ReNEWing the Future of Nursing Through Outcomes-Based Financing

ReNEWing the Future of Nursing Through Outcomes-Based Financing

ReNEWing the Future of Nursing Through Outcomes-Based Financing

For many aspiring nurses, the greatest barrier is not ability or ambition: it is the cost of completing a demanding program while balancing work and everyday expenses.

The ReNEW Fund—short for Reinvesting in Nursing Education and the Workforce—is a partnership between Western Governors University (WGU) and Social Finance designed to address that challenge. WGU leaders Bob Collins and Debbie Mazur joined Social Finance Vice President Justin Bakule to explain how the model supports learners while helping healthcare employers build stronger talent pipelines.

Financing Built Around Success

ReNEW helps Pell-eligible students fund the final two years of WGU’s prelicensure nursing program, when clinical rotations, simulation labs and reduced work hours can create significant financial pressure.

Learners receive zero-interest, zero-fee financing with outcomes-based protections. If a learner does not graduate, pass the NCLEX or find a job earning at least $60,000, the financing does not have to be repaid.

“If the outcome is not achieved, if they don’t get the better job, don’t make them pay us back,” Bakule said.

Unlike traditional student loans, this approach aligns financing with the outcome education is meant to produce: completion, employment and economic mobility.

Building Local Nursing Pipelines

Hospitals continue to face nursing shortages, high turnover and dependence on costly travel nurses and sign-on bonuses. ReNEW offers a longer-term strategy by helping healthcare workers and community members earn nursing credentials and remain with local employers.

WGU’s hybrid model also makes the program especially promising for rural communities. Learners can study and complete clinical rotations where they live, creating a locally rooted pipeline for hospitals that often struggle to recruit and retain nurses from outside the  area.

ReNEW demonstrates what’s possible when institutions, employers and financing partners design around shared outcomes. By reducing financial risk for learners and helping healthcare organizations cultivate talent, the model invests not only in nursing education, but in stronger workers, employers and communities.

Transcript

Wesley Smith (03:26.862)
Bob, Debbie, Justin, welcome to the President’s Forum Podcast.

Debbie Mazur (03:52.679)
Great to be here.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (03:53.052)
Thank you.

Bob Collins (03:54.049)
Thanks.

Wesley Smith (03:54.797)
Hey, before we get into this finance innovation conversation, can we just do a brief round of self-introductions so our listeners have some context on you know who’s who’s talking and the expertise that you all have in in this conversation? Bob, can you kick us off?

Bob Collins (04:11.469)
Great, sure. Will thanks. greetings. My name is Bob Collins. I’m a senior advisor and the vice president of talent finance at Western Governors University in the Office of the President. I’ve been very fortunate to have spent my entire career as a financial aid administrator. And you know, the the work that I’ve completing here for the Office of the President is from a senior advisor role. It’s more of a federal public policy kind of work influencing legislation and regulation.

And on the VP of talent finance, that’s the innovative financing that that is my focus right now. So that’s a great opportunity. Yeah.

Wesley Smith (04:47.768)
Great. Bob, I can I can tell our listeners too that you’re you’re probably my go-to expert on higher ed finance generally. I I I go to Bob because I know how much experience you have, Bob. Thanks for joining us. Debbie, Debbie, can you can you tell our listeners a little bit about you, your background?

Bob Collins (05:02.221)
Thank you.

Debbie Mazur (05:08.571)
Yes, absolutely. Hi everyone, I’m Debbie Mazer and I am the head of the Healthcare Vertical Workforce Partnerships here at Western Governors University. My background has been in workforce development, higher education, and healthcare for my entire career. So I’ve had the pleasure of working alongside many of the largest hospitals in the country to help them to solve for their workforce challenges.

Wesley Smith (05:32.44)
Great. Thanks for joining us, Debbie. And then Justin, we’re coming your way now.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (05:36.957)
Sure. My name’s Justin Backley. I’m a vice president of of impact investing at social finance. We’re a national nonprofit that focuses on a lot of things. But in this context, we run 12 different workforce investment funds, all aimed at serving underserved learners with innovative student financing models to get them into better jobs.

Wesley Smith (05:59.361)
I I love the breadth of knowledge there. So you you don’t have just this one program that that you can draw from from experience. You you have a dozen or so that you can say, Hey, this is what we’re doing across the board.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (06:12.69)
That’s right, Wes. We we run 12 different funds with about a little over $300 million at play in the marketplace, either deployed or ready to be deployed to students. And at this juncture, we’ve served over 17,000 students across the United States. So that’s right. We’ve worked across a number of different contexts, of which though the the partnership here with the renew fund and WGU is is one of the most exciting ones that we have.

Wesley Smith (06:36.866)
Yeah, fantastic. Thanks for joining us today. let’s get started. Big picture, Bob. tell us a little bit about the changing, you know, student finance landscape. This has been boiling for a long time. And there have been, you know, we’ve needed to address financial aid generally and just the way that we finance higher education in in the United States. So tell us a little bit about specifically the growing interest in outcomes-based financing.

Bob Collins (07:05.271)
Yeah, absolutely. Thanks. yeah, we’re in a new era of borrowing, right? or how to pay for college, circa twenty twenty six, right? But before we go there, let me let me give you a a brief history of of higher education and finance. you know, most of us recall the higher education act of nineteen sixty-five as the legislation that really got us to where we are, but it actually started before then. It was in nineteen forty-four.

When they created the GI Bill. That was for veterans. It allows housing opportunities, mortgages, as well as paying for education after World War II. So it’s tuition and fees and some living expenses for the veterans. It was a great program then, and it’s still a great program today. Fast forward just a couple of years later to 1958, it was the national defense student loan. That was the first type of loan.

Implemented by it’s federal funded, but it was school as the lender in that space. And this was 1958. This is the Soviet Union, Sputnik, right? Science, engineering, math, you know, the technical skills. We needed to compete. So that’s how we got to 1965. These two programs were very successful, and so they expanded them in HEA’s 19 Higher Education Act 1965 to include the basic educational opportunity grant.

Right. So that’s known as the Pell Grant today. So there was some grant funding for low to moderate income individuals, as well as a student loan program. It was either federally insured or federally guaranteed. That loan program was bank originated. The banks would originate the loans, service the loans, and then they would be reinsured by the federal government up to 98% if the student should default.

So that’s the 1965 version of this. Let’s fast forward to 20 years ago, 2006. What happened then? Congress passed the Graduate Plus Loan Act, which made graduate parent or graduate loans unlimited, up to the cost of attendance. That was just 20 years ago. And it’s kind of mimicked the parent plus loan where where parents could borrow up to the cost of attendance.

Bob Collins (09:23.587)
for their for their children, for their dependents. And that basically covered all the direct and indirect costs, tuition fees, meals, housing, et cetera. So, you know, 20 years later, we’ve got a student loan debt crisis, right? 1.7 billion trillion, excuse me, that’s with a T, 1.7 trillion in debt and unmanageable debt. It’s just out of control. And so I think what happened

You know, since since that 20 years ago, there was also an economic downturn, if you remember, in 2008 where the where the bank originated loans were eliminated. And it became an exclusively a federal direct student loan. So the federal government is now the lender in these programs carrying that $1.7 trillion in student loan debt. So it’s it’s kind of a a situation now where what was introduced more recently was the work.

working class, what was it? The

Bob Collins (10:25.047)
Working Families Tax Cut Act. That was just introduced effective this July one. So it’s also known as the one big beautiful bill, right? That that was effective July one. And it basically it limited the amount of the grad plus loans. Actually, it it eliminated grad plus up to cost of attendance. And it also put some restrictions on the Pell or the Parent Plus loan. And so that that was the that was the working, that was the recent legislation that put those constraints in place.

You know, and candidly, without meaningful limits on these student loans, it turned into unmanageable debt. So it’s really a good piece of legislation that in that regard. But more recently, there was some legislation that passed where with these new federal borrowing limits and the and the changing financing landscape, institutions we need to adapt. And so now we need to look at student-centered financing, and that would be the urgency.

Would be expressed by the reflected in the bipartisan outcomes-based financing bill that both the House and the Senate introduced this summer. And so that was House Bill 9469, June 25 that was introduced this year, and then Senate Bill 4943, June 24. So back to back, bipartisan, bicameral legislation.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (11:35.174)
Yeah.

Wesley Smith (11:48.792)
So Bob, tell us about just tell listeners w about outcomes based financing. What does that mean?

Bob Collins (11:54.646)
Actually, my colleague Justin Backley can probably describe that the best. Justin, you wanna put that?

Wesley Smith (11:59.555)
Okay.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (12:01.038)
Yeah, sure. I mean, Wes, I guess let’s start with the learners, right? So, what’s the worst outcome we can imagine for somebody trying to pursue a degree? In this example with Renew, we’re talking about trying to become a nurse. Pre-licensure meaning the person is not working in the nursing field their first degree to get their licensure. The worst outcome is that they’re unsuccessful in getting that degree or a job and they end up with student debt, right? As a student. And in essence, in any educational, traditional educational loan,

You’re asking the person to take out a loan under the premise that they’re going to get a better job at the end to be able to both repay that loan and have a productive life, right? Moving forward. So when you introduce an outcomes-based dimension to it, in the case of renew, what we’re talking about is if you don’t graduate, life gets in the way for whatever reason. In nursing, if you don’t pass the end clicks, or you don’t even get a job making a certain amount of money, those are it is making the debt unserviceable.

Those are all the outcomes we try to prevent or protect against. So that if that happens to a student, they actually don’t have to pay us back. And here, what we’re trying to do is align the incentives of the financing with what we want for the student, which is the best outcome. Get that job at the end of this and a productive job that they can move forward with. So when we offer those protections, you can imagine how different that is from a traditional student loan where

None of those questions are being asked about your outcome. It’s just a debt that you have to repay under any circumstances. So that one point seven trillion dollars Bob mentioned of outstanding student debt, we’re saying, Hey, for the places we can finance students, if the outcome is not achieved, if they don’t get the better job, don’t make them pay us back.

Wesley Smith (13:49.069)
Right, right. Okay. So I want to get into now the specifics of what we came to talk about. That’s the renew basics. Like let’s get into the renew program and let’s let’s let’s get a good overview of what you’re doing. And Bob, I’m coming back to you for that. Tell us a little bit about like big picture. What is the renew program?

Bob Collins (14:07.563)
Yeah, let’s start with the acronym RENU, right? Financial aid, you gotta have an acronym. It’s reinvesting in nursing, education, and workforce. Renew. Okay. So that was the the moniker that we put on it. we met with social finance about three years ago. It’s the problem to solve, the critical nursing shortage, right? So we year one, we spent a kind of like the design phase, if you will, to look at the what how do we increase access, remove financial barriers for students.

And so we partner with social finance to look at and I you know, Justin can speak to the the financing, the the fund itself, but what we’re trying to do as an institution is to remove financial barriers for the pre-licensure nursing program. It’s a really expensive program to deliver, and what we wanted to do is help those low to moderate income individuals re provide that, you know, the access to these programs. If if you take a look at our student demographics in the in the pre-licensure nursing program.

more than half of them are Pell eligible students, which is which is phenomenal. I mean, they go on to a a better paying job w upon completion and getting the BSN, right? So basically we we cover the the last two years of the program. That’s where it’s really gets expensive. You’re gonna have two simulation clin lab work that you’re gonna need to travel to and spend two weeks at these simulation labs. You’re gonna have to do seven clinical rotations. That’s

That’s going to reduce your hours at work and it’s be you know intense where you still need to pay rent and buy food. You know, you need a method of payment to cover those. So the renew fund was established to to not just to supplement the federal student loans, but to supplant. So in other words, we’re we’re funding the last two years of the core nursing program for low to moderate income with this renew fund.

as well as their Pell Grant and other scholarships and gift date. Justin can probably speak to a little bit more about the mechanics of the funding.

Wesley Smith (16:11.074)
Yeah, Justin, give us some mechanics on the funding and then Debbie, I want to hear from you about the employer role.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (16:17.19)
Yeah. Let’s let’s Wes, let me s start at the end and and work work backwards. So contextually, when we started Renew, what were we what were we looking for in a marketplace? and by marketplace, I mean a marketplace of jobs and job demand. We wanted to find places where, to be honest with you, what I sometimes refer to as the employer talent desperation curve was at a peak, right? Where are employers?

Wesley Smith (16:23.735)
Okay.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (16:46.892)
Most desperate to recruit and retain workers for what underlying business-driven reasons? And because what we’ve learned, and and Debbie can speak more about this as well, when you go talk to employers about talent issues, frankly, every, you know, I always like to say every everybody has a lot of problems. Right. You ask people what their problems are as an employer, they’ll give you a long list of problems. However, there’s a different, shorter list.

That I think employers are willing from a business perspective to pay to solve and invest in. So we were looking for places where the problem on the job demand side versus supply were at at the most severe, right? Because in a world in which we want to link students up to jobs most reliably and ideally then even have an employer willing to repay that financing on behalf of the student.

We need to be in the spaces that have the biggest problems. And healthcare, writ large, was that place. I’ll pause after this, but then the second thing for us that happened to match up very nicely with WGU is when you want to do something like that, for us as a nonprofit, you want to do it at scale. And so you need a high quality educational institution that can scale and that has ambitions for scale.

And I would also emphasize between our two organizations that has a mission orientation that is shared for why they want to scale, who they want to serve in terms of students. And then from there, a lot of the details about how to structure a financial product to align with that student body, PEL-eligible, highly PEL-eligible, with what employers need on the other end.

is a mechanism of a set of design decisions that were undertaken by both organizations in in service of the students we’re trying to support.

Wesley Smith (18:43.598)
It makes sense that, you know, both both of the organizations are dedicated to the student first and foremost, and then and then you know creating opportunities. So everything, all the decisions, you know, downstream of that seem to be a lot easier if you’re aligned on what the outcome should ultimately be, which is a a better, you know, a better outcome for the student.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (18:49.189)
Right.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (19:05.97)
Correct, correct. And so to Bob’s point about supplanting federal lending, for us, the eligibility criteria for new is Pell eligible students. So again, drawing from a high percent to total, but trying to serve those for which the financial barrier may well get in the way of persistence and success. So starting with that broad Pell eligibility to identify eligible students within WGU’s program. And then for us, the question is how best to serve them with a financial product.

Wesley Smith (19:15.019)
Uh-huh.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (19:35.887)
related to the cost of attend total cost of attendance at WGU. And here, under any circumstance, we want to give them the best financing deal they can. In this case, it means a 0% zero fee loan with the outcomes based protections. So if they don’t graduate, don’t pass the NCLEX, or don’t get a job with a $60,000 minimum income threshold, they don’t have to pay us back. Again, making sure that there’s downside protection, great deal for the student.

Wesley Smith (20:05.506)
Right, right. Well, and and none of this works unless you do what you you what you you you talked about initially, which is you find the most critical need in the workforce and you have to have employers that are bought in, right? So Debbie, tell us a little bit about the employer partnership in this in in this program and the critical role that employers play.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (20:17.404)
Correct.

That’s correct.

Debbie Mazur (20:31.845)
Yes, absolutely. So Wes, let me share with you that as we’re having conversations with employers, you know, there are some patterns and some trends that are revealing themselves in different different ways related to our hospital workforce shortages. first, I’ll share that the workforce shortage still exists, but the way it reveals itself in one hospital in comparison to another is completely different. So at one hospital, there may be a shortage specifically for a specialty area.

For another hospital, it may be that they’re struggling to fill talent for specific shifts. And in other hospitals, it might be that the shortage is so broad that they just simply need a pipeline of talent from their community. So every single hospital’s circumstance for as it relates to the nursing shortage is definitely unique and renew fits to solve these problems wherever they are.

Now there’s some patterns that we realize that employers have been putting in place to help to solve for their nursing workforce challenge. And these patterns are things along the lines of implementing contract labor or travel nurses. And we all know that travel nurses cost a significant amount more than a traditional nurse that’s graduated with their BSN program. The other pattern that we see is that turnover rates continue to exist.

In the first year and beyond the first year. So those high turnover rates still exist within the nursing workforce and within the hospital system. And again, Renew can help by incentivizing those students through the repayments to stay longer within that organization. And then finally, another thing that we’re seeing, Wes, is employers, specifically hospitals, are offering sign-on bonuses for nursing talent. And we also know that this is a really short-term solution.

With Renew, what we’re offering is not only a pipeline from the local community to solve for the nursing workforce shortage, but also the ability to have a long-term retention strategy through the incentivized loan repayments for that pre-licensure nurse.

Wesley Smith (22:47.126)
Right, right. Well, I I think that clearly hospitals and and and and those who are in need of nursing as an expertise in in their workforce, they have a lot of reasons financially to look for a different way to do business. This is I mean, the current way that we’ve done this has produced these massive shortages and all of the employers they just don’t have a stable workforce. So

The risk in saying, okay, let’s change the way that we do this, let’s let’s focus on retention, let’s focus on increasing the pipelines. It makes it a lot of sense to me for an employer to say, okay, we’re ready, we’re ready to try something new. Is that is it are are you feeling like from employers that that they’re recognizing that as well?

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (23:32.166)
Yeah.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (23:37.203)
I think there’s two things in particular that from your question, Wes, that I would point to that are unique in this circumstance. One of the clear reasons for the shortage, and we see this across other parts of our portfolio, is for most institutions an inability to react to a job market by expanding their pipeline, meaning the educational institutions themselves. So number one, with WGU, you have growth potential.

That far surpasses most local institutions and ability to expand, right? And that I really cannot be understated as part of the advantage here. Number two, the WGU educational modality of a hybrid education. In particular, one of the things that Debbie’s pointing at is we run into rural hospitals all the time, or we run into certain locations. Now, when I have an educational modality that enables a clinical rotation.

Not in a big city like Boston or Salt Lake City, but in every little community for which there is a student co-located, I’ve strengthened the pipeline of ability to attract and retain someone. Because what we know is if you’re in a small community, the likelihood, say that someone’s gonna come from Boston and then move to that small community after a nursing school is pretty limited unless the person was from that community. But with WGU, now I’ve we’ve unlocked a way.

through the learning modality to have you learn in your location, do your clinical rotation in that location, and then ideally have this financial mechanism, which then incents the person both to stay and stay with their local employer. So that kind of matching and that kind of scalability is quite unique in this picture.

Wesley Smith (25:15.405)
That’s re

Wesley Smith (25:20.142)
Yeah, absolutely. And and anybody who’s done work, you know, on rural issues knows that the you know, the brain drain or the talent fleeing rural areas is a real problem for for these rural communities. And this looks like a solution, a part partly a solution for that. L you can train there, you can stay there, you can support a family in your rural community in healthcare.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (25:40.646)
Right.

Right. So a very common conversation we may have, especially in the healthcare industry, in a in a hospital context that’s rapidly consolidating, is you might talk to a large hospital system for which their academic medical center cornerstone location is in a big city.

They don’t typically have an attraction and retention problem. And you hear quite the opposite. we don’t have any more capacity for clinical rotations. We have too many people. We can take the best of the best. People want to come here. They view this as a destination. However, we’ve also acquired all these other hospitals that aren’t that cornerstone. And lo and behold, we see these problems manifested across our system. Or we still work with independent systems and talk to them that are in these kinds of locations.

And they have a real hard time both developing the talent and retaining it within wherever they’re located.

Wesley Smith (26:36.184)
Right, right. Well, this has been really interesting. And to learn more about Renew has been very helpful. I want to end with this question for the three of you. Let’s let’s go all three. I would love advice that you have for other institutions or employers or even finance partners who are interested in building something like Renew. What what would where would you encourage them to start? What are the things that they need to think about if they want to be

You know, on the innovative finance side and figuring out solutions for their students. So with that, Bob, give us give us your advice.

Bob Collins (27:13.985)
Yeah, I would recommend institutions identify certain certain student populations that are more likely to need those fine meet those financing gaps. you know, based on your programs of study and and the cost of attendance, things like that. So certainly working with that and then prioritize how you get low to moderate income access. Remove those financial barriers. I think that’s the most important thing.

Wesley Smith (27:37.55)
Great. I like I like that idea, you know, identify the the students that you want to make an impact on the most and then work from there. That’s probably solid advice for almost everything in higher ed, right?

Bob Collins (27:49.986)
Indeed.

Wesley Smith (27:50.926)
Debbie, what’s your advice?

Debbie Mazur (27:53.862)
Yes, so for for my lens, as we’re working with these hospital partners, there is a tremendous amount of talent that’s on the front line within these hospital systems. Think about our patient care technicians, our environmental services workers, our transporters, and many of those folks, those low to mid-in income earners, are are looking for opportunities. They’re aspiring to be a nurse, but they just don’t have a path forward. And Renew with the WG Partnership unlocks that opportunity.

For that internal career mobility and economic mobility for those employees within the organization. So my advice is to really look under the hood and see if there’s opportunity within their organization to fill their pipeline with a solution like the WGU Release Renew solution to build a long-term sustainable strategy.

Wesley Smith (28:44.054)
Right, right. That that makes a lot of sense as well. Justin, we’ll give you the final word. Give give us some advice.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (28:48.262)
Sure. Two two thoughts. to pick up, I think as an organization for social finance, we start and end with the learners. So I agree with Bob’s centering on the learners. And I think the most productive question we’re often asking and answering within a design phase is looking long and hard at really what is the financial barrier getting in the way of persistence. And Wes, what I would tell you is for instance, in Massachusetts, we have a program where community college is free, right? So people say, well

What what would you need to finance? Turns out, you know, for an adult learner, a living expense loan to drive persistence is a needed element, even in a context where tuition is completely free. So really asking yourselves, what’s the barrier in the way of success? And then to pick up on what Bob and Debbie both said, especially if your orientation is around workforce and outcomes and jobs and being you know, as as focused on that as you can be.

I think really having persistence and patience on the employer side to to work to solutions that align with what employers need and are willing to pay for is really important.

Wesley Smith (29:58.86)
Yeah. Yeah. I think that as I look at the renew program, I think so many things lined up perfectly. But the biggest one is the demand by employers. And bringing employers in as payers and and being able to renew the fund with that. very, very helpful. I I can imagine that there are other areas in the workforce that that have similar dynamics that people would want to explore.

Justin Bakule (Social Finance) (30:25.166)
Absolutely.

Wesley Smith (30:26.668)
Well, thank you all for joining us today. Bob, Debbie, Justin. We’re we’re appreciative of the expertise that you shared with us and good luck on the program.

FY 2027 NDAA: Preliminary Higher Education and Servicemember Housing Comparison

Scope note: This comparison uses the Senate Armed Services Committee–reported text of S. 4784 and the House Armed Services Committee–reported text of H.R. 8800, both dated June 15, 2026. The House subsequently considered floor amendments.

Executive summary

The Senate bill contains the more significant provisions for institutions serving active-duty students. It would increase the permissible military tuition-assistance rate, establish extensive standards governing institutional participation in Department of Defense education programs, and increase student-loan repayment assistance for members of the Selected Reserve.

The House bill places greater emphasis on specialized defense workforce education, including new graduate programs at the Uniformed Services University, expanded eligibility under the SMART Defense Education Program, and academic credit for certain defense internships.

On housing, the approaches are complementary but distinct. The House bill focuses more directly on Basic Allowance for Housing calculations and barracks oversight, while the Senate bill emphasizes tenant remedies and accountability in privatized military housing.

Comparison

Policy area Senate—S. 4784 House—H.R. 8800 Higher education or servicemember impact
Military Tuition Assistance (549) Authorizes the Secretary of Defense to increase the tuition-assistance cap to as much as $350 per semester hour. It also requires annual reporting connecting education spending to attainment, retention, readiness, and transition outcomes. The language also adds institutional fees as an allowable tuition assistance expenditure. Prior to floor amendments did, not contain a comparable statutory increase in the per-credit tuition-assistance cap in the committee-reported bill. The funding tables retain support for service tuition assistance programs. A floor amendment was adopted to mirror Senate language. The Senate provision could reduce the gap between military tuition assistance and institutional tuition, particularly for online and adult-serving institutions. Because the language is permissive, it would authorize, but not require, DoW to adopt the $350 rate.The Bergman amendment differs from the Senate version in that it requires $350, using the word “shall” versus “may.”
Institutional eligibility for DoW education programs (549B) Creates detailed standards for institutions seeking to participate in DoW education programs. Generally prevents DoW from categorically excluding an otherwise eligible nonprofit institution or denying educational support merely because a servicemember attends that institution. The protections do not extend to for-profit institutions. No directly comparable institutional-participation framework appears in the committee-reported House bill. The Senate approach would constrain DoW’s ability to impose institution-specific exclusions while preserving objective, institution-neutral eligibility and program requirements.
Selected Reserve student-loan repayment (636) Increases the annual loan-repayment percentage under the Selected Reserve education loan repayment authority from 15% to 20%. No equivalent increase appears in the House committee-reported text. The Senate bill would allow qualifying reservists to receive faster repayment of eligible student debt, subject to the existing program’s limits and service requirements.
Defense workforce education and internships (220) Includes a broader research-security framework for institutions conducting DoW-funded fundamental research, along with restrictions involving foreign countries and entities of concern. It also repeals an existing temporary authority for hiring students and university faculty. (215) (1104) Expands eligible education under the SMART Defense Education Programbeyond only accredited institutions of higher education and creates or expands opportunities for defense internships that may carry undergraduate or graduate academic credit through institutional agreements. The House provisions are more directly oriented toward building defense workforce pathways and recognizing career-focused education. The Senate provisions allow greater access to the SMART Defense Education Program.
Specialized graduate programs Does not include the same House requirement for new psychology and social-work degree programs at the Uniformed Services University. (531) Requires the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences to establish a Doctor of Psychologyprogram and a Master of Social Work program, generally within five years. The House bill would expand the federal military-health education pipeline, particularly in behavioral health and social work. Its direct impact on civilian institutions would likely be limited, although it could influence clinical partnerships and workforce competition.
ROTC and international students Establishes a program to promote foreign-student participation in Senior ROTC and limits DoW’s authority to reorganize Senior ROTC. Also establishes a program promoting participation of qualified foreign students in Senior ROTC, with coordination among DoW, partner countries, and participating institutions. The chambers appear broadly aligned on expanding carefully structured foreign-student participation in ROTC, although final program details and section placement differ. This is more likely to be reconciled than eliminated in conference.
Basic Allowance for Housing (2825) Does not include the same package of permanent BAH rate-adjustment authorities found in the House bill. It does, however, address BAH through remedies connected to failed inspections of privatized housing. (6612, 613) Makes authority for certain temporary BAH increases permanent and lowers the threshold for extraordinary rate adjustments where actual housing costs diverge from existing rates from 20% to 15%. The House bill also excludes BAH from income calculations for the basic needs allowance. The House language is more likely to provide near-term financial relief in rapidly changing or unusually expensive housing markets. Excluding BAH from basic-needs calculations could also make more junior servicemembers eligible for that allowance.
Privatized military housing enforcement (2825) Requires procedures allowing a servicemember tenant to withhold or abate BAH payments when privatized military housing fails an inspection, continuing until violations are corrected and independently verified. Does not contain a directly comparable BAH-withholding remedy in the committee-reported text. The Senate bill creates a stronger direct tenant-enforcement mechanism. Privatized housing companies would face a more immediate financial consequence for unresolved habitability failures.
Unaccompanied housing and barracks (2828) Requires additional documentation when DoW proposes to move funding away from housing or other facilities and includes information regarding barracks managers and affected personnel. (2817) Expands annual reporting on unaccompanied housing, including facility-by-facility compliance with minimum habitability standards, deficiencies, staffing, and maintenance information. The House bill provides the more detailed and transparent barracks oversight framework. The Senate bill focuses more on preventing poorly documented diversion of facility resources.
Domestic-violence emergency housing (539 B) Contains a provision requiring a military domestic-violence emergent housing policy. No directly comparable provision was identified in the House committee-reported version. The Senate provision could strengthen short-term housing protections for servicemembers or military family members facing domestic violence, although implementation details would depend on DoW policy.

Most consequential issues for higher education

1. Institutional participation protections

The Senate’s institutional-eligibility language is likely the most important issue for colleges enrolling active-duty servicemembers. It would generally require DoW participation decisions to rest on objective, institution-neutral criteria rather than categorical judgments about an institution or its organizational structure. It expressly preserves DoW’s authority to enforce program-wide eligibility standards, funding caps, and other neutral requirements, but excludes for-profit institutions from the bill’s protections.

For nonprofit online institutions and institutions with multiple schools, subsidiaries, or instructional units, this language could provide greater certainty that servicemembers will not lose tuition assistance or other DoW support solely because of the institution they attend.

2. Tuition-assistance modernization

The Senate’s authorization to increase the tuition-assistance ceiling to $350 per semester hour would be a meaningful update. However, the provision does not itself guarantee that every military service will adopt the higher amount. DoW would retain discretion to prescribe implementing regulations and determine the actual benefit level.

The accompanying reporting requirement is also significant because it moves beyond enrollment counts and calls for measures connecting DoW education investments to educational attainment, recruitment and retention, mission readiness, and successful transition to civilian life.

3. Research security compliance

The Senate bill contains substantially more extensive research-security requirements for institutions conducting DoW-funded research. These include a formal DoW Research Security Program, support and training for participating institutions, restrictions involving foreign entities of concern, and potential limits on DoW funding for noncompliant institutions or researchers.

Research universities would need to examine the eventual definitions, waiver standards, institutional due-diligence requirements, and relationship between the NDAA language and existing federal research-security requirements.

4. Workforce pathways

The House bill more clearly advances specialized education-to-workforce pathways. Its SMART Defense Education Program language could make career-focused or alternative educational programs eligible alongside traditional associate, bachelor’s, and advanced degrees, depending on the final statutory wording and implementation. It also facilitates agreements through which students can obtain academic credit for qualifying defense internships.

This approach may create new partnership opportunities for colleges offering cybersecurity, engineering, critical-minerals, logistics, and other defense-relevant programs.

Likely conference issues

The following provisions appear most likely to require substantive House-Senate negotiation:

  1. The Senate’s $350 tuition-assistance authority, because the House does not contain a comparable policy change.
  2. The Senate’s institutional-participation protections, particularly the exclusion of for-profit institutions and limitations placed on DoW discretion.
  3. The Senate’s research-security framework, which may raise institutional compliance, foreign-collaboration, and administrative-burden concerns.
  4. The House BAH package, including the lower threshold for extraordinary housing-rate adjustments and treatment of BAH under the basic needs allowance.
  5. The House’s specialized workforce and academic-pathway provisions, including SMART eligibility and credit-bearing internships.

Bottom line

For institutions serving active-duty and reserve-component students, the Senate bill is generally more consequential, particularly because of tuition assistance, student-loan repayment, and institutional-participation protections. For institutions engaged in defense research, the Senate bill also presents the greater potential compliance impact.

The House bill offers stronger provisions on BAH adequacy, barracks transparency, and specialized defense workforce pathways. A final conference agreement could combine the House’s housing and workforce provisions with the Senate’s education-benefit and institutional-participation provisions, producing a broader package than either bill currently contains on its own.

Principal sources

  • Senate Armed Services Committee filing notice and official S. 4784 text.
  • House Armed Services Committee FY 2027 NDAA resources and official reported text of H.R. 8800.
  • GovInfo legislative record for the House-reported version.
Financing Higher Education Innovation That Lasts

Financing Higher Education Innovation That Lasts

Financing Higher Education Innovation That Lasts

How can institutions move innovation beyond the pilot stage? By building the financial model early, aligning resources with strategy, and creating partnerships that help successful ideas scale.

Why Sustainable Funding Matters

Financing innovation is more than a budget exercise. It determines whether flexible pathways, new delivery models, and other student-centered ideas can become lasting parts of an institution.

This month, the Presidents Forum will share how members are financing higher education innovation and building sustainable models around what works.

Policy and Partnership Updates

The Forum is monitoring the Department of Education’s proposed accreditation, innovation, and modernization rule, military tuition assistance provisions in the NDAA, and uncertainty around Pell funding.

Innovation Listening Sessions are also shaping the Innovation Blueprint. Collaboration partners will soon add their perspectives to the process.

Looking Ahead to Dallas

Members and partners will continue the conversation in Dallas on November 12–13, focusing on the policies, partnerships, and financial strategies that turn bold ideas into lasting improvements for learners.

Transcript

This month at the Presidents Forum, we are focused on a question that sits beneath almost every conversation about the future of higher education: how do you pay for it?

Financing the future of learning is not simply a budget exercise. It is a strategic challenge that determines which promising ideas survive their pilot phase and which ones don’t. The institutions that consistently turn innovation into lasting change are, almost without exception, the ones that worked out the financial model early. This month we are looking carefully at how our members are doing exactly that — and what the rest of us can learn from them.

There is significant activity on the policy front as well. The Department of Education has released a new proposed rule addressing accreditation, innovation, and modernization. The rule loosens some older constraints but tightens requirements around transparency, independence, and student protections. The public comment period is now open, closes on September 21, and is available in the National Register.

On the legislative side, the National Defense Authorization Act continues to move forward, carrying with it the military tuition assistance provisions we have been monitoring closely. Pell funding remains unsettled as well. We will continue to watch both and will report to you when there is something definitive to share.

Closer to home, we have been conducting innovation listening sessions with our institutional members, and those conversations have been genuinely informative. What we are hearing is actively shaping the Innovation Blueprint, and we will be bringing our collaboration partners into that process soon so that their perspectives can help build it as well.

All of this work will lead us to Dallas on November 12th and 13th where we’ll work together in person.

Thank you, as always, for the trust you place in the Forum. We look forward to a productive month ahead.

The Next Great Partnership in Higher Education: Institutions and AI

The Next Great Partnership in Higher Education: Institutions and AI

By Ashish Fernando, CEO & Founder, EDMO 

Higher education has never advanced alone. Every era of progress has been a function of partnership, with employers, with communities, with the technologies of the moment. What is different now is the nature of the partner. For the first time, institutions are being asked to collaborate not with a new tool, but with a new kind of capability: one that drafts, advises, analyzes, and improves with use. 

The most significant development in the last year hasn’t been the fact that colleges are embracing AI since almost all of them have done so. Rather, it is the case that the most progressive institutions have moved away from seeing AI as just an experiment and now regard it as part of their infrastructure, making this change on purpose by means of work that is aligned with their mission rather than through one-size-fits-all implementations. 

The different institutions involved in this change are not following the same strategy, and that is the most encouraging aspect. Miami Dade College, which has just introduced Florida’s first bachelor’s degree in applied AI, has recently obtained $2 million from Google.org to help expand a national consortium aimed at preparing students for careers that are driven by AI. Meanwhile, National University has developed a framework that it refers to as About, With, and Beyond AI in order to prepare students for both the technological and the human aspects of the work ahead. 

AI should not be used in higher education as a substitute for humans; that way of putting it is both too restricted and too lacking in creativity. Instead, the possibility lies in having AI work alongside faculty members, advisors, admissions staff, and student support personnel so as to take on repetitive tasks, increase capacity, and enable the institutions to react at the speed that students currently expect. The evidence from these campuses all indicates the same thing: the benefits are not derived from automation for its own sake, but come from AI detecting when a student is falling behind and prompting a timely, human response. 

That principle is gradually altering the way students enroll, since many universities are not ready for it. Instead of asking those initial questions during a visit to campus or by filling out an enquiry form, a prospective student is now more likely to ask them through an AI interface: Which course suits my background? What credits will transfer? What financial aid is available? If the response given is general, out of date or missing altogether, the institution may lose its relevance without even knowing that the student had existed. At the same time, admissions staff spend their days answering the same limited range of questions: current status, the required documents, deadlines, eligibility, and the next steps — questions which almost never require them to begin from scratch. AI can take care of that first stage of interaction continuously, across

different channels and languages, in a consistent manner. When managed properly, it does not replace the human relationship; rather, it preserves the time needed to build that relationship. 

Yet having capability without discipline is a disadvantage, and the most effective institutions are honest about this point. Instead of pretending that AI can be got rid of altogether, Western Governors University drew a clear distinction between using AI as a tool for learning and using it to avoid learning and found that students appreciated the clarity. WGU also took further steps by helping to establish the Credential Integrity Action Alliance in order to defend the value of the degree itself, while other institutions are re-designing their methods of assessment to focus on an authentic display of ability: oral defenses, version tracking, and performance tasks which are hard to fake. This is what maturity entails—not enthusiasm, not fear—but governance that is introduced early on and in an open manner. 

The institutions which will succeed won’t be those that spend the most on AI; instead, they will be the ones that establish the strongest AI partnerships. 

These partnerships operate in two directions. The first involves institutions and the technology they take on. An AI system which has not been trained on the institution’s knowledge, is not aligned with the institution’s policies, and has not been incorporated into the current systems is not an asset; it is a liability even though it has a friendly interface. A chatbot that responds with confidence but is inaccurate is not an example of innovation. A document system that saves time but cannot be audited is not an advance. In the field of higher education, trust is not something that is added on later; it is the result. 

The second collaboration exists between administrators and educators. AI should not be something imposed on faculty and staff; it must be developed together with them since they are the ones who know where difficulties actually occur, what questions are asked every day, which procedures fail during the busy period, in what situations judgment is necessary and in what cases automation is appropriate. The proper way to judge any tool is not by how fast it gives an answer, but by whether the student has come out of the experience in a better position- has their understanding been enhanced, or has the tool merely supplied the answer? 

We have a duty, as leaders, to oppose both the view that AI will solve all our problems and the idea that it is too risky to engage with. Both of these positions are dishonest. Students, employers, and society have already taken steps in this direction. The only real issue now is whether we guide the development of AI deliberately or simply accept it without doing so. 

The discipline needed isn’t complicated, even though it is demanding. Begin by focusing on the mission, identify the points at which students encounter difficulties and the places where staff waste hours on repetitive tasks, select the applications in which AI can increase speed, accuracy, access, or support and make sure people are kept informed in all cases where judgment is involved, keep track of what actually takes place, establish governance before it is actually required, and provide continuous training then make improvements based on that. 

Even in higher education there is no need for AI if what is wanted is for it to become less human; instead, it needs AI so that its staff can spend more of their time on the more human aspects of their work, such as teaching, giving advice, providing mentorship, making decisions, and guiding students through the experiences that change their lives.

The next major partnership in higher education won’t be one between institutions and machines but will instead take place among institutions, educators, and the technology they select, collaborating to create a student experience which is faster, fairer, more personal and more scalable than the one that existed before. 

That is the future we should build.


What Is Military Tuition Assistance and Why Does It Matter for Workforce Education?

What Is Military Tuition Assistance and Why Does It Matter for Workforce Education?

What Is Military Tuition Assistance and Why Does It Matter for Workforce Education?

What is Military Tuition Assistance?

Military Tuition Assistance (TA) is a federal benefit program that provides financial aid for voluntary, off-duty education programs to active-duty service members. Administered by the U.S. Department of Defense, TA covers up to 100% of college tuition and authorized fees for courses taken at accredited colleges, universities, and technical institutes—up to specific annual per-credit-hour caps set by individual service branches.

Key Benefits of Military Tuition Assistance

  • Enhances Force Readiness: Provides service members with technical, analytical, and leadership capabilities that improve operational performance.

  • Drives Economic Mobility: Enables military personnel to build marketable skills and earn stackable credentials or degrees before transitioning to the civilian workforce.

  • Closes the Skills Gap: Connects higher education institutions directly with adult and non-traditional learners seeking high-demand career pathways.

  • Cost-Effective Education: Reduces the reliance on veteran benefits (like the GI Bill) during active service, allowing members to preserve benefits for future advanced education or family transfer.

How Tuition Assistance Supports Workforce Development

By providing funding for flexible, student-centered learning options—including online, competency-based, and asynchronous courses—TA serves as a powerful engine for lifelong learning. It aligns adult learners with industry-aligned skills, fostering economic growth and strengthening the broader workforce pipeline.

Transcript

Shalise (00:00.214)
You guys are rolling. Okay. I’m just gonna introduce the the podcast that we’re doing, and then I’ll bring you in. Welcome to the President’s Forum Podcast. Today we’re kicking off a new just one question conversation. Okay, I’m not able to scroll. Sorry. Okay, let’s try that one more time. Welcome to the President’s Forum Podcast. Today we’re kicking off a new just one question conversation with Jonathan Woods, the Forum’s Military Affairs and Workforce Education Policy Fellow.

Jonathan has joined us on the show before, but this is his first time in the Just One Question Seat. So welcome, Jonathan.

Jonathan Woods (00:36.273)
Thank you, Shalise. I’m happy to be here.

Shalise (00:39.042)
The question that we’re putting to you today is an important one. we’d like you to explain to us what is military tuition assistance and why is it so important.

Jonathan Woods (00:50.929)
Shalise, that could very well be the economic question of the century. for 80 years, the War Department has been quietly compiling one of the greatest weapons in our nation’s history. It’s not a kinetic weapon, but it’s an economic weapon, and it’s called tuition assistance. See, I don’t think the rank and file agency personnel really know the magnitude of the economic challenge in front of our nation, or rather, they don’t know the magnitude of the opportunity staring them in the face. From Mike Rowe of Dirty Jobs fame to Michael Crow.

President of Arizona State University, to Secretary of War Pete Heggseth, to the president himself, all these people have stated that human capital in the form of a skilled workforce is the key that unlocks knowled the the knowledge economy. And so but there’s a problem. the problem is according to the Bureau of Labor statistics, the nation will need four and a half million new workers over the next ten years. These workers need to be skilled at the associates level or

higher or higher than our associates level to rebuild the nation’s industrial base. We’re talking about DIB and DIB adjacent jobs like advanced and additive manufacturing, physical and cybersecurity, semiconductor, transportation and logistics, energy production and distribution. That’s just to name a few. Now four and a half million across 10 years, that’s 450,000 per year. That’s new skilled workers. Where are they going to come from?

Numerically speaking, though, between 20% and 40% of the needed number transition off of enlistment contracts every year. But most are not ready for these exceptional jobs. That’s where TA comes in. TA, when we look at TA as a talent pipeline rather than a benefit delivery structure, the the system unlocks industrial capacity that just it can explode, and we are poised to set that off in the economy. But TA is going to need some tinkering.

And that’s why TA is so important. So to answer your just one question, pretty important. we we wanna unlock the talent pipeline potential and TA is the weapon to use that.

Shalise (02:57.708)
I love that answer and thinking about TA as a talent pipeline. That’s really insightful. That wraps up our Just One Question conversation with Jonathan Woods. Thank you so much, Jonathan, for helping us better understand tuition assistance, why it matters not just as a benefit, but as a pathway or a pipeline that you’re saying for service members to build skills, advance their education, and prepare for what comes next. For our listeners,

Jonathan Woods (03:22.051)
Absolutely. Okay. All right.

Shalise (03:23.18)
Sorry, okay. I’m gonna take that last line. I do want you to respond. So that’s great. Okay. I’m gonna I’m gonna I’m gonna take that last line again and I’ll let you I’ll give you a space to respond there. let’s see here. Jonathan, thank you for helping us better understand. I’m gonna take that whole thing. That wraps up our just one question conversation with Jonathan Woods. Jonathan, thank you for helping us better understand why tuition assistance matters, not just as a benefit.

But as a pathway for service members to build skills, advance their education, and prepare for what comes next.

Jonathan Woods (03:57.435)
Thank you. So happy to pitch in.

Shalise (04:00.207)
For our listeners, you can learn more about the Presidents Forum at presidentsform.org.