Category: financial aid

  • Case Study: Florida Policy Opening Enrollment for At-Risk Students

    Case Study: Florida Policy Opening Enrollment for At-Risk Students

    Title: The Role of State Policy in Supporting Students Experiencing Homelessness and Former Foster Youth in Higher Education

    Authors: Carrie E. Henderson and Katie Grissom

    Source: The Urban Institute

    Paying for a college degree is already a difficult, complex process for many students involving a variety of sources of financial aid and payment. For students with a history of foster care or housing instability, this task becomes even more challenging given the lack of financial and social support they experience growing up.

    To properly support these students, policymakers and higher education administrators need to create educational environments that go beyond teaching and learning to prioritize access to essential resources and socioeconomic conditions that can provide stability in students’ lives. State policy can provide critical opportunities to open pathways for students and address the personal, emotional, and logistical challenges that students face. A new report from the Urban Institute explores how the Florida state legislature took steps to enhance access to postsecondary education for homeless students and former foster youth and how it affected higher education attainment.

    Key findings include:

    New state policies expanded tuition and fee exemptions: In 2022, the Florida legislature created policies that expanded the eligibility for tuition and fee exemptions to match the federal definition of homeless children and youth and include students who had been involved in shelter, dependency, or termination of parental rights proceedings.

    Increase in tuition and fee exemptions rose since implementation: The data Florida collected showed an upward trend in the use of the homelessness fee exemption in both the Florida College System (FCS) and the State University System (SUS) between 2021-22 and 2023-24. In the FCS in 2023-24, the number of exemptions increased by 103 percent since 2021-22, from 689 to 1,396. SUS institutions experienced more incremental growth, as homelessness exemptions increased from 344 in 2021-22 to 432 in 2023–24, a 26 percent increase.

    Tuition and fee exemptions can reduce the financial burden of postsecondary education, making it more affordable and attainable for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. However, policymakers considering exemptions and subsidies should include dedicated funding to help institutions of higher education implement these services effectively. Without additional funding, colleges and universities lack the supplemental resources to implement policies feasibly. Furthermore, policymakers should listen to and work with administrators to fund holistic wraparound services that impact students’ ability to enroll, persist, and succeed in higher education.

    To read the full report from the Urban Institute, click here.

    —Austin Freeman

    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • New Might Not Always Mean Improved: The Benefits and Drawbacks of the New FAFSA

    New Might Not Always Mean Improved: The Benefits and Drawbacks of the New FAFSA

    Title: Chutes and Ladders: Falling Behind and Getting Ahead with the Simplified FAFSA

    Authors: Jonathan S. Lewis and Alyssa Stefanese Yates

    Source: uAspire

    Prior to the 2024-25 academic year, the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) underwent significant changes, mandated by Congress through the FAFSA Simplification Act. A recent uAspire survey of 274 students, parents, counselors, and financial aid administrators found the changes to the FAFSA entailed a number of “chutes,” or drawbacks, and several “ladders” that allowed for a more streamlined financial aid filing process.

    Key survey findings regarding the simplified FAFSA’s benefits and challenges include:

    Benefits:

    • Students appreciated the reduced number of questions within the new FAFSA form.
    • The office of Federal Student Aid improved help text and resources, which aided those accessing the form in answering common questions.
    • Some populations had easier experiences with FAFSA, such as those with relatively straightforward finances, and individuals without overwhelming extenuating circumstances.
    • Those with previous FAFSA experience noted a generally easier experience with the changes.
    • Students with access to high school or college counselors often found greater success with the changes, demonstrating the importance of accessibility to help during the process.

    Challenges:

    • More than half of those surveyed reported experiencing technical problems.
    • The delayed FAFSA timeline heightened stress among students and counselors.
    • Insufficient communication and customer service left approximately 4 million calls to the Department of Education’s call center between Jan. 1 and May 31 unanswered.
    • The issues above often compounded, forming intersecting challenges for students and counselors.
    • Individuals without a Social Security number and English language learners felt the challenges with FAFSA more severely, struggling in particular with technical problems and communication barriers, demonstrating that some populations had more difficult experiences than others.

    The authors conclude by recommending several additional changes to the FAFSA. To minimize the compounding negative effects of the chutes, financial aid processing should be completed faster; technical glitches should be fixed; and communication, wording, and form accessibility should be improved. The authors also recommend fortifying the ladders by finding additional opportunities to reduce the time spent and frustration felt by those filing.

    Overall, the survey highlights how the FAFSA changes produced diverse and polarizing effects. Many students found the process to be simple, securing their financial aid with just a few clicks; other students felt extreme stress caused by technical roadblocks and delays, which left them uncertain about how to pay for school.

    To read the full report from uAspire, click here. For additional information and to read about the Jan. 16 webinar with the authors of the report, click here.

    —Julia Napier

    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Recommendations for States to Address Postsecondary Affordability

    Recommendations for States to Address Postsecondary Affordability

    Authors: Lauren Asher, Nate Johnson, Marissa Molina, and Kristin D. Hultquist

    Source: HCM Strategists

    An October 2024 report, Beyond Sticker Prices: How States Can Make Postsecondary Education More Affordable, reviews data to evaluate affordability of postsecondary education across nine states, including Alabama, California, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.

    The authors emphasize the importance of considering net price, or the full cost of attendance less total aid. Depending on the state, low-income students pay 16-27 percent of their total family income to attend community college.

    At public four-year colleges with high net prices, students with family income of $30,000-48,000 py more than half of their income (51-53 percent) for school in two of the nine states. Four-year colleges with low net prices show cost variability based on whether a student is the lowest income, earning $0-30,000, or has $30,000-48,000 in income. Students in the former group pay 21-27 percent of their family income toward education, while students in the latter group pay 40-41 percent of their income.

    The brief recommends that policymakers take the following issues into account:

    • The way states fund public institutions is critical for low-income students. Consider increasing funding for community colleges as well as evaluating how student income factors into allocation of state funds.
    • Tuition policy is integral to making decisions about postsecondary education. Public perception of college affordability is influenced by tuition costs. States have the power to set limits on how much institutions can raise or change costs, but states also must be careful not to limit institutions from charging what they require to adequately support students’ needs.
    • Transparency and consistency among financial aid programs increase their reach. States should consider making financial aid programs more readily understandable. State financial aid policies should also increase flexibility to adjust for transferring, length of time to graduate, and financial aid from other sources.
    • How states support basic needs affects students’ ability to afford attending college. Policies at the state level can offer students more options for paying for food, housing, caregiving, and more.

    To read the full report, click here.

    —Kara Seidel

    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Good News About the FAFSA

    Good News About the FAFSA

    Millions of current and prospective college students were let down last year when the federal rollout of the new FAFSA form was badly bungled and delayed for months. The fallout from the resulting chaos and uncertainty was well-documented and widespread, including a drop in over 5 percent in first-year enrollment for fall 2024 linked at least in part to the FAFSA problems.

    But now, there is some good news for students, their families, and the institutions working hard to ensure that low- and middle-income students have a path to higher education.

    While we have been harsh critics of the Department of Education’s failed FAFSA rollout, it is important to recognize when they’ve done well. The department committed to making the new FAFSA form work as intended for the next academic year—and they not only have accomplished that, but they have also done it faster than promised, and faster than many expected.

    Education Secretary Miguel Cardona announced Nov. 21 that after four successful rounds of beta testing, the 2025-26 FAFSA form is now available to all students and families. While we would have preferred for the 2025-26 FAFSA to have been available on Oct.1, we applaud that the department’s announcement came 10 days ahead of the promised Dec. 1 date, and the system appears to be performing as expected. In addition, this fully opens the gateway to the other benefits of the new FAFSA form, including allowing hundreds of thousands more individuals to access Pell Grants, the cornerstone of college affordability for so many students.

    This success is mirrored by a rare bipartisan moment in Congress that underscores how important it is to get federal student financial aid determinations to low-income students as early as possible. During the lame-duck session of Congress–and despite the partisan polarization and acrimony of the election season—the House and Senate approved and sent to President Biden legislation  aimed at streamlining the application process for federal student aid by making Oct. 1 the official FAFSA launch date each year.

    ACE and other higher education associations identified how critical this change in date was, and Congress listened. The FAFSA Deadline Act, introduced earlier this year, gives students and families more time to make crucial financial decisions and institutions adequate time to provide clear and transparent aid offers. We pushed Congress to move the legislation as quickly as possible, and lawmakers acted quickly—and in a bipartisan manner—to approve it.

    Passage of this legislation is a vital step toward improving access to financial aid, particularly for low-income students. Ensuring a properly functioning FAFSA form is another.

    There has been much consternation, rightfully so, about the flawed FAFSA roll out, and the consequences remain serious. All of us—the government and colleges and universities—will have to work hard to bring back the students who were not able to attend college this year because the financial aid system failed them.

    Campus leaders can do their part by ensuring that current and prospective students are well informed about the FAFSA and how to best navigate the new form and process. In its Nov. 21 announcement about the release of the 2025-26 FAFSA, the department also included an array of resources that institutions can share with students and their families and college counselors.

    In a difficult political climate, it is great to see both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government working in tandem to better support low- and middle-income students. These twin successes are extremely important and long overdue. We’ll keep urging policymakers to build on this progress in 2025, and we know that our institutions will do their part as well.

    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Troubled FAFSA Rollout Linked to Sharp Decline in First-Year College Enrollment

    Troubled FAFSA Rollout Linked to Sharp Decline in First-Year College Enrollment

    Title: Fewer Freshmen Enrolled in College This Year Following Troubling FAFSA Cycle

    Author: Katharine Meyer

    Source: Brookings Institution, National Student Clearinghouse Research Center

    The rollout of the new FAFSA form last year triggered cascading consequences across the higher education community. The launch was delayed, customer calls remained unanswered, and the number of filings decreased by about three percent. As the form’s issues compounded, experts predicted that the fumbled rollout would likely negatively impact the higher education sector across several metrics, particularly new student enrollment.

    The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center collected data at the beginning of the academic year to begin painting the updated enrollment picture and will follow up with final enrollment numbers for the 2024-25 academic year. The Brookings Institution analyzed the preliminary data and observed large declines in FAFSA filings, followed by a decrease in first-year enrollment.

    Across all institutions, first-year enrollment is down 5.8 percent among 18-year-olds and 8.6 percent among 19-20-year-olds. At public four-year institutions, first-year enrollment declined 8.5 percent, and it declined 6.5 percent at private four-year institutions. White freshman enrollment declined the most (11.4 percent), followed by multiracial (6.6 percent) and Black (6.1 percent) first-year student enrollment. Enrollment at HBCUs, however, increased 5.9 percent from last year and has cumulatively increased 12.6 percent since fall 2022.

    First-year enrollment at four-year schools declined across all levels of Pell Grant recipience. Institutions that experienced the largest declines in first-year enrollment, though, were public and private four-year institutions with the highest shares of students receiving Pell Grants (-10.4 and -10.7 percent, respectively). First-year enrollment at four-year colleges is also down across all levels of selectivity, with the largest decline occurring at very competitive public four-year institutions (-10.8 percent), followed by competitive public four-year institutions (-10.3 percent).

    Despite declines in first-year enrollment, total college enrollment increased three percent, due in part to a 4.7 percent increase in community college enrollment. Interestingly, this increase occurred at certain types of two-year institutions but not all of them. At colleges that predominantly award associate degrees and some bachelor’s degrees, freshman enrollment increased 2.2 percent, and at two-year institutions that enroll a higher proportion of low-income students, first-year enrollment increased 1.2 percent. At community colleges only awarding associate degrees, however, enrollment decreased by 1.1 percent.

    The author notes these insights come with caveats; many factors have contributed to enrollment decline over the last decade, notably falling public confidence in higher education and the ever-growing cost of attending college. The sharp decline in first-year enrollment, however, correlates with the troubled FAFSA launch. Continuing to collect data over time will provide more insight into the implications of recent disruptions to enrollment trends, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic and the FAFSA rollout. The 2025-26 FAFSA form will be available this December, and its functionality will determine the gravity of the past year’s enrollment decline.

    To view the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center data dashboard, click here. To read the Brookings Institution analysis, click here.

    —Erica Swirsky

    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link

  • Families Use a Variety of Options to Keep Pace with Increasing College Tuition

    Families Use a Variety of Options to Keep Pace with Increasing College Tuition

    Title: Covering the Tuition Bill: How Do Families Pay the Rising Price of College?

    Author: Phillip Levine

    Source: The Brookings Institution

    The increasing costs of attendance at colleges and universities, especially higher “sticker prices,” have attracted attention from both families and policymakers. Although many families are not paying the full sticker prices due to financial aid, today’s families are still facing higher bills for postsecondary education.

    A new analysis from the Brookings Institution examines the different funding sources that families use to pay for four-year nonprofit colleges and how these differ depending on family income. While the findings reflect the different limitations families face based on their incomes, they also suggest that rising net prices mean all households face additional hardships when their children enroll in college.

    Key findings include:

    Middle- and higher-income parents increasingly used their own income and savings.

    • Between 1996 and 2008, payments to colleges from parents’ income and savings jumped by $1,500 to $4,600, depending on the family income and type of institution. These values likely increased again by several thousand from 2008-2020, but specific figures are not available.

    Middle- and higher-income parents have borrowed more.

    • Families with incomes below $50,000 and students attending private institutions saw the highest increases, an average of $1,200, in parents taking out loans from 2008 to 2020.
    • Families with incomes between $50,000 and $100,000 borrowed, on average, $800 more in parent loans for students attending public institutions between 2008 and 2020.
    • Parents were more likely than students to take out education loans, especially between 1996 and 2008 and among middle- and higher-income families.

    Students from lower-income backgrounds worked more.

    • Payments to colleges with funds from student earnings increased among families with incomes under $50,000 from 1996-2008. Student earnings likely also covered the bulk of net price increases for lower-income families between 2008 and 2020.
    • Students from families earning less than $50,000 enrolled at public institutions were six percentage points more likely to work in 2008 compared to in 1996.

    These findings provide reassurance that increased student borrowing is not the primary resource for students to cover increased net prices at four-year colleges. Although the student debt crisis continues to gain attention as overall student loan debt has grown broadly, that increase is largely not occurring at four-year nonprofit institutions.

    However, increased borrowing by parents, especially in middle- and higher-income families, is a trend worthy of more attention. Given that lower-income families may be unable to take on parental loans due to creditworthiness, parental borrowing can contribute to increased inequality as cost may prevent lower-income students from selecting the best school for them or from attending college at all. Middle- and higher-income families can face other significant consequences: If parents deplete their assets or save less, they may not be able to retire until they are older or have decreased retirement income.

    To read the full report, click here.

    —Austin Freeman

    If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

    Source link