SB 285 creates a new chapter in Indiana Code on “workforce transparency” and directs the Commission for Higher Education, working with the Department of Workforce Development and, for some reports, the Department of Education, to collect and compile comparative information about colleges, career and technical education, apprenticeships, vocational programs, and workforce outcomes. The bill focuses on metrics such as the most in-demand jobs in Indiana, starting salaries, program costs, student loan debt and default rates, graduation and completion rates, and the earnings and debt outcomes of Indiana residents who attend state educational institutions or career and technical education centers.
The bill also authorizes the commission to create two public-facing tools: an interactive “student horizon dashboard” and a “student graduate horizon scorecard.” These tools are intended to help students, families, and schools compare educational pathways by cost, debt, salary, and job-market alignment. The scorecard may also include information about military enlistment, including ASVAB requirements, base pay, benefits, and signing bonuses, and it is to be distributed annually to public, charter, and state-accredited nonpublic schools.
In addition, SB 285 requires the commission to submit an annual report to the Legislative Council beginning in 2026 on how well state educational institutions and career and technical education programs align with Indiana’s labor market and help fill in-demand jobs. The bill allows the commission to use existing databases such as the federal College Scorecard, share data among agencies, and require state educational institutions and career and technical education centers to provide requested information. It also gives the commission rulemaking authority to implement the chapter.
The bill’s impact on state law is to add a new statutory framework in IC 21-49 for collecting, publishing, and comparing higher education and workforce data, while imposing new reporting and data-submission obligations on public postsecondary institutions and career and technical education centers. It does not create a new benefit program or funding stream; instead, it expands state data-gathering and transparency requirements and makes the resulting information publicly accessible.
The overall sentiment appears strongly favorable. The bill advanced through both the Senate Education and Career Development Committee and the Senate Appropriations Committee with large margins, and it passed the Senate floor 49-0. The amendments reflected in committee and on the floor appear to have been technical and clarifying rather than substantive opposition-driven changes, suggesting broad agreement with the bill’s goals of improving consumer information and workforce alignment.
SB 285 adds a new chapter to Indiana Code governing workforce transparency and authorizes the Commission for Higher Education to collect, compile, and publish comparative data on postsecondary education, career and technical education, apprenticeships, military enlistment, student debt, and labor-market outcomes. It also requires state educational institutions and career and technical education centers to provide requested information, creates annual reporting duties to the Legislative Council, and permits the commission to adopt rules to implement the chapter.
The bill appears to have enjoyed broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It was reported favorably from committee, passed the Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously, and cleared the Senate floor 49-0. The amendments in the process were largely technical, suggesting general agreement with the bill’s transparency and career-information goals.
There is little evidence of major controversy in the available record. The main points of adjustment were whether certain duties were mandatory or permissive, how to define and limit the data collected, and how to frame the information around Indiana residents and specific institutions. The committee amendments also narrowed and clarified the scope of some data points, but no substantive ideological dispute is reflected in the votes or bill history provided.