By Hugh T. Ferguson, NASFAA Senior Staff Reporter
On Tuesday, the Department of Education (ED) published proposed regulations its 90/10 rule for for-profit colleges, Pell Grant Eligibility for Prison Education Programs, and procedures for institutions undergoing changes in ownership. A pair of negotiated rulemaking committees met last year to discuss the regulations and reached consensus on 90/10 and the Pell Grant Eligibility topics during the sessions, but did not come to consensus on the change of ownership paper, which is reflected in ED’s proposed rule.
NASFAA will be digging into these documents and would welcome member perspectives as we review and craft our own comments. As a reminder, ED has already delayed the publication of five regulations that were included in the 2021-22 negotiated rulemaking agenda, until April of 2023.
Stay tuned to Today’s News for more details along with an updated analysis from NASFAA.
Publication Date: 7/26/2022
New Survey Paints Hopeful Picture on Higher Ed Value, But Costs and Completion Barriers Remain
Foxx on Cardona’s Tenure: ‘On All the Broad Strokes, You Have a Failing Grade’
NASFAA Shares Preview of Comments on ED’s Student Loan Debt Relief Proposal
2024-25 FAFSA Key Dates Timeline
Is Your Campus Ready for New Regulations Effective July 1, 2024?
ED Closes In on Reprocessed FAFSAs, Provides Temporary Filing Fix for Mixed-Status Families
Statement on FAFSA Reprocessing Update, Fix for Mixed-Status Families
ED Announces Completed Reprocessing of 'Nearly' All of Impacted ISIRs
Today's News for April 30, 2024
FSA Chief Richard Cordray to Step Down at the End of June
Today's News for April 29, 2024
NASFAA Signs Onto Letter Requesting ED to Further Delay GE Reporting Requirements
Quick Scan Survey Results: April 16
Off the Cuff - Episode 295 Transcript
ED Revises Loan Consolidation Guidance for Incarcerated Borrowers
Today's News for April 18, 2024
ED Provides Information about Reprocessed ISIR Codes and FAFSA Communication Efforts
ED Releases Draft Rules to Provide Student Debt Relief for Subsets of Borrowers
Today's News for April 17, 2024
Today's News for April 15, 2024
Off the Cuff - Episode 294 Transcript
Today's News for April 12, 2024
Today's News for April 11, 2024
"From a Hardship to a Crisis" - NASFAA Testifies on Current Status of the FAFSA Rollout
Today's News for April 10, 2024
ED Releases Details on Reprocessing ISIRs, FAFSA Student Corrections
Education Secretary Miguel Cardona Letter to College Presidents
Federal Student Aid Program Summary for 2024-25
Off the Cuff - Episode 293 Transcript
Today's News for April 5, 2024
In Reversal, ED Plans to Reprocess FAFSA Records Impacted by Recent Errors
Today's News for April 4, 2024
ED Releases More Details on List of Unaffected FAFSA Records
ED to Pause PSLF, TEACH Processing During 3-Month Transition Period
Today's News for April 3, 2024
States Sue to End Biden’s SAVE Repayment Plan
FSA Releases Details on Three Additional Issues With FAFSA Applicant Records
Today's News for April 2, 2024
ED Delays Reporting Deadline for Gainful Employment and Financial Value Transparency Regulations
Today's News for April 1, 2024
ED Updates Governors on FAFSA Rollout, Urges States to Support Institutions Preparing Aid Packages
Today's News for March 27, 2024
Peter G | 7/26/2022 2:3:50 PM
I'm not sure if I'll say it in public comment, but there seems to be a tension between raising the bar and wanting to address the cost of college.
For PEP, one of the main places this shows up is the requirement that accreditors perform an on-site visit. I inquired how much that costs (and did not get a response) but in the past I understood it to be low five figures, not even counting the school's time to make it happen. That is absorbable if you are looking at a larger scale program, but given the limited space in some facilities, we are looking at maybe a dozen part-time students per year (and maybe not even that) and maybe 10-12k in revenue in year one even before accounting for actual operational costs, which will be substantial and frankly we were already going into this assuming it would run at a loss.
I was also a bit surprised by the expansion of the definition to include incarcerated youth. I'm sure there will be exceptions, but I think this will actually result in a decrease vs. what has been offered which clearly wasn't Congress' intent. While appreciating what ED is thinking IN THEORY, the tension here in reality is that most juveniles just based on age (and how that feeds diploma/GED status) aren't Title IV eligible, and I suspect there are going to be relatively few cases where it makes sense to build out all this infrastructure. We're among the largest districts in the country and we serve a very small handful of incarcerate youth a year. We just won't be able to serve those students anymore unless they can self-pay or the state steps in.
You must be logged in to comment on this page.