PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 30, 2015
Higher Education Innovation Act
This bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to establish a voluntary, alternative accreditation system for higher education providers.
The Department of Education (ED) must establish a process for approving innovation authorizers to authorize institutions of higher education or other providers that: promote student success outcomes and cost-effectiveness, agree to outcome-based oversight and reporting requirements, meet performance metrics, and comply with other specified requirements.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
To apply to be an authorizer, an entity must agree to publicly disclose certain data and submit to ED details regarding its:
experience and capabilities,
financial ability to meet the requirements,
authorization process,
educational or subject matter focus,
membership and relationship with industries and businesses, and
conflict of interest controls.
An authorizer must use performance metrics relating to student learning, completion, and benefit to the student and affordability. The minimum threshold for each metric must meet or exceed the 60th-percentile student outcome.
Providers authorized using this process are eligible for Pell Grant and other federal funding, subject to specified funding requirements and allocations. An authorizer must agree to pay ED at least 25% of the annual balance of student loans that are in default and held by current or former students of providers that the authorizer approved.
Providers that meet the requirements of both an innovation authorizer and a recognized accrediting agency may hold both the accreditation and authorization or select which entity to use.
The authority for the alternative authorization system expires five years after enactment of this bill.
People & committees
Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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 S.2111 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 S.2111 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 S.2111 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 S.2111 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.