House committee advances SB 77 with substitute to allow comprehensive universities to seek doctoral programs

The Kentucky House Standing Committee on Postsecondary Education voted to advance Senate Bill 77 with a committee substitute that would remove statutory language barring comprehensive public universities from offering certain doctoral degrees and set eligibility and review criteria for any new doctoral program.

Senator Matt Dinh, the bill sponsor who appeared before the committee, said the legislation also seeks to give smaller institutions a stronger voice on a related education board. "Senate Bill 77 gives our small colleges and universities an opportunity, to serve on the EPSB board," Dinh said, noting some small campuses do not have a chief academic officer to send to that board and may want to designate another academic leader instead.

Representative James Tipton, who explained the committee substitute on the floor, said the sub removes statutory language that currently prevents comprehensive universities from offering terminal degrees such as doctor of philosophy or doctor of musical arts. "That language is stricken in the sub," Tipton said, adding that the substitute replaces the ban with a set of eligibility criteria and guardrails that CPE would use in program approval.

Under the substitute, a comprehensive university would become eligible to seek approval for a new doctoral program only after meeting several thresholds, including maintaining a first-to-second-year retention rate at or above 77% in at least two of the last three years, a six-year bachelor's graduation rate at or above 56% in at least two of the last three years, and possessing unrestricted cash reserves and short-term investments sufficient to cover the institution's total operating and nonoperating expenses for three months, as calculated from the prior fiscal year's audited financial statements. The substitute also lays out separate review pathways depending on whether the proposal requires a general-fund appropriation.

Travis Powell, senior vice president and general counsel for the Council on Postsecondary Education, told the committee the retention and graduation thresholds were derived from national data. "Those two numbers'the 77% and the 56%'are from national data that we pulled to put, for all comprehensive universities, that would put them in the 75th percentile," Powell said. He described a two-path review process: a program that requires general-fund appropriation would be considered in CPE's biennial budget request and, if funded, would return to CPE for expedited approval and programmatic accreditation tracking. Programs that do not seek general-fund appropriation would follow the normal CPE program-approval process.

David McFadden, president of Eastern Kentucky University, said comprehensive universities already offer a number of doctoral programs and praised a pathway that allows expansion while maintaining standards. "All of the institutions who are pursuing a variety of different program offerings are committed to really moving Kentucky forward," McFadden said. He cautioned that setting numeric thresholds in statute requires careful analysis so the standards are both attainable and durable.

Representative Bratcher moved the substitute; Representative Truitt seconded. The committee adopted the substitute and later voted to report Senate Bill 77 with the committee substitute attached. The roll call as read into the record recorded affirmative votes from Representatives Baker, Banta, Bratcher, Brown, Decker, Doan, Groesel, Massaroni, McCool, Payne, Roark, Stalker, Thompson, Truitt, Wilner and Chair Tipton. The committee also adopted a title amendment prior to adjournment.

The substitute preserves CPE's authority to assess program alignment with an institution's mission, statewide and regional workforce needs, student and employer demand, use of existing resources, and programmatic accreditation requirements, and it establishes a three-year post-approval review cycle for programs that may require continuing appropriations.

If the general assembly funds a proposed program, CPE would be responsible for tracking programmatic accreditation and performance to ensure graduates meet licensure requirements where applicable. If the general assembly does not appropriate funds, the program must still meet CPE's normal program-approval standards.

The committee's action advances the substitute to the full House for consideration. The substitute language replaces an explicit statutory prohibition with eligibility criteria and procedural requirements overseen by CPE, while keeping a role for the Legislature through the biennial budget when additional state funding is requested.