As of July 1, 2026, many of the higher education provisions found in H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, came into effect. Among these provisions are the accountability rules finalized by the Department of Education for degree and certificate programs and, separately, Workforce Pell programs.  

One of the outcomes is the new regulatory framework known as the Student Tuition and Transparency System (STATS), the replacement for its accountability predecessors, Gainful Employment (GE) and Financial Value Transparency (FVT).  

The new STATS structure now encompasses all Title IV-eligible degree and certificate programs. Thus, programs that disburse the Pell Grant, federal student loans, federal work-study, and other forms of federal student aid are now covered under this accountability structure. This marks an expansion of GE, which previously covered only programs in for-profit institutions and certificate programs and non-degree credentials that provide vocational skills in public and private non-profit institutions.  

Here are additional key features of the STATS framework: 

• Programs are measured using the earnings premium. Thus, four years after program completion, the median earnings of Title IV completers of an eligible Title IV program are compared to those of working individuals aged 25-34 with only a high school diploma and not enrolled in higher education. 
• Programs that fail to meet this metric two out of three consecutive years would lose access to the federal student loan program for no less than two years. 
• In addition, if a failing program also enrolls at least half of the college’s students or generates at least half of the college’s revenue, theprogram isineligible for all Title IV federal student aid, which includes the Pell Grant, Direct Federal Student Loans, Federal Work Study, etc. If multiple failing programs at an institution, when added together, enroll half of students or half of revenue, all included programs face this sanction. 
• Institutions are responsible for submitting student and program-level data (tuition and fees, financial aid awards, etc.) to the Department of Education. 
• Finally, institutions must provide detailed cost-and-earningsinformation to prospective students as well as warn those enrolling in failing programs that the program could lose loan or Title IV eligibility that year. 

In addition to these accountability regulations for degree and certificate programs, there is a new regulatory framework governing accountability for Workforce Pell programs. Workforce Pell programs are short-term programs that are between eight and 15 weeks, 150 to 599 clock hours, and meet the 70 percent job completion and 70 percent job placement rates.  

Here are a few accountability features of Workforce Pell programs: 

• Unlike its counterpart programs subject to regulations in the STATS framework, Workforce Pell programs are measured using the value-added earnings metric. Three years after completing the Workforce Pell program, completers must earn more than 150 percent of the federal poverty line. 
• Earnings adjusted by locality using the federal Regional Price Parity (RPP) index developed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Thus, in high-cost areas, program graduates must earn more than in low-cost areas.  
• Value-added earnings must be greater than zero and greater than the program’s tuition and fees; otherwise, a Workforce Pell program loses eligibility for no less than two years. 
• A Workforce Pell program loses eligibility if the state governor withdraws approval. 
• In addition to reporting to the Secretary of Education that the program tuition is not greater than the value-added earnings, institutions must also submit student completion data.    

Value-added earnings are determined using the following formula: 

Value-added earnings=((3-year median Earnings/regional price parity index)* 100)- 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Line) 
Adjusted Median Earnings =(3-year median Earnings/regional price parity index) * 100 

To simplify the formula:  

Value-added earnings =(Adjusted Median Earnings of working student completers - 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Line) 

Below are a few examples of the value-added earnings calculation. 

In the first example, XYZ University is located in Arkansas, with a lower cost of living than the rest of the country. Thus, the Regional Price Parity (RPP) index is 86.5 compared to the national average of 100. If Workforce Pell completers’ median earnings are $25,000 three years after completion, the formula adjusts their earnings to $28,902, because the $25,000 has more buying power in Arkansas than other parts of the country. Next, the formula compares this adjusted earnings level to 150% of the Federal Poverty Level in Arkansas, which is $21,780. The Workforce Pell program completer earns $7,122in value-added earnings, showing this program helps the completer earn significantly more than the poverty line. In a fictitious scenario where tuition and fees are $5,200, the program would remain eligible because the value-added earnings of $7,122 are higher than tuition and fees. The program must continue to remain between eight and 15 weeks and 150 to 599 clock hours, meet the 70 percent job completion and 70 percent job placement rates, and maintain approval from the governor. 

In the second example in higher-cost Alaska, the Regional Price Parity (RPP) index is 101.7, greater than the national average. The adjusted Workforce Pell completers’ three- yearmedian earnings are calculated at $28,515; its unadjusted value is $29,000. This is due to the higher cost of living in Alaska, limiting the purchasing power in the state. When taking the difference between the adjusted median earnings of $28,515 and $27,315, which represents 150 percent of the poverty line, the Workforce Pell program completer would earn $1,200 in value-added earnings. However, if we keep the fictional tuition and fees at $5,200 and apply the value-added earnings from this example of $1,200, the program would lose eligibility because the tuition and fees exceed the value-added earnings.  

It is undeniable that H.R.1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, ushered in changes that have created shifts affecting all sectors in the higher education landscape. While the newlaw’sshort-term workforce training provides new opportunities for community college students, community colleges and their higher education peers must now follow new accountability mandates that are now in effect.   

Below is a comparison table summarizing the accountability regulations under STATS and for Workforce Pell.

Genesis Santiago is the Senior Government Relations Associate at ACCT