As Introduced

136th General Assembly

Regular Session H. B. No. 644

2025-2026

To enact section 3333.1211 of the Revised Code to create the Higher Education Evidence-Based Innovation Fund and Grant Program and to require the Chancellor of Higher Education to conduct a study on retrenchment processes at state institutions of higher education.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF OHIO:

Section 1. That section 3333.1211 of the Revised Code be enacted to read as follows:

Sec. 3333.1211. (A) As used in this section:

(1) "State institution of higher education" has the same meaning as in section 3345.011 of the Revised Code.

(2) "Student success program" means a program established and operated by a state institution of higher education for the purpose of improving postsecondary retention rates, completion rates, or the time students take to earn a degree, excluding post-baccalaureate programs, and with an emphasis on supporting low-income students.

(3) "Evidence-based reform or practice" means an activity, strategy, or intervention that either:

(a) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on one of the following:

(i) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study;

(ii) Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study;

(iii) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias.

(b) Does both of the following:

(i) Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes;

(ii) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention.

(4) "Evidence tier-one reform or practice" means a reform or practice that prior research suggests has promise for the purpose of successfully improving student achievement or attainment for low-income students and for which student outcomes can be meaningfully measured.

(5) "Evidence tier-two reform or practice" means an evidence tier-one reform or practice or other reform or practice meeting similar criteria, that through rigorous evaluation, including through the use of existing administrative data, as applicable, has been found to improve student achievement or attainment and for which the impact and cost-effectiveness can be meaningfully measured.

(6) "Evidence tier-three reform or practice" means an evidence tier-two reform or practice, or other reform or practice meeting similar criteria, that has been found to produce sizable, important impacts on student achievement or attainment and which can be expected to provide information related to both of the following:

(a) Determining whether such impacts can be successfully reproduced and sustained over time;

(b) Identifying the conditions in which such reform or practice is most effective.

(B) The higher education evidence-based innovation fund is created in the state treasury consisting of such amounts designated for the purposes of the fund by the general assembly and any private contributions. Amounts credited to the fund shall be used to award competitive grants to state institutions of higher education to support the adoption of evidence-based reforms and practices. Unspent amounts in the fund shall not be transferred to the general revenue fund.

(C) The chancellor of higher education shall establish and administer a grant program under which the chancellor shall distribute amounts from the higher education evidence-based innovation fund on a competitive basis to state institutions of higher education to support the development, piloting, scaling, and assessment of student success programs. Preference shall be given to applications that propose tier-three reforms or practices. Beginning in 2027, the chancellor shall open a competitive grant period at least once every two years. The award term for a competitive grant may be more than two years. Additional competitive grant periods may be held at the discretion of the chancellor. The chancellor shall not award grants in excess of the amount held in the higher education evidence-based innovation fund.

(D) A competitive grant application shall include all of the following:

(1) A plan to increase, with respect to all students enrolled at the state institution of higher education, attainment and completion rates or graduation rates, including both of the following:

(a) A description of the evidence-based reform or practice that would be used, including a summary of the most rigorous and relevant studies available regarding the reform or practice and whether the reform or practice would be an evidence tier-one, two, or three reform or practice;

(b) A particular focus on serving low-income students through student services and collaboration among two-year programs, four-year programs, and workforce systems.

(2) A description of how the state institution of higher education will, directly or in collaboration with other accredited institutions of higher education or nonprofit organizations, use the grant funds to implement or support the evidence-based reform or practice;

(3) Annual benchmarks for student outcomes with respect to the evidence-based reform or practice, including a description of the availability of relevant data;

(4) A plan to evaluate the evidence-based reform or practice that includes, to the maximum extent feasible, experimental designs using random assignment or other research methodologies that allow for the strongest possible causal inferences when random assignment is not feasible;

(5) A description of how the evidence-based reform or practice will be sustained once the grant expires.

(E) The chancellor of higher education shall, in consultation with the department of education and workforce and the department of job and family services, develop criteria for awarding the competitive grants. The criteria shall include metrics related to all of the following:

(1) Student outcomes, including all of the following:

(a) Student retention;

(b) Student completion;

(d) Student preparation for high-wage or high-need jobs.

(2) Student access, including both of the following:

(a) Net price of higher education for students;

(b) Support for low-income students.

(3) Sustainability and scale, including all of the following:

(a) Number of students served;

(b) Scalability of program;

(d) Sustainability of the program once the grant expires.

(4) Evidence and evaluation, including both of the following:

(a) Availability of data to support evaluation and research;

(b) The evidence tier of the evidence-based reform or practice that would be used.

(F) Each state institution of higher education that receives a grant shall use the grant funds to carry out the programs and proposals described in the institution's grant application.

Section 2. The Chancellor of Higher Education shall conduct a feasibility study on including employment and earnings criteria in the retrenchment processes described in section 3345.454 of the Revised Code. The study shall investigate student outcomes for a variety of programs of study, including comparing the wage outcomes of postsecondary degrees to those of high school diplomas. The study shall also make recommendations on improving the employment, earnings, and workforce alignment of degree programs as part of program approval and retrenchment processes.

Not later than one year after the effective date of this section, the Chancellor shall submit a report on the study's findings to the General Assembly in accordance with section 101.68 of the Revised Code.