Bill Overview
Title: Student Protection and Success Act
Description: This bill establishes certain consequences for institutions of higher education (IHEs) that have low student loan repayment rates or high student loan balances among their students. The bill makes an IHE ineligible for federal student financial aid programs for two fiscal years if a certain percentage of its students are not able to start repaying the principal of their loans by specified deadlines. The Department of Education must award grants to IHEs that have a strong record of supporting low- and moderate-income students. The bill funds the grants by requiring IHEs with certain nonrepayment loan balances to make risk-sharing payments. Grants may be used to increase college access and success for the students using investments and practices such as awarding additional need-based financial aid, enhancing academic and student support services, and establishing or expanding accelerated learning opportunities. The bill also revises the types of student service expenditures and resources information collected by the National Center for Education Statistics.
Sponsors: Sen. Shaheen, Jeanne [D-NH]
Target Audience
Population: Students enrolled in institutions of higher education worldwide
Estimated Size: 19600000
- The bill directly impacts institutions of higher education and their eligibility for federal student financial aid programs.
- Students of these institutions will be indirectly affected as changes in funding could affect resources and services they receive.
- Low- and moderate-income students should benefit as certain IHEs might receive additional grants if they have a strong record supporting these students.
- The data collected by the National Center for Education Statistics on student services expenditures and resources may change, impacting how institutions are compared and funded in the future.
- Institutions with poor student loan repayment rates may experience decreased enrollment if they lose federal aid eligibility, impacting the students considering those schools.
Reasoning
- This policy is designed to indirectly affect students by placing consequences on institutions with poor loan repayment rates or high loan balances. This makes the policy influential to both institutions and their students.
- Particularly, low- and moderate-income students might benefit from enhanced financial and academic support if their schools receive grants, which may boost their wellbeing.
- However, students attending or planning to attend institutions that lose eligibility for federal student financial aid programs might face increased financial uncertainty and reduced access to education.
- The population affected includes about 19.6 million college students in the US as of 2023, but the severity of the impact will vary significantly depending on the institution's financial aid status before and after the enactment of this policy.
- Simulating responses can help highlight a range of impacts from highly beneficial for some students to potentially damaging for others, while considering the policy's funding limits.
Simulated Interviews
Student - Nursing (Texas)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy helps increase the grants my university gets, so students like me can have more financial support.
- It's good to focus on helping low-income students who often struggle the most.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Student - Business Administration (California)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about my college's eligibility for federal aid but hopeful that their financial department will improve outcomes so we can keep aid.
- If my college loses federal funds, it could jepordize my education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Student - Arts (New York)
Age: 19 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about the grants and hope they will lead to more resources and opportunities for students like me.
- Enhancing student services is crucial for our academic and personal success.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Student - Engineering (Florida)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could provide more services for students, which is a good thing.
- However, I'm concerned about how they measure loan repayment rates and what that could mean for students' ability to pay off debt.
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 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Graduate Student - Sociology (Illinois)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this may push universities to work on loan default rates seriously.
- It's vital for those schools to improve their support systems and outcomes for students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Student - Computer Science (North Carolina)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Losing financial aid would be devastating for me as I wouldn't be able to afford college without it.
- I hope the policy incentivizes schools to improve their practices quickly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Alumnus - Humanities (Virginia)
Age: 26 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is somewhat of a relief, although it's too late for me, I hope it can help future students.
- More accountability for universities could decrease future student debt woes.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Student - Political Science (Ohio)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel good about my college's outlook with this policy as it's likely eligible for grants.
- Policies like this motivate schools to focus on aiding students' success.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Student - Biology (Georgia)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think supporting low-income students and encouraging better practices among universities are both positive outcomes.
- This policy may lead to better academic experiences and student services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
University Administrator (Michigan)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased scrutiny on loan repayment rates will require us to improve our advising services.
- We must focus on providing students with the tools they need to succeed financially post-graduation.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 2: $1550000000 (Low: $1250000000, High: $1850000000)
Year 3: $1600000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1900000000)
Year 5: $1700000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 10: $1900000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2200000000)
Year 100: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2500000000)
Key Considerations
- Institutions with persistent issues may struggle or close, impacting local economies and available education resources.
- Long-term improvements in student outcomes could stabilize or reduce student loan default rates, impacting financial stability.