Prohibits public institutions of higher education from accepting examination scores from testing entities that require disabled individuals to undergo comprehensive testing for disabilities that do not change over time
HB 1640 adds a new section to Missouri law governing public higher education admissions testing accommodations. Beginning with the 2027-28 academic year, public institutions of higher education would be prohibited from accepting standardized test scores from a testing entity that requires a disabled applicant to have taken a comprehensive disability test within the prior two years in order to receive accommodations. The bill defines several terms, including “disabled applicant,” “lifelong disability,” and “static disability,” and lists the standardized applicant examinations covered, such as the ACT, SAT, AP, CLT, GMAT, LSAT, MCAT, and PSAT/NMSQT.
The practical effect is to limit how Missouri public colleges and universities may rely on scores from certain admissions tests if the testing provider’s accommodation policy is tied to recent comprehensive disability testing for applicants with lifelong or static disabilities. The bill appears aimed at ensuring that students with documented, nonprogressive disabilities are not disadvantaged by testing policies that require repeated or recent disability evaluations as a condition of accommodations. It would affect public institutions of higher education in Missouri and, indirectly, the testing organizations whose score reports those schools accept.
HB 1640 would amend Chapter 173, RSMo, by creating section 173.068 and imposing a new admissions-related restriction on Missouri public institutions of higher education. The statute would not directly regulate private colleges, but it would change the score-acceptance practices of community colleges, state colleges, and state universities that receive state funds. It would also influence standardized testing entities by creating a state-level incentive to revise accommodation documentation requirements for disabled test takers, especially those with lifelong or static disabilities.
The available context suggests the bill is framed as a disability-access and fairness measure, with its caption emphasizing protections for disabled individuals who have stable, nonprogressive conditions. No committee testimony or recorded votes are provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or support in the legislative record included here. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears intended to be protective of students with disabilities and to improve access to admissions testing accommodations.
The main point of potential contention is the bill’s restriction on accepting scores from testing entities that require recent comprehensive disability testing to qualify for accommodations. Supporters would likely view this as preventing burdensome or repetitive documentation requirements for applicants with lifelong disabilities such as dyslexia, ADHD, or autism spectrum disorder. Opponents, if any, might argue that the bill interferes with testing-provider standards or creates uncertainty for admissions offices about which scores they may accept. Because no transcripts or votes are included, specific named advocates or critics are not identified.