Codify — Article

Expanding Medical Education Act: Grants for underserved areas

Establishes a federal grant program to start, grow, or diversify medical schools and branch campuses in medically underserved regions.

The Brief

SB975 creates a federal grant program under the Public Health Service Act to support the establishment, expansion, or improvement of medical and osteopathic schools, including branch campuses. Grants go to institutions of higher education or consortia to build capacity in areas where access to medical education is limited, with priority for sites that are underserved or minority-serving.

Eligible activities include recruiting diverse students, developing curricula focused on rural and underserved care, planning and construction, accreditation, faculty hiring, and infrastructure upgrades. The program requires periodic reporting to Congress and the public to track outcomes and geographic distribution.

At a Glance

What It Does

The Secretary may award grants to higher education institutions (or consortia) to establish, improve, or expand medical or osteopathic schools or branch campuses. Priority is given to underserved locations and minority-serving institutions.

Who It Affects

Institutions of higher education and consortia, particularly those in medically underserved regions or that are minority-serving; prospective medical students and residents; communities in rural or underserved areas.

Why It Matters

This program aims to expand the healthcare workforce in shortage areas, improve access to care, and enhance diversity in medicine by supporting new or expanded schools and targeted training.

More articles like this one.

A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.

Unsubscribe anytime.

What This Bill Actually Does

The Expanding Medical Education Act authorizes a new grant program to help colleges and university systems start or grow medical schools or osteopathic schools, including their satellite campuses. Grants are intended for institutions that will operate in areas with few or no existing medical programs, or that would serve as minority-serving centers in underserved regions.

Funds can be used for a range of purposes, from recruiting students from disadvantaged backgrounds to building facilities, accrediting programs, and hiring qualified faculty. The act also requires the Secretary to develop curricula that emphasize care for rural and underserved populations, and to report annually on activities and outcomes, with deeper five-year progress reviews to Congress.

Definitions clarify terms like branch campus and medically underserved community.

The Five Things You Need to Know

1

The bill authorizes the Secretary to award grants to higher education institutions (or consortia) to establish, improve, or expand medical or osteopathic schools, including branch campuses.

2

Priority for grants goes to areas with no existing schools or to minority-serving institutions located in medically underserved regions.

3

Grants may fund recruitment of students from disadvantaged backgrounds and the development of rural/underserved care curricula.

4

Funds cover planning, construction, accreditation, faculty hiring, program support, and infrastructure expansion for the schools or branches.

5

Recipients must submit annual reports to the Secretary and Congress every five years, with de-identified student data where available.

Section-by-Section Breakdown

Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections. Expand all ↓

Section 749C(a)

Grant authority for medical/osteopathic schools

This section grants the Secretary authority to award funds to higher education institutions or consortia to establish, improve, or expand schools of medicine or osteopathic medicine, including branch campuses. It creates the core mechanism for federal support in underserved areas and signals congressional intent to build capacity where it is most needed.

Section 749C(b)

Priority criteria for grant awards

The Secretary must prioritize applications that locate a new school or branch campus in an area with no other such school, or that would place a minority-serving institution in a medically underserved area. Prioritization also applies to areas designated as health professional shortage areas, aligning funding with workforce gaps.

Section 749C(c)

Equitable distribution considerations

To the extent practicable, the Secretary should distribute awards to geographic regions across the United States, aiming to reduce regional disparities in medical education capacity and access.

5 more sections
Section 749C(d)

Use of grant funds

Funds may be used to recruit and enroll students from disadvantaged backgrounds and underrepresented groups, and to develop curricula focused on care for rural and underserved populations. Grants may also be used for planning and constructing new or branch campuses, accreditation activities, faculty hiring, program support, and infrastructure upgrades to support new or expanded schools.

Section 749C(e)

Application requirements

Eligible entities must submit an application to the Secretary detailing planned activities, including programs described in subsection (d). The process is designed to evaluate capacity to establish or expand a school and to deliver on the underserved-area mission.

Section 749C(f)

Reporting to Congress and public

Recipients must submit annual reports on grant activities. Every five years, the Secretary must prepare a comprehensive report to the Senate HELP Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee, covering awardees, geographic distribution, student outcomes, and effects on the health workforce and access to care.

Section 749C(g)

Definitions

Key terms are defined, including ‘branch campus’ (a geographically separate campus offering at least 50% of the degree program with independent faculty and budget authority), ‘first generation college student,’ ‘health professional shortage area,’ and ‘medically underserved community,’ to ensure consistent interpretation.

Section 749C(h)

Authorization of appropriations

The bill authorizes such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section, signaling ongoing federal support subject to future appropriations.

At scale

This bill is one of many.

Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.

Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →

Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost

Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.

Who Benefits

  • Rural and medically underserved communities gain greater access to physicians as new schools or campuses are established where shortages exist.
  • Students from disadvantaged or underrepresented backgrounds gain pathways into medical education through targeted recruitment and supportive programs.
  • Minority-serving institutions that establish medical programs gain capacity and may improve institutional reputation and capacity.
  • Consortia of higher education institutions can leverage resources to build new programs and expand into underserved regions.

Who Bears the Cost

  • Federal government bears the cost of appropriations to fund grants and the administrative costs of administering the program.
  • Recipient institutions incur costs to plan, build, credential, and operate new campuses or programs, including facilities, faculty, and accreditation processes.
  • State and local partners may incur costs related to campus siting, community engagement, and clinical training partnerships.

Key Issues

The Core Tension

Should scarce federal funds be directed to rapidly establish new schools and branch campuses in underserved areas, potentially at the risk of quality oversight and long-term viability, or should funds be concentrated in strengthening and expanding proven programs in existing institutions to achieve similar access gains?

The program promises to expand the medical education pipeline to underserved areas and diversify the physician workforce, but it raises questions about scale, accountability, and long-term sustainability. Because funds are to be authorized as necessary and allocated to a broad set of activities, there is potential for uneven implementation across regions and institutions.

Critical issues include ensuring consistent accreditation standards across new campuses, preventing duplication of existing programs, and measuring meaningful health outcomes in communities served. The reporting requirements help address transparency, but the bill does not specify explicit performance metrics or funding adequacy thresholds, leaving some tension between ambition and fiscal reality.

Try it yourself.

Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.