PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 14, 2017
Common Sense Opportunities Act
This bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require the Department of Education (ED) to inform each entity operating programs under the federal TRIO programs (programs designed to identify and provide services for students from disadvantaged backgrounds) of the status of their application for continued funding at least four months (currently eight) prior to the expiration of the funding.
The bill establishes a process for applicants to resubmit an application for a grant or contract for higher education resources or student assistance when the application contains a technical error. The bill prohibits ED from rejecting an application solely because it contains a technical error, unless ED notifies the applicant of the error and the applicant does not correct it by the resubmission deadline.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
ED must submit an annual report that: (1) identifies each entity that received a grant or contract for higher education resources or student assistance and indicates the amount of the grant or contract; and (2) identifies each entity that applied for, but did not receive, such grant or contract and indicates the reason for the rejection of the application. ED must set forth the information separately for each state and local educational agency in the report.
People & committees
Rep. Davidson, Warren [R-OH-8] · R–OH
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 the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 2025. 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.3784 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.3784 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.3784 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.3784 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.