What You Need to Know
- Key takeaway #1A federal court temporarily extended the deadline for Higher Education institutions to respond to a government survey from March 18th to March 25th. The survey elicits data on university admissions, including data on students’ race and sex.
- Key takeaway #2Higher Education institutions should assess their readiness to respond to the ACTS survey and similar federal data requests. Institutions should anticipate continued federal scrutiny of admissions practices.
On March 13, a Massachusetts federal district court temporarily blocked the Trump Administration from requiring higher education institutions to respond to the Admissions and Consumer Transparency Supplement (“ACTS”) survey — a new data collection effort mandating that institutions disclose detailed admissions information regarding students’ race and sex to the federal government. In Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Department of Education, 1:26-cv-11229 (D. Mass.), the court extended the deadline for institutions to respond to the survey from March 18th to March 25th to allow time to consider the case.
Background
On March 11, seventeen Democratic state attorneys general sued the Trump Administration over the ACTS survey, a new component of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (“IPEDS”) — the mandatory, annual survey system that gathers certain data from colleges and universities. The ACTS survey stems from President Trump’s August 2025 presidential memorandum, Ensuring Transparency in Higher Education Admissions, which directed the Secretary of Education to expand IPEDS reporting requirements.
According to the States’ complaint, “the ACTS survey seeks a vast array of disaggregated data” for the 2025–2026 academic year and six prior years. The Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (“IES”) and the National Center for Education Statistics (“NCES”) issued an August 15, 2025 Request for Comment stating that the ACTS survey would “collect data by race-sex pair” across multiple categories — including standardized test scores, GPAs, family income, Pell Grant eligibility, and parental education.
The Complaint’s APA Claims
The States’ complaint raises three principal claims under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”). First, plaintiffs allege that the ACTS survey is contrary to law and in excess of statutory authority because the IES and the NCES are statutorily required to operate free from “partisan political influence.” The States contend the survey furthers enforcement of policy objectives rather than serving as a reliable statistical reporting tool.
Second, the complaint alleges that Defendants failed to observe required procedures, including Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) requirements to minimize respondent burdens, use plain terminology, and employ effective statistical methodology.
Third, the complaint alleges that the ACTS survey is arbitrary and capricious, citing Defendants’ unexplained departure from longstanding IPEDS procedures, failure to consider the burden on institutions, and failure to consider alternatives such as a voluntary pilot or phased implementation.
Litigation Status
The court’s temporary restraining order was issued “without prejudice to a further extension of the deadline or other preliminary relief as justice may require.” A hearing on Plaintiffs’ motion is scheduled for March 24 before Judge Dennis Saylor IV. The extended March 25 deadline remains in effect, and institutions should be prepared to comply absent further judicial relief.
Implications for Higher Education Institutions
Higher Education institutions should assess their readiness to respond to the ACTS survey and similar federal data requests, including whether existing data collection infrastructure can compile the required information on short notice. Even if the court grants further preliminary relief, institutions should anticipate continued federal scrutiny of admissions practices.
Institutions should consider consulting with legal counsel to evaluate data collection capabilities, assess potential exposure, and develop a compliance strategy accounting for both the current litigation and the broader regulatory landscape. Crowell’s Higher Education team is available to advise on these issues, including compliance readiness, data collection strategies, and responses to federal enforcement actions.
For further information, please contact:
Elizabeth Hecker, Partner, Crowell & Moring
ehecker@crowell.com
