AHEAD Committee Continues Discussion on Teach-Out Proposal
By Maria Carrasco, NASFAA Staff Reporter , Megan Walter, Senior Policy Analyst
The Accountability in Higher Education and Access through Demand-driven Workforce Pell (AHEAD) Committee met on Thursday to discuss updated proposed language from the Department of Education (ED), based on feedback from negotiators, as part of incorporating the new institutional accountability framework created by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA).
The discussion began with Dave Musser, ED’s federal negotiator, returning to a topic raised during Monday’s session on the definition of “earnings.” Musser clarified that ED is proposing to define “earnings” to include wages, tip income, and other forms of earned income, such as self-employment. He added that, if the committee reaches consensus, the department would publish this definition and include a direct question to the higher education community to solicit information on what tax forms would indicate earned income that is untaxed, ensuring it is accounted for in the earnings premium calculation.
From there, the committee continued its discussion from Wednesday regarding a proposal created by Aaron Lacey, a negotiator representing private nonprofit institutions, on a voluntary teach-out agreement option for institutions whose program fails the accountability test once. Under this approach, after receiving the first failing determination, an institution could opt into an addendum to its Program Participation Agreement (PPA) committing to stop enrolling all new students and teach out the existing cohort. ED would still calculate and publish the program’s second-year rate, but would not proceed to initiate any program termination.
ED included Lacey’s proposal in the department’s proposed regulations text for review by the committee.
However, some negotiators raised concerns about including the proposal in its current form. Tamar Hoffman, representing legal assistance organizations, consumer advocates, and civil rights groups, cautioned that Lacey’s approach could allow institutions failing accountability measures to keep students enrolled regardless of how much time they have left in the program. She also noted that it would not prevent institutions from circumventing the restriction by launching a substantially similar program and continuing to enroll new students.
“To me, this seems like a giant loophole for institutions to try to maintain eligibility for Title IV funds when they aren't actually delivering adequate services to students,” Hoffman said.
Musser suggested that the department could add language to clarify that the teach-out option could only be provided to students who “have less than X amount of time to complete their degree or to complete their program.” Lacey added that schools could easily calculate when the last person enrolled in the program, assuming no leaves of absence and full-time status, would graduate. That date would be included in the PPA addendum.
To address Hoffman’s second concern, Jeffrey Andrade, the deputy assistant secretary for policy, planning, and innovation at ED, also proposed that language could be added from the committee’s previous session on the Workforce Pell around the prohibition of creating substantially similar programs, meaning if a school decided to take the teach-out option for a program, they would not be able to create a substantially similar program in the future.
Lacey supported this addition, saying it's reasonable to add language that an institution can't roll out a substantially similar program if they’ve taken the option to discontinue the program.
Much of the time in the morning and afternoon was spent in private caucuses, discussions the public is not permitted to observe.
The AHEAD Committee will convene on Friday for its final day of negotiated rulemaking, when negotiators are expected to vote on the full package of accountability measures. Consensus requires that every negotiator either vote in favor (thumb up) or abstain (thumb sideways). A single “thumb down” vote prevents the committee from reaching consensus. If consensus is achieved, ED must use the agreed-upon language in its proposed regulation; if not, ED may draft the proposed rules at its discretion.
The committee previously reached consensus in December on the entire package of proposals regarding the creation of the Workforce Pell Grant program.
Stay tuned to Today’s News for more daily coverage of this week’s negotiated rulemaking session.
Publication Date: 1/9/2026
You must be logged in to comment on this page.