Overview

Title

To require institutions of higher education participating in Federal student aid programs to share information about title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including a link to the webpage of the Office for Civil Rights where an individual can submit a complaint regarding discrimination in violation of such title, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

S. 163 is a rule that makes schools tell students about a law that stops unfair treatment based on skin color or where they come from. It wants schools to tell people how they can complain if they think they've been treated unfairly.

Summary AI

S. 163 is a bill that aims to increase awareness and reporting of discrimination in higher education institutions participating in federal student aid programs. It requires these institutions to share information about Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. The bill mandates the creation of an awareness campaign by the Department of Education, monthly briefings to Congress on discrimination complaints, and audits of institutions with high numbers of complaints. It also directs the Office for Civil Rights to keep complaints open even if resolved by other agencies or institutions.

Published

2025-01-21
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Introduced in Senate
Date: 2025-01-21
Package ID: BILLS-119s163is

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
5
Words:
1,184
Pages:
6
Sentences:
29

Language

Nouns: 389
Verbs: 88
Adjectives: 55
Adverbs: 11
Numbers: 49
Entities: 103

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.44
Average Sentence Length:
40.83
Token Entropy:
4.96
Readability (ARI):
23.70

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The bill, known as the "Protecting Students on Campus Act of 2025," is designed to enhance transparency and awareness around Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 at institutions of higher education. Title VI is crucial as it prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs receiving federal financial assistance. The proposed legislation includes measures to ensure that colleges and universities provide clear information on how students can report discrimination complaints. It also mandates that these institutions disseminate materials related to a public awareness campaign spearheaded by the Department of Education.

Summary of Significant Issues

One of the significant issues raised by the bill is the concern over potential wasteful spending, particularly in relation to the public awareness campaign. The requirement for annual updates and the use of appealing visual and auditory elements might lead to unnecessary expenditures without clear evaluation standards. Additionally, if nonprofit organizations are contracted for this campaign, questions about transparency and potential favoritism may arise.

The legislation also introduces some ambiguity concerning the definition of "high traffic public places" and "high traffic institution web pages," which may result in inconsistent practices between institutions. Furthermore, the bill's provisions require monthly congressional briefings, which may be seen as overly bureaucratic if they do not lead to concrete actions or improvements.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, the bill aims to empower students by informing them of their rights and the steps they can take if they experience discrimination. This increased awareness could lead to a more supportive educational environment and potentially reduce instances of discrimination. However, the effectiveness of this initiative depends heavily on the proper implementation of the campaign and the usefulness of the materials distributed.

If the campaign materials and updates are not executed effectively, there could be misallocation of resources, impacting the overall success of the awareness effort. The requirement for institutions to handle more detailed reporting could also strain resources, particularly for smaller colleges that may struggle to meet these demands.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For students, especially those belonging to minority groups, the bill is likely to be beneficial as it enhances their ability to report and address discrimination issues. Raising awareness about Title VI rights is expected to create a more inclusive campus climate.

For educational institutions, particularly smaller ones, the bill could impose additional workload and reporting duties that may require allocation of resources or adjustments in existing systems. Larger universities with more substantial administrative structures might handle these requirements more smoothly, potentially leading to disparities in compliance and effectiveness.

For policymakers and civil rights organizations, the bill presents an opportunity to gather more detailed data on discrimination in higher education, which could inform further legislative and policy actions. However, the demands for regular briefings and reports might be perceived as resource-intensive without clear evidence of their practical benefits in driving change.

In conclusion, while the "Protecting Students on Campus Act of 2025" has noble intentions of bolstering civil rights awareness and protection in higher education, careful attention to implementation, transparency, and evaluation methods will be critical to achieving its intended goals without unnecessary expenditure or administrative burden.

Issues

  • There is potential for wasteful spending in Section 2 due to the requirement for annual updates and distribution of public awareness campaign materials. If these materials are not effectively evaluated for impact and necessity, resources could be misallocated. Additionally, the requirement for appealing visual and auditory elements might lead to excessive spending unless guidelines or budgetary constraints are established.

  • In Section 2, the proposal allows for contracting with nonprofit organizations for the public awareness campaign. This could raise concerns about favoritism or lack of transparency in the selection of organizations unless the contract terms or criteria are clearly defined.

  • The vagueness in determining 'high traffic public places' and 'high traffic institution web pages' as mentioned in Section 2 might result in inconsistent implementation across different institutions, potentially undermining the effectiveness of the awareness campaign.

  • Section 3's requirement for monthly briefings and reports to Congress might be seen as bureaucratic and resource-intensive without a clear indication of its effectiveness in addressing discrimination issues. The section lacks specific details on how Congress will use these briefings to ensure accountability and follow-up actions.

  • The term 'disaggregated by the basis of discrimination' in Section 3 is potentially vague, which might lead to inconsistent reporting unless it is further defined.

  • The lack of reference to specific privacy laws or guidelines regarding the protection of 'personally identifiable information' in Section 3 might lead to varying interpretations of compliance, potentially compromising privacy standards.

  • Section 4's requirement for each institution of higher education to submit an annual report could be burdensome for smaller institutions with fewer resources. This could lead to resource allocation challenges and inequities among institutions.

  • There is no specific definition of 'the top 5 percent of institutions' in the context of the audit in Section 4, leading to ambiguity in how institutions are selected for auditing.

  • Section 5 does not specify how the Office for Civil Rights will coordinate with other civil rights enforcement agencies to ensure no duplication of efforts, which might lead to inefficiencies in handling discrimination complaints.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section gives the official short name of the legislation as the “Protecting Students on Campus Act of 2025.”

2. Title VI awareness campaign Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines a public awareness campaign run by the Secretary of Education to inform people about their rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. It also requires colleges to prominently display information about reporting discrimination and post materials from this campaign in high-traffic areas both physically and online.

3. Congressional briefings Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section requires the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights of the Department of Education to give Congress monthly updates for a year on complaints received about racial discrimination, explain how these complaints are being handled, and report on how long they remain open. Additionally, a report containing this information should be shared with Congress 48 hours before each briefing, ensuring privacy laws are followed.

4. Audit and study Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The text outlines that colleges getting federal money must report discrimination complaints to the Department of Education each year, detailing the number and type of complaints and actions taken. The Department's Inspector General will then audit colleges with the most complaints to check their handling of these issues and study the differences between complaints made to colleges and those made to the federal office.

5. OCR process reforms Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education must continue to investigate complaints, even if they are already being handled by another civil rights agency or through internal grievance procedures.