Tag: Implementation

  • Making OBBBA Implementation Work for Students

    Making OBBBA Implementation Work for Students

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is the biggest shake-up to federal higher education policy in more than a decade. And while the bill passed on partisan lines, implementing it to maximize student success and postsecondary value requires real bipartisan cooperation. With negotiated rule making under way, and 2026 implementation deadlines looming, a new deep-dive report from Inside Higher Ed, “After Reconciliation: Higher Ed Reform and Where Left–Right Collaboration Matters Most,” looks at conservative, progressive and institutional priorities and perspectives on three key areas of OBBBA: institutional accountability for student outcomes; new loan limits and payment reforms; and changes to the Pell Grant program, including the introduction of Workforce Pell.

    Join the Discussion

    On Wednesday, Jan. 21 at 2 p.m. Eastern, Inside Higher Ed will host a live webcast discussion on the report and OBBBA’s impact on higher education. Register for that here. Download the free report here.

    Despite clear differences of opinion on various areas of the bill, many experts agree on the need for accountability, limits on excessive graduate debt and support for high-value training programs. 

    “The underlying principles here of stronger accountability for financial outcomes, of reining in excessive borrowing, especially in the graduate education space—those are bipartisan priorities that have been expressed for a long time,” says Michelle Dimino, director of education programs at the think tank Third Way. “These are conversations that we have been having in the higher education reform space for the last decade and beyond.”

    Common concerns also emerge around the tight timeline for adoption, the data infrastructure to support changes, aligning earnings regulations, handling repayment plan transfers with care, protecting the Pell Grant budget and more. Another challenge: execution by an Education Department in transition.

    “After Reconciliation: Higher Ed Reform and Where Left–Right Collaboration Matters Most” was written by Ben Upton. The independent editorial project is supported by Arnold Ventures.

    Source link

  • Solving the staffing crisis is key to the Science of Reading movement

    Solving the staffing crisis is key to the Science of Reading movement

    Key points:

    As someone who’s dedicated my career to advancing the Science of Reading movement, I’ve seen firsthand what it takes to help every child become a strong, fluent reader. We’ve made incredible strides in shifting the conversation toward evidence-based instruction, but I know we’re at a critical inflection point. While we–obviously–continue our work helping schools and districts adopt SOR, there’s an issue that stands in the way of real, sustained, progress: the staffing crisis and leadership churn that are leaving our educators overwhelmed and skeptical toward “change.” Without addressing these deeper structural issues, we risk stalling the momentum we’ve worked so hard to build.

    The hidden costs of constant turnover

    The data on teacher and leader turnover is bleak, and I’ve seen how it undermines the long-term commitment needed for any meaningful change. Consider this: Roughly 1 in 6 teachers won’t return to the same classroom next year, and nearly half of new teachers leave within their first five years. This constant churn is a massive financial burden on districts, costing an estimated $20,000 per teacher to recruit, hire, and onboard. But the real cost is the human one. Every time a new leader or teacher steps in, the hard-won progress on a literacy initiative can be jeopardized.

    I’ve watched districts spend years building momentum for the Science of Reading, providing extensive training and resources, only to see a new superintendent or principal arrive with a new set of priorities. This “leader wobble” can pull the rug out from under an initiative mid-stream. It’s especially frustrating when a new leader decides a program has had “plenty of professional learning” without taking the time to audit its impact. This lack of continuity completely disrupts the 3-5 years it takes for an initiative to truly take hold, especially because new teachers often arrive with a knowledge gap, as only about one-quarter of teacher preparation programs teach the Science of Reading. We can’t build on a foundation that’s constantly shifting.

    Overwhelmed by “initiative fatigue”

    I know what it feels like to have too much on your plate. Teachers, already juggling countless instructional materials, often see each new program not as a solution but as one more thing to learn, implement, and manage. Instead of excitement, there’s skepticism–this is initiative fatigue, and it can stall real progress. I’ve seen it firsthand; one large district I worked with rolled out new reading, math, and phonics resources all at once.

    To prevent this, we need to follow the principle of “pull weeds to plant flowers.” Being critical, informed consumers of resources means choosing flowers (materials) that are:

    • Supported by high-quality, third-party research
    • Aligned across all tiers of instruction
    • Versatile enough to meet varied student needs
    • Teacher-friendly, with clear guidance and instructional dialogue
    • Culturally relevant, reflecting the diverse backgrounds of students

    Now, even when a resource meets these standards, adoption shouldn’t be additive. Teachers can’t layer new tools on top of old ones. To see real change, old resources must be replaced with better ones. Educators need solutions that provide a unified, research-backed framework across all tiers, giving teachers clarity, support, and a path to sustainable student progress.

    Building a stable environment for sustained change

    So, how do we create the stable environment needed to support our educators? It starts with leadership that is in it for the long game. We need to mitigate turnover by using data to understand why teachers are leaving and then acting on that feedback. Strengthening mentorship, clarifying career pathways, and improving school culture are all crucial steps.

    Beyond just retaining staff, leaders must foster a culture of sustained commitment. It’s not enough to have a few “islands of excellence” where a handful of teachers are getting great results.

    We need system-wide adoption. This requires strong leaders to balance support and accountability. I’ve seen how collaborative teams, engaged in problem-solving and data-based decision-making, can transform a school. When teachers see students as “our students” and not just “my students,” shared ownership grows.

    A leader’s job is to protect and sustain this vision, making sure the essential supports–like collaborative planning time, ongoing professional development, and in-classroom coaching–are in place. But sustaining change goes beyond daily management; it requires building deep capacity so the work continues even if leadership shifts. This means hiring, training, and retaining strong educators, investing in future leaders, and ensuring committed advocates are part of the implementation team. It also requires creating a detailed, actionable roadmap, with budgets clearly allocated and accountability measures established, so that any initiative isn’t just a short-term priority but a long-term promise. By embedding these structures, leaders can secure continuity, maintain momentum, and ensure that every step forward in literacy translates into lasting gains for students.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • Scaling structured literacy with implementation science

    Scaling structured literacy with implementation science

    When districts adopt evidence-based practices like Structured Literacy, it’s often with a surge of excitement and momentum. Yet the real challenge lies not in the initial adoption, but in sustaining and scaling these practices to create lasting instructional change. That’s the point at which implementation science enters the picture. It offers a practical, research-backed framework to help district leaders move from one-time initiatives to systemwide transformation.

    Defining the “how” of implementation

    Implementation science is the study of methods and strategies that support the systematic uptake of evidence-based practices. In the context of literacy, it provides a roadmap for translating the science of reading, based on decades of cognitive research, into day-to-day instructional routines.

    Without this roadmap, even the most well-intentioned literacy reforms struggle to take root. Strong ideas alone are not enough; educators need clear structures, ongoing support, and the ability to adapt while maintaining fidelity to the research. Implementation science brings order to change management and helps schools move from isolated professional learning sessions to sustainable, embedded practices.

    Common missteps and how to avoid them

    One of the most common misconceptions among school systems is that simply purchasing high-quality instructional materials or delivering gold-standard professional learning, like Lexia LETRS, is enough. While these are essential components, they’re only part of the equation. What’s often missing is a focus on aligned leadership, strategic coaching, data-informed decisions, and systemwide coordination.

    Another frequent misstep is viewing Structured Literacy as a rigid, one-size-fits-all approach. In reality, it is a set of adaptable practices rooted in the foundational elements of reading: Phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Effective implementation requires both structure and flexibility, guided by tools like the Active Implementation Formula or NIRN’s Hexagon Tool.

    District leaders must also rethink their approach to leadership. Instructional change doesn’t happen in a vacuum or stay confined to the classroom. Leaders at every level–from building principals to regional directors–need to be equipped not just as managers, but as implementation champions.

    Overcoming initiative fatigue

    Initiative fatigue is real. Educators are weary of the pendulum swings that often characterize educational reform. What’s new today may feel like a rebranded version of yesterday’s trend. Implementation science helps mitigate this fatigue by building clear, supportive structures that promote consistency over time.

    Fragmented professional learning is another barrier. Educators need more than one-off workshops–they need coherent, job-embedded coaching and opportunities to reflect, revise, and grow. Coaching plays a pivotal role here. It serves as the bridge between theory and practice, offering modeling, feedback, and emotional support that help educators build confidence and capacity.

    Building sustainable systems

    Sustainability starts with readiness. Before launching a Structured Literacy initiative, district leaders should assess their systems. Do they have the right people, processes, and tools in place? Have they clearly defined roles and responsibilities for everyone involved, from classroom teachers to district office staff?

    Implementation teams are essential. These cross-functional groups help drive the work forward, break down silos, and ensure alignment across departments. Successful districts also make implementation part of their onboarding process, so new staff are immersed in the district’s instructional vision from day one.

    Flexibility is important, too. No two schools or communities are the same. A rural elementary school might need different pacing or grouping strategies than a large urban middle school. Implementation science supports this kind of contextual adaptation without compromising core instructional principles.

    Measuring progress beyond test scores

    While student outcomes are the ultimate goal, they’re not the only metric that matters. Districts should also track implementation fidelity, educator engagement, and coaching effectiveness. Are teachers confident in delivering instruction? Are they seeing shifts in their students’ engagement and performance? Are systems in place to sustain these changes even when staff turnover occurs?

    Dashboards, coaching logs, survey tools, and walkthroughs can all help paint a clearer picture. These tools also help identify bottlenecks and areas in need of adjustment, fostering a culture of continuous improvement.

    Equity at the center

    Implementation science also ensures that Structured Literacy practices are delivered equitably. This means all students, regardless of language, ability, or zip code, receive high-quality, evidence-based instruction.

    For multilingual learners, this includes embedding explicit vocabulary instruction, oral language development, and culturally responsive scaffolding. For students with disabilities, Structured Literacy provides a clear and accessible pathway that often improves outcomes significantly. The key is to start with universal design principles and build from there, customizing without compromising.

    The role of leadership

    Finally, none of this is possible without strong leadership. Implementation must be treated as a leadership competency, not a technical task to be delegated. Leaders must shield initiatives from political noise, articulate a long-term vision, and foster psychological safety so that staff can try, fail, learn, and grow.

    As we’ve seen in states like Mississippi and South Carolina, real gains come from enduring efforts, not quick fixes. Implementation science helps district leaders make that shift–from momentum to endurance, from isolated success to systemic change.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • “Phased implementation” of new UK BCA thresholds confirmed

    “Phased implementation” of new UK BCA thresholds confirmed

    Director of Universities UK International (UUKi), Jamie Arrowsmith, has issued an update to the sector regarding various changes due to take place as a result of the government’s immigration white paper, published in May 2025.

    UUKi, the sector body representing UK universities’ global interests, has been engaging with officials on the various proposals facing the sector. This includes the government’s ambition to implement an international student levy, shortening the Graduate Route from two years to 18 months, and tightening the Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) thresholds that universities are held to.

    Arrowsmith’s update brought the news that the Home Office has committed to phased implementation of the new BCA thresholds. He also said that the Home Office has also committed to “discretionary exceptions for smaller providers and for institutions that would have passed under current rules”.

    ⁠The government’s proposal is to raise the minimum pass requirement of each BCA metric by five percentage points, so that a sponsor must maintain a course enrolment rate of at least 95% and a course completion rate of 90% in order to pass the compliance threshold.

    However, the change that has most unsettled the sector is the proposal to tighten the visa refusal rate compliance threshold, halving it from 10% to 5%.

    Arrowsmith told members that UKVI is now piloting enhanced data sharing to give sponsors more insight into visa refusals – a step UUKi has long called for.

    “While this is welcome, we’re clear that further systems and data improvements are needed as a matter of course to support institutions in adjusting to the tighter thresholds,” said Arrowsmith.

    The incoming measures also include a traffic-light banding system that rates sponsors on compliance performance, with underperforming institutions facing being placed on a UKVI action plan or a possible recruitment cap.  

    “We’re also seeking greater clarity on the proposed red-amber-green rating system and will continue to engage through the Education Advisory Group and regular discussions with UKVI and the Home Office,” added Arrowsmith.

    A spokesperson for the Home Office told The PIE News: “We strongly value the contribution of international students and recognise their importance to the UK’s world-leading universities. That’s why we’re tightening the rules to ensure those coming here are genuine students and education providers take their responsibilities seriously.”

    Communications surrounding curtailing the Graduate Route are “expected imminently”, said Arrowsmith, and UUKi is arguing strongly against the implementation from the January/February 2026 intake, “so that those students are able to access the two-year offer they applied for”.

    “We continue to press for written confirmation that PhD graduates will retain three years’ eligibility, and for changes to apply from a set course start date rather than a graduation date, to provide clarity for institutions and applicants,” he continued.

    We strongly value the contribution of international students and recognise their importance to the UK’s world-leading universities. That’s why we’re tightening the rules to ensure those coming here are genuine students and education providers take their responsibilities seriously
    UK Home Office

    News from this week’s Labour Party conference has brought some overdue clarity on the proposed levy on universities’ income from international students. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson confirmed the measure remains on the table, with the revenue earmarked to fund targeted maintenance grants.

    The announcement sparked backlash from sector leaders. Some took aim at the government’s assumptions that universities will be able to simply pass the levy onto international students through higher tuition fees, while others argued that it’s unfair to force international students to essentially pay for domestic maintenance grants.

    As the government seeks to implement these reforms, most can be enacted through changes to the immigration rules without requiring an act of parliament — the only exception being the levy on international student fees.

    Source link

  • Most students, educators use AI–but opinions differ on ethical use

    Most students, educators use AI–but opinions differ on ethical use

    Key points:

    As generative AI continues to gain momentum in education each year, both its adoption and the attitudes toward its use have steadily grown more positive, according to a new report from Quizlet.

    The How America Learns report explores U.S. student, teacher, and parent perspectives on AI implementation, digital learning and engagement, and success beyond the classroom.

    “At Quizlet, we’ve spent nearly two decades putting students at the center of everything we do,” said Quizlet CEO Kurt Beidler. “We fielded this research to better understand the evolving study habits of today’s students and ensure we’re building tools that not only help our tens of millions of monthly learners succeed, but also reflect what they truly need from their learning experience.”

    AI becomes ubiquitous in education
    As generative AI solutions gain traction in education year over year, adoption and attitudes towards the technology have increased and improved. Quizlet’s survey found that 85 percent of respondents–including high school and college teachers, as well as students aged 14-22–said they used AI technology, a significant increase from 66 percent in 2024. Of those respondents using AI, teachers now outpace students in AI adoption (87 percent vs 84 percent), compared to 2024 findings when students slightly outpaced teachers.

    Among the 89 percent of all students who say they use AI technology for school (up from 77 percent in 2024), the top three use cases are summarizing or synthesizing information (56%), research (46 percent), and generating study guides or materials (45 percent). The top uses of AI technology among teachers remained the same but saw significant growth YoY: research (54 percent vs. 33 percent), summarizing or synthesizing information (48 percent vs. 30 percent), and generating classroom materials like tests and assignments (45 percent vs. 31 percent).

    While the emergence of AI has presented new challenges related to academic integrity, 40 percent of respondents believe that AI is used ethically and effectively in the classroom. However, students are significantly less likely to feel this way (29 percent) compared to parents (46 percent) and teachers (57 percent), signaling a continued need for education and guidelines on responsible use of AI technology for learning.

    “Like any new technology, AI brings incredible opportunities, but also a responsibility to use it thoughtfully,” said Maureen Lamb, AI Task Force Chair and Language Department Chair at Miss Porter’s School. “As adoption in education grows, we need clear guidelines that help mitigate risk and unlock the full potential of AI.  Everyone–students, educators, and parents–has a role to play in understanding not just how to use AI, but when and why it should be used.”

    Digital learning demands growth while equity gap persists
    Just as AI is becoming a staple in education, survey results also found that digital learning is growing in popularity, with 64 percent of respondents expressing that digital learning methods should be equal or greater than traditional education methods, especially teachers (71 percent).

    Respondents indicated that flexibility (56 percent), personalized learning (53 percent), and accessibility (49 percent) were the most beneficial aspects of digital learning. And with 77 percent of students making sacrifices, including loss of sleep, personal time, and missed extracurriculars due to homework, digital learning offers a promising path toward a more accommodating approach. 

    While the majority of respondents agreed on the importance and benefits of digital learning, results also pointed to a disparity in access to these tools. Despite nearly half (49 percent) of respondents agreeing that all students in their community have equal access to learning materials, technology, and support to succeed academically, that percentage drops to 43 percent for respondents with diagnosed or self-identified learning differences, neurodivergent traits, or accessibility needs.

    Maximizing success for academic and real-world learning
    While discussion around AI and education has largely focused on use cases for academic learning, the report also uncovered an opportunity for greater support to help drive success beyond the classroom and provide needed resources for real-world learning.

    Nearly 60 percent of respondents believe a four-year college degree is of high importance for achieving professional success (58 percent). However, more than one-third of students, teachers, and parents surveyed believe schools are not adequately preparing students for success beyond the classroom.

    “As we drive the next era of AI-powered learning, it’s our mission to give every student and lifelong learner the tools and confidence to succeed, no matter their motivation or what they’re striving to achieve,” said Beidler. “As we’ve seen in the data, there’s immense opportunity when it comes to career-connected learning, from life skills development to improving job readiness, that goes well beyond the classroom and addresses what we’re hearing from students and teachers alike.”

    The top five skills respondents indicated should be prioritized more in schools are critical thinking and problem solving (66 percent), financial literacy (64 percent), mental health management (58 percent), leadership skills (52 percent), and creativity and innovation (50 percent).

    This press release originally appeared online.

    eSchool News Staff
    Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all)

    Source link

  • Beyond the AI Hype: Strategic AI Implementation in Higher Education

    Beyond the AI Hype: Strategic AI Implementation in Higher Education

    The buzz around AI in higher ed is undeniable. The topic dominated conference discussions at ASU + GSV, with nearly every booth, breakout, and keynote referencing AI somehow. When AI gets tossed around so often, it can be hard to differentiate between what’s real and what isn’t.  

    While the transformative promise of AI is exciting, successful AI implementation requires more than fast adoption. The more important question is: How can institutions move from ideas to impact? 

    The reality is that achieving meaningful results with AI requires more than just purchasing the latest tool. That’s often the easiest part, but it can also be a trap. Tool and tech procurement, absent a well-informed implementation strategy, can add to your technical debt. It’s critical to look beyond the buzzword and first define where you want your institution to be in the future. With your north star in place, you can determine how AI can play a role in a holistic solution. 

    Operationalizing AI for Real Impact 

    Many discussions around AI for higher ed focus on its evolving capabilities to generate content, automate tasks, engage and support students, and handle other critical functions. But what is the impact you’re looking to make, and how are you going to measure the return on investment? Those questions tend to be missing from higher ed’s ongoing AI conversation. Don’t implement tactics (or tools) until you know their role in your broader tech strategy. Too often, there is a heightened sense of urgency to implement and not enough focus on the complexities of weaving these tools into the intricate fabric of an institution. There is no easy button in AI. 

    Trying to catch the AI hype without having a strategic AI implementation plan is like buying state-of-the-art lab equipment before you’ve decided what type of science courses you are going to offer.  Effective integration involves significant change management, process design, and ongoing investment.  

    For example, many schools already use AI-powered agents to assist with student recruitment by answering prospects’ questions and suggesting next steps. These bots can scale engagement significantly — but to be effective, they require meticulous training, constant monitoring, and attentive human oversight to ensure the interaction is aligned with a school’s culture and values. As technology evolves, the operational model must adapt. Without constant care and feeding, AI tools can become outdated, provide incorrect information, or fail to align with the institution’s unique voice and mission. Remember, technology and tool outputs are only as good as the inputs.  

    And the investment isn’t just the initial software cost. The investment also includes ongoing commitment to deployment, integration, training, and ensuring the technology drives the desired outcomes. Many underestimate this operational heavy lifting in the rush to adopt AI, yet it’s the linchpin for success. 

    Start with Strategy, Not Just Software 

    A more effective, pragmatic approach to AI implementation in higher education begins by identifying the institution’s core challenges and strategic objectives. 

    Are you focused on reversing enrollment declines? Improving student retention rates? Enhancing support services? Increasing operational efficiency? By defining your goals and measurable key performance indicators (KPIs) from the outset, you’re in the best position to strategically evaluate how AI — alongside other data, technology, and talent resources — can contribute to a solution that supports the entire student lifecycle. 

    Without this clarity, institutions risk spending significant resources without achieving tangible returns. It’s about focusing efforts, perhaps starting with a contained, controllable area where impact can be carefully monitored and measured, rather than attempting to boil the ocean. 

    Leveraging AI Strategically 

    Currently, many institutions are grappling with important discussions around AI ethics, academic integrity, and preventing misuse by students to cheat. It’s important not to get stuck there. Students who want to circumvent rules will find a way. AI is simply the newest tool. Focusing excessively on policing AI use means missing the boat on its strategic potential. 

    The real opportunity lies in leveraging AI across the entire student lifecycle — from recruitment and enrollment to engagement, support, and retention. AI can personalize outreach, provide 24/7 advising support, identify at-risk students earlier, and automate administrative tasks, freeing up staff for higher-value interactions. It will almost certainly be part of effective solutions, but it shouldn’t be the only part. 

    The Indispensable Human Element  

    In the race to apply AI, we must not forget the crucial role of human intelligence (HI). AI tools, even sophisticated ones, require human oversight. They must train on the correct data and the institution’s values, mission, and unique persona.   

    Humans are essential for guiding AI, correcting its inevitable errors and ensuring its outputs align with institutional standards. Furthermore, education remains a fundamentally human endeavor. While AI can enhance efficiency and scale, it cannot replace true empathy, mentorship, and social-emotional connection, which are vital to student success and belonging. The most effective approach combines the power of AI with the irreplaceable value of human talent — a synergy Collegis champions through its focus on data, tech, and talent. 

    Moving Fast, But Moving Smart 

    The desire to rapidly adopt AI in higher ed is understandable. However, a rushed implementation without a clear strategy is likely to falter. Stepping back to define objectives, plan the integration, and establish metrics is the best way to accelerate the path to meaningful impact. 

    This more deliberate, strategic approach enables institutions to harness AI’s power effectively, ensuring it serves their unique mission and drives measurable results. It’s about moving beyond the hype and focusing on the pragmatic steps needed to make AI work for higher ed, creating sustainable value for the institution and the students it serves. The journey requires careful navigation, a focus on operational reality, and often, a partner who understands how to bridge the gap between potential and practice. 

    Innovation Starts Here

    Higher ed is evolving — don’t get left behind. Explore how Collegis can help your institution thrive.

    Source link

  • NIH Speeds Up Implementation of New Public Access Policy

    NIH Speeds Up Implementation of New Public Access Policy

    The National Institutes of Health is accelerating a Biden-era plan to make its research findings freely and quickly available to the public, the agency announced Wednesday.

    The 2024 Public Access Policy was set to take effect Dec. 31, 2025, but will now take effect July 1 of this year. It updates the 2008 Public Access Policy, which allowed for a 12-month delay before research articles were required to be made publicly available. The 2024 policy removed the embargo period so that researchers, students and members of the public have rapid access to these findings, according to the announcement. 

    NIH director Jay Bhattacharya, who took over last month, said the move is aimed at continuing “to promote maximum transparency” and rebuilding public confidence in scientists, which has waned in recent years. 

    “Earlier implementation of the Public Access Policy will help increase public confidence in the research we fund while also ensuring that the investments made by taxpayers produce replicable, reproducible, and generalizable results that benefit all Americans,” Bhattacharya said in the memo. “Providing speedy public access to NIH-funded results is just one of the ways we are working to earn back the trust of the American people.”

    Although the scientific research community is supportive of the policy itself, some are calling on the NIH to reinstate the original implementation date to give researchers time to effectively comply with this and other new agency regulations. 

    “This new effective date will impose extra burdens on researchers and their institutions to meet the deadline,” Matt Owens, president of COGR, which represents research institutions, said in a statement Wednesday. “Ironically, at the same time NIH is accelerating implementation of this policy, the agency is adding new burdensome certification and financial reporting requirements for grant recipients. This runs counter to the administration’s efforts to reduce regulations.”

    Source link

  • EEOC Issues Long-Awaited Regulations on Implementation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act – CUPA-HR

    EEOC Issues Long-Awaited Regulations on Implementation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | April 17, 2024

    On April 15, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued its long-awaited final regulations and interpretative guidance on the implementation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). The EEOC states in its press release that the final rule is intended to offer “important clarity that will allow pregnant workers the ability to work and maintain a healthy pregnancy and help employers understand their duties under the law.” It provides guidance to employers and workers “about who is covered, the types of limitations and medical conditions covered, and how individuals can request reasonable accommodations.” The regulations will be published in the Federal Register on April 19 and go into effect 60 days later.

    The PWFA, which was signed into law in December 2022, requires most employers with 15 or more employees “to provide reasonable accommodations to a qualified employee’s or applicant’s known limitations related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, absent undue hardship on the operation of the business of the covered entity.” It passed Congress with strong bipartisan support.

    Known Limitations

    Under the regulation, “limitations” include both physical and mental conditions related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. The regulations specify that the definition of a limitation “shall be construed broadly to the maximum extent permitted by the PWFA.” A limitation “may be a modest, minor, and/or episodic impediment or problem” and can be related to current or past pregnancies, potential or intended pregnancies, and labor and childbirth.

    The examples of limitations provided in the rule include miscarriage or stillbirth, migraines, lactation, postpartum depression, and pregnancy-related episodic conditions, such as morning sickness, but the list is not intended to be exhaustive. The limitation may be “a need or a problem related to maintaining [the worker’s] health or the health of the pregnancy,” and it “need not be caused solely, originally, or substantially by pregnancy or childbirth.” Related medical conditions can include conditions that existed before pregnancy or childbirth but are exacerbated by the pregnancy or childbirth.

    The employee or their representative must communicate the limitation to the employer to receive a reasonable accommodation. The employee and employer should engage in an interactive process to determine if a worker’s limitation qualifies for a reasonable accommodation and the appropriate accommodation.

    Reasonable Accommodations

    Under the final rule, “reasonable accommodations” have the same definition as under the Americans with Disabilities Act. They include modifications or adjustments to the application process, to the work environment or how the work is performed, and that allow the employee to enjoy equal benefits and privileges of employment as are enjoyed by similarly situated employees without known limitations. It also includes modifications or adjustments to allow a covered employee to temporarily suspend one or more essential functions of the job.

    The rule provides several examples of reasonable accommodations that may be appropriate under the act. These include but are not limited to additional breaks, allowing the worker to sit while they work, temporary reassignment or suspension of certain job duties, telework, or time off to recover. Leave can be requested even if the employer does not offer leave as an employee benefit, the employee is not eligible for the employer’s leave policy, or the employee has used up their allotted leave under the employer’s policy.

    Reasonable accommodations are limited to the individual who has a PWFA-covered limitation; it does not extend to an individual who is associated with someone with a qualifying limitation or someone with a limitation related to, affected by, or arising out of someone else’s pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical condition. The regulations specifically clarify that “time for bonding or time for childcare” are not covered by the PWFA.

    Undue Hardship

    The rule explains that an employer does not have to provide a reasonable accommodation if it would cause an “undue hardship,” or a significant difficulty or expense. The rule includes a variety of factors that should be considered when determining if a reasonable accommodation would impose an undue hardship, including the nature and net cost of the accommodation; the overall financial resources of the facility or covered entity; the type of operations of the covered entity; and the impact of the accommodation on operations, including on the ability of other employees to perform their duties or the facility’s ability to conduct business.

    The rule provides several factors to consider when analyzing whether an accommodation involving the temporary suspension of essential functions of the position qualifies as an undue hardship. These include the length of time the employee will not be able to perform the essential function; whether there is work for the employee to accomplish; the nature of the essential function; the employer’s history of providing temporary suspensions to other, similarly situated employees; whether other employees can perform the functions; and whether the essential functions can be postponed.

    Other Provisions

    The rule also encourages “early and frequent communication between employers and workers” in order “to raise and resolve requests for reasonable accommodation in a timely manner.” Employers are also instructed that they are not required to request supporting documentation when an employee asks for a reasonable accommodation; they should only do so when it is reasonable under the circumstances.

    Controversies Surrounding the Regulations

    While the PWFA was passed by Congress with strong bipartisan support, the EEOC has faced significant pushback about the implementing regulations.

    The EEOC’s delay in issuing these regulations caused considerable frustration from employers. The PWFA went into effect in June 2023, which was when employers were required to comply with the law and the EEOC began accepting claims of discrimination under the act. Without the implementing regulations, however, employers had no certainty as to how to comply, leaving them exposed to potential liability.

    The most significant criticism stemmed from the regulation’s implications around abortion. In fact, of the nearly 100,000 comments the EEOC received in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking on the regulations, over 96,000 discussed the regulation’s inclusion of abortion. The final rule clarifies that “having or choosing not to have an abortion” qualifies as a medical condition under the regulations. Several Republican members of Congress accused the EEOC of using the regulations to further the Biden administration’s pro-choice agenda. EEOC Chair Charlotte Burrows, however, defended the language, saying it is consistent with legal precedent and the agency’s interpretations of other civil rights statutes under their jurisdiction. The regulation clarifies that employers will not be required to pay for abortions or travel-related expenses for an employee to obtain an abortion. The EEOC specifies they expect the most likely accommodation related to abortion will be leave to attend a medical appointment or recover from a procedure. Several conservative organizations are threatening legal action against the final rule.

    Litigation Challenging the PWFA

    On February 27, 2024, a federal district court in Texas ruled that the House of Representatives lacked a quorum when it passed the PWFA, because over 200 representatives voted by proxy. The Constitution required that a quorum be present for the House to conduct business, but in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the House allowed for proxy voting. The court found Congress violated the Constitution when it passed the law and blocked enforcement of the act against the state of Texas and its agencies. The law is in effect elsewhere in the United States, but other legal challenges may follow Texas’s approach.



    Source link