A substantive modification. v2 expands the scope of required data collection on students with disabilities to include graduate students, clarifies the acceptable documentation for disability status, and specifies that policies for accommodations must align with federal disability laws. Additionally, v2 includes conforming amendments to update cross-references throughout the Higher Education Act and Title 38.
RISE Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Banks, Jim [R-IN]
- Committees
- Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Aug 5, 2026
Bottom line
The RISE Act aims to streamline access to college accommodations for students with disabilities and enhance data transparency regarding disability support services in higher education.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to standardize and simplify the process for students with disabilities to establish eligibility for accommodations in higher education. It broadens the types of documentation colleges must accept and requires institutions to be transparent about their accommodation policies. Additionally, it mandates that colleges report key data on students with disabilities to federal data systems and authorizes $10 million for a national center supporting postsecondary students with disabilities.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill removes unnecessary barriers for students with disabilities transitioning from high school to college by standardizing documentation requirements, which often vary significantly between institutions. They contend it will reduce administrative burdens on families and institutions, ensure greater transparency in accommodation processes, and provide valuable data to help prospective students and their families make informed decisions about college selection based on disability support services.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that while well-intentioned, the new data collection requirements could impose additional administrative burdens on institutions, especially smaller ones, without sufficient federal funding to cover the costs. Some may also raise concerns about potential privacy implications of collecting and reporting disability-related data, even with safeguards, or suggest that overly broad documentation acceptance might lead to challenges in providing truly individualized and effective accommodations.
The bill is relatively short and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 3, amending Section 487(a) of HEA
Standardized Documentation for Disability Accommodations
This provision requires institutions of higher education to accept a broader range of documentation as sufficient proof of a student's disability for accommodation purposes. This includes Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) or Section 504 plans from high school (regardless of when the last evaluation occurred), records from other educational agencies or institutions, evaluations from licensed professionals, or documentation of disability due to uniformed service. It also mandates transparent policies for accommodation eligibility and public dissemination of this information.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for easing the transition for students with disabilities from high school to college by ensuring that documentation already in place is widely accepted, preventing students from having to undergo costly and redundant re-evaluations.
Critics contend
Some might contend that while simplifying documentation is beneficial, it could potentially lead to institutions accepting outdated or less specific documentation, making it harder to provide the most appropriate and individualized accommodations for a student's current needs in a college setting.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the goal of reducing barriers for students with disabilities against the need for institutions to have current and relevant information to provide effective and individualized accommodations.
Section 4, amending Section 777(a) of HEA
Authorization of Funds for National Center
This section authorizes an appropriation of $10,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 to support the National Center for Information and Technical Support for Postsecondary Students with Disabilities. This center is intended to provide resources and technical assistance related to students with disabilities in higher education.
Section 5, amending Section 487(a) of HEA
Inclusion of Disability Data in IPEDS
This provision requires institutions to submit specific data related to undergraduate and graduate students registered with their disability services offices to the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) or other federal data collection efforts. The data includes the total number of registered students, those accessing accommodations, the percentage of enrolled students registered, and the number of certificates/degrees awarded to registered students. An exception is made if reporting would reveal personally identifiable information.
The bill specifies that an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or a Section 504 plan is sufficient documentation for a disability if it was 'utilized at any point in high school (without regard as to whether the date of the student's most recent evaluation or reevaluation occurred before the student entered high school)'.
Section 3(A)(i)(I) and (II)
Why it matters:This detail is crucial for the bill's intent to reduce barriers, as it explicitly addresses a common issue where colleges require recent evaluations, even if a student's disability is long-standing. Its placement is standard for legislative drafting that defines specific criteria.
Case for: Supporters highlight this as a key improvement, ensuring that students are not penalized for having older but still valid documentation, thereby reducing financial and logistical burdens on families.
Case against: Critics might argue that while convenient, accepting documentation without regard to the recency of evaluation could lead to accommodations being based on outdated information, potentially not reflecting a student's current needs or the demands of higher education.
Estimated impact: This clarification significantly broadens the usability of existing high school documentation for potentially thousands of students with disabilities transitioning to college each year.
This subsection contains numerous conforming amendments, redesignating paragraphs and updating cross-references within the Higher Education Act of 1965 and Title 38, United States Code, due to the insertion of a new paragraph (18) in Section 487(a).
Section 5(b)
Why it matters:These are standard legislative housekeeping measures necessary to ensure that all internal references in existing law remain accurate after a new provision is added. Their technical nature means they are typically placed at the end of the relevant section.
Case for: These amendments are essential for the proper functioning of the law, ensuring that all parts of the Higher Education Act and related statutes correctly reference the updated paragraph numbering.
Case against: No specific opposition, as these are purely technical and non-controversial adjustments.
Estimated impact: Ensures legal consistency and clarity across federal statutes, preventing confusion or legal challenges arising from incorrect cross-references.