Selective admissions transparency is intensifying as federal and institutional actors move to require more data, and as faculty governance bodies press for clearer rationale behind applicant decisions. A new federal survey mandate—called the Admissions and Consumer Transparency Supplement (ACTS)—orders selective four-year colleges to provide unprecedented applicant data under a stated “ensuring transparency” goal. The move follows recommendations from a faculty committee at Yale University calling for more explicit articulation of admissions goals and priorities, alongside broader policy and political pressure. The topic is now feeding into legislative proposals targeting legacy and donor preferences, including calls to phase out such advantages or disclose their scale. Policy analysts and enrollment leaders caution that more published outcome data can’t fully capture how colleges weigh judgment among large applicant pools. Still, enrollment-management executives like Georgia Tech’s Rick Clark argued institutions must “strive to be as transparent as possible” to restore trust. For admissions offices, the near-term impact is operational: responding to ACTS data collection requirements while managing the limits of what transparency can realistically convey about decision logic.