PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. DeSaulnier, Mark [D-CA-10] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Sep 9, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10203 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10203 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10203 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10203 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-01 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This bill proposes changes to how colleges support students with disabilities. It would require accessibility offices and acceptance of specified disability records, authorize competitive grants for accessible teaching and inclusive programs, and establish national assistance centers. It would also create voluntary guidelines for accessible digital learning materials while preserving existing disability-law obligations. These are proposed requirements and funding authorizations; the supplied evidence does not establish that they became law.
Each institution of higher education shall establish an office of accessibility
Adopt policies that, at a minimum, make any of the following documentation submitted by an individual sufficient to establish that such individual is an individual with a disability
the Secretary shall award grants, on a competitive basis, to institutions of higher education
to create or expand a comprehensive transition and postsecondary education program for students with intellectual disabilities
to provide for the establishment and support of a National Technical Assistance Center
for the purpose of establishing a coordinating center for institutions of higher education that offer inclusive higher education programs for students with intellectual disabilities
Nothing in this section shall be construed to require an institution of higher education to require, provide, or both recommend and provide, postsecondary electronic instructional materials or related technologies that conform to the guidelines.
an institution that selects or uses nonconforming postsecondary electronic instructional materials or related technologies must otherwise comply with existing obligations
Section 101 would require competitive, five-year grants to colleges from appropriated funds. At least five grants would support professional development and technical assistance. Awards would consider geographic balance, urban and rural areas, and different institution types and sizes.
From amounts appropriated under section 765C, the Secretary shall award grants, on a competitive basis, to institutions of higher education
Not less than 5 grants shall be awarded to institutions of higher education that provide professional development and technical assistance
A grant under this section shall be awarded for a period of 5 years.
In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary shall consider the following: (1) Geographic distribution Providing an equitable geographic distribution of such awards. (2) Rural and urban areas Distributing such awards to urban and rural areas. (3) Range and type of institution Ensuring that the activities to be assisted are developed for a range of types and sizes of institutions of higher education.
Section 101 grants would support staff training in accessible teaching, disability accommodations, the transition from secondary school, accessible distance education, or career guidance. Career guidance would have to include at least one listed element, such as work experience, coursework advice, workplace self-advocacy, or career selection.
A grant awarded under this section shall be used to carry out one or more of the following activities
training to provide innovative, effective, and evidence-based teaching methods and strategies, consistent with the principles of universal design for learning
methods and strategies of providing appropriate accommodations
ensure the successful and smooth transition of students with disabilities from secondary school to postsecondary education
provide accessible distance education programs or classes
which shall include at least one of the following: (i) Supporting internships, apprenticeships registered under the Act of August 16, 1937 (commonly known as the National Apprenticeship Act; 50 Stat. 664, chapter 663; 29 U.S.C. 50 et seq.), or work-based learning opportunities. (ii) Counseling on coursework to meet the degree, certificate, or recognized postsecondary credential appropriate for the field chosen. (iii) Developing self-advocacy skills to advocate for appropriate accommodations once in the workplace. (iv) Support with selecting a career pathway that leads to competitive, integrated employment.
Section 101 applicants would describe their activities, consultation with disability experts and others, coordination with their accessibility office, and use of effective practices. Recipients would evaluate and share results. The Secretary would issue an initial public report within one year of enactment and a later report within five years of the first post-enactment grant award.
Each application shall include— (1) a description of the activities authorized under section 762(b)
(2) a description of how the institution consulted with a broad range of people, including individuals with expertise in disability supports or special education, within the institution to develop activities for which assistance is sought; (3) a description of how the institution will coordinate and collaborate with the office of accessibility; and (4) a description of the extent to which the institution will work to replicate the research-based and best practices of institutions of higher education with demonstrated effectiveness in serving students with disabilities.
shall evaluate and disseminate to other institutions of higher education the information obtained
Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the authorizing committees, and make available to the public, a report
Not later than five years after the date of the first award of a grant under this section after the date of the Improving Access to Higher Education Act, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the authorizing committees, and make available to the public, a report
Section 102 would require each covered college to establish an accessibility office serving students who arrive with disabilities or acquire them while enrolled. Offices would explain services at orientation, update information online, and provide information about disability rights and accommodations for course-related or required work experiences.
Each institution of higher education shall establish an office of accessibility to develop and implement policies to support students who enter postsecondary education with disabilities and students who acquire a disability while enrolled in an institution of higher education.
inform students, during student orientation, about services provided at the institution of higher education, and continually update such information through the accessibility office’s website and other communications
provide information to students regarding accommodations and modifications provided by the institution of higher education with respect to internships, practicums, work-based learning, apprenticeships registered under the Act of August 16, 1937 (commonly known as the National Apprenticeship Act; 50 Stat. 664, chapter 663; 29 U.S.C. 50 et seq.), or other work-related environments that— (A) the student may engage in through courses; or (B) are necessary for completion of a degree, certificate, or recognized postsecondary credential
provide information to students regarding their legal rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 794)
An accessibility office would have to accept any listed type of documentation as sufficient to establish disability. These include an individualized education program, even an outdated one; a Section 504 accommodation plan; specified school records; a licensed professional’s record or evaluation; another college’s disability record; or documentation of a service-related disability. Additional documentation could be requested when a student with a prior individualized education program was later found ineligible for special-education services.
make any of the following documentation submitted by an individual sufficient to establish that such individual is an individual with a disability
Documentation that the individual has had an individualized education program (IEP) in accordance with section 614(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1414(d)), including an IEP that may not be current on the date of the determination that the individual has a disability.
The office of accessibility may ask for additional documentation from an individual who had an IEP but who was subsequently evaluated and determined to be ineligible for services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(ii) Documentation describing services or accommodations provided to the individual pursuant to section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) (commonly referred to as a Section 504 plan). (iii) A plan or record of service for the individual from a private school, a local educational agency, a State educational agency, or an institution of higher education provided in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.). (iv) A record or evaluation from a relevant licensed professional finding that the individual has a disability. (v) A plan or record of disability from another institution of higher education. (vi) Documentation of a disability due to service in the uniformed services, as defined in section 484C(a).
Accessibility offices would have to make accommodation-eligibility procedures clear and distribute them accessibly to students, parents, and faculty at orientation and on a public website. They would also have to provide accommodations for students with mental health disabilities.
(B) Adopt policies that are transparent and explicit regarding the process by which the institution determines eligibility for accommodations. (C) Disseminate the information described in subparagraph (B) to students, parents, and faculty— (i) in an accessible format; (ii) during student orientation; and (iii) by making such information readily available on a public website of the institution. (D) Provide accommodations to students with mental health disabilities.
Section 102 would also allow competitive, five-year grants for institution-wide accessible course design or accessible distance education. Applications would require consultation, a sustainability plan, and a revenue-and-expense plan. Award decisions would consider geographic distribution and institution types and sizes.
From amounts appropriated under section 765C, the Secretary may award grants on a competitive basis
A grant under this section shall be awarded for a period of 5 years.
(A) Providing an equitable geographic distribution of such awards. (B) Ensuring that the activities to be assisted are developed for a range of types and sizes of institutions of higher education.
(2) a description of the consultation the institution has had with a broad range of people within the institution, including individuals with expertise in disability supports or special education, in developing the information under paragraph (1); (3) a plan for the sustainability of the program after the end of the grant period; and (4) a written business plan for revenue and expenditures
(1) develop and implement across the institution of higher education, a universal design (as defined in section 103) for learning framework for course design and instructional materials to improve campus-wide accessibility to instruction, materials, and the learning environment; or (2) develop or improve distance education courses consistent with the principles of universal design for learning to improve accessibility of instruction and materials.
Innovation-grant recipients would evaluate and share their work. The Secretary would publish an initial report within one year of the section’s enactment and a final report within six years of the first grant award, including recommendations for replicating effective projects.
shall evaluate and disseminate to other institutions of higher education, the information obtained through the activities described in subsection (c)
Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the authorizing committees, and make available to the public, a report
Not later than 6 years after the date of the first award of a grant under this section, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the authorizing committees, and make available to the public, a report that— (A) reviews the activities and program performance of the projects authorized under this section; and (B) provides guidance and recommendations on how effective projects can be replicated.
Section 103 would establish an independent commission to develop accessibility guidelines for digital college learning materials and related technology. It would include disability communities, college leaders and support staff, and developers and manufacturers. Federal employees would be ineligible; certain federal volunteers or advisers could serve if they met the stated outside-employment and compensation conditions. The commission would have no permanent staff, with administrative support from the Education Department.
The Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President pro tempore of the Senate, and the Secretary of Education shall establish an independent commission
to develop guidelines for accessible postsecondary electronic instructional materials and related technologies
(A) Communities of persons with disabilities for whom the accessibility of postsecondary electronic instructional materials and related technologies is a significant factor in ensuring equal participation in higher education, and nonprofit organizations that provide accessible electronic materials to these communities. (B) Higher education leadership, including institution of higher education presidents, provosts, deans, vice presidents or deans of libraries, chief information officers, and other senior institutional executives. (C) Higher education disability coordinators or other disability support staff. (D) Developers of postsecondary electronic instructional materials and manufacturers of related technologies.
Federal employees are ineligible for appointment to the Commission. An appointee to a volunteer or advisory position with a Federal agency or related advisory body may be appointed to the Commission so long as his or her primary employment is with a non-Federal entity and he or she is not otherwise engaged in financially compensated work on behalf of the Federal Government, exclusive of any standard expense reimbursement or grant-funded activities.
There shall be no permanent staffing for the Commission.
The Commission shall be provided administrative support, as needed, by the Secretary of Education through the Office of Postsecondary Education
The commission would have 18 months after enactment to issue guidelines and an annotated list explaining existing technology standards, with an optional six-month extension. Issuance would require approval by at least 75 percent of members. A 12-expert technical panel would be convened within one month after the commission’s first meeting and include a United States Access Board representative.
Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, subject to a 6-month extension that it may exercise at its discretion, the Commission shall— (A) develop and issue guidelines
Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, subject to a 6-month extension that it may exercise at its discretion, the Commission shall, with the assistance of the technical panel established under paragraph (4), develop and issue an annotated list of information technology standards.
Issuance of the guidelines and annotated list of information technology standards shall require approval of at least 75 percent of the members of the Commission.
Not later than 1 month after first meeting, the Commission shall appoint and convene a panel of 12 technical experts
The technical panel shall include a representative from the United States Access Board.
The guidelines would address digital course content and tools that colleges require, provide, or both recommend and provide. They would allow alternative designs with substantially equivalent or greater accessibility and usability. If fully compliant products were unavailable commercially or compliance were technically infeasible, colleges could choose the product that best meets the guidelines consistent with their business and teaching needs.
digital curricular content that is required, provided, or both recommended and provided by an institution of higher education for use in a postsecondary instructional program
any software, applications, learning management or content management systems, and hardware that an institution of higher education requires, provides, or both recommends and provides for student access to and use of postsecondary electronic instructional materials
allow for the use of an alternative design or technology that results in substantially equivalent or greater accessibility and usability by individuals with disabilities than would be provided by compliance with the guidelines
where electronic instructional materials, or related technologies, that comply fully with the guidelines are not commercially available, or where such compliance is not technically feasible, the institution may select the product that best meets the guidelines consistent with the institution’s business and pedagogical needs
Using materials that conform to the new guidelines would be voluntary. Colleges using other materials would still have to meet existing disability-access obligations through appropriate modifications, accommodations, or aids and services. The bill expressly preserves existing disability-law remedies, defenses, and federal rulemaking authority.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to require an institution of higher education to require, provide, or both recommend and provide, postsecondary electronic instructional materials or related technologies that conform to the guidelines.
an institution that selects or uses nonconforming postsecondary electronic instructional materials or related technologies must otherwise comply with existing obligations under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794) and titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12131 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 12181 et seq.) to provide access to the educational benefit afforded by such materials and technologies through provision of appropriate and reasonable modification, accommodation, and auxiliary aids or services
nothing in this Act may be construed
(B) to expand, limit, or alter the remedies or defenses under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
(D) to limit the authority of Federal agencies to issue regulations pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
Within five years after the guidelines and standards list are issued, and every five years thereafter, the Secretary would seek public comments on whether to reconstitute the commission to update them, then report a recommendation to Congress. This is a review schedule, not a stated expiration date for the guidelines.
Not later than 5 years after issuance of the guidelines and annotated list of information technology standards described in subsections (a) and (b), and every 5 years thereafter, the Secretary of Education shall publish a notice in the Federal Register requesting public comment about whether there is a need to reconstitute the Commission to update the guidelines and annotated list of information technology standards
The Secretary shall then submit a report and recommendation to Congress regarding whether the Commission should be reconstituted.
Section 104 would require annual competitive awards from appropriated funds for inclusive college programs for students with intellectual disabilities. Each grant would last five years. Grants would be capped at $300,000 for one institution and $500,000 for a consortium of at least three institutions. A college with a pre-enactment grant could receive another only after that grant ended or as part of such a consortium.
From amounts appropriated under section 769(a), the Secretary shall annually award grants, on a competitive basis, to institutions of higher education (or consortia of three or more institutions of higher education)
An institution of higher education that received a grant under this section before the date of the enactment of the Improving Access to Higher Education Act may not receive an additional grant under this section unless— (i) the institution receives a grant as part of a consortium of three or more institutions of higher education; or (ii) the grant term of such preceding grant has ended.
(i) Institution of higher education A grant under this section made to an institution of higher education may not be in an amount greater than $300,000. (ii) Consortium A grant under this section made to a consortia of institutions of higher education may not be in an amount greater than $500,000.
A grant under this section shall be awarded for a period of 5 years.
Inclusive-program awards must provide equitable geographic distribution, balance awards between two-year and four-year institutions to the extent possible, and fund high-quality inclusive programs serving areas underserved by these programs. Colleges with institutionally owned or operated student housing could receive awards only if they integrate students with intellectual disabilities into housing offered to students without disabilities, including through direct supports or partnerships. Awards must also encourage involvement by students studying education, rehabilitation, assistive technology, or related fields. Selected applicants must have an existing Title IV-eligible comprehensive transition and postsecondary program or agree to establish one. Separately, application preferences would favor relevant agency partnerships or geographically underserved states.
In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary shall— (1) provide for an equitable geographic distribution of such grants; (2) to the extent possible, provide for an equitable distribution of such grants between 4-year institutions of higher education and 2-year institutions of higher education, including community colleges; (3) provide grant funds for high-quality, inclusive higher education programs for students with intellectual disabilities, hereinafter referred to as inclusive higher education programs, that will serve areas that are underserved by programs of this type;
in the case of an institution of higher education that provides institutionally owned or operated housing for students attending the institution, award grants only to such institutions that integrate students with intellectual disabilities into the housing offered to students without disabilities or to institutions that provide such integrated housing through providing supports to students directly or through partnerships with other organizations
(5) provide grant funds to encourage involvement of students attending institutions of higher education in the fields of special education, general education, vocational rehabilitation, assistive technology, or related fields in the program;
(6) select applications that— (A) demonstrate an existing comprehensive transition and postsecondary education program for students with intellectual disabilities that is title IV eligible; or (B) agree to establish such a program
give preference to applications submitted under subsection (b) that agree to incorporate into the inclusive higher education program for students with intellectual disabilities carried out under the grant one or more of the following elements: (A) The formation of a partnership with any relevant agency serving students with intellectual disabilities, such as a vocational rehabilitation agency. (B) Applications that represent geographically underserved States.
Funded inclusive programs would provide individual academic and social supports, career development, independent-living skills, and integrated work experiences. They would use individual planning, award a degree or other listed credential upon completion, prepare a sustainability business plan by the end of year three, and partner with local education agencies to support students still eligible for special education.
provides individual supports and services for the academic and social inclusion of students with intellectual disabilities in academic courses, extracurricular activities, and other aspects of the regular postsecondary program
(i) academic and career development; (ii) socialization and inclusion with the general student population; (iii) independent living skills, including self-advocacy skills; and (iv) integrated work experiences and career skills that lead to competitive integrated employment
(D) integrates person-centered planning in the development of the course of study for each student with an intellectual disability participating in the program; (E) plans for the sustainability of the program after the end of the grant period, with a written business plan for revenue and expenditures to be provided to the Department by the end of year 3; and (F) awards a degree, certificate, or recognized postsecondary credential for students with intellectual disabilities upon the completion of the program
partner with one or more local educational agencies to support students with intellectual disabilities participating in the program who are eligible for special education and related services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Inclusive-program grantees would contribute cash or in-kind support covering at least 25 percent of program costs. The Secretary would publish a review of funded programs and recommendations for replicating effective programs within five years after the first grant award.
Such matching funds may be provided in cash or in-kind, and shall be in an amount of not less than 25 percent of the amount of such costs.
Not later than 5 years after the date of the first grant awarded under this section, the Secretary shall prepare and disseminate a report to the authorizing committees and to the public that— (1) reviews the activities of the inclusive higher education programs for students with intellectual disabilities funded under this section; and (2) provides guidance and recommendations on how effective programs can be replicated.
Inclusive-program grantees would annually send the coordinating center individual student experience and outcome data. They would also track each student annually for five years after graduation or another exit. Required subjects include courses, academic results, employment, independent living, and social outcomes.
shall collect and transmit to the coordinating center established under section 777(b) on an annual basis for each student who is enrolled in the program, student-level information related to the experiences and outcomes
Such longitudinal data shall be collected for every student each year for 5 years after the student graduates from, or otherwise exits, the program.
(A) the number and type of postsecondary education courses taken and completed by the student; (B) academic outcomes; (C) competitive, integrated employment outcomes; (D) independent living outcomes; and (E) social outcomes.
Sections 102 and 104 would replace “2009” with “2027” in existing funding-authorization provisions. Section 102 would also renumber section 765 as 765C. The surrounding authorization language is not reproduced, so these substitutions alone do not establish the complete funding amounts or periods.
by redesignating section 765 as section 765C
by amending section 765C, as so redesignated, by striking 2009 and inserting 2027
Section 769(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1140i) is amended by striking 2009 and inserting 2027.
Section 105 would require support for a National Technical Assistance Center through a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement using appropriated funds. Eligible operators would be colleges, nonprofits, or their partnerships with relevant expertise. The program would be administered by the Education Department’s office handling other postsecondary programs, in consultation with its special-education and rehabilitation office.
From amounts appropriated under paragraph (5), the Secretary shall award a grant to, or enter into a contract or cooperative agreement with, an eligible entity to provide for the establishment and support of a National Technical Assistance Center.
an institution of higher education, a nonprofit organization, or partnership of two or more such institutions or organizations, with demonstrated expertise in— (A) transitioning students with disabilities from secondary school to postsecondary education; (B) supporting students with disabilities in postsecondary education; (C) technical knowledge necessary for the dissemination of information in accessible formats; and (D) working with diverse types of institutions of higher education, including community colleges
administered by the office in the Department that administers other postsecondary education programs in consultation with the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
The technical assistance center would help students, families, and college personnel across disability types and maintain an accessible public database of college disability services. It would report on postsecondary success within three years of establishment and every two years afterward. The bill would authorize $10 million for this work; authorization does not itself provide the money.
provide information and technical assistance to students with disabilities and the families of students with disabilities to support students across the broad spectrum of disabilities
provide information and technical assistance to faculty, staff, and administrators of institutions of higher education
building, maintaining, and updating a database of disability support services information with respect to institutions of higher education, or for expanding and updating an existing database
Such database shall be available to the general public through a website built to high technical standards of accessibility practicable for the broad spectrum of individuals with disabilities.
Not later than three years after the establishment of the National Technical Assistance Center, and every two years thereafter, the National Technical Assistance Center shall prepare and disseminate a report to the Secretary and the authorizing committees analyzing the condition of postsecondary success for students with disabilities.
There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $10,000,000.
Section 105 would also establish a national coordinating center for inclusive college programs for students with intellectual disabilities. The Secretary would competitively select an experienced entity for a five-year cooperative agreement. The Office of Postsecondary Education would administer it with the special-education and rehabilitation office.
an entity, or a partnership of entities, that has demonstrated expertise in the fields of— (A) higher education; (B) the education of students with intellectual disabilities; (C) the development of inclusive higher education programs for students with intellectual disabilities; and (D) evaluation and technical assistance
the Secretary shall enter into a cooperative agreement, on a competitive basis, with an eligible entity for the purpose of establishing a coordinating center
administered by the Office of Postsecondary Education, in collaboration with the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
The Secretary shall enter into a cooperative agreement under this subsection for a period of five years.
The coordinating center would provide technical assistance, evaluate programs, maintain student and program databases, and continue collecting outcomes from earlier grant cycles. It would help programs develop credentials, review legislation and funding streams, conduct outreach, bring grant recipients together at least annually, and convene a work group to develop and test model standards suitable for accreditation. A separate requirement to recommend changes concerning funding streams contains an unclear cross-reference to paragraph (H)(ii), while the funding-streams review appears in (L)(ii).
(B) provide technical assistance regarding the development, evaluation, and continuous improvement of such programs; (C) evaluate such programs using qualitative and quantitative methodologies
(D) evaluate participant progress by creating and maintaining a database of student-level information and data related to the experiences and outcomes of youth who participate in each inclusive higher education program that receives a grant under this subpart; (E) create and maintain a mechanism for continuing to collect outcome information from students who participated in inclusive higher education programs that were developed in previous grant award cycles
(F) assist recipients of a grant under this subpart in efforts to award a meaningful credential and to seek institution of higher education approval for any newly developed credentials; (G) create and maintain a database of student and program level data
(L) review and analyze— (i) the impact of Federal and State legislation on inclusive higher education and inclusive higher education policy; and (ii) funding streams for such programs; (M) provide recommendations regarding the funding streams described in paragraph (H)(ii); (N) develop mechanisms for regular communication, outreach and dissemination of information about inclusive higher education programs for students with intellectual disabilities under subpart 2 between or among such programs and to families and prospective students;
host a meeting of all recipients of grants under subpart 2 not less often than once each year
convene a work group to continue the development of and recommendations for model criteria, standards, and components of inclusive higher education programs and comprehensive transition and postsecondary programs for students with intellectual disabilities, that are appropriate for the development of accreditation standards
develop and conduct a protocol for field testing and implementing the model standards
The coordinating center would report on its activities within five years of establishment. Section 105 would authorize such sums as may be necessary to carry out the subpart for fiscal years 2027 through 2032 and repeal existing section 778. The source does not reproduce section 778, so the repeal’s full effect cannot be determined from this bundle.
Not later than 5 years after the date of the establishment of the coordinating center under this subsection, the coordinating center shall report to the Secretary, the authorizing committees, and the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity on the activities described in paragraph (5).
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subpart such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2027 and each of the five succeeding fiscal years.
Section 778 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 is repealed.
Section 106 would define a qualifying transition program as a college program leading to a degree or other listed credential, with advising and a course of study. Students would participate at least half-time, as determined by the college, through integrated courses or work experiences. The definition requires social and academic integration to the maximum extent practicable. It also says work components need not occur each semester, but its reference to “work components (ii)” is unclear because the listed work experiences appear in (D)(iv).
a program that leads to a degree, certificate, or recognized postsecondary credential issued by an institution of higher education
(C) Includes student advising and a program of study. (D) Requires students with intellectual disabilities to participate on not less than a half-time basis as determined by the institution
(i) Regular enrollment in credit-bearing courses with students without disabilities that are offered by the institution. (ii) Auditing or participating in courses with students without disabilities that are offered by the institution and for which the student does not receive regular academic credit. (iii) Enrollment in noncredit-bearing, nondegree courses with students without disabilities. (iv) Participation in internships, apprenticeships, or work-based experiences in competitive integrated settings for a semester, or multiple semesters.
Requires students with intellectual disabilities to be socially and academically integrated with students without disabilities to the maximum extent practicable.
(F) Does not require the work components (ii) to occur each semester.
The proposed definition of a student with an intellectual disability describes a cognitive impairment with significant limitations in intellectual and cognitive functioning and adaptive behavior expressed in conceptual, social, and practical skills. It lists current or former special-education eligibility and also provides a documentation route for students without specified prior eligibility findings, including a professional evaluation or government disability record. The relationship between these routes is unclear because the text joins them with “and (C) or.”
(A) with a cognitive impairment, characterized by significant limitations in— (i) intellectual and cognitive functioning; and (ii) adaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical adaptive skills
(B) who is currently, or was formerly, eligible for a free appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.); and (C) or, in the case of a student who has not currently or formerly been found eligible for a free appropriate education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), or a student who has not previously been found eligible as a student with an intellectual disability under such Act, documentation establishing that the student has an intellectual disability
(i) a documented comprehensive and individualized psycho-educational evaluation and diagnosis of an intellectual disability by a psychologist or other qualified professional; or (ii) a record of the disability from a local or State educational agency, or government agency, such as the Social Security Administration or a vocational rehabilitation agency, that identifies the intellectual disability.
Section 106 defines “universal design for learning” as flexible ways to present information, engage students, and let them demonstrate learning while reducing barriers and maintaining high expectations. It also identifies an accessibility office with the institution’s disability-services office or equivalent, and incorporates referenced statutory definitions of disability, covered institutions, and recognized credentials.
(A) provides flexibility in the ways information is presented, in the ways students respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and in the ways students are engaged; and (B) reduces barriers in instruction, provides appropriate accommodations, supports, and challenges and maintains high achievement expectations for all students, including students with disabilities and students who are limited English proficient.
(2) Disability The term disability has the meaning given such term in section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102). (3) Institution of higher education The term institution of higher education has the meaning given such term in section 101. (4) Office of accessibility The term Office of Accessibility has the meaning given to the office of disability services of the institution or equivalent office. (5) Recognized postsecondary credential The term recognized postsecondary credential has the meaning given the term in section 101 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.
Section 201 would add institutional reporting about students formally registered with an accessibility office. Data would cover enrollment, accommodation use, the undergraduate disability percentage, and undergraduate credentials awarded. Reporting would not be required if the student numbers would reveal personally identifiable information about an individual student.
The institution will submit, for inclusion in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System of the Department or any other Federal postsecondary institution data collection effort, key data related to undergraduate and graduate students enrolled at the institution who are formally registered as students with disabilities with the institution’s office of accessibility
including the total number of students with disabilities enrolled, the number of students accessing or receiving accommodation, the percentage of students with disabilities of all undergraduate students, and the total number of undergraduate certificates or degrees awarded to students with disabilities
An institution shall not be required to submit the information described in the preceding sentence if the number of such students would reveal personally identifiable information about an individual student.
Section 202 would replace “2009” with “2027” in a provision concerning training for realtime writers who provide closed captioning and court reporting. Because the amended subsection is not reproduced, the supplied text does not establish the full funding terms or program requirements.
202. Training for realtime writers to provide closed captioning and court reporting services Section 872(e) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1161s(e)) is amended by striking 2009 and inserting 2027.
Section 203 would change a reference in section 103(6) of the Higher Education Act from “section 3(2)” to “section 3.” The underlying provision is not supplied, so this analysis cannot establish the change’s full substantive effect.
Section 103(6) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1003(6)) is amended by striking section 3(2) and inserting section 3.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 9, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on September 1, 2026. It does not establish subsequent action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-09T15:55:53Z. 2026-09-01: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2026-09-01: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-01. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated rider was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to this version and does not establish the absence of riders in other versions or accompanying materials. No amendment attachment history is established.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to this version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials. Formal earmark status cannot be established without the absent disclosures and related materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
A narrow eligibility exception warrants scrutiny as a targeted benefit. This classification does not imply improper purpose or guaranteed funding.
Section 104 would allow a college with an unfinished pre-enactment grant to receive an additional grant as part of a consortium of at least three colleges. This gives those consortium participants an exception to the usual requirement that their earlier grant term end first. The exception remains within the bill’s inclusive-education program, and awards would still be competitive.
An institution of higher education that received a grant under this section before the date of the enactment of the Improving Access to Higher Education Act may not receive an additional grant under this section unless— (i) the institution receives a grant as part of a consortium of three or more institutions of higher education; or (ii) the grant term of such preceding grant has ended.
the Secretary shall annually award grants, on a competitive basis, to institutions of higher education (or consortia of three or more institutions of higher education), to enable such institutions or consortia to create or expand a comprehensive transition and postsecondary education program for students with intellectual disabilities
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 9, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI