This report identifies and examines several of the major postsecondary education policy issues facing the 113 th Congress. For each of the broader issue areas identified, the report provides brief background information and an introduction and discussion of various aspects of the issue. Varied policy options are also identified for further consideration. The aim of the report is to provide concise (2-4 page) summaries of selected postsecondary education policy issues and possible approaches to address them. The report does not attempt to thoroughly assess tradeoffs or possible advantages and disadvantages associated with the policy options that are discussed. The federal government affects and influences postsecondary education policy most directly through the programs and policies authorized by the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA; P.L. 89-329), and other federal postsecondary education programs, such as federal veterans' education benefits and federal tax benefits authorized under the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). Other federal laws also have an impact on postsecondary education policy. Examples include federal immigration laws and the federal bankruptcy code. HEA programs and policies are particularly relevant at this time as the HEA may soon be considered for reauthorization. Authorization of appropriations for most HEA programs is provided through FY2014, with the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) authorizing appropriations for an additional year—through FY2015. Many of the issues identified in this report may be considered as part of an HEA reauthorization effort. Some of the other issues identified here have received recent legislative consideration or attention and may be considered as part of other legislative efforts before the 113 th Congress. For example, issues pertaining to the education of noncitizens may be considered as part of legislative efforts related to comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). Issues pertaining to federal tax benefits supportive of postsecondary education may be considered as part of efforts to reform the IRC. This report presents an examination of the following postsecondary education issue areas in the sections that follow. College costs and prices. The Federal Pell Grant program. Federal student loans. Student loans and personal bankruptcy. Noncitizens and eligibility for federal student aid. Postsecondary education tax benefits. Institutional quality. College completion. Campus safety. The 113 th Congress may consider policy options aimed at addressing college affordability. At issue is growing concern that college prices are becoming out of reach for many families. In the United States, postsecondary education is financed through a mix of government appropriations, gift and endowment revenue, and payments for tuition and fees. In recent decades college prices have increased at rates that have consistently outpaced inflation. With published prices for tuition, fees, room and board at public four-year institutions averaging roughly $17,000 for in-state students and $21,000 for out-of-state students, and $38,000 at private not-for-profit four-year institutions, concerns have arisen about college access and affordability and about the sustainability of further price increases. Myriad factors are thought to play a role in the escalation of college prices. Some commonly cited factors include the following: A decline in state higher education appropriations on a per student basis, which has led to greater reliance on tuition revenues at state colleges and universities. Fluctuating values of institutional endowments. Escalating costs of high-skilled labor, which may have a particularly strong effect on higher education, a labor intensive industry that relies heavily on highly skilled labor. Escalating costs of technology and other goods that colleges update regularly. Durable demand for postsecondary education, which may endow colleges, as credentialing institutions, with considerable pricing power (i.e., the ability to raise prices without destabilizing demand). A plurality of institutional missions at colleges and universities (which may divert attention and resources from instruction), and an orientation and incentives targeted toward raising and spending revenues to enhance the quality of students' experiences as opposed to a focus on utilizing revenues efficiently. Faculty governance, tenure policies, and ineffective central control of costs. It has also been suggested that broad availability of and increases in federal financial aid for students may support or even fuel college price increases. While a precise diagnosis of which among these factors play the primary roles in contributing to price increases remains elusive, there is little disagreement about the trends in prices, and about the increasing financial strain being placed on families and students pursuing postsecondary education. At the same time, there is no clear roadmap toward a solution. However, the levers available to federal policy makers—should they seek to address affordability—provide many options. Some of the options that receive frequent mention and relevant considerations are discussed below. Student aid programs authorized under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA; P.L. 89-329), generally provide portable aid, which is premised on empowering students to shop on the basis of quality and price among qualified institutions in the higher education marketplace. In a properly functioning market, it is assumed that consumers have good information about the goods and services they are purchasing. However, imperfect information is commonly identified as a problem affecting students seeking to choose among colleges and college programs. An example of this is a perceived lack of transparency regarding college prices. While colleges publish list prices, they also engage in fairly extensive tuition discounting on the basis of factors such as need and merit. These discounts, in effect, reduce prices. Additionally, other subsidies such as governmental grants, also often awarded on the basis of need, further defray the price students are actually asked to pay. Since "net prices" (prices net of governmental grant aid and institutional discounts) are not available to students when they are applying to schools, students must often determine the schools they are going to apply to without having a clear sense of the price they will actually be asked to pay, and without the ability to compare prices between different institutions. Moreover, multi-year prices for educational programs are generally not available when students are identifying college choices and when selecting a college to attend. This lack of transparency results in part because the net price for each individual is determined annually and is influenced by factors such as financial need and merit, which can fluctuate across candidates and across years in school. Net price is also affected by factors such as the non-tuition revenue available to schools, which fluctuates across years. The federal government has taken some steps through provisions enacted in the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (HEOA; P.L. 110-315 ) to address transparency issues. These provisions require colleges to make available more information on net prices charged in recent years to different categories of students, and require schools to post on-line net price calculators. Still, the required net price information delineates existing net prices across a fairly limited set of students (e.g., only for aided students), and net price calculators are criticized sometimes for lacking sophistication and/or being cumbersome to use. It has been suggested that requiring more comprehensive data, different data, or different displays of data on institutional net prices and discounts across categories of students might be helpful, and that net price calculators or "estimators" with greater functionality or that are easier to use might also be desirable. Further, it is sometimes suggested that in addition to year one net price estimates, admitted students might be provided net price estimates or ranges for the full program that are grounded in the known characteristics of the students (and family) that are likely to affect calculated need and thus impact net price across multiple years in school (such as variation brought on by fluctuation in the number of family members expected to be enrolled in college). Another component of consumer information that has garnered attention is information on student outcomes. In a variety of venues there have been calls for improvements in the availability and quality of information on employment and earnings outcomes for college graduates and for graduates of specific academic programs. This information is not consistently available, making it hard for students to gauge potential return on educational investments. Data collection and reporting on student outcomes for institutions or specific academic programs could be supported, facilitated, and/or required by the federal government. This could be a large undertaking and depending on the approach employed also may raise privacy concerns. Better information on price and student outcomes may enable students to make better informed decisions about how much to invest in educational programs and about which programs to pursue, which may in turn have an effect on prices. Proposals have been considered in recent years that would tie participation in certain federal student aid programs to an institution's rate of increase in prices. Generally these types of proposals constrain access to new or existing student aid programs for colleges whose prices rise at levels beyond some type of college affordability index which is constructed based on a measure of inflation such as the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U). These types of proposals can also be structured in ways that provide access to more aid at schools whose price increases fare well in relation to a college affordability index. In general, these proposals have targeted aid awarded directly to colleges, such as the HEA campus-based programs or newly proposed student aid funds that would be awarded directly to colleges. Provided that the incentives to control prices are sufficiently robust, they might induce colleges to focus on constraining those expenditures and practices that contribute to price increases over which they have control. Traditionally, higher education has been a labor-intensive endeavor, placing a high priority on preserving limited-scale interactions between instructors and students. It has been commonly argued that given the nature of the service being provided, opportunities to substitute technology for labor are limited. In recent years, however, the rapid expansion of online education programs and courses may be beginning to challenge this notion. One development has been the growth of online college courses and programs, with an estimated 6.7 million students enrolled in at least one online course at degree-granting institutions. Online courses and programs are available at a large share of the nation's colleges and universities. If taught like traditional courses, these on-line offerings seemingly do not do much to reduce costs.