Bringing Clarity to Student Borrowing

Bringing Clarity to Student Borrowing

Bringing Clarity to Student Borrowing

Private student loans can help cover a college financing gap, but students and families need clear information about borrowing costs, loan terms, and repayment before choosing a loan. In this Presidents Forum Podcast, Chance Russell, co-founder and chief business officer at Desata, explains how colleges can support informed private student loan decisions as federal borrowing rules change.

Why are colleges paying more attention to private student loans?

Changes to federal student borrowing limits may leave some students and families looking for additional ways to pay for college. For colleges and financial aid offices, helping students navigate private education loans can be challenging: policies and compliance requirements take time, and many teams have limited staff and resources.

Russell said the gap between policy and implementation can affect more than financial aid administration. When students cannot understand or access financing options, the cost of college may become an enrollment barrier.

What should students compare when evaluating private student loans?

Students and families should look beyond an advertised interest rate. A teaser rate may not reflect the rate a particular borrower will receive, so comparing loan offers requires clear information about the terms and the cost of borrowing. As Russell put it, “they should know what they’re getting into before they get started.”

Transparent information can help borrowers make decisions that fit their circumstances. It also helps institutions explain college costs and financing options without overstating what any one loan can offer.

How can colleges guide students without choosing a loan for them?

Colleges have several ways to respond when students need private education loans. They can provide no recommendation, create a preferred lender list, or point students to a third-party comparison resource. Each approach has different tradeoffs, and preferred lender lists require careful attention to compliance and transparency.

Russell cautioned that saying nothing does not necessarily give students neutral guidance: students may instead rely on online search results or loan marketplaces where advertising can influence which offers they see. Institutions evaluating comparison tools can ask how loans are ranked, how the platform is funded, and whether its incentives could affect recommendations.

How are student borrowing, college costs, and career outcomes connected?

Russell said colleges can strengthen decision-making by making education costs clearer and considering how programs prepare students for work. Employers can share feedback about the knowledge and skills they need, while institutions can use that feedback to improve programs and communicate outcomes to prospective students.

Bottom Line

For higher education leaders, the takeaway is practical: clear information about college costs, private student loan terms, and education outcomes can help students and families make more informed decisions.

Transcript

Wesley Smith (00:00.465)
Hey Chance, welcome to the President’s Forum Podcast.

Chance Russell (00:09.794)
Wesley, it’s great to be here.

Wesley Smith (00:11.301)
Hey, a lot of our members know you. They’ve worked with you over the years at in both Congress and at the department. But for those who haven’t worked with you directly, can you start us out today by telling us a little bit about your background and how you got to where you are now?

Chance Russell (00:26.562)
Yeah, absolutely. And again, you know, can’t thank you enough for for having me on here. you guys do great work. so a little bit about myself. my background and in my career is is federal student aid policy. So, you know, I started working on the House Education and Workforce Committee in 2019, served there for about seven years, where I ultimately led the higher ed team, focused on student aid policy, and worked on many of the provisions that were included in the one big beautiful bill act, particularly

Around workforce Pell and student loan repayment simplification. from there, I actually went to the Department of Education and served there for around nine months as deputy chief economist, where I was helping to implement those said reforms on Pell and repayment. you know, and being on both sides of that, you see kind of the gap between policy and implementation pretty fast. Congress writes a policy, the partner writes the rules, and you know.

You have institutions, you know, and financial aid offices where there’s, you know, only a couple of people to help make it work by a given deadline with, you know, no new tools to do so. And that’s why my co-founders and I started DeSada, where we’re building these new tools for free for institutions to help them navigate these changes and and close the gap. So, you know, we’ve got a a new calculator that helps institutions see the impact of some of the student loan limits that have been put in place.

As well as our soon to be released tool clarified, which is a private student loaning ranking engine that institutions can confidently point students to and who have, you know, federal aid that doesn’t cover their their total costs.

Wesley Smith (02:02.968)
I I love the background because there are a lot of a lot of folks out there that haven’t really thought about the difference between, you know, writing legislation and then implementing it and actually having it work. And that’s a pretty significant difference. And you’ve been watching that on both sides. On on the finance side in higher education, you’ve mentioned gaps a couple times. So tell me what you realized when after after, you know.

legislation’s passed and you’re like, okay, now the implementation starts. What are the gaps and what are you working on to you know bridge those gaps?

Chance Russell (02:42.145)
Yeah, you know, I’ll start on just when anytime you have a brand new policy, and you know, this is the first time I think in 15 years where we’ve had real significant legislative change in higher ed financing, it’s gonna be difficult no matter what. You know, the department, they have their own timelines that they have to meet that are set by Congress. And so, you know, everyone’s operating under a constrained system. But what you start to see is that something that seems simple in a couple lines in law.

Wesley Smith (03:02.45)
Mm-hmm.

Chance Russell (03:10.975)
Oftentimes ends up being much more difficult to implement in practice. And we saw, especially on the student loan side, for a long time, institutions have not really had to grapple with recommending private student loans. you know, we used to have you know, essentially you could borrow for grad or for parents up to cost of attendance. And so you haven’t had to have those conversations and

Wesley Smith (03:12.806)
Yeah.

Chance Russell (03:40.972)
What we notice is a lot of institutions are struggling when it comes to that because it’s a big compliance issue. for instance, you have to go through an RFI process, you have to do annual reporting, et cetera. And that’s a lot to do in a couple of months. And especially when these are important enrollment decisions, right? For precedents, why this is important. This isn’t just how much a student gets and when they enroll, it’s if they enroll.

Wesley Smith (03:55.878)
Right.

Wesley Smith (04:05.276)
Right, right. you you’re doing this work and you’re thinking through, you know, what do institutions care about? how how do they have to approach this to make it work? But you know, one of the things from the presence forum perspective that we we always want to prioritize is how do students navigate it? How do families navigate it? And give us your your experience on what these changes mean to students and

families when they’re looking at their your educational, you know, financing options.

Chance Russell (04:38.667)
Yeah, you know, with the changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, I mean, I’ll also kind of start with your latter point of the question. So one in four grad parent borrowers are now, you know, if borrowing was what it was last year, are being pushed to the private market, there would be a funding gap. Of course, you know, you may see institutions that may adjust their pricing or their institutional aid or, you know, kind of play around with their programs, but there’s a large share that’s going into the private student loan market. And for that, for in for

Students, kind of like how I mentioned, institutions have not had to grapple with giving that guidance. So students and families are getting a lot of noise. and whether that’s on the loan limit side or repayment, I mean, all the time I’m seeing on Instagram or TikTok things that aren’t exactly true and are either a marketing or, you know, well, you could put this in the same category as like clickbait, right? And I think students and families get pushed around when they don’t have that.

Clear guidance, whether that’s from the federal government, but more importantly, from institutions. And institutions are who they trust, right? When they have a financing gap for college, who are they going to go to first, right? The place where they’re enrolling. so what we’ve seen is is confusion. And it’s it’s kind of the same reason. You know, we’re we’re building these tools for for institutions. A lot of this is is student facing as well, kind of like clarified that I had mentioned earlier. We’re trying to come in and fill that information gap in an honest way.

Wesley Smith (05:45.765)
Right.

Wesley Smith (06:03.826)
Right. Well, we we’ve had these conversations before chance that and I think we’re both on the same page, that transparency of cost is just a high priority. And we’ve got to figure out not only cost, but you know what the outcomes of of education are as well. And the more we can do to get that in the hands of consumers, the better off the market will be in higher education, the better off our institution, the healthier

Institutions will be if we can get that transparency across the finish line. Now, do you do you feel like we’re moving in the right direction on that? What do you what do you think needs to happen there?

Chance Russell (06:41.163)
Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I’ll I’ll start. I mean, I’m very glad that you all, you know, you brought this question up because it’s something that when I, you know, every boss that I have worked for previously and you know, their counterpart on the other side of the aisle are gonna say transparency is key. You’re not gonna find a lot of disagreement, especially when it comes to price. Right. You know, higher education traditionally has been one of these the only market where you don’t know how much you pay until four years later. Like imagine buying a house.

And in three years, well, actually we raise the price. You know, that’s it it’s it becomes difficult. And whether that’s on college pricing or really on the loan side too, which is something that we’ve been seeing since we started De Sada, is that, you know, there’s a lot of gimmicks that can happen out there. And at the end of the day, it’s deterring, you know, it’s either deterring enrollment or it’s leading students to maybe not make the decision that’s best for them. I I’ll give you an example. When it comes to private student loans,

You’re gonna see all the time rates as low as 2.5%. Well, that’s below the federal borrowing cost right now. So if a lender was, you know, lending at 2.5% to everybody, they would be out of business in about a month. but that’s what you see. You see these flashy teaser rates, and it’s luring, you know, you know, it’s it’s distorting the decision making process for students and family when it comes to borrowing. And I think you can say the same way when it comes to college pricing, but

Yeah, on the loan side in particular, like kind of the need is right now with these new caps, like we need honesty, we need transparency. And what are what are you gonna pay? Right? A loan is not like this is one of the bigger financial decisions that students and families are gonna make in their life. And you know, call me crazy, but I think they should know what they’re getting into before they get started.

Wesley Smith (08:29.33)
Absolutely. I completely agree. You mentioned something that is, I think, true for most consumers, most students. And that is they trust the institutions more than they trust, you know, the the marketing that’s hitting them. And so they’re gonna look to, you know, the the institutions, the colleges, universities that they’re that they’re looking to enroll in to for help in navigating, you know, student finance decisions. What do you think the role is of the college and university in that?

In that process.

Chance Russell (09:00.577)
Yeah, you know, I would say when it comes to recommending private student loans in particular, you know, schools kind of have like three options. First, it’s say nothing, be neutral, say student, go out and find your find your loan. And I I say neutral and I want to put quotes around that because it’s not neutral. And I’ll come back to that in a second. Your second option is you can do what’s called a preferred lender list, where you request information from lenders about, you know, their products, and then you decide, you know, which lenders you want.

To to recommend. Now that comes with a lot of compliance issues. it’s a lot of work. and it’s it’s risky because essentially in 2007, you had institutions that unfortunately were taking, I guess, kickbacks, as you would say. You get to go on a cruise, you get to go to Vegas, et cetera, if you put our loans first. Lots of investigations went into that and Congress cracked down on it. Now, that part of the law has not changed with OB3.

Well, more people need private loans. Those same constraints on institutions are there. I think, you know, that is absolutely better than going with option one and saying no, but it’s something that you need to, you know, assess as an institution yourself. The risk, the benefits, etc. The third is to be able to point to like a neutral third party. And I want to be very, you know, I won’t use quotations on neutral like I did for option one because it’s very important that it is neutral. What you’re seeing today.

Is these affiliate loan marketplaces or these other platforms? There’s two things happening. One, it’s pay for play, the highest lender, the lender that pays the most has the biggest ad budget. They’re gonna show up. And B, they’re taking a cut of the volume of the loan. So if you got like a ten thousand dollar loan, maybe the affiliate marketer, that third party, takes five percent a cut of that. What is that doing? It’s incentivizing higher borrowing. So

This brings me back to that first option. When you say nothing, it may be, you know, that you are reducing your compliance risk, but it’s not neutral by any means. Students are going to Google, they’re going to these spots where biggest ad spend wins, and it’s not based on borrower fit. so what I would say is weigh your options when it comes to recommending private student loans, but also look at, you know, actual neutral tools and you know, full disclosure, that’s why we built.

Chance Russell (11:22.071)
clarified, it’s what we’re trying to do here, whether it’s, you know, having a published methodology of how we rank loans or, you know, how we’re funded, look for those tools, but just don’t don’t leave with saying nothing. And if you are going to recommend loans, ask the right questions. Students don’t need another teaser rate. They need to know what they’re getting into.

Wesley Smith (11:41.285)
Right, right. Okay, Chance, I’m gonna give you the the last word on this, but I want you to think big and think out, you know, a decade or two even. where do you see federal borrowing? the federal borrowing rules and and and private lending market going in the next couple decades? Like w how does this evolve? What what do you see happening in the future?

Chance Russell (12:09.163)
Yeah, and I the this is the type of stuff I like to think about. But let me start with like a couple year horizon here. I think there’s going to be the need for some regulatory, well, some legislative clarity around who gets higher borrowing limits. So if you recall, if you’re a grad student, some students get around 20,000 bucks, some get 50,000. And that’s all around this professional definition. There’s tons of lawsuits that are happening with it. It’s just unfortunate the department’s kind of been put in a place where they define what

Wesley Smith (12:32.23)
Right.

Chance Russell (12:38.849)
professional is, but Congress kind of put a constraint on that. so I could imagine, you know, some legislative clarity there. Now, does Grad Plus come back? I think the answer is no. I think if you talk to folks on both sides of the aisle, they are going to say that some institutions, you know, may have abused that privilege for, you know, quote, as many in Congress put it as uncapped lending. So what does that mean for the long term?

I think right now institutions are seeing kind of this, for lack of a better word, I don’t want to call this perfect, but perfect storm of an enrollment decline. You have loss of faith in higher education itself, and you have massive changes on the funding side. I think it’s gonna force institutions, I think for the better to think differently and to innovate, right? And to change how they’re, you know, whether it’s increasing transparency or rethinking college pricing altogether,

I think that that’s the direction we’re moving in. And I’m an eternal optist optimist. There may be bumps along the way, but I think we’re gonna end up in a place where financing is gonna be based on outcomes. Enrollment’s gonna be based on transparency about those outcomes and transparency on the price. And the winners are gonna be the ones that get in early.

Wesley Smith (13:57.789)
Right. Right. I like that. I like that vision of you know, outcomes-based orientation as we move forward. I also really like the analysis around the disruption because I just think we’re in such a a a new era of higher education, not only in the finance side, but just the AI side, the innovation side, that there’s so much changing right now. I can’t imagine.

That that’s not going to have a significant impact on how institutions handle the the you know the cost side, how how the lending takes place, the whole student finance experience I think has to be different, has to change in the future. I’m I’m really confident that outcomes will prevail at at the end of the day. But one of the things that that is really hard to measure right now is the outcome.

do you think that do you think that in as we move forward on this, that employer engagement will will be determinative on how we measure outcomes and also how we finance higher education moving forward? What’s the role of an employer moving forward?

Chance Russell (15:16.457)
Absolutely. I mean, if I’m sitting here as an employee, I am an employer now, I guess, as we started this company. Like, I want to make sure that the students that I’m getting are well prepared. And right now, if you talk to employers, whether that’s in tech and in AI, I mean, recently you just saw Meta, right? They’re gonna be rolling out their own their own like I guess, credentials in a sense to help folks because it, you know, the what they’re getting right now is not

what they expected. And I think for too long employers had sat on the sideline, but now they can’t. so where I see kind of the financing side when it comes well and just the influence from employers going is you’re going to see a lot more, I think, demands on what is it that students are learning, transparency about that, and the ability to prove that it works. And that means you, you know, your members are producing graduates that go into the workplace and those they’re they’re staying there. Employers are happy about it because that’s that’s really not the case at the moment.

on the financing side, you know, you’re seeing different kind of companies pop up that are are trying to look at this, or if you look at like these loan repayment assistance programs that employers are starting to kind of build up, they care about it, right? It’s a recruitment tool, but they’re only gonna recruit those that have the knowledge and the skills to succeed in their workplace. So it’s it’s I’m glad to see more employer engagement. I think everyone in Congress on both sides of the aisle would agree with that.

Wesley Smith (16:31.292)
Yeah.

Chance Russell (16:39.521)
But at the end of the day, there is still, you know, the role for the institution to give employers what they need. And employers should be providing that feedback to institutions as well to help them shape.

Wesley Smith (16:49.008)
Yeah. A lot of work to do here. Chance, we really appreciate you joining. We appreciate your expertise and being being free with it. Thanks for coming on and sharing.

Chance Russell (16:59.028)
Absolutely, Wesley. Happy to do it.

Measuring What Matters

Measuring What Matters

Measuring What Matters

Higher education has no shortage of data. The more important question is whether institutions are measuring what truly reflects student success.

This October, the Presidents Forum is exploring how colleges and universities can look beyond traditional metrics to better understand whether learners are persisting, completing, advancing in their careers, and seeing meaningful value from their education.

Moving Beyond Traditional Metrics

Enrollment and completion remain important, but they do not tell the whole story. Institutions also need to understand how well their programs serve working adults, military-connected learners, first-generation students, and others whose pathways may not follow a traditional timeline.

Measuring what matters means connecting institutional data to the outcomes students experience. It means asking whether programs create clear pathways, whether support systems help learners overcome barriers, and whether education leads to real opportunity.

Policy Updates

The Forum continues to monitor federal developments that could shape this work. The National Defense Authorization Act remains under consideration, including provisions related to Military Tuition Assistance.

The public comment period for the Department of Education’s proposed Accreditation, Innovation, and Modernization regulations has also closed. The Forum is now watching for the final rule and preparing to help members understand what it may mean for accreditation, transparency, and institutional practice.

Turning Listening Into Action

The Forum has completed its Innovation Blueprint listening sessions with institutional members and collaboration partners. Those conversations have helped clarify the priorities, challenges, and opportunities that should guide the next phase of the work.

Members and partners will build on that foundation when the Forum gathers in Dallas in November. The focus will be on turning shared insights into practical action—and ensuring innovation is measured by the outcomes it creates for learners.

The Bottom Line

Better measurement is not about collecting more data. It is about focusing on the information that helps institutions make better decisions, demonstrate impact, and deliver stronger outcomes for students.

Transcript

Hi, everyone. Here’s a quick look at what’s happening at the Forum in October.

On the policy front, the National Defense Authorization Act is still under consideration, including provisions related to Military Tuition Assistance. We’ll continue monitoring its progress and keep you updated.

The comment period for the Department of Education’s proposed AIM regulations has closed, and we’re now waiting to see what is included in the final rule.

Our communications theme for October is “Measuring What Matters.” We’ll explore how institutions can look beyond traditional metrics to better understand student success and demonstrate their impact.

Finally, thank you to everyone who participated in our Innovation Blueprint listening sessions. We’ve now completed the partner sessions, giving us clear priorities to build on. And we look forward to turning those conversations into action when we gather in Dallas in November.

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.

Partnerships That Expand Opportunity

Partnerships That Expand Opportunity

Partnerships That Expand Opportunity

As the Presidents Forum moves through August, one theme continues to emerge across our work: partnerships.

Through our Innovation Listening Sessions with college and university presidents, we’re gathering ideas and insights to help shape our November meeting in Dallas. One message has been consistent: meaningful innovation rarely happens in isolation.

This month, we’ll highlight examples of institutions working alongside employers, community organizations, technology partners, and public leaders to expand access, strengthen workforce pathways, and improve student outcomes.

We’re also continuing to monitor key policy developments, including the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and congressional efforts to address the Pell Grant funding shortfall. We’ll keep members informed as these issues evolve.

At the Presidents Forum, partnerships remain central to advancing accountable innovation and creating more opportunities for today’s learners.

Transcript

As we move through August, the Presidents Forum is focused on a theme that continues to show up across all areas of our work: the power of partnerships.

We’ve been conducting Innovation Listening Sessions with presidents to prepare for our upcoming meeting in Dallas this November. These conversations are giving us valuable insight into the challenges, opportunities, and big ideas shaping the future of higher education.

One thing we’re hearing clearly is that meaningful innovation rarely happens in isolation. It happens through strong partnerships — between institutions, employers, community organizations, and state and federal leaders. This month we’ll see powerful examples of colleges and universities working together with partners to expand access, better serve learners, and respond to workforce needs in new and practical ways.

On the policy front, the NDAA, which includes provisions related to military tuition assistance, is still being considered. And it remains to be seen how Congress will address the Pell shortfall, which continues to be a significant issue for students and institutions alike.

As always, we’ll continue monitoring these developments and sharing updates as they unfold.

Thanks for watching, and stay tuned for more throughout the month.

Student-Centric Higher Education Means Designing Around Today’s Learners

Student-Centric Higher Education Means Designing Around Today’s Learners

Student-Centric Higher Education Means Designing Around Today’s Learners

Student success begins with understanding who today’s students are.

For many colleges and universities, the traditional image of a full-time student attending classes on a residential campus no longer reflects reality. Today’s learners are working adults, parents, first-generation students, military-connected learners, and others balancing education alongside careers, families, and financial responsibilities.

That reality is shaping the Presidents Forum’s work this July.

Student centricity is more than access

Improving access remains an important goal, but enrolling students is only the beginning.

A truly student-centered institution helps learners persist, complete a credential, and translate that education into meaningful opportunity.

That requires institutions to design around the realities students face rather than expecting students to adapt to institutional structures.

Flexible learning options, responsive student services, clear academic pathways, and strong career connections all contribute to student success.

Designing institutions around students

Across the Presidents Forum, member institutions are demonstrating what student-centered innovation looks like in practice.

That includes expanding online and hybrid learning, strengthening student support services, improving transfer pathways, adopting technology that reduces barriers, and building closer connections between education and workforce opportunity.

While each institution approaches the work differently, the goal is the same: creating systems that help more students succeed.

Policy shapes what institutions can achieve

Student-centered innovation also depends on a policy environment that supports new approaches while maintaining accountability for outcomes.

This month, the Presidents Forum continues to monitor two important federal developments.

The Department of Education is expected to release its proposed Accreditation, Innovation, and Modernization (AIM) rule, which could influence accreditation, institutional flexibility, and accountability across higher education.

The Forum is also tracking ongoing discussions surrounding the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), recognizing its importance for military-connected students and institutions that serve them.

As these developments unfold, the Forum will continue helping members understand what changes may mean for their institutions and their students.

The bottom line

Student centricity is not a single initiative. It is a commitment to designing higher education around the lives students actually lead.

Whether through institutional innovation or public policy, the goal remains the same: helping more students access opportunity, complete their education, and achieve lasting success.

Transcript

In July, the Presidents Forum is focusing on student centricity — what it means to design higher education around the realities, needs, and goals of today’s learners.

That includes working adults, parents, first-generation students, military-connected learners, and others who need flexible, high-quality pathways that connect learning to opportunity.

Across the Forum, this theme is central to our work. Student centricity is not just about access. It is about whether students can persist, complete, and see real value from their education.

That means stronger support systems, clearer pathways, more responsive delivery models, and policy environments that make innovation possible while keeping student outcomes at the center.

On the policy front, we are continuing to follow two major developments. First, the Department of Education’s upcoming AIM proposed rule on accreditation, innovation, and modernization. Second, ongoing activity around the NDAA.

The Forum is tracking the AIM proposed rule closely and preparing to help members understand its implications. The NDAA remains more uncertain, so we will continue monitoring developments there and keep members informed as there is more clarity.

As always, our focus remains: advancing policies and practices that help institutions better serve students and strengthen the future of higher education.

Grad PLUS: What the Latest Change Means for Graduate Students

Grad PLUS: What the Latest Change Means for Graduate Students

Grad PLUS: What the Latest Change Means for Graduate Students

What changed with Grad PLUS loans

The Department of Education recently updated its guidance on how Grad PLUS loans are treated under new lifetime borrowing limits.

Previously, institutions were told that Grad PLUS loans would not count toward the $257,500 lifetime cap. That guidance has now changed. For students no longer eligible under legacy provisions, prior Grad PLUS borrowing will now count toward that cap.

This shift introduces immediate implications for how graduate education is financed.


Who is most affected

The impact will be concentrated among students in higher-cost graduate programs.

This includes students in medical, dental, counseling, and doctoral programs. Part-time doctoral students may face particular challenges, as longer timelines can increase cumulative borrowing.

Students who previously used Grad PLUS loans and are returning to school are also at risk. They may reach the cap before completing their program.


What institutions need to do now

Institutions will need to adjust quickly.

Financial aid teams should revisit awarding and packaging strategies, especially for students enrolling in upcoming terms. Advising will also need to shift. Students must understand how prior borrowing affects their remaining eligibility.

Clear communication will be critical. Institutions should prepare to re-advise students and update financial plans in real time as guidance evolves.


What to watch next

The timeline is tight.

Final regulations are expected at least 30 days before the effective date of July 1, 2026. That leaves a narrow window for institutions to prepare and for students to adjust their plans.

There is also ongoing uncertainty. Recent guidance has already shifted once, and additional changes remain possible.

Transcript

Wes (07:33.942) Amy, welcome to the show and let’s get right to it. The Department of Education just reversed course. Graduate Plus loans will now count toward the new lifetime borrowing limit under the one big, beautiful bill. What does that actually mean for students that are trying to finance their graduate education? Maybe we should start with, give our listeners background on what happened and then let’s answer that question.

Amy Glynn (07:56.885) Yeah, so when we’re talking about those new lifetime borrowing caps, the department had previously told schools that graduate plus loans would not count towards the $257,500 lifetime cap established under OB-3. In a webinar last week, this guidance was shifted and schools have been told that once a student is no longer eligible for the legacy provisions, previous borrowed grad plus loans will count against that lifetime cap.

And this is a really significant change for institutions that are serving those non-traditional students who are trying to fund their education. They are at severe risk of losing access to all Title IV aid for graduate programs because we know those funding sources are limited to the student loan portfolio.

Wes (08:43.118) Interesting. Okay, so give us the students who are most affected by this.

Amy Glynn (08:47.796) Yeah, students at greatest risk of having to stop out because of this change are going to be those in some of our more costly programs. If you think about things that are in the medical field, dental, our counseling programs, doctoral students, all doctoral students, but especially ones who are enrolled part time. Obviously, it’s our students who previously borrowed Graphic Plus looking to return to school.

And those are individuals who are going to face potential challenges by hitting that lifetime cap. Because the cap never resets. Even if a student has repaid or paid down their student debt, the cap is established and once you hit it, you lose access to those funding programs.

Wes (09:32.342) Interesting, interesting. Okay, so we know that students have to be aware of this now. And that also, I mean, you speak from an administration perspective. You’ve been there on the ground working in financial aid. Tell us what institutions need to know about the change.

Amy Glynn (09:36.448) Thank

Amy Glynn (09:49.044) Yeah, it’s one thing to understand the change. They probably need to shift their advising and their packaging, their financial aid offers that have been established, especially for students that are in these affected populations who are taking courses this summer, but especially students who are starting in the fall in a more traditional sense.

And so they need to understand the provisions. They need to establish a communication protocol to advise or re-advise students. And they need to be prepared to be incredibly nimble because this guidance could change again. You we thought we had a pretty clear understanding based on good faith negotiations that these loans were not going to count against a student’s cap. And this reversal

has significantly changed things and created a level of uncertainty in the knowledge that we did have around negotiations that are on an incredibly aggressive and tight timeframe already.

Wes (10:54.242) So speaking of the timeframe, let’s conclude with some details on the timeframe. What does it look like moving forward?

Amy Glynn (11:01.374) Yeah, so final regulations are supposed to be published a minimum of 30 days before the effective date. Effective date is July 1 of 26. So the time frame is pretty fast and pretty furious and is coming at us real quick.

Wes (11:18.624) Amy, thanks for your time. It was very clear and very useful.

Amy Glynn (11:22.443) Thanks Wes.