Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9639

Bill Overview

Title: Higher Standards for Higher Education Act

Description: This bill requires the Department of Education, in its annual report on cohort default rates (generally, a percentage of how many current and former students default on their student loans in a fiscal year), to collect and report additional data for institutions of higher education with an endowment of $1 billion or more.

Sponsors: Rep. Van Duyne, Beth [R-TX-24]

Target Audience

Population: Students at institutions of higher education with an endowment of $1 billion or more

Estimated Size: 800000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Undergraduate Student (New York, NY)

Age: 20 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy might make it easier for students like me to understand and anticipate potential loan default risks.
  • I'm curious if it will affect the financial aid packages or the student loan options available to us.

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 7 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 8

Graduate Student (Boston, MA)

Age: 23 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This may help in planning my financial obligations after school, especially if default data gets more detailed.
  • Could influence the perception of financial risks associated with attending schools with high tuition.

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 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 9

University Administrator (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could alter student behavior regarding loans, possibly impacting enrollment figures.
  • Understanding trends in student defaults could help us better plan financial aid offers.

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 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 7

Undergraduate Student (Chicago, IL)

Age: 19 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The more available information, the better we can prepare financially for post-graduation life.
  • Not sure how immediate the benefits will be to us students.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Professor (Durham, NC)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Having transparency on loan default data might reduce student stress over debt.
  • Could shift how students and parents plan for financing education.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

PhD Candidate (Ann Arbor, MI)

Age: 25 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Might affect future financial aid discussions.
  • I don't expect it to have a direct impact on my current situation, but perhaps more for undergraduates who are more loan-dependent.

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 10 9
Year 20 10 10

Prospective Student (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 18 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Knowing more about default rates may influence my school choice, based on financial outcomes.
  • My parents are concerned about the debt burdens — seeing this data might help alleviate some worries.

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 7
Year 20 9 8

Parent (Palo Alto, CA)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Data transparency is always good, but will it change loan offerings or aid packages?
  • Could help guide financial planning for families.

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 7 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 8

Financial Aid Officer (Houston, TX)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could be crucial in how we advise students on taking out loans.
  • An opportunity to refine loan advice based on historical default data.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)

Age: 27 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy improves transparency and oversight in higher education finance.
  • Likely to enhance government accountability on student loans.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)

Year 2: $13000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $17000000)

Year 3: $14000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $18000000)

Year 5: $12000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $16000000)

Year 10: $9000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $12000000)

Year 100: $3000000 (Low: $1000000, High: $5000000)

Key Considerations