An Act amending the act of March 10, 1949 (P.L.30, No.14), known as the Public School Code of 1949, in higher education accountability and transparency, further providing for comparison tool.
Summary
HB613 amends the Public School Code of 1949 to expand the higher education “comparison tool” maintained under the state’s higher education accountability and transparency provisions. The bill adds a new data point that the tool must allow users to compare among institutions of higher education: each institution’s endowment. The measure is narrowly focused on disclosure and comparison of institutional financial resources, rather than on funding levels, tuition, or admissions policy.
By requiring endowment information to be included in the comparison tool, the bill would change the state’s higher education transparency requirements and direct the relevant state education authorities to make this financial metric available to the public. The effective date is 60 days after enactment. The practical effect would be to give students, families, policymakers, and researchers another standardized measure for comparing colleges and universities in Pennsylvania.
Impact
HB613 would amend Section 2003-H(b)(2) of the Public School Code of 1949, which governs the state’s higher education comparison tool, by adding endowment as a required comparison category. This would not alter institutional governance or funding formulas directly, but it would expand the statutory list of information that must be collected and displayed for public comparison of colleges and universities. Institutions of higher education would be the affected parties, as their endowment data would become part of the state’s transparency framework.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript, recorded votes, or formal opposition, so there is no documented debate to indicate strong support or resistance. Based on the bill’s limited scope and its focus on transparency and consumer information, the measure appears to be a straightforward informational reform rather than a controversial policy change. The sponsor list suggests interest from members likely supportive of higher education accountability measures.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. If concerns were raised, they would most likely relate to whether endowment figures are comparable across institutions, whether the data could be misleading without context, or whether smaller schools might be disadvantaged by public comparisons to wealthier institutions. However, none of those concerns appear in the available record, and no opposing arguments or votes are shown.