As a rule that requires a RFA, RAFA or JIS, this rule will be initially reviewed in the calendar year 2021, which is no later than the 3rd year after the year in which this rule is being adopted.

Since publication of Proposed Rule Making in the State Register on November 29, 2017, the State Education Department (SED) received one comment:

1. COMMENT:

Commenter raised multiple concerns related to the proposed amendments to Subparts 27-1 and 27-2 of the Rules of the Board of Regents. These concerns include the following:

(a) The first concern, in Section 27-1.1(a), relates to the addition of the phrase “most educationally disadvantaged” in the proposed regulation. The concern is that the addition of this language suggests a “shift” from a comprehensive review of each applicant by the institution of higher education to a “hierarchy” based only on “most disadvantaged.” The commenter is concerned that this would increase the number of students admitted that may fail.

(b) The second concern, in Section 27-1.1(b), relates to the updated language and definition of “economically disadvantaged.” The commenter suggests that the language needs clarity, and that the Department could consider accepting the use of the federal IRS Data Retrieval Tool as a “recognized acceptable alternative” for verifying income of applicants.

(c) The last concern relates to the language in the proposed amendment which refers to HEOP students as “disadvantaged” because it is “negative, critical and stigmatizing.”

DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:

In response to the concerns raised above:

(a) The Department understands the commenter’s concern and as a result, has revised the proposed amendment to use the word “should” instead of “shall” to address any concerns that institutions will be forced to take students who are not capable of succeeding, while remaining true to the intent that the students who are accepted include the students that HEOP was meant to aid.

(b) As long as student’s meet the income criteria set forth in the proposed amendment, the Department believes the current proposed language, which allows institutions to use the IRS Data Retrieval Tool or other methods as a possible way to establish a student’s demonstrated income level, is sufficient.

(c) Lastly, while the Department recognizes the commenter’s concern raised with regard to the term “disadvantaged,” Education Law §§ 6451 and 6452 require the Department to define the term “educationally disadvantaged”. Therefore, in an effort to avoid confusion in the field and to be consistent with the statutory language, the Department does not recommend any changes to the proposed amendment.