance needs.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 7

Student Counselor (Michigan)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy will make my job easier by providing clearer metrics on program quality.
  • I’m concerned about the potential overwhelm in managing the increased inquiries from worried students.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Higher Education Consultant (Washington)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Positive step in ensuring educational outcomes are aligned with current job market needs.
  • Institutions may need significant consulting services to comply, which creates an opportunity in my field.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 9
Year 2 9 9
Year 3 9 9
Year 5 9 9
Year 10 9 9
Year 20 10 9

Academic Advisor (Alabama)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Many students depend on reliable financial assistance, and the policy provides some accountability.
  • I'm hopeful it will improve student retention and outcome success rates over time.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)

Key Considerations