Search

Most Americans today need some education beyond high school to secure a well-paying job, and higher education is a key factor in social and economic mobility. But higher education is not accessible to all students. To further equalize opportunity, states must understand options for improving the way they fund higher education. America's public K-12 system has been grappling with similar funding disparities for decades -- challenges that offer important lessons for postsecondary funding. Bellwether's analysis, "Strengthening State Higher Education Funding: Lessons Learned From K-12," identifies insights and lessons from K-12 finance policy that may be instructive as states rework how they fund higher education. This report explores four topics and associated questions that are also relevant across K-12 education: (1) Equity: How can states distribute funding to students and public IHEs with the greatest needs?; (2) Adequacy: How much funding is enough to achieve the desired outcomes?; (3) Cost Sharing: How can local governments and states share the cost of public higher education?; and (4) Stability: How can public IHEs secure consistent and predictable funding?

This First Look publication provides the first results of the 2019-20 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:20), the most comprehensive national study of student financing of postsecondary education in the United States. This report includes information for about 80,800 undergraduate students and 19,700 graduate students attending 2,200 postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. This report describes the percentages of students receiving various types of financial aid and average amounts received, by type of institution attended, gender, race/ethnicity, attendance pattern, and income level. Percentages and average amounts are additionally described by dependency status for undergraduate students and by graduate program for graduate students. Supplemental tables feature state-level percentages of students receiving aid and average amounts received by undergraduate students. [For the summary, see ED629548. For the supplemental tables, see ED629549.]

This First Look report presents selected findings about student financial aid during the 2019-20 academic year. These findings are based on data from the 2019-20 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:20). NPSAS:20 is a national study of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled any time between July 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020, in institutions that can participate in federal financial aid programs. The main purpose of NPSAS:20 is to measure how students and their families pay for postsecondary education and, particularly, their receipt of federal student aid given through Title IV of the Higher Education Act. Data used in this report are from about 80,800 undergraduate and 19,700 graduate student survey respondents attending approximately 2,200 institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. This report classifies financial aid by type (grants, loans, work-study, and other) and source (federal, state, institution, employer, and other private sources). [For the full report, see ED629547. For the supplemental tables, see ED629549.]

In August 2022, the U.S Department of Education (ED) announced it would invoke the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 (HEROES Act) to cancel up to $20,000 of federal student loan debts for borrowers who fell below certain income thresholds. The HEROES Act authorizes the Secretary to "waive or modify" statutory or regulatory provisions applicable to federal student financial assistance programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965 to ensure that borrowers are not placed in a worse position financially in relation to their student loans as a result of a war, other military operation, or national emergency. Plaintiffs filed multiple lawsuits challenging the cancellation policy before any borrowers could obtain relief under it. Certain suits resulted in two federal court orders blocking implementation of the program. The Supreme Court agreed to review these two cases, "Biden v. Nebraska" and "Department of Education v. Brown," and heard oral argument in February 2023. The questions for which the Court granted certiorari generally can be divided into jurisdictional questions, that is, whether federal courts may hear the challenges to the cancellation policy, and merits questions, that is, assuming jurisdiction exists, whether the cancellation policy is lawful. This report begins by placing those important questions in their context, surveying affected federal student loan programs, past uses of HEROES Act authority, and congressional debates concerning student loan cancellation. The report then describes the cancellation policy itself and traces the history of Nebraska and Brown in the lower courts. This report next assesses the parties' key legal arguments about standing, statutory authority for the policy, and whether the Secretary adopted the policy in a procedurally valid manner. Finally, this report concludes with a discussion of potential implications of decisions in Nebraska and Brown for the cancellation policy, for the Secretary's HEROES Act authority, and for legal doctrines that are not confined to the federal student loan context.

Achieving Washington's state attainment goal of 70% of residents aged 25-44 earning a credential requires not just maintaining but increasing college enrollment among high school graduates and adult learners. Increasing enrollment and reaching the attainment goal among Washingtonians from populations historically excluded from higher education requires deliberate emphasis on racial equity in the state policies pursued. Yet, college enrollment rates are stagnant in Washington state--overall and among Black, Latinx, and Indigenous student populations. This policy brief chronicles college enrollment trends in Washington and nationwide and identifies state-level efforts to slow or reverse the college enrollment trend line. It also complements this scan of state strategies with a distillation of the initiatives that existing evidence suggest can increase statewide college enrollment.

This publication describes the methods and procedures used for the 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, Administrative Collection (NPSAS:18-AC). It also provides information that will be helpful to analysts in accessing and understanding the restricted-use files containing the NPSAS:18-AC data. NPSAS:18-AC includes cross-sectional, nationally representative samples of undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in postsecondary education in the United States. NPSAS:18 AC also includes state-representative samples of undergraduate students in some states, as well as in public 2 year and in public 4 year institution sectors within some states. The study covers topics pertaining to student enrollment with a focus on how individuals and families finance postsecondary education. NPSAS:18-AC is based solely on data collected from administrative data sources and, unlike other NPSAS studies, does not include student survey data.

States collectively invest over $12 billion a year to support over 4.5 million students through financial aid programs. This interactive 50-State Comparison provides a look at the specific criteria employed in the top two largest aid programs by state. This interactive resource includes details about which state programs are linked to measuring need through the federally calculated Estimated Family Contribution (EFC) or purely family income. On the merit side, this 50-State Comparison includes details about which state programs use GPA or SAT/ACT scores to determine eligibility. It also includes information on which states require a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) or use their own state application process for aid. Finally, following federal action to simplify the FAFSA form, it catalogs which state aid programs specifically require Selective Service registration or restrict eligibility for students with drug convictions. Hyperlinked data tables for 50-State Comparisons on these dimensions are provided. A state-level profile of all data points can be viewed by going to the individual state profiles page.

This publication describes the methods and procedures used for the 2008/18 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:08/18). The B&B graduates, who completed the requirements for a bachelor's degree during the 2007-08 academic year, were first surveyed as part of the 2008 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08), and then followed up with in 2009 and 2012. The 2018 follow-up is the third and final survey for the B&B:08 cohort, conducted 10 years after completion of the bachelor's degree. This report details the methodology and outcomes of the B&B:08/18 student survey data collection and administrative records matching. [For "Baccalaureate and Beyond (B&B:08/18): First Look at the 2018 Employment and Educational Experiences of 2007-08 College Graduates. First Look. NCES 2021-241," see ED609932.]

Higher education is increasingly important for individual wellbeing, the economic competitiveness of Washington state, and the state's recovery from the COVID-19 crisis. However, postsecondary enrollment trends have not kept pace with the state's changing economic needs and expanded financial aid programs. Issues with stagnant direct enrollment rates in Washington are being further compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence suggests that the pandemic has affected postsecondary enrollment and may continue to impact the college-going culture in the state. This research brief presents evidence around postsecondary enrollment trends, including enrollment data leading up to and during the pandemic, as well as trends in financial aid applications that are associated with postsecondary enrollment. The aim of this brief is to help institutional leaders and higher education stakeholders in Washington understand current trends and address challenges in postsecondary enrollment to help more students complete postsecondary programs and gain a meaningful credential.

States invest in public higher education in two primary ways: through direct funds to institutions (general operating support) and direct funds to students in the form of state financial aid programs (student grant aid). General operating support is the larger of the two funding categories, totaling $80.8 billion in 2019, while state financial aid allocations totaled $12.3 billion. To gain a deeper understanding of the impacts this state investment in higher education has on student outcomes, we examine the historical data and empirical literature on state support for higher education. We find clear evidence that increased financial investments--specifically, increased state general operating and student financial aid--are directly tied to student success in higher education. These findings suggest that states will not meet their attainment goals or the workforce demands of the modern economy without sustained investment in the public higher education sector. We conclude with finance policy solutions that states and the federal government can adopt to support their efforts to reach state postsecondary attainment goals and close equity gaps in degree attainment and college completion.

This brief communicates findings from Phase 1 of "State Responses to COVID-19 -- Implications for Outcomes-Based Funding and Promise Programs," a 50-state policy scan to determine how Promise Program policies are shifting in response to COVID-19 related budget fluctuations. Conducted between August and December of 2020, this 50-state scan included the following goals: (1) explore how COVID-19 and related budget cuts have impacted state Promise Programs; and (2) explore how, if at all, shifts in Promise Programs affected the level or type of support provided to sectors and institutions that serve Black, Latinx and low-income students. The research team reviewed publicly available websites, including those of state legislatures, higher education agencies, local and state-level media, and systematically recorded data along several key elements. Overall, more than half of statewide Promise programs made changes to program components in response to COVID-19. Of the 15 programs that made changes, it was found that 11 programs adjusted eligibility requirements, with many relaxing requirements to maintain access and others imposing additional eligibility requirements in response to budget cuts. Of the programs that adjusted eligibility requirements, most sought to maintain or expand access for students to account for challenges during the coronavirus pandemic. [For a related report, "The State of Student Success Funding during COVID-19: Results from a Policy Scan," see ED614911.]

The National Association of Scholars believes that higher education should gather scholars and students to cultivate excellence and pursue the truth, transmit the heritage of Western civilization to a new generation, prepare cultured and virtuous citizens, and train students for vocational success. American colleges and universities should embody academic excellence and foster it in their students. Institutions of higher education should strive to make their classes affordable, so as to make higher education accessible for any qualified student. This policy guide provides a guideline of 40 detailed suggestions for legislative reforms. These initiatives, if enacted by Congress, would encourage reform of America's costly, politicized, and dysfunctional system of higher education. The report is comprised of the following sections: (1) Finances; (2) Rights; (3) America; (4) Equality; (5) Regulatory Reform; and (6) Additional Proposals.

Homelessness among college students is a diverse phenomenon, encompassing different age groups, family compositions, causes, and dynamics. One of the most significant barriers to higher education for youth experiencing homelessness is accessing financial aid; without financial aid, they cannot transition to and complete their college education, and remain at higher risk of continued homelessness as adults. This report examines six years of financial aid data for unaccompanied homeless youth (UHY). These data demonstrate continued barriers to financial aid access -- barriers that have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 outbreak.

The Tuition and Fee Report is produced annually by the Colorado Department of Higher Education to provide detailed information on the tuition and fee rates at Colorado's public institutions, as well as to give context regarding the state funding environment in which tuition and fee rate-setting occurs. From Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19 to FY 2019-20, resident tuition and fees increased an average of 1.1 percent across all of Colorado's public institutions. At four-year institutions, the average increase was 1.5 percent, and at two-year institutions, the average was 0.2 percent. This relatively small increase was in large part thanks to a significant General Fund investment of $121 million in FY 2019-20. This year, the report highlights flat tuition across nearly all the state's institutions as a result of a historic state investment of $121 million in FY 2019-20. While mandatory fees did increase at most institutions, tuition being held flat for one year demonstrates the commitment of both the state and institutions to contain costs. In accordance with C.R.S. § 23-1-105.5(2), this report provides detailed information on the tuition and fee rates that Colorado public institutions of higher education charged to resident and non-resident students and is divided into the following sections: (1) Definitions; (2) Key Findings; (3) The Process of Tuition Setting and the Relationship to Costs; (4) A Summary of Tuition and Fee Changes in the 2019-20 Fiscal Year; (5) Interstate Comparisons; and (6) Appendices which provide detailed examples and comparisons across institution type, student groups, and year-to-year comparisons. [For the 2018-19 report, see ED593343.]

In recent years, nontraditional workforce training programs have proliferated inside and outside of traditional postsecondary institutions. A subset of these programs, bootcamps, advertise high job placement rates and have been hailed by policymakers as key to training skilled workers. However, few formal data exist on the number, types, prices, location, or other descriptive details of program offerings. We fill this void by studying the universe of bootcamp programs offered as of June 30, 2017. In this report, we discuss the attributes of the 1,010 technology-related programs offered in the United States, Canada, and online. We find more diversity among bootcamp providers and programs than would be expected from public discourse. This primarily relates to the mode of delivery (online vs. in person), intensity (part time/full time), cost, and program types. Based on the data we collected, we present a classification structure for bootcamps focused on five distinct program types.

This report seeks to inform state policy for increasing the supply of high school instructors who are qualified to teach in dual enrollment programs. First, a brief definition of dual enrollment is provided. Second, results are presented from a content analysis of state policies for dual enrollment instructor qualifications. Third, the faculty qualification policies of regional accreditation organizations are compared with a particular emphasis on the Higher Learning Commission and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Fourth, several strategies are identified that aim to bolster graduate education programs and encourage teachers to complete relevant graduate coursework.

"The Condition of Education 2018" is a congressionally mandated annual report summarizing the latest data on education in the United States. This report is designed to help policymakers and the public monitor educational progress. This report contains indicators on the state of education in the United States, from prekindergarten through postsecondary education, as well as labor force outcomes and international comparisons. This year's report includes 47 indicators on topics ranging from prekindergarten through postsecondary education, as well as labor force outcomes and international comparisons. In addition to the regularly updated annual indicators, this year's spotlight indicators highlight new findings from recent the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) surveys: (1) The first spotlight indicator examines the choices and costs that families face as they select early childhood care arrangements; (2) The second spotlight describes the characteristics of teachers who entered the teaching profession through an alternative route to certification program; and (3) The third spotlight presents data on average student loan balances for students completing graduate degrees. "The Condition" includes an "At a Glance section," which allows readers to quickly make comparisons within and across indicators, and a "Highlights" section, which captures key findings from each indicator. The report contains a "Reader's Guide," a "Glossary," and a "Guide to Sources" that provide additional background information. Each indicator provides links to the source "data tables" used to produce the analyses. As new data are released throughout the year, indicators will be updated and made available on "The Condition of Education" website. [For the 2017 report, "The Condition of Education 2017. NCES 2017-144," see ED574257.]

In fiscal years 2014-15 and 2015-16, Colorado's public institutions witnessed the smallest year-over-year percent increases in tuition rates in more than a decade. This was largely the result of increases in General Fund support for higher education. In an attempt to maintain this progress, the General Assembly chose to hold the Department of Higher Education's appropriation flat in FY 2016-17 rather than proceed with the $20 million (3 percent) cut as originally requested in the Governor's budget request. Fiscal Year 2017-18 saw modest investment in higher education based on inflationary increase to the General Fund share of both Education and General expenses as well as inflationary increases to employee health benefit increases. In accordance with C.R.S. § 23-1-105.5(2), this report provides detailed information on the tuition and fee rates that Colorado public institutions of higher education charged to resident and non-resident students in Fiscal Year 2016-17. The report is organized into the following sections: (1) Key Findings and Definitions; (2) The Process of Tuition Setting and its Relationship to Costs; (3) A Summary of Tuition and Fee Changes in the 2016-2017 Academic Year; and (4) Tuition and Fee Interstate Comparisons. The appendices provide detailed examples and comparisons across institution type, student groups, and year-to-year comparisons. [For the Fiscal Year 2016-17 report, see ED586444.]

The purposes of this equity indicators project are to: (1) report the status of higher education equity in the United States and identify changes over time in measures of equity; (2) identify policies and practices that promote and hinder progress; and (3) illustrate the need for increased support of policies, programs, and practices that not only improve overall attainment in higher education but also create greater equity in higher education opportunity and outcomes. Family income remains the primary focus of the 2018 report. Recognizing the need to also address inequity based on other interrelated demographic characteristics, reports since 2016 also include selected indicators that highlight differences by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES). In these reports, SES is measured by an index comprised of family income, parents' education, and parents' occupation developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). For the first time, the 2018 "Indicators" report includes data describing higher education equity by U.S. state. Considering indicators of equity by state is essential given the many differences across the 50 states in historical, demographic, economic, and political characteristics, as well as the characteristics of their K-12 and higher education systems. This report presents data as far back as comparable data warrant, often beginning with 1970. In addition to providing longitudinal indicators of equity, the "Indicators" project is also intended to advance productive conversation about effective policies and practices for improving equity in higher education opportunity and outcomes. In 2018, the "Indicators" project is launching the "Improving Equity in Higher Education Search for Solutions Blog" hosted by PennAHEAD (http://www.ahead-penn.org/) intended to further advance discussion of how to create meaningful improvements in higher education equity. Methodological Appendix A provides additional notes, tables, and figures. A combined list of references and resources is included. [For "Indicators of Higher Education Equity in the United States: 2017 Historical Trend Report," see ED583542.]

This 50-State Comparison shows how states approach adult inclusion in state financial aid policies. Education Commission of the States researched state financial aid policies in all states to provide this comprehensive resource, with information provided for the two largest financial aid programs (by expenditure) in each state, according to 2015 data. The following hyperlinks to data tables are included: (1) Are awards based on academic merit, financial need, or other criteria?; (2) Do students need to enroll full-time to receive aid?; (3) Is eligibility linked to the date that the student graduated high school?; (4) Does the state define a statewide application deadline, and if so, what is the deadline?; (5) Which postsecondary sectors are eligible to participate?; and (6) All data points for all states.

"The Condition of Education 2017" is a congressionally mandated annual report summarizing the latest data on education in the United States. This report is designed to help policymakers and the public monitor educational progress. This year's report includes 50 indicators on topics ranging from prekindergarten through postsecondary education, as well as labor force outcomes and international comparisons. "The Condition" includes an "At a Glance" section, which allows readers to quickly make comparisons within and across indicators, and a "Highlights" section, which captures a key finding or set of findings from each indicator. The report contains a "Reader's Guide," a "Glossary," and a "Guide to Data Sources" that provide additional information to help place the indicators in context. In addition, each indicator references the data tables that were used to produce the indicator, most of which are in the "Digest of Education Statistics." In addition to the regularly updated annual indicators, this year's report highlights innovative data collections and analyses from across the Center: (1) The first spotlight indicator examines the relationship between student risk factors at kindergarten entry (poverty and low parent educational attainment) and academic achievement in early elementary school; (2) The second spotlight indicator draws on administrative data from the Center's EDFacts data collection and finds that 2.5 percent of students in U.S. public elementary and secondary schools were reported as homeless in 2014-15; (3) The third spotlight indicator draws on longitudinal data from the Beginning Postsecondary Students Study to examine the rates at which first-time college students persist toward completion of a degree or certificate; and (4) The fourth spotlight indicator examines how disability rates for U.S. adults vary by educational attainment, finding that 16 percent of 25- to 64-year-olds who had not completed high school had one or more disabilities in 2015, compared to 4 percent of those who had completed a bachelor's degree and 3 percent of those who had completed a master's or higher degree. In addition, two indicators provide insights from the Center's recent work on technology in education. The first previews key findings from the Center's upcoming report, "Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside of the Classroom." The second presents findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress's 8th-grade Technology and Engineering Literacy (TEL) assessment. [For the 2016 report: "The Condition of Education 2016. NCES 2016-144," see ED565888.]

In fiscal years 2014-15 and 2015-16, Colorado's public institutions witnessed their smallest year-over-year percent increase in tuition rates in more than a decade. This was largely the result of increases in General Fund support for higher education. In an attempt to maintain this progress, the General Assembly chose to hold the Department of Higher Education's appropriation flat in FY 2016-17 rather than proceed with the $20 million (3 percent) cut as originally requested in the Governor's budget request. In accordance with C.R.S. § 23-1-105.5(2), this report provides detailed information on the tuition and fee rates that Colorado public institutions of higher education charged to resident and non-resident students in Fiscal Year 2015-16. The report is organized into the following sections: (1) Key Findings and Definitions; (2) The Process of Tuition Setting and its Relationship to Costs; (3) A Summary of Tuition and Fee Changes in the 2015-2016 Academic Year; and (4) Tuition and Fee Interstate Comparisons. The appendices provide detailed examples and comparisons across institution type, student groups, and year-to-year comparisons. [For the 2014-15 report, see ED562005.]

The purposes of this equity indicators project are to: (1) report the status of higher education equity in the United States and identify changes over time in measures of equity; (2) identify policies and practices that promote and hinder progress; and (3) illustrate the need for increased support of policies, programs, and practices that not only improve overall attainment in higher education but also create greater equity in higher education opportunity and outcomes. This edition includes selected indicators that highlight differences by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES), an index comprised of family income, parents' education, and parents' occupation developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). This Indicators Report presents data as far back as comparable data warrant, often beginning with 1970. In addition to providing longitudinal indicators of equity, this report is also intended to advance productive conversation about effective policies and practices for improving equity in higher education opportunity and outcomes. To this end, the report includes an essay that connects the indicators to current policy debates. The indicators and essays promote productive dialogue about how to create meaningful improvements in higher education equity. Methodological Appendix A provides additional notes, tables, and figures. [For the "Indicators of Higher Education Equity in the United States: 2016 Historical Trend Report," see ED569199.]

A college education is not everyone's cup of tea. The United States needs other ways to instill job skills in the younger generation. The German apprenticeship system is sometimes viewed as an appealing alternative. But substantially increasing apprenticeship opportunities in the United States may not be as easy or inviting as it sounds. The German model depends for its success on strong unions and professional licensing requirements. Applying the German method to the United States would require huge--and, for some, hugely unpopular--changes to the structure of the economy. This paper discusses various ways to encourage apprenticeships--from ensuring that potential apprentices can borrow money to finance apprenticeships in the way they currently borrow for college (thus allowing the employer to avoid having to pay an apprentice more than he is initially worth) to more elaborate public subsidies and changes in the law.

The national commitment to increasing postsecondary educational attainment, combined with growing economic anxiety, has made community colleges the focus of many federal and state policy initiatives. There is good reason for this: by virtue of their nature and reach, community colleges--public institutions of higher education that predominantly award associate degrees and sometimes bachelor's degrees--are indispensable to meeting national goals for educational attainment as well as for the development of a productive workforce. But no national system of community colleges exists, and national policies to improve opportunity and success at community colleges should reflect their diversity of students, programs, missions, and funding structures. In this report, the authors focus on key variables that differentiate community colleges, and they elaborate on their significance for students. They first describe the range of missions and programs across institutions in this sector and explore differences in their student bodies. They then focus on student financing and national policies designed to address both affordability and broader concerns about student success. Finally, the authors discuss how some community colleges, frequently in partnership with states and other stakeholders, are effectively working on a student success agenda.

Every year, millions of college students borrow money to help bridge the gap between college costs and available income, savings, and grants. Experts agree that, for those who need to borrow to pay for college, federal student loans are the safest and most affordable option. Unfortunately, some colleges choose not to participate in the federal student loan program, preventing their students from borrowing federal loans when needed. This is The Institute for College Access & Success' fifth assessment of federal student loan participation at community colleges across the country. The authors identified 15 colleges that have left the loan program since 2013-14, eight of which are in North Carolina. Seven colleges have joined the loan program, five of which are in Louisiana. In addition to national averages and state-by-state data for 2015-16, this issue brief takes a deeper look at activity in California, North Carolina, and Louisiana. A Participation Rate Index (PRI) Worksheet is appended.

Student debt is still rising for bachelor's degree recipients. In 2013, seven in 10 (69%) graduating seniors at public and private nonprofit colleges had student loans. These borrowers owed an average of $28,400 in federal and private loans combined, up two percent compared to their peers in 2012. Debt at graduation varies greatly by state and by college, and this report includes average debt levels for each state, lists of notably high- and low-debt colleges, and links to data for more than 1,000 colleges nationwide. It also includes policy recommendations for reducing the burden of student debt. The following is appended: "Where the Numbers Come from and How We Use Them."

This is the forty-third report prepared in Washington providing tuition and fee data for flagship institutions, comprehensive institutions, and community colleges. Tuition and fee rates for academic year 2013-14 were collected by staff from the Connecticut Office of Higher Education, who developed an online tool to collect these data from the 50 states and transmitted the information to the Council in early 2014. Washington Student Achievement Council staff analyzed the data and prepared the current report. Among the key findings were: At flagship institutions, the average increase from 2012-13 to 2013-14 was just under four percent. Several states, including Washington, froze tuition this academic year, though the data show small changes due to increases in mandatory fees. In all, 20 states increased total resident undergraduate tuition and fees at their flagship institution by less than $200. Resident undergraduate tuition and fees grew by three percent in the comprehensive sector. Sixteen states held average tuition and fee growth below $200 in this sector. Whereas five states saw tuition growth of over ten percent in this sector from 2011-12 to 2012-13, only two states exceeded that figure this year. Growth in community college tuition was similar to the other sectors at three percent. In all, 20 states, including Washington, held tuition and fee growth below $100 in the two-year college sector, with Missouri significantly reducing tuition for residents. Three appendices are included: (1) Resident Undergraduate Tuition and Required Fees by State; (2) National Comparisons--Tuition and Required Fees by Sector and Residency, 2009-10 to 2013-14; and (3) List of Colleges and Universities Included in the Tuition and Fee Report Survey.

Education issues were again at the forefront when the leaders of 42 states and the District of Columbia outlined their priorities in their 2014 State of the State addresses. Governors outlined their plans for increasing the quality and availability of education--from preschool through postsecondary--to spur economic growth and enhance the quality of life of each state's citizens. This brief highlights the most frequently cited education priorities of the nation's governors. They include: (1) Career and technical education--At least 13 governors and the D.C. mayor outlined proposals improving or expanding CTE options for students; (2) Dual enrollment--Governors in at least 10 states discussed college- and career-ready high school graduates, many outlining plans to increase funding for, or access to, dual enrollment programs; (3) Early learning--At least 14 governors and the mayor of D.C. highlighted preschool proposals in their 2014 addresses, focused primarily on expanding access through increased funding, universal pre-K and public-private partnerships; (4) Economic and workforce development--At least 13 governors described plans to create or strengthen partnerships between their education systems and business communities, with a focus on ensuring graduates are prepared to meet state workforce need; (5) Higher education--Governors in at least 17 states outlined proposals related to higher education, most focused on tuition, financial aid and affordability. Five governors called for a freeze on tuition rates; (6) K-12 finance--At least a dozen governors and the D.C. mayor have made the restoration of K-12 funding a priority, following cuts made in the economic recession; and (7) Teacher compensation--Governors in at least 10 states included teacher compensation policy in their addresses, with calls for pay increases or compensation policy changes.

This white paper, examines state policies to improve affordability, encourage full-time enrollment, and incent timely completion of postsecondary credentials and degrees. The authors found that existing grant aid programs do not provide sufficient support to allow students with documented need to cover tuition costs and living expenses, nor do they focus on or encourage full-time enrollment and timely completion. Therefore, many students must work at least part time and are unable to devote themselves to full-time study and those who enroll full time based on the federal standard of 12 credit hours per term still have difficulty completing on time. Research has also shown that costs also have a significant negative impact on timely college completion, particularly for low-income students. Focusing on the varying contexts of individual states, they also examine existing policy recommendations that are gaining traction in the national and state-level affordability discussions: (1) Federal/state matching grant program with incorporated maintenance of effort; and (2) State grant aid programs with incentives for students to enroll full-time. [For the update to this report, see ED589770.]

President Obama sent his fiscal year 2014 budget request to Congress on April 10, 2013. The New America Foundation's Education Policy Program released this subsequent issue brief, "Key Questions on the Obama Administration's 2014 Budget Request." Obama's budget request totals $71.2 billion in appropriations funding for the U.S. Department of Education. It includes spending for a pre-kindergarten federal-state partnership program for low- and moderate-income 4-year-olds and a new college and career readiness competitive grant effort. The request also details a number of proposals to address college affordability, innovation, transparency, and quality, including a proposal that would pay alternative higher education providers like MOOCs and employers who provide high-quality two-year degrees at no cost to the student. The White House budget request would reform interest rates on federal student loans, tying them to the 10-year Treasury note rate plus an additional percentage each year, but leaving the rates fixed over the life of the loan. The proposal is adapted from a plan published last year by the Education Policy Program's Jason Delisle. The Education Policy Program at the New America Foundation has reviewed the president's proposals and generated a list of key questions that policymakers, the media, stakeholder groups, and the public should ask about the proposals.