Search

The College Cost Reduction Act would overhaul the Higher Education Act, making changes to student borrowing and repayment, borrower protections, college oversight, postsecondary data, and more. The bill includes a new proposed risk-sharing model that would require colleges to repay the federal government for a calculated proportion of their previously enrolled students' unpaid federal student loans--including missed payments and waived unpaid interest, as well as discharged principal under an income-driven repayment program or under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. This proportion would be calculated for each degree program at a college using a formula that accounts for college costs charged to students while enrolled and student earnings after they leave. Because this proposal would create financial liabilities for colleges that incentivize them to promote some types of degrees and programs and disincentivize others, The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) potential effects it would have by program, college, and sector. They found that the proposal would likely discourage colleges from promoting and supporting public service professions.

Five years after our 2019 analysis of student borrowing rates across the University of California (UC) system, TICAS partnered with the University of California Student Association (UCSA) again to evaluate the state of affordability and student debt for undergraduates at the UC, and their implications for student success. While our analysis finds improvement across several affordability metrics, concerning inequities in borrowing persist, especially by income, race/ethnicity, and disability status. The UC system's institutional aid program makes it a leader among its peers, but there is still room to strengthen affordability and close equity gaps in degree attainment. Our analysis offers targeted recommendations to build upon UC's efforts to strengthen student success and advance an affordability guarantee that eliminates the need to borrow. [This report was coproduced with the University of California Student Association.]

The U.S. Government Accountability office (GAO) recently released a report presenting new data on eligibility and uptake for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) among college students with low incomes. The report paints a stark picture that, despite high levels of food insecurity among college students, few are receiving SNAP benefits. Our new brief highlights the report's findings and offers policy recommendations to improve student eligibility for SNAP and ensure that students who do qualify are receiving this crucial benefit.

A functioning and equitable college transfer pipeline can help students to lower college costs, minimize student debt, and get credit toward a four-year degree. These benefits are crucial for students and families who pursue postsecondary education for upward economic mobility. However, in the face of a complex maze of policies and practices that students need to navigate to get credit for completed coursework, less than a quarter of students who enter community colleges with the explicit intention to move on to a four-year degree successfully transfer. Our new primer on student transfer options in Michigan provides an in-depth review of the myths and realities transfer students face in the state, proven national strategies to improve transfer success, and the impact of Michigan's current transfer policies on students, institutions, and the state workforce. The primer also offers recommendations for increased transfer affordability and completion tailored to the higher education system in Michigan.

This year, The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) Michigan Student Advocacy Fellows focused their advocacy on expanding resources for students to cover rising non-tuition costs associated with higher education. As their culminating project, the students conducted a survey assessing the impact of non-tuition costs on Michiganders and created an issue brief to guide policymakers in creating resources for students to access housing, food, transportation, and other costs. The brief reviews programs other states have implemented to address student basic needs and provides recommendations to create new state and federal resources to increase college affordability.

A collaboration between The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) and the Student Senate for California Community Colleges (SSCCC), this policy brief examines the costs of attending California Community Colleges (CCCs) for low-income students and the roles that financial aid resources, work hours, and student loan borrowing currently play in meeting those costs. The report sheds light on the college affordability challenges that CCC students face and the need for state and CCC leaders to consider strategies that support CCC students' ability to afford and complete their education. Key recommendations from the brief include, among others, supporting equitable financial aid reform and encouraging more students to apply for financial aid. [This report was co-produced with The Student Senate for California Community Colleges.]

This is the technical document for the report, "Centering Quality, Centering Equity: Lessons Learned in Increasing Early Childhood Educator Credentials." The report explores Early Childhood Education (ECE) credential requirements in California (CA) and Washington, D.C. (D.C.) for two key reasons: 1) both recently raised these requirements and 2) both are in the process of implementing the new changes. The study does not seek to advocate in favor of or against the adoption of increased credential requirements. Rather, its purpose is to shed light on the need to center racial and economic equity in policy design and implementation--focusing on the impact of increased credential requirements on early childhood educators in states pursuing these changes. The appendices in this technical document are: (1) Make-up of Early Care and Education Workforce; (2) Center-Based Early Educator Characteristics by Role; (3) Center-Based Early Educator Work Experience and Credentials by Role; (4) Center-Based Early Educator Time Worked, Income, and Wages by Role; (5) Lead Teachers' Work Experience and Credentials by Race and Ethnicity; (6) Lead Teachers without a Postsecondary Degree, Characteristics by Race and Ethnicity; (7) Focus Group Interview Protocol for California; (8) Focus Group Interview Protocol for Washington, D.C.; (9) Hourly Wages for Early Childhood Educators; and (10) Comparison of D.C. Teacher Salaries in 2022 and Minimum Salaries Required in Fiscal Year 2024 for Programs Receiving Pay Equity Funds.

Thriving communities depend on a strong early childhood education (ECE) system--one where both young children and members of the workforce are served and supported. In recent years, state government leaders have increasingly focused on changing qualifications for specific ECE roles, as increasing credential requirements has sometimes been associated with increasing quality. However, across the country, early childhood educators face significant barriers to economic security and continuing education--all while supporting children, parents, and their communities with specialized education services. This report examines the barriers that even highly qualified early child educators experience in the face of increased credential requirements. Featuring case studies of California and Washington, D.C., the report offers implications for policies that protect educators and advance racial and economic equity in the profession. Included with the report are an Executive Summary encapsulating the findings and a Technical Document describing the methodology, data collection, and quantitative analysis.

In December 2023, TICAS published new research on the College Affordability Gap--the gap between students' total cost of attendance and non-loan aid available to them--in California, Michigan, and New York, with a focus on students eligible for Pell Grants. Our new report builds on this research with data from nine additional states (Colorado, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington), all of whom are part of TICAS' State Policy Network to Advance Debt-Free College. This research helps to define the magnitude of the affordability crisis students face and offers recommendations for state and federal policymakers to incrementally improve college affordability.

This brief examines how specific college affordability policies and practices at the federal, state, and institutional levels can be strengthened to close racial equity gaps in college affordability and completion and to support widespread diversity and representation in higher education. By increasing access to financial aid and shifting the way colleges and universities equitably award and disburse funds, we can leverage financial aid as a marketing, recruitment, enrollment, and retainment tool for both low-income and minoritized students, and to counteract the chilling effect of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decision curtailing the use of race-conscious admissions in higher education. Socio-economic status is not a perfect proxy for race, but affordability policies are a critical lever for equity, given that Latinx, Black, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (NHPI), and American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) students receive multiple forms of grant aid at higher percentages than their white counterparts. The recommendations made in this paper will help close racial/ethnic and economic equity gaps in higher education without violating the SCOTUS decision. [Eileen and Harold Brown provided additional funding for this series of briefs.]

This is the executive summary for the full report, "Centering Quality, Centering Equity: Lessons Learned in Increasing Early Childhood Educator Credentials." Thriving communities depend on a strong early childhood education (ECE) system--one where both young children and members of the workforce are served and supported. In recent years, state government leaders have increasingly focused on changing qualifications for specific ECE roles, as increasing credential requirements has sometimes been associated with increasing quality. However, across the country, early childhood educators face significant barriers to economic security and continuing education--all while supporting children, parents, and their communities with specialized education services.

TICAS partnered with higher education researcher Dr. Donald E. Heller to examine the "affordability gap" that students are facing when paying for college. The report uses federal data to determine the so-called "college affordability gap" in three states--California, Michigan, and New York--with a focus on students who are eligible for the federal Pell Grant. The affordability gap is defined in this analysis as the gap between a student's total costs of attending college--including tuition, fees, housing, food, and other expenses--and the amount of non-loan aid available to them: a combination of family resources, grant aid, and earnings from a reasonable number of work hours. The report then examines how much the example states would need to invest close this gap for Pell-eligible students, with the goal of a $0 gap for such students. This analysis builds on TICAS' ongoing efforts to build a debt-free future for all students.

The Cal State Student Association (CSSA) and The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) examine trends in college affordability for California State University (CSU) bachelor's degree recipients compared to its original analysis published six years ago. This new report finds that in 2021-2022, nearly two in three CSU bachelor's degree recipients who left college with student loan debt had family incomes no greater than $54,000; and despite decreases in overall borrowing rates, equity gaps persist with racially marginalized students continuing to be more likely to graduate with debt than their white and Asian peers. As the CSU continues its efforts to strengthen student success, close equity gaps, and increase affordability without relying on student loans or working excessively, we offer recommendations to support its students' by ensuring that revenue from a tuition increase be used as institutional aid for the lowest income students with flexibility towards covering non-tuition costs, providing greater transparency to the public on how the CSU is using its State University Grant (SUG) funding to cover college costs, and supporting 2024 budget advocacy for Cal Grant Reform. The CSU's intentionality around closing equity gaps in affordability and success is more important than ever given the chilling effects of the U.S. Supreme Court decision to end affirmative action nationally, student loan repayments resuming in Fall 2023 after an extended pandemic-induced pause, proposed CSU tuition increases, and rising costs of living. [This report was produced with the Cal State Student Association (CSSA).]

In a joint report released today, The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) and The Education Trust-West urge California lawmakers to keep their promise in ensuring educational equity for BIPOC students and students with the greatest need by investing in Cal Grant Reform starting in the 2023-24 state budget. "Investing Equitably in California College Affordability" outlines specific steps policymakers should take to ensure the most vulnerable students receive adequate financial aid to cover the cost of attending California colleges through intentional budgetary actions that would implement already passed reforms to the state's most critical financial aid investment one year earlier.

Amid efforts to address the ongoing crisis of high costs, high debt burdens, and decreasing confidence in the value of higher education, TICAS [The Institute for College Access & Success] commissioned leading academics to write a series of papers to inform the policy conversation about how to implement effective, equitable, and sustainable solutions to the college affordability crisis. Collectively, the papers outline the current college financing landscape, discuss potential policy options for reducing reliance on debt, and examine specific components that could be addressed as part of a larger federal-state funding partnership to achieve debt-free college for all.

The higher education to workforce pipeline is crucial for our country's economic growth and longevity. However, almost half of students who enroll in college fall off and never complete. The outcomes are even starker for students from low-income backgrounds who face high levels of unmet needs and barriers to completion while in school. Ensuring that the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) supports postsecondary education and access, both for enrolled students and SNAP participants who could enroll, would better support higher education outcomes that can lead to a stronger workforce and economy. In its first analysis focused on student basic needs and anti-poverty, TICAS details the disconnect between higher education access and SNAP eligibility requirements and provides policy solutions to help improve pathways that lead to economic security.

The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) is the primary application that determines access to federal, state, and institutional financial aid. When students fail to complete their FAFSA application, they are less likely to enroll or complete a credential, leaving tens of millions of federal resources for students on the table. Boosting FAFSA completion rates in Michigan is integral in reducing out-of-pocket costs for all Michiganders looking to improve their job eligibility and lifetime earnings. As one of the core priorities of TICAS Michigan and community partners across the state, it is crucial that any implementation of a state-wide mandate of FAFSA completion as a high school graduation requirement removes potential barriers and unintended consequences for outgoing high school graduates. TICAS Michigan's analysis compiles key feedback from community partners across the state to provide insights and student-centered recommendations to help guide policy discussions on solutions to improving Michigan's FAFSA completion rates.

In Chicago, despite an increase in high school graduates and college enrollment, only one in four community college students graduate within three years. COVID-19 exacerbated longstanding barriers to college success faced by students from low-income backgrounds, as well as for Black, Latino, and Indigenous students. Without proactive interventions and intentionally designed wraparound supports or comprehensive approaches to student success (CASS) support services, equity gaps in college completion and postsecondary outcomes will persist. Strong cross-sector partnerships, adequate funding, and policy enhancements are necessary to expand equitable access to high-quality comprehensive supports that get more students to degree completion. The City Colleges of Chicago (City Colleges) and nonprofit partner, One Million Degrees (OMD), provide one compelling partnership model for overcoming these barriers. Instead of seeing low completion rates as evidence that college is not for everyone, City Colleges, OMD, and their partners are considering the factors causing students to stop out. They are also scaling up support to ensure students complete college no matter their race, ethnicity, or economic background.

Robust longitudinal education and workforce data are integral in addressing disparities in educational opportunities and economic outcomes. However, not all states link their P-12, postsecondary, and workforce data sets. Kentucky and Tennessee are two state examples that proved success in linking data from different agencies. TICAS' brief analyzes the two states' data systems and offers key lessons on how to develop a robust data system that can successfully inform decision makers in allocating resources to improve educational opportunities and economic outcomes.

If the state of California finds the funds, the Cal Grant Reform Act--as enacted in the 2022 Budget Act--is to be implemented in 2024 to support hundreds of thousands of Californians in affording, accessing, and succeeding in higher education. Instead, the state has proposed adding more funding to the less equitable Middle Class Scholarship (MCS) program. This Equity Alert provides an overview of why Cal Grant Reform is needed; describes the limitations of the Middle Class Scholarship program in serving low-income, BIPOC, and community college students in California; and provides recommendations that state policymakers can act on this year to advance equity-centered financial aid reforms.

Current assessments of college value fall short of centering race in its measurements by ignoring the unique economic conditions students of color face. To support ongoing advocacy for equitable investments in both students of color and institutions serving the largest shares of racially marginalized students, in its latest analysis, The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) introduces a new metric, Race and Economic Mobility (REM), which captures economic outcomes by institutions' composition of racially marginalized students. TICAS' analysis found that students who attended colleges that serve greater shares of students of color earn less in income 10 years after graduation than their peers who attended colleges with fewer shares of students of color. Even more alarming, at colleges serving the largest share of Black students, students owe more in student loans than they originally borrowed.

The Pell Grant is targeted to students with the greatest financial need, and many policymakers find the Pell Grant a useful policy lever for promoting access and success for students from lower- and moderate-income backgrounds. There are several examples where policymakers use Pell eligibility to allocate resources and hold colleges accountable for their outcomes; however, basic information about Pell access and completion is not well documented in policy research. To address this problem -- and to provide baseline statistics useful in policy conversations -- this analysis provides information about the data sources used throughout the creation of the series and seeks to highlight potential improvements on data collection in the field. The fourth and final piece of TICAS' series on Pell Grant access and completion, this brief presents an overview of reporting process for the whole series. It reviews the use of College Scorecard and IPEDS Outcome Measures (OM), followed by a review of missing data, and concludes with a comparison of completion rates using both data sources. [For Part I, see ED623192. For Part II, see ED623193. For Part III, see ED623194.]

The Pell Grant is targeted to students with the greatest financial need, and many policymakers find the Pell Grant a useful policy lever for promoting access and success for students from lower- and moderate-income backgrounds. There are several examples where policymakers use Pell eligibility to allocate resources and hold colleges accountable for their outcomes; however, basic information about Pell access and completion is not well documented in policy research. To address this problem -- and to provide baseline statistics useful in policy conversations -- this analysis provides new information about Pell enrollments and degree completion rates for for-profit colleges and universities. The third in a, now, four-part series on the Pell Grant, this brief presents basic data trends, finding that for-profits that predominantly award certificates tend to have higher Pell Grant access and completion rates than other types of for-profits, although research consistently finds certificate programs provide weaker economic returns than other postsecondary credentials. Additionally, this brief finds completion rates for Pell Grant students at for-profits are increasing at a much slower pace (half a percentage point per year) than at public and non-profit institutions. [For Part I, see ED623192. For Part II, see ED623193. For Part IV, see ED623196.]

TICAS, in partnership with MDRC and LEO, has worked for more than a year and a half with a community of seven evidence-based college completion programs. These programs, which span the country geographically, all employ a similar model that uses counselors, coaches, or case managers to connect students with a range of support -- personal, financial, and academic -- to help them complete college. All have also undergone rigorous evaluations that have shown statistically significant impacts on college persistence, completion, and student earnings after graduation. We met with them in February and again in May to discuss their experience over the last two years and to learn how they have adapted to keep as many students on track to graduate as possible. This paper summarizes those lessons learned and offers some insights for the field on innovative approaches to recruiting and retaining students during a time of enormous pressure and upheaval. [This report was authored with support from Bottom Line, CUNY ASAP | ACE, InsideTrack, NISS, One Million Degrees, Project QUEST, and Stay the Course.]

The Pell Grant is targeted to students with the greatest financial need, and many policymakers find the Pell Grant a useful policy lever for promoting access and success for students from lower- and moderate-income backgrounds. There are several examples where policymakers use Pell eligibility to allocate resources and hold colleges accountable for their outcomes; however, basic information about Pell access and completion is not well documented in policy research. To address this problem -- and to provide baseline statistics useful in policy conversations -- this analysis provides new information about Pell enrollments and degree completion rates for public and non-profit four-year universities. The second in a four-part series on the Pell Grant, this brief presents basic data trends, finding Pell Grant access and completion rates vary by selectivity. [For Part I, see ED623192. For Part III, see ED623194. For Part IV, see ED623196.]

The Pell Grant is targeted to students with the greatest financial need, and many policymakers find Pell to be a useful policy lever for promoting access and success for students from lower-income backgrounds. There are several examples where policymakers use Pell eligibility to allocate resources and hold colleges accountable for their outcomes; however, basic information about Pell access and completion is not well documented in policy research. To address this problem -- and to provide baseline statistics useful in policy conversations -- this analysis provides new information about Pell enrollments and degree completion rates for community colleges. As the first in a four-part series on the Pell Grant, this brief provides background on the community college sector and data used in the analysis, followed by trends on the percentage of undergraduates receiving Pell Grants over time. [For Part II, see ED623193. For Part III, see ED623194. For Part IV, see ED623196.]

Despite the availability of income-driven repayment (IDR) plans--and significant improvements to program design and generosity over time--too many federal student loan borrowers?continue to struggle with repayment. Many struggling borrowers never enroll in an IDR plan; even for some who do,?income-based monthly payments can?still be too high. Borrowers also struggle to navigate the bureaucratic hurdles of enrolling in and staying enrolled in?IDR plans. For IDR?to better?protect borrowers from unaffordable payments, keep borrowers out of default, and provide a reliable light at the end of the tunnel, policymakers must make significant reforms to IDR design and implementation. These forward-looking design changes must be made alongside ongoing efforts to address historic shortcomings of the IDR system. "How Reforming Income-Driven Repayment Can Reduce the Burden of Student Debt" focuses on two key design changes that will help reduce the burden of debt for millions of borrowers: (1) increasing the amount of a borrower's income that is "protected" from the IDR payment formula and (2) shortening the maximum repayment period. [This report was written with contributions from Jessica Thompson and J. Oliver Schak.]

The growing cost of college is one of the most significant barriers to completion. However, research shows that frequent, intensive advising, combined with financial and other support, can make a tremendous difference in helping students complete. For two years, TICAS has worked with a group of rigorously evaluated organizations across the country that provide these comprehensive approaches to student success, or CASS, by connecting students with counselors and advisors to foster personal relationships and building a customized suite of support. Along with research partners MDRC and the Wilson Sheehan Lab for Economic Opportunities (LEO), TICAS convened these groups to better understand what it would take to reach all students who could benefit from these programs throughout the country. With this community of practice, TICAS created a research agenda identifying the research questions most pressing to answer at this moment in time and a framework for equity in the use of data.

On August 24, 2022, President Biden announced that his administration would be cancelling $10,000 -- $20,000 of student debt for middle- and lower-income borrowers. Naturally, this announcement has unleashed a wave of follow-up questions among borrowers. This fact sheet is intended to help Californians with student loans navigate the process of determining their eligibility and understanding the program.

"Student Debt and the Class of 2020" is The Institute for College Access & Success' (TICAS') sixteenth annual report on the student loan debt of recent graduates from four-year colleges, documenting changes and variation in student debt across states and colleges. State averages for debt at graduation in 2020 ranged from $18,350 (Utah) to $39,950 (New Hampshire), and new graduates' likelihood of having debt varied from 39 percent (Utah) to 73 percent (South Dakota). In 19 states, average debt was more than $30,000, and it was over $35,000 in six states. Many of the same states appear at the high and low ends of the spectrum as in previous years. High-debt states remain concentrated in the Northeast and low-debt states are mainly in the West. Available data on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on current students and borrowers suggest a cause for concern about college affordability and unaffordable debt burdens. This report includes federal policy recommendations to reduce debt burdens and manage repayment in the wake of COVID-19 and beyond. [For "Student Debt and the Class of 2019. 15th Annual Report," see ED609297.]

Racial and economic equity gaps persist in access to college, degree attainment, and employment outcomes despite attempts to close them over multiple decades, and systemic barriers make it more difficult for BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, People of Color] students and students from low-income backgrounds to not only complete their degree but receive the same returns on those degrees as their White and higher-income peers. As policymakers look to build a new federal-state partnership to restore and maintain funding for public colleges, the federal government, states, and institutional leaders must prioritize closing these equity gaps in postsecondary education. The federal government should include funds for states to assess equity gaps in resources and student outcomes and develop strategies to combat them using available federal and state data to identify and target resources where they are most needed. However, the data are limited and vary by state. Improvements to data are essential for policymakers to better understand and more effectively address these longstanding inequities. A new report from the Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) provides an in-depth overview of federal and state postsecondary data collection, highlights current legislation that could fill existing equity gaps, and makes policy recommendations for federal and state data collection, which includes the creation of equity dashboards to analyze trends, individual institution data, and program outcomes to provide actionable information to guide state policies that improve equity in postsecondary education. [This report was written with key support from Jessica Thompson, J. Oliver Schak, Michele Streeter, and Kate Tromble.]

Most colleges and universities help millions of Americans earn a degree or diploma to lead to economic security and a better life. In the wake of the Great Recession, it was revealed that too many for-profit colleges -- by enrolling hundreds of thousands of students -- sought to take advantage of the federal financial aid system to make windfall profits. Issued in 2014, the Gainful Employment (GE) Rule was designed to ensure that career-education programs leave their graduates with debts that are affordable relative to their actual incomes. It distinguishes between programs that provide affordable training that leads to well-paying jobs and those that do not, based on the debt-to-income ratios of their graduates. This fact sheet provides an overview of the gainful employment regulation, including the impact on the for-profit college industry, and pushes for the Biden Administration to restore rules to prevent student aid from going to colleges that operate wasteful, fraudulent, and abusive programs.

Most colleges and universities help millions of Americans earn a degree or diploma to lead to economic security and a better life. In the wake of the Great Recession, it was revealed that too many for-profit colleges -- by enrolling hundreds of thousands of students -- sought to take advantage of the federal financial aid system to make windfall profits. The 2016 Borrower Defense Rule was a direct response to widespread deception by multiple large for-profit colleges where students took out thousands of dollars in debt based on false or misleading information. Most notably, this includes the closures of Corinthian Colleges and ITT Technical Institute, two for-profit chains, where investigators repeatedly documented widespread misleading and deceptive practices. This fact sheet provides an overview and history of the 2016 rule, including a timeline of Corinthian Colleges' collapse.

A college degree or credential is a crucial stepping-stone to the middle class, and American colleges and universities play an essential role in building a more prosperous, equitable country. However, too many colleges routinely and disproportionately enroll students who end up struggling to repay or, worse, default on their student debt. "A Policymaker's Guide to Using New Student Debt Metrics to Strengthen Higher Education Accountability," a new report from The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS), considers three promising debt metrics that could complement and strengthen existing accountability metrics and ultimately move the needle on borrower success: debt-to-discretionary earnings ratios, earnings net of expected debt payments thresholds, and repayment rates.

"Dismantling Dire Disparities: A Closer Look at Racially Inequitable Funding at Public Four-Year Colleges and Universities" examines funding and resource patterns from the Great Recession to the peak of the economic recovery (2006 to 2018), and takes a deep dive into the public four-year colleges that disproportionately enroll and graduate BIPOC students. Inadequate and inequitable funding persisted at public colleges and universities during the 12-year period, especially for community colleges, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and other Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) that primarily educate Black and Latina/o students. [This report was written with key support from Nancy Wong.]

Complaints are an essential tool not only to resolve student problems but also to identify patterns of widespread misconduct and take action to prevent ongoing harm to students and taxpayers. However, the current complaint landscape is complex and not well designed to serve students' needs. "Unheard Voices: The Case for Improving Higher Education Complaint Systems" takes an in-depth look at systems in the current complaints landscape, finding many are ineffective, inefficient, and undermine consumer protection efforts. [Substantial contributions to this report were made by: Debbie Cochrane, Libby Masiuk, and Ana Fung.]

"Student Debt and the Class of 2019" is The Institute for College Access & Success' (TICAS') fifteenth annual report on the student loan debt of recent graduates from four-year colleges, documenting changes and variation in student debt across states and colleges. This report includes federal policy recommendations to reduce debt burdens, given the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond, including investing in students and public colleges, extending and expanding emergency student loan relief, and improving transparency and oversight. [For "Student Debt and the Class of 2018. 14th Annual Report," see ED600625.]

High tuition makes headlines and may dissuade students from pursuing college or excluding what appear to be high-cost colleges. However, a college's "sticker price" can be misleading because it does not reflect any grant or scholarship aid that reduces the price students actually pay. As the costs of attending college have risen, the role of financial aid in making college affordable for low- and moderate-income students has become increasingly important. A decade ago, the federal government attempted to address confusion around sticker and net prices by requiring all colleges to maintain on their websites a net price calculator (NPC) that displays a personalized estimate of net cost based on the family resources input by a prospective student. At their best, net price calculators can be helpful marketing tools for colleges looking to expand access for students with financial need, showing how much grant aid students are likely to receive and how much the price comes down once those awards are applied. In this way, they are also powerful tools for students who may uncover the reality that their dream college is in closer financial reach than they may have assumed. While Net Price Calculators are a critical resource, national research has shown that they can be hard to find, hard to use, and hard to compare across colleges. In this paper, the authors explore the accessibility, ease of use, and comparability of NPCs in Michigan, and find that trends in the state mirror the national story: these tools are not consistently easy to find, use, or compare. The authors provide recommendations for the federal government, states, and colleges to improve NPCs. [This report was researched and written with support from Lindsay Ahlman, Oliver Schack, and Jessica Thompson.]

Analysis finds that out-of-pocket college costs are unaffordable for low-income Californians, and often more so at the state's community colleges where tuition is low. This analysis is the third in a series, and is the first to look at affordability challenges of students in different living arrangements. [Debbie Cochrane and Oliver Schak made significant contributions to this report. For the 2019 report, see ED593560].

This brief illustrates that while many borrowers in IDR [income-driven repayment] will repay their loans in full, those who do receive a discharge of remaining debt after 20 or 25 years of responsible payments may face an unaffordable tax liability because these discharged amounts are treated as taxable income under current law.

States invest heavily in education, providing funding either directly or in the form of financial aid from preschool through college, with positive outcomes from those impacting nearly every other area of public policy, particularly the workforce. To understand and assess results, states collect and analyze information about these investments at various levels, and most have already created longitudinal data systems. These systems empower students to make better-informed decisions and provide policymakers with a deeper understanding of the factors that shape student outcomes in order to create public policy to address state priorities. "What's Aid Got to Do With It? The Importance of Incorporating Financial Aid Data in California's Cradle-to-Career Data System," the latest report from The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS), examines how states -- Texas, Virginia, and Maryland -- have utilized financial aid data in their longitudinal and higher education data systems and provides recommendations for how California can follow suit to build a longitudinal data system that will help address equity gaps within the state. [Debbie Cochrane, Laura Szabo-Kubitz, and Jingwen Zhang made substantial contributions to this report.]

One lasting legacy of the COVID-19 pandemic may be more students attending online classes at both traditional and fully online colleges. The efficacy of online education remains unproven, especially for students with academic or other challenges. And yet, both students and policymakers lack the data they need to assess whether online classes are serving students well. Online classes are the best, and often only, option in the midst of a pandemic. Some online programs have shown promise at expanding access, helping more students learn at a lower cost. However, most online programs remain unproven, particularly on a large scale, and for students with gaps in academic preparation or other needs. Despite the risks, it is challenging to assess the quality of online education. Key sources of data on colleges do not identify whether programs are online, making it impossible for students to make informed choices or for regulators to identify potential problems. Changes in data collection are needed to protect students, including data on the graduation rates, loan defaults, and other outcomes of online students. The author recommends that the U.S. Department of Education: (1) Track colleges that move online through pandemic-related regulatory waivers to allow future oversight; (2) Collect data on online students in key student aid and higher education databases and publish key findings; and (3) Identify potentially problematic online programs and institutions by monitoring rapid growth, low student retention rates, and predatory recruiting practices in order to subject them to further scrutiny.

Millions of college students, across the nation and in California, benefit from financial aid that reduces the amount students and families must pay for tuition and fees, supplies, and living expenses like food, housing, and transportation while enrolled. In California, concerns about college costs and affordability have in recent years expanded into debates about how to reform the state's Cal Grant program. Awarding $2.1 billion in 2018-19, the Cal Grant program is the largest state grant program in the nation and is available to low- and middle-income students who meet certain eligibility criteria. Students, advocates, and policymakers working to increase college affordability in California have traditionally focused the bulk of their efforts on strengthening the Cal Grant program and, just prior to the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, major reform was moving forward. Institutional grant aid is a significant source of financial aid that helps reduce California students' financial barriers to college, yet it is relatively less understood than the state Cal Grant program. This report sheds light on the role institutional grants play in supplementing federal and state aid to support affordable and equitable college opportunity in California, highlighting the scale and diversity of these programs in the state's public and private nonprofit colleges. The author uses the most recent available public data, which reflect pre-pandemic funding and enrollment levels, to explore for each type of college: (1) The amount of institutional aid colleges allocate to students with financial need, versus those without need for financial aid; (2) The share of undergraduate students receiving federal Pell Grants, the vast majority of whom have incomes under $40,000, which is a marker of accessibility for low-income students; (3) The net price for low-income students; and (4) Levels of debt that college graduates leave school with.

In 2014, ACCT and TICAS partnered to examine student loan default at nine community colleges and explore administrative practices aimed at addressing students' default risks. At each college, we analyzed cohort default rate data and uncovered notable trends and populations at higher risk, identified default-reduction strategies the college was already using, and suggested additional strategies to consider. In 2020, we followed up with these colleges to understand how their strategies had evolved since our analysis.

California has long been a national and global leader in developing and maintaining quality higher education options, as well as in providing financial aid and consumer protections for Californians who access that education. However, although California's colleges and the state government do collect, receive, and report a great deal of data, these data have not been effectively connected to present accurate, understandable, and comparable employment outcomes information in a transparent way for policymakers, students and families, institutions, researchers, and others. In the absence of a statewide data system in California, the California Community Colleges (CCC), California State University (CSU), and University of California (UC) have each initiated their own independent efforts to share higher education outcomes data. However, the data each independently share are slightly different, and there is no consistency in format or presentation among any of the segments. The result is that higher education employment outcomes data available in California are not comparable because of inconsistency in data definitions and reporting between the segments and individual schools; incomplete because it does not include vital elements that students and policymakers need to know; and inaccessible because it is not housed centrally for statewide use. This report provides an overview of higher education employment outcomes data currently available in California, highlights where data are lacking, and makes recommendations for the state to improve the data's availability, comparability, and usability by: (1) Creating and developing a secure, private, central statewide database that collects and houses studentlevel education, employment, and wage data for all higher education institutions in California; (2) Even in the absence of a statewide database, making verified employment and wage outcomes data newly available to students at private schools by requiring that the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and the Employment Development Department (EDD) share data in the same way that public segments do; and (3) Creating a publicly accessible dashboard that presents accurate, comparable education employment outcomes data by school and by program. In addition, this report also highlights qualities of several systems developed in other states, which can serve as examples as California develops a model statewide system.[This report was written with assistance from Debbie Cochrane, Lindsay Alhman, Neha Dalal, Veronica Gonzalez, and Jessica Thompson.]

In recent years, enrollment at for-profit colleges has fallen steeply due to sustained economic growth, the poor reputation of the industry as a result of increasing awareness of documented abuses, and stronger accountability policies that were put in place during the Obama Administration. However, after years of enrollment declines, for-profit colleges may be poised for a rebound. "The Evolution of the For-Profit College Industry: New Challenges for Oversight" focuses on important changes to the sector, which include the growth of online education, the efforts of for-profit colleges to convert to non-profit status, and the increased use of online program managers (OPMs) by public and non-profit colleges to operate their online programs.

In a joint fact sheet, The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) and National Student Legal Defense Network (Student Defense) partnered to provide key facts about the National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreements (NC-SARA) and how it can undermine student protections.

The cohort default rate (CDR) has worked to reduce students' risk of default, but decades of experience have also revealed weaknesses that policymakers must tackle. "Driving Down Default" outlines key priorities for strengthening the CDR to further reduce student loan default, including specific recommendations to protect against manipulation, build in greater incentives for schools to continue to meaningfully improve their CDRs, and ensure the CDR effectively targets high-risk colleges. [Key contributions for this report were provided by Debbie Cochrane and James Kvaal.]

The recommendations put forth in this paper stemmed from a series of conversations, conducted over the course of 2019, with experts and stakeholders representing a range of perspectives and experiences within higher education and financial aid. The working group explored policy design details in depth and identified core areas of general agreement, which are incorporated into recommendations for the next steps that California policymakers should take to: (1) improve accuracy of colleges' cost estimates; (2) set reasonable financial expectations for families and for students; (3) ensure reasonable non-financial eligibility terms for students; (4) remove unnecessary and outdated barriers to financial aid; and (5) communicate effectively with students and families. Together, these changes would form the backbone of an achievable debt-free pathway to a college degree or certificate for California residents. The recommendations are intended to help identify the North Star for state financial aid discussions and to guide new investments both large and small by articulating both the goals of financial aid reform as well as the students in most need of investment.

For decades, state disinvestment in public higher education, paired with inequitable funding across institution types, has undermined states' ability to provide accessible and affordable higher education opportunities. In recent years, varied higher education stakeholders began calling for an end to state disinvestment through a reimagined federal-state partnership to better support public colleges. The authors of this report are specifically proposing a framework for a new federal-state partnership that will equip states to maintain their investment in public colleges across economic cycles. The framework in this report outlines three key design principles that a federal-state partnership must include to be effective: (1) providing strong incentives to maintain and increase state investment; (2) ensuring stable funding across economic cycles; and (3) making headway in closing racial and economic equity gaps in access and attainment. To account for changing budget realities, the report outlines several adjustable policy levers that Congress could scale up or down depending on available funding, as opposed to proposing a minimum or recommended dollar amount for federal spending. The authors also provide illustrated examples at several levels of funding.