```

[House Report 113-83]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

113th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     113-83

======================================================================

 
        IMPROVING POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION DATA FOR STUDENTS ACT

                                _______
                                

  May 20, 2013.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Kline, from the Committee on Education and the Workforce, submitted 
                             the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1949]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Education and the Workforce, to whom was 
referred the bill (H.R. 1949) to direct the Secretary of 
Education to convene the Advisory Committee on Improving 
Postsecondary Education Data to conduct a study on improvements 
to postsecondary education transparency at the Federal level, 
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an 
amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Improving Postsecondary Education Data 
for Students Act''.

SEC. 2. STUDY ON IMPROVEMENTS TO POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION TRANSPARENCY 
                    AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.

  (a) Formation of Advisory Committee on Improving Postsecondary 
Education Data.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall convene 
        the Advisory Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education 
        Data (in this Act referred to as the ``Advisory Committee''), 
        which shall be comprised of 15 members who represent 
        economically, racially, and geographically diverse populations 
        appointed by the Secretary in consultation with the 
        Commissioner for Education Statistics, including--
                  (A) individuals representing different sectors of 
                institutions of higher education, including individuals 
                representing undergraduate and graduate education;
                  (B) experts in the field of higher education policy;
                  (C) State officials;
                  (D) students and other stakeholders from the higher 
                education community;
                  (E) representatives from the business community;
                  (F) experts in choice in consumer markets;
                  (G) privacy experts;
                  (H) college and career counselors at secondary 
                schools;
                  (I) experts in data policy, collection, and use; and
                  (J) experts in labor markets.
          (2) Chairperson.--The Secretary shall appoint the Chairperson 
        of the Advisory Committee.
  (b) Study Required.--The Advisory Committee shall conduct a study 
examining--
          (1) the types of information, including information related 
        to costs of postsecondary education, sources of financial 
        assistance (including Federal student loans), student outcomes, 
        and postgraduation earnings, the Federal Government should 
        collect and report on institutions of higher education to 
        assist students and families in their search for an institution 
        of higher education;
          (2) how such information should be collected and reported, 
        including how to disaggregate information on student outcomes 
        by subgroups of students, such as full-time students, part-time 
        students, nontraditional students, first generation college 
        students, students who are veterans, and Federal Pell Grant 
        recipients under subpart 1 of part A of title IV of the Higher 
        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a); and
          (3) the ways in which the Federal Government may make such 
        information more readily available to--
                  (A) students and their families in a format that is 
                easily accessible and understandable, and will aid 
                students and their families in making decisions; and
                  (B) States, local governments, secondary schools, 
                individual or groups of institutions of higher 
                education, and private-sector entities.
  (c) Scope of Study.--In conducting the study under this Act, the 
Advisory Committee shall, at a minimum, examine--
          (1) whether the current Federal transparency initiatives on 
        postsecondary education--
                  (A) are reporting consistent information about 
                individual institutions of higher education across 
                Federal agencies; and
                  (B) are similar to transparency initiatives on 
                postsecondary education carried out by States, 
                individual or groups of institutions of higher 
                education, or private-sector entities;
          (2) whether--
                  (A) the collection and reporting of postgraduation 
                earnings by the Federal Government is feasible, and if 
                feasible, the options for collecting and reporting such 
                information;
                  (B) collecting and reporting such information would 
                improve the use of Federal transparency initiatives and 
                ease decisionmaking for students and their families; 
                and
                  (C) collecting and reporting such information would 
                have an impact on student privacy, and if so, how such 
                impact may be minimized;
          (3) whether any other information, including information 
        relating to student outcomes or identified under the review 
        required under subsection (d), should be collected and reported 
        by the Federal Government to improve the utility of such 
        initiatives for students and their families, and if so, how 
        such information may be collected and reported, including 
        whether the information should be disaggregated by subgroups of 
        students;
          (4) whether any information currently collected and reported 
        by the Federal Government on institutions of higher education 
        is not useful for students and their families and should not be 
        so collected and reported;
          (5) the manner in which the information from Federal 
        transparency initiatives is made available to students and 
        their families, and whether format changes may help the 
        information become more easily understood and widely utilized 
        by students and their families;
          (6) any activities being carried out by the Federal 
        Government, States, individual or groups of institutions of 
        higher education, or private-sector entities to help inform 
        students and their families of the availability of Federal 
        transparency initiatives;
          (7) the cost to institutions of higher education of reporting 
        to the Federal Government the information that is being 
        collected and reported through Federal transparency 
        initiatives, and how such cost may be minimized; and
          (8) the relevant research described in subsection (d).
  (d) Review of Relevant Research.--In conducting the study under this 
Act, the Advisory Committee shall review and consider--
          (1) research and studies, if any, that have been conducted to 
        determine questions most frequently asked by students and 
        families to help inform their search for an institution of 
        higher education;
          (2) the types of information students seek before enrolling 
        in an institution of higher education;
          (3) whether the availability to students and their families 
        of additional information on institutions of higher education 
        will be beneficial or confusing;
          (4) results, if any, that are available from consumer testing 
        of Federal, State, institution of higher education, and 
        private-sector transparency initiatives on postsecondary 
        education that have been made publicly available on or after 
        the date that is 10 years before the date of enactment of this 
        Act; and
          (5) any gaps in the research, studies, and results described 
        in paragraphs (1) and (4) relating to the types of information 
        students seek before enrolling in an institution of higher 
        education.
  (e) Consultation.--
          (1) In general.--In conducting the study under this Act, the 
        Advisory Committee shall--
                  (A) hold public hearings to consult with parents and 
                students; and
                  (B) consult with a broad range of interested parties 
                in higher education, including appropriate researchers, 
                representatives of secondary schools (including college 
                and career counselors) and institutions of higher 
                education from different sectors of such institutions 
                (including undergraduate and graduate education), State 
                administrators, and Federal officials.
          (2) Consultation with the authorizing committees.--The 
        Advisory Committee shall consult on a regular basis with the 
        authorizing committees in conducting the study under this Act.
  (f) Reports to Authorizing Committees.--
          (1) Interim report.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
        of enactment of this Act, the Advisory Committee shall prepare 
        and submit to the authorizing committees and the Secretary an 
        interim report describing the progress made in conducting the 
        study under this Act and any preliminary findings on the topics 
        identified under subsection (c).
          (2) Final report.--
                  (A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
                of enactment of this Act, the Advisory Committee shall 
                prepare and submit to the authorizing committees and 
                the Secretary a final report on the study, including--
                          (i) recommendations for legislative, 
                        regulatory, and administrative actions based on 
                        findings related to the topics identified under 
                        subsection (c); and
                          (ii) a summary of the research described in 
                        subsection (d).
                  (B) Consultation with nces.--The Advisory Committee 
                shall consult with the Commissioner of Education 
                Statistics prior to making recommendations under 
                subparagraph (A)(i) with respect to improving the 
                information being collected and reported by the Federal 
                Government on institutions of higher education.
  (g) Availability of Funds.--The amount necessary to conduct the study 
under this Act shall be made available from amounts available to the 
Secretary for administrative expenses of the Department of Education.
  (h) Definitions.--For purposes of this Act:
          (1) Authorizing committees.--The term ``authorizing 
        committees'' has the meaning given the term in section 103 of 
        the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1003).
          (2) First generation college student.--The term ``first 
        generation college student'' has the meaning given the term in 
        section 402A(h) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
        1070a-11(h)).
          (3) Institution of higher education.--The term ``institution 
        of higher education'' has the meaning given the term in section 
        102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002), 
        except that such term does not include institutions described 
        in subsection (a)(1)(C) of such section 102.
          (4) Secondary school.--The term ``secondary school'' has the 
        meaning given the term in section 9101 of the Elementary and 
        Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
          (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        Education.
          (6) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given the term 
        in section 103 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
        1003).
          (7) Student.--The term ``student'' includes--
                  (A) a prospective student;
                  (B) a student enrolled in an institution of higher 
                education;
                  (C) a nontraditional student (as defined in section 
                803(j)(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
                U.S.C. 1161c(j)(2))); and
                  (D) a veteran (as defined in section 480(c)(1) of 
                such Act (20 U.S.C. 1087vv(c)(1))) who is a student or 
                prospective student.

                                PURPOSE

    H.R. 1949, the Improving Postsecondary Education Data for 
Students Act, directs the Secretary of Education to convene an 
Advisory Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education Data to 
conduct a study on improvements to postsecondary education 
transparency at the federal level.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    As the Committee on Education and the Workforce continues 
to evaluate the appropriate role of the federal government in 
higher education, we are committed to ensuring students have 
access to relevant and helpful information about colleges and 
universities.

                             112TH CONGRESS

Hearings--First session

    On March 9, 2011, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce held a hearing in Washington, D.C. entitled, ``The 
Budget and Policy Proposals of the U.S. Department of 
Education.'' The purpose of the hearing was to discuss the 
fiscal year 2012 budget proposal for the Department of 
Education. Testifying before the committee was the Honorable 
Arne Duncan, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, 
Washington, D.C.
    On November 30, 2011, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 
Training held a hearing in Washington, D.C. entitled ``Keeping 
College Within Reach: Discussing Ways Institutions Can 
Streamline Costs and Reduce Tuition.'' The purpose of the 
hearing was to highlight a number of innovative practices 
institutions of higher education are implementing to keep their 
costs down, thereby limiting tuition increases for students. 
Testifying before the subcommittee were: Ms. Jane V. Wellman, 
Executive Director, Delta Project on Postsecondary Costs, 
Productivity, and Accountability, Washington, D.C.; Dr. Ronald 
E. Manahan, President, Grace College and Seminary, Winona Lake, 
Indiana; Mr. Tim Foster, President, Colorado Mesa University, 
Grand Junction, Colorado; and Mr. Jamie P. Merisotis, President 
and Chief Executive Officer, Lumina Foundation for Education, 
Indianapolis, Indiana.

Hearings--Second session

    On March 28, 2012, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce held a hearing in Washington, D.C. entitled 
``Reviewing the President's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Proposal 
for the U.S. Department of Education.'' The purpose of the 
hearing was to discuss the fiscal year 2013 budget proposal for 
the Department of Education. Testifying before the committee 
was the Honorable Arne Duncan, Secretary, U.S. Department of 
Education, Washington, D.C.
    On July 18, 2012, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 
Training held a hearing in Washington, D.C. entitled, ``Keeping 
College Within Reach: Exploring State Efforts to Curb Costs.'' 
The purpose of the hearing was to highlight a number of 
innovative practices occurring at the state level to assist 
postsecondary institutions in keeping costs affordable and 
promote accountability of public funds. Testifying before the 
subcommittee were: Mr. Scott Pattison, Executive Director, 
National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO), 
Washington, D.C.; Ms. Teresa Lubbers, Commissioner for Higher 
Education, State of Indiana, Indianapolis, Indiana; Dr. Joe 
May, President, Louisiana Community and Technical College 
System (LCTCS), Baton Rouge, Louisiana; and Mr. Stan Jones, 
President, Complete College America, Zionsville, Indiana.
    On September 20, 2012, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 
Training held a hearing in Washington, D.C. entitled, 
``Assessing College Data: Helping to Provide Valuable 
Information to Students, Institutions, and Taxpayers.'' The 
purpose of the hearing was to examine data being collected by 
the federal government from institutions of higher education, 
including requirements put in place during the last 
reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Testifying before 
the subcommittee were: Dr. Mark Schneider, Vice President, 
American Institutes for Research, Washington, D.C.; Dr. James 
Hallmark, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Texas A&M 
System, College Station, Texas; Dr. Jose Cruz, Vice President 
for Higher Education Policy and Practice, The Education Trust, 
Washington, D.C.; and Dr. Tracy Fitzsimmons, President, 
Shenandoah University, Winchester, Virginia.

                             113TH CONGRESS

Hearings

    On April 16, 2013, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 
Training held a hearing in Washington, D.C. entitled, ``Keeping 
College within Reach: The Role of Federal Student Aid 
Programs.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine the 
federal role in higher education and lay out the pros and cons 
of shifting the focus of federal student aid programs from 
enhancing access to improving student outcomes. Testifying 
before the subcommittee were: Mr. Terry W. Hartle, Senior Vice 
President, Division of Government and Public Affairs, American 
Council on Education Washington, D.C.; Ms. Patricia McGuire, 
President, Trinity Washington University, Washington, D.C.; Mr. 
Dan Madzelan, Former Employee (Retired), U.S. Department of 
Education, University Park, Maryland; and Ms. Moriah Miles, 
State Chair, Minnesota State University Student Association, 
Mankato, Minnesota.
    On April 24, 2013, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 
Training held a hearing in Washington, D.C. entitled, ``Keeping 
College Within Reach: Enhancing Transparency for Students, 
Families, and Taxpayers.'' The purpose of the hearing was to 
examine ways to improve the information provided by the federal 
government to inform students and families about their 
postsecondary education options. Testifying before the 
subcommittee were: Dr. Donald E. Heller, Dean, College of 
Education, Professor of Education, Michigan State University, 
East Lansing, Michigan; Mr. Alex Garrido, Student, Keiser 
University, Miami, Florida; Dr. Nicole Farmer Hurd, Founder and 
Executive Director, National College Advising Corps, Carrboro, 
North Carolina; and Mr. Travis Reindl, Program Director, 
Postsecondary Education, National Governors Association Center 
for Best Practices, Washington, D.C.

Legislative action

    On May 13, 2013, Rep. Luke Messer (R-IN) introduced H.R. 
1949, the Improving Postsecondary Education Data for Students 
Act. The bill directs the Secretary of Education to convene an 
Advisory Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education Data to 
conduct a study on the factors students and families want, 
need, and already consider when choosing a higher education 
institution.
    On May 16, 2013, the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce considered H.R. 1949 in legislative session and 
reported it favorably, as amended, to the House of 
Representatives by a voice vote. The committee considered and 
adopted the following amendment to H.R. 1949:
     Rep. Luke Messer (R-IN) offered an amendment in 
the nature of a substitute to H.R. 1949 to include individuals 
who represent undergraduate and graduate education, college and 
career counselors at secondary schools, experts in data policy, 
collection, and use, and experts in labor markets to the list 
of individuals required to be represented on the Advisory 
Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education Data; ensures 
individuals on the advisory committee represent economic, 
racial, and geographically diverse populations; requires the 
advisory committee to examine information related to the 
sources of financial assistance, including federal student 
loans, as part of the required aspects of the study; requires 
the advisory committee to examine how information regarding 
student outcomes should be disaggregated for first-generation 
students; and other conforming and technical changes to the 
bill. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote.
    Below is a summary of H.R. 1949.

                                SUMMARY

    The Improving Postsecondary Education Data for Students Act 
directs the Secretary of Education to convene an Advisory 
Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education Data. The 
advisory committee is to be comprised of 15 members 
representing economic, racial, and geographically diverse 
populations consisting of representatives of higher education 
institutions, experts in higher education, state officials, 
students, representatives from the business community, college 
and career counselors, experts in data policy, experts in labor 
markets, and experts in consumer choice and privacy.
    The advisory committee is required to conduct a study 
examining the types of information on institutions of higher 
education the federal government should collect and report, and 
the best way to make that information available and easily 
accessible to students and families. In conducting the study, 
the advisory committee is required to examine whether current 
federal transparency initiatives are reporting consistent data 
and whether those efforts are similar to existing federal, 
state, institutional, and private-sector transparency 
initiatives. The advisory committee is also required to explore 
the value and privacy risk of reporting post-graduation 
earnings, the best manner in which useful information could be 
made available to students and families, any activities 
currently underway to help inform students of the availability 
of federal transparency initiatives and the sources of federal 
financial assistance, and the cost to institutions of reporting 
information to the federal government.
    Additionally, the legislation specifically directs the 
advisory committee to explore opportunities to provide better, 
more consistent, and effective data to the public, while also 
identifying data that is no longer useful and should be 
considered for elimination. The advisory committee is further 
required to complete a review of relevant research on this 
topic to inform its study.
    In the process of preparing the study, the advisory 
committee must hold public hearings to consult with parents and 
students, as well as consult with a broad range of higher 
education stakeholders and the appropriate authorizing 
committees in the House of Representatives and Senate. Within 
180 days of enactment of the Improving Postsecondary Education 
Data for Students Act, the advisory committee must submit an 
interim report to the authorizing committees and the Secretary 
of Education. Within one year of enactment, the advisory 
committee must submit a final report to the authorizing 
committees and the secretary. The final report is to include 
recommendations for legislative, regulatory, and administrative 
actions made in consultation with the Commissioner of Education 
Statistics as well as a summary of relevant research.

                            COMMITTEE VIEWS

Introduction

    In recent years, the federal government has taken steps to 
improve data collection and transparency in higher education. 
The Higher Education Opportunity Act, the 2008 reauthorization 
of the Higher Education Act, included several provisions to 
provide students and their families with the information needed 
to make informed decisions about their postsecondary education 
opportunities.
    For the first time, the law required colleges and 
universities to make information about price, financial aid, 
and basic facts and figures, such as demographics and 
graduation rates, readily available to the public. Students 
also now have access to a number of products designed to help 
them learn about their higher education options, including the 
College Navigator, financial aid shopping sheets, net price 
calculators, and the College Scorecard.
    While many of these initiatives are helpful resources, 
students still report confusion when researching their 
postsecondary options and trying to choose an institution that 
is best for their unique situation. Meanwhile, higher education 
leaders have raised concerns about the overwhelming amount of 
federal data and reporting requirements, some of which are 
duplicative of state and local efforts and may partially 
contribute to the increase in college costs.

Improving postsecondary education data for students

    To help shine a spotlight on the challenges and 
opportunities in higher education transparency, Representative 
Luke Messer (R-IN) introduced H.R. 1949, the Improving 
Postsecondary Education Data for Students Act. The legislation 
directs the Department of Education to convene an Advisory 
Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education Data to conduct 
a study on the factors students and families want, need, and 
already consider when choosing a higher education institution. 
The bill directs the advisory committee to issue its 
recommendations within a year of enactment to assist 
congressional efforts to reauthorize the Higher Education Act.
    The legislation requires the advisory committee to review 
existing federal, state, institutional, and private-sector 
transparency initiatives to determine which initiatives are 
most helpful to students as they research their postsecondary 
education options. In its review of these existing transparency 
measures, the advisory committee is tasked with exploring 
opportunities to provide better, more consistent, and effective 
data to the public, while identifying data that is outdated, 
confusing, or obsolete and should be considered for 
elimination.
    During an April 24, 2013 hearing entitled, ``Keeping 
College Within Reach: Enhancing Transparency for Students, 
Families, and Taxpayers,'' the Subcommittee on Higher Education 
and Workforce Training explored opportunities to improve 
student access to relevant higher education data. At the 
hearing, Mr. Travis Reindl, Program Director for the Education 
Division at the National Governors Association, urged Congress 
to take up such an effort:

          Simpler and clearer should be a goal for federal 
        efforts. The upcoming reauthorization of the Higher 
        Education Act provides a prime opportunity for the 
        Congress to review all of the existing dashboards, 
        report cards, and data tools for postsecondary 
        education to determine whether and how they are being 
        used, and if there are opportunities for streamlining 
        or consolidation . . . We encourage a thorough review 
        of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System 
        (IPEDS), with the goal of identifying and eliminating 
        surveys and survey items that are rarely used. This 
        would provide needed relief for states and their 
        colleges and universities.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\http://edworkforce.house.gov/calendar/
eventsingle.aspx?EventID=308347

    Additional experts testifying to the subcommittee stressed 
the importance of consumer information in the decision making 
process. Nicole Hurd, CEO of the National College Advising 
Corps, works with over 300 staff working every day to counsel 
low-income and under-represented high school students on 
college. Mrs. Hurd reflected that, while some fine-tuning may 
be in order, Congress must move forward in providing more tools 
for students when considering college:\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Ibid.

          Think about what choices you can make when you can 
        actually see a school's graduation rate, loan default 
        rates, median borrowing, grants and scholarships, net 
        costs so our families, especially our low income 
        families can see what this is really going to cost 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        them.

    The committee notes there are a number of federal agencies 
in addition to the Department of Education that collect and 
publicly report information on colleges and universities. The 
committee urges the advisory committee to conduct a 
comprehensive study of federal transparency initiatives, 
including, but not limited to, the Department of Veterans 
Affairs and the Department of Defense. The committee urges the 
advisory committee staff to meet with the relevant authorizing 
committees in the House of Representatives and the Senate prior 
to finalizing its scope of work, holding public hearings, or 
providing the required interim and final reports.

Making higher education data relevant for today's students

    Over the last 10 years, the dynamics of higher education 
have shifted dramatically. According to the National Center for 
Education Statistics (NCES), non-traditional students now make 
up approximately 70 percent of all undergraduates. This trend 
is expected to continue in the coming years; in fact, NCES 
expects enrollments of students older than 25 will rise by 20 
percent between 2010 and 2020.\3\ Non-traditional students 
often have different reasons for obtaining a postsecondary 
education and may use different factors than typical high 
school graduates in trying to seek out their institution of 
choice. The Improving Postsecondary Education Data for Students 
Act requires the advisory committee to examine traditional, 
non-traditional, and first-generation students, including 
student veterans, to determine the information each group wants 
and needs to assist their search for the right college and 
university. The legislation also directs the advisory committee 
to solicit feedback from students and families.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In recent years, states, researchers, business leaders, and 
Members of Congress have discussed the possibility of reporting 
the salaries of college graduates from public and private 
universities. At a September 20, 2012 Subcommittee on Higher 
Education and Workforce Training hearing on ``Assessing College 
Data: Helping to Provide Valuable Information to Students, 
Institutions, and Taxpayers,'' Mr. Mark Schneider, Vice 
President of the American Institutes for Research (AIR), 
argued, ``While improving measures of student learning and 
student progress are important, ultimately, we need to assess 
the extent to which labor markets are validating the usefulness 
of the skills college graduates possess.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\http://edworkforce.house.gov/calendar/
eventsingle.aspx?EventID=330710
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Recently the federal government developed a resource 
(www.mynextmove.org) to provide individuals with regional 
employment and salary information; however, many individuals 
are interested in gathering more specific post-graduation 
earnings for individual academic programs. To that end, H.R. 
1949 requires the advisory committee to explore the feasibility 
of reporting post-graduation earnings data and whether that 
information will improve the usefulness of federal transparency 
initiatives for students and their families. The legislation 
also instructs the advisory committee to consider the 
implications such information will have on student privacy.

Evaluating current efforts before layering more requirements

    In addition to requiring the advisory committee to 
determine what additional information is helpful when students 
are making college financing decisions, H.R. 1949 also requires 
the advisory committee to determine if there is information 
that is already being collected that can be eliminated by the 
Department of Education and/or Congress. Every time Congress 
reauthorizes the Higher Education Act, it seems to add 
additional reporting requirements to the law. These statutory 
requirements lead to additional regulations and informal 
guidance, both of which hamper efforts to simplify the nation's 
student aid programs.
    During the 2010-2011 academic year, institutions dedicated 
826,632 hours and almost $29 million to filling out IPEDS 
surveys. This estimate increased to 850,320 hours and almost 
$31 million for the 2012-13 academic year.\5\ Once the advisory 
committee determines what information students want to know 
about individual institutions of higher education, Congress and 
the department have to be willing to forego such reporting 
requirements in an effort to streamline the information 
available to students and their families. In his testimony 
before the subcommittee, Mr. Schneider summarized the current 
situation:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education 
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. IPEDS 2011-2014 Supporting 
Statement Part A, OMB Paperwork Reduction Act Submission (OMB No. 1850-
0582 v.10). Submitted February 2, 2011.

          The reauthorization of HEA [is] an ideal opportunity 
        for Congress to start cleaning out the IPEDS attic. 
        There's just stuff in there that may have been 
        important at one time or seemed important at one time . 
        . . We need to ask the question, what's the compelling 
        national interest in collecting [some of] the data?\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\http://edworkforce.house.gov/calendar/
eventsingle.aspx?EventID=308347

    The committee is hopeful the advisory committee will 
provide thoughtful recommendations about ways to streamline or 
eliminate reporting requirements that are no longer useful for 
students and families. The committee notes the past work of the 
Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance to review 
and analyze federal regulations to determine if they are overly 
burdensome as required under the 2008 reauthorization, and the 
Government Accountability Office's recent report entitled 
``Higher Education: Experts Cited a Range of Requirements as 
Burdensome.''\7\ The committee urges the advisory committee to 
expand on this expertise within the framework of what 
information is helpful to students and families.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-371
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Improving the delivery of information for students and families

    The Improving Postsecondary Education Data for Students Act 
requires the advisory committee to examine the current delivery 
of information to students and families searching for the 
institution of higher education that best fits their unique 
needs. In its efforts, the advisory committee is charged with 
developing recommendations for improving the delivery of 
information in a more consistent and understandable medium.
    The proliferation of federal transparency initiatives in 
the past few years has been promising, but improvements can 
clearly be made. When interviewed, students and families often 
cite different areas and modes of research than what policy 
makers in Washington believe they should be examining. Students 
often rely on information from friends and family or directly 
from institutions, or simply choose the school that is closest 
to their home. More often than not, students and families rely 
on information based on personalized effects, than empirical 
information provided by the federal government. At the April 
24, 2013 Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce 
Training hearing, Mr. Alexander Garrido, a student at Keiser 
University in Miami, FL, stated, ``I was not aware of any 
navigation tools from the Department of Education, which was 
why my decision was based mostly on my visit and the support of 
my friends and family.''\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\http://edworkforce.house.gov/calendar/
eventsingle.aspx?EventID=330710
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Students and families may be deterred from using federal 
transparency resources due to a variety of reasons, including 
their exceptional length or complicated and inconsistent 
delivery. At the same hearing, Dr. Donald Heller, Dean of the 
College of Education at Michigan State University, summarized 
the current task before policymakers:

          The Internet has greatly helped to democratize access 
        to information. What it has not done as successfully, 
        however, has been to help people get access to the 
        right information to meet their needs. And it is 
        critical that we help prospective students to get the 
        right information in their hands at the necessary 
        times.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

    The Improving Postsecondary Education Data for Students Act 
will take an important step toward strengthening higher 
education transparency and ensuring all students have access to 
the data they need to choose the right college. The advisory 
committee's report will assist the House Committee on Education 
and the Workforce's efforts to reauthorize the Higher Education 
Act. During this process, the committee plans to take a 
comprehensive approach to maintain and strengthen the 
information found to be most useful to students, families, and 
taxpayers, while streamlining the regulatory and reporting 
burden imposed on colleges and universities.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    States the short title as the ``Improving Postsecondary 
Education Data for Students Act.''

Section 2. Study on improvements to postsecondary education 
        transparency at the federal level

    Directs the Secretary of Education to convene an Advisory 
Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education Data to review 
existing federal, state, institutional, and private-sector 
transparency initiatives to determine which programs are most 
helpful to students as they research their postsecondary 
education options.

                       EXPLANATION OF AMENDMENTS

    The amendments, including the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, are explained in the body of this report.

              APPLICATION OF LAW TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a 
description of the application of this bill to the legislative 
branch. H.R. 1949 directs the Secretary of Education to convene 
an Advisory Committee on Improving Postsecondary Education Data 
to conduct a study on improvements to postsecondary education 
transparency at the federal level.

                       UNFUNDED MANDATE STATEMENT

    Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act (as amended by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act, P.L. 104-4) requires a statement of 
whether the provisions of the reported bill include unfunded 
mandates. This issue is addressed in the CBO letter.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    H.R. 1949 does not contain any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9 of House Rule XXI.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    In accordance with clause (3)(c) of House Rule XIII, the 
goal of H.R. 1949 is to provide for market-based interest rates 
for certain federal student loans. The Committee expects the 
Department of Education to comply with these provisions and 
implement the law in accordance with the stated goal.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    No provision of H.R. 1949 establishes or reauthorizes a 
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of 
another Federal program, a program that was included in any 
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program 
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance.

                  DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS

    The committee estimates that enacting H.R. 1949 does not 
specifically direct the completion of any specific rule makings 
within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 551.

  STATEMENT OF OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause 
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
the Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are 
reflected in the body of this report.

               NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND CBO COST ESTIMATE

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect 
to requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives and section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received 
the following estimate for H.R. 1949 from the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 17, 2013.
Hon. John Kline,
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1949, the 
Improving Postsecondary Education Data for Students Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Justin 
Humphrey.
            Sincerely,
                                              Douglas W. Elmendorf.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 1949--Improving Postsecondary Education Data for Students Act

    H.R. 1949 would authorize the Secretary of Education to use 
administrative funds to form an advisory committee and produce 
reports on the types of postsecondary education data that the 
Department of Education should collect and how that information 
should be collected and disseminated.
    Based on funding levels for similar activities of the 
Department of Education, CBO estimates that implementing the 
bill would require about $1 million in fiscal year 2014, 
assuming the appropriation of the estimated amounts.
    Enacting H.R. 1949 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    H.R. 1949 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Justin Humphrey. 
The estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison of the 
costs that would be incurred in carrying out H.R. 1949. 
However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides that this 
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in 
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act.

                                  

```