Essential Questions for Postsecondary Completion: Postsecondary Persistence

Students complete a high percentage of courses attempted (that is, with a low rate of course dropping and/or failure) (Advancing by Degrees).

Students complete gateway math in first year. Students who completed a college-level math course within two years of initial enrollment were nearly three times as likely to complete as students who did not finish college-level math in that time (Steps to Success).

Students complete 20-30 credits in the first year (Advancing by Degrees).

Students earn summer credits (Advancing by Degrees).

% of first-year students enrolling in 15 credits (How Many Credits Should an Undergraduate Take?)

Students enroll continuously, without stop-outs (Advancing by Degrees).

Students register on time for courses (Advancing by Degrees).

Students maintain an adequate grade-point average. Studies find substantial increases in the chance of retention and degree completion with every one-grade increase in college GPA, after controlling for high school preparation and other factors.

Students achieve a rising GPA over time. Research has emphasized the importance of the trend in a student’s GPA, finding students with rising GPAs over some number of terms being more likely to earn a degree than students with GPAs that either remain constant or decline over time. (Advancing by Degrees).

First-Year Credits Earned. A 2009 study of California Community College student outcomes by C. Moore et al. found that the probability of completion rises with the number of credits earned in the first year, with a fairly linear relationship between the two measures. Researchers found a similar relationship with the probability of completion if they limited the credits earned to only college-level (non-remedial) credits rather than all credits, although the percentage of degree seekers who completed was somewhat higher at each level of college-level credits earned in the first year. Given the large number of CCC students who enroll in college with remedial needs, researchers chose to include all credits, and selected 20 credits in the first year as a reasonable threshold indicator of success (other research has used a range of first-year credits, generally from 20 to 30). Fifty eight percent of degree seekers who earned at least 20 credits in the first year completed – three times as many as those who did not earn that threshold level of credits (Steps to Success).

Credit Completion Ratio. To accumulate credits and build momentum toward completion, students need to complete the courses in which they enroll. In a 2009 study of California Community College student outcomes, researchers found that the rate of earning a certificate or degree or transferring was 24% points higher among students who completed at least 80% of the credits they enrolled in during the first year compared to those who completed a smaller percentage of first-year credits. They calculated the first-year credit completion ratio as the number of credits earned divided by the number of credits attempted, so that either failing or withdrawing from a course led to non-completion of credits (Steps to Success).

Student Attendance Patterns. Students who attend full time and enroll continuously can accumulate credits faster than students who enroll part time and stop out. A 2009 study of California Community College student outcomes by C. Moore et al. found that students who enrolled full time in their first term were almost twice as likely to complete as students who began as part-time students. Continuously enrolled students had a completion rate that was 7 percentage points higher than students who stopped out. Continuous enrollment did not correlate with completion for older students (age 25+), who may be better able to use periods of stopping out to manage job and family responsibilities without getting off track in their pursuit of a college credential (Steps to Success).

Student on-time course registration. A 2009 study of California Community College student outcomes by C. Moore et al. found that late registration for courses affects the probability of completion, with the likelihood of completion declining as the share of courses in which students enroll late increased. “Late” registration was defined as enrolling in a course after the start date of the term. Among students who registered late for no more than one in five of their courses, the completion rate was 32%, compared to 24% for students who registered late more often. Late registration affected completion for all student groups. Nearly half (47%) of degree seekers registered late for at least one in five of their courses (Steps to Success).

% of students receiving proactive advising in the first year. Proactive advising is a holistic approach where advisors initiate contact with students early and consistently to build a connection with the student and engage in discussions around their academic and personal success. Common topics covered in proactive advising meetings include academic goals, career paths, time management, emotional needs, personal wellness, course planning, and strategies and resources for achieving success (Proactive advising practice guide).

Academic momentum – A 15-Credit First-Semester: A study by Paul Attewell and David Monaghan found that academically and socially similar students who attempt 15 rather than 12 credits in their first semester graduate at significantly higher rates within 6 years of initial enrollment. They also find that students who increase their credit load from below fifteen to fifteen or more credits in their second semester are more likely to complete a degree within 6 years than similar students who stay below this threshold. Our evidence suggests that stressing a norm that full time enrollment should be 15 credits per semester would improve graduation rates for most kinds of students. However, an important caveat is that those undergraduates whose paid work exceeds 30 hours per week do not appear to benefit from taking a higher course load (How Many Credits Should an Undergraduate Take?)

Academic momentum – A 15-Credit First-Semester: A study by Clive Belfield et al. found that over their time in college, students who take 15 credits in their first semester pay 4–14 percent less per credit and 9–19 percent less per degree in tuition and fees than students who only take 12 credits in their first semester. These savings also produce gains for colleges, because more tuition revenue is generated as more students persist. The academic and economic effects are even stronger for students who sustain momentum through the first year (Momentum: The Academic and Economic Value of a 15-Credit First-Semester Course Load for College Students in Tennessee).

Academic momentum: Academic advisors and counselors have to target every first-time student for at least 20 additive credits by the end of the first calendar year of enrollment. The chances of making up for anything less than 20 credits diminish rapidly in the second year. Community colleges have some special challenges here, given increasing rates of transfer among traditional-age students. With 6 credits of dual-enrollment course work, even part-time students can reach 20 credits in the first calendar year, and community colleges enroll the bulk of traditional-age part-time students (The Toolbox Revisited).

Advanced coursework in high school: The first year of postsecondary education has to begin in high school, if not by AP then by the growing dual enrollment movement or other, more structured current efforts (for examples, see Hughes, Karp, Fermin and Bailey 2005). If all traditional-age students entered college or community college with a minimum of 6 credits of “real stuff,” not fluff, their adaptation in the critical first year will not be short-circuited by either poor placement or credit overload (The Toolbox Revisited).

Quantitative literacy: It’s not merely getting beyond Algebra 2 in high school any more: The world demands advanced quantitative literacy, and no matter what a student’s postsecondary field of study—from occupationally-oriented programs through traditional liberal arts— more than a ceremonial visit to college-level mathematics is called for (The Toolbox Revisited).

First-year credit generation: Less than 20 credits by the end of the first calendar year of enrollment (no matter in what term one started, whether summer, fall, winter, spring) is a serious drag on degree completion. It is all the more reason to begin the transition process in high school with expanded dual enrollment programs offering true postsecondary course work so that students enter higher education with a minimum of 6 additive credits to help them cross that 20-credit line. Six is good, 9 is better, and 12 is a guarantee of momentum (The Toolbox Revisited).

Summer terms: More than 60 percent of the students in the sample under investigation enrolled during summer terms. Undergraduates are not only more geographically mobile, but have shattered observance of the traditional academic calendar. Summer term credits are more than metaphors for high octane persistence: Earning more than 4 credits during those terms held a consistently positive relationship to degree completion, and gave African-American students, in particular, a significant boost in hypothetical graduation rates (table 32). College and community college administrators can be very creative in expanding the use of summer terms (The Toolbox Revisited).

First-year credit generation, i.e., the goal of making sure that postsecondary students end their first calendar year of enrollment with 20 or more additive credits (The Toolbox Revisited).

Student academic performance: Earning grades that place one in the top 40 percent of first-year GPA for the whole cohort is a strong—and positive—contributor to academic momentum (The Toolbox Revisited).

Success in First-Year College Courses. Annual number and percentage of entering first-time degree- or certificate-seeking undergraduate students who complete entry college-level math and English courses within the first two consecutive academic years; by race/ethnicity, gender, age groups, Pell status (at time of entry), and remedial status (at time of entry).  Measures the proportion of undergraduate students completing entry, college-level math and English courses within the first two academic years at public institutions of higher education (Complete to Compete).

Credit Accumulation. Number and percentage of first-time degree- or certificate-seeking undergraduate students completing 24 credit hours (for full-time students) or 12 credit hours (for part-time students) within their first academic year by student entry status, race/ethnicity, gender, age groups, Pell status (at entry), and remedial status (at time of entry). Measures the proportion of undergraduate students making steady academic progress during one academic year at public institutions of higher education (Complete to Compete).

Retention Rates. Number and percentage of entering degree- or certificate-seeking undergraduate students enrolling from fall to spring and from fall to fall at an institution of higher education by student entry status, race/ethnicity, gender, age groups, Pell status (at time of entry), and remedial status (at time of entry). Measures the rate at which undergraduate students return to a public institution of higher education from fall to the following spring and from fall to the consecutive fall (Complete to Compete).

Course Completion. Percentage of credit hours completed out of those attempted by entering degree- or certificate seeking undergraduate students, by semester and annually, by student entry status, race/ethnicity, gender, age groups, Pell status (at time of entry), and remedial status (at time of entry). Measures the proportion of attempted credit hours completed by undergraduate students at public institutions of higher education (Complete to Compete).

% of [English Language Learner] students participating in college orientation programs (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students participating in summer bridge programs (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students who enroll within 6 months of high school graduation (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Student enrollment by institution type and status (full time vs. part time) (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students who enroll within 12 months of high school graduation (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students placed into remedial courses (English/Math) (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students completing remedial coursework within one academic year (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students completing college level math course (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of courses attempted to courses successfully completed (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students completing more than 20 credits in the first academic year (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Average college GPA (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students who complete and submit renewal FAFSA form (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students awarded financial aid (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of institutions offering meta-majors or guided pathways (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Use of summer terms as standard offering (The Toolbox Revisited).

Rigorous high school curriculum and instruction: Secondary schools must provide maximum opportunity-to-learn, by which we mean not merely course titles, but course substance. If we seek better preparation for any kind of postsecondary education—occupational, professional or traditional arts and sciences—we have to ratchet up the challenge of content (The Toolbox Revisited).

Engagement with high schoolers: Postsecondary institutions have got to be active players and reinforcers at the secondary school level—particularly in partnership with schools that are not providing or inspiring students—with opportunity to learn at those ratcheted-up levels of content. Pep talks, family visits, recruitment tours, and guidance in filling out application and financial aid forms are not enough (The Toolbox Revisited).

Reducing time-to-degree: Excessive no-penalty withdrawals and no-credit repeats appear to do irreparable damage to the chances of completing degrees. Institutions might think very seriously about tightening up, with bonuses of increased access and lower time-to-degree (The Toolbox Revisited).

Use of summer terms: More than incidental use of summer terms has proven to be a degree-completion lever with convincing fulcrum. It’s part of the calendar-year frame in which students are increasingly participating. Four-year and community colleges can entice students into fuller use of summer terms with creative scheduling (The Toolbox Revisited).

Rigorous curriculum starting in high school: The academic intensity of the student’s high school curriculum counts more than anything else in precollegiate history in providing momentum toward completing a bachelor’s degree. Provided that high schools offer [rigorous] courses, students are encouraged or required to take them, and, in the case of electives, students choose to take them, just about everybody could accumulate this portfolio. Unfortunately, not all high schools present adequate opportunity-to-learn, and some groups of students are excluded more than others. Latino students, for example, are far less likely to attend high schools offering trigonometry (let alone calculus) than white or Asian students (The Toolbox Revisited).

Increase use of college success courses, early advising, and similar programs to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

Improve financial aid counseling to emphasize benefits of full-time enrollment to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

Charge lower per-credit fees for enrolling with a full-time credit load to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

Encourage full-time attendance by providing financial aid and other incentives to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

Provide financial aid for enrollment in summer terms to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

For four-year students, facilitate summer enrollment in community college “back home” to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

Offer online summer courses to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

Require enrollment in at least one summer term to address needs of students who do not reach a threshold of credit accumulation in their first year (20 – 30 semester credits) (Advancing by Degrees).

Use “early alert” systems and improved tutoring services to provide more academic assistance to assist students with low credit-completion ratio in first year (Advancing by Degrees).

Limit course drops and repeats or impose extra fee for course withdrawal past a certain date or for repeating a course to address students with low credit-completion ratio in first year (Advancing by Degrees).

Limit late registration or impose an extra fee for registering late (Advancing by Degrees).

Use success courses to teach students effective enrollment patterns (Advancing by Degrees).

The problem of excessive no-penalty withdrawals and no-credit repeats, which affect 10 percent of the cohort. One of the most degree-crippling features of undergraduate histories is an excessive volume of courses from which the student withdrew without penalty and those the student repeated. Institutional policy and advising can cut the incidence of withdrawals and repeats in half (The Toolbox Revisited).

Use of summer terms. Strategic enrollment management can move more sections of high demand courses into summer terms, offer credit-bearing internships in summer terms, and engage in other creative initiatives that will also smooth out the utilization of institutional resources over what has become an “academic calendar year” (The Toolbox Revisited).

No delay of entry. This is a matter of recruitment strategy among high school students whose commitment to postsecondary education is less than fervid. The later they show up, the more their postsecondary fate is in jeopardy (The Toolbox Revisited).

First-year grade point average: Grade point average (GPA) for courses taken in the first academic year of postsecondary education. First academic year defined as all terms across all institutions with start months between TRUMO and the following May (inclusive). Excludes noncredit courses, courses on GED-level transcripts, pass/fail courses, and courses credited by examination or transfer (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

Number of months to bachelor’s degree: Number of months between the date of first enrollment and the date the bachelor’s degree was awarded, as shown on transcripts. NOTE: This is a measure of elapsed time, not enrolled time (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

Rigorous high school curriculum: Identifies students whose high school transcript indicates at least four Carnegie units of English and at least three Carnegie units each of mathematics, science, and social studies (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

Enrollment continuity: Continuity of enrollment in postsecondary education. If there was a gap of two or more semesters (or three or more quarters) in term dates, then student enrollment was deemed noncontinuous (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

Number of credits completed and bachelor’s degree attainment: Combines degree attainment with the number of semester credits completed at qualifying institutions (2- or 4-year institutions with Carnegie Classification 11–59). Excludes credits by examination, transfer credits not earned at qualifying institutions, courses taken while in high school, courses on GED-level transcripts, clock-hour courses, and graduate level courses. Number of credits is rounded to the nearest tenth (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

Academic momentum: A study by A. C. McCormick and C. D. Carroll found that first-year credit production was positively related to total credit production: students who completed fewer than 20 credits in the first year (but at least 10 credits over the period of study) averaged 86 credits overall, while those who completed at least 30 credits in the first year averaged 128 credits over the full period studied. These differences are also reflected in the proportion of students who completed a bachelor’s degree: from 45 percent among those with fewer than 20 credits in the first year to 91 percent among those who completed at least 30 credits in the first year (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

Enrollment continuity: A study by A. C. McCormick and C. D. Carroll found students who interrupted their enrollment (defined as those whose enrollment history includes a gap of two or more semesters, 19 percent of students in the analysis) were half as likely to complete a bachelor’s degree as those who were continuously enrolled. Timing of the interruption also made a difference: students who interrupted during or immediately after the first year were least likely to have completed the degree (27 percent), while those who interrupted during or after the third year were most likely to do so (43 percent) (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

First-year GPA: A study by A. C. McCormick and C. D. Carroll found academic performance in the first year to be strongly correlated with degree completion: the higher a student’s first-year GPA, the more likely that student was to have received a bachelor’s degree (Credit Production and Progress Toward the Bachelor’s Degree).

Remedial coursetaking: In a study of the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), X. Chen found that a majority of first-generation students (55 percent) took some remedial courses during their college years, compared with 27 percent of students whose parents held a bachelor’s or advanced degree (table 3). In particular, 40 percent of first-generation students took remedial mathematics courses, and 13 percent took remedial reading courses, compared with 16 and 6 percent, respectively, of students whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher (First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education).

In a study of the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), X. Chen found one-in-three first-generation students (33 percent) had not identified a major after entering postsecondary education, compared with 13 percent of students whose parents had a bachelor’s or advanced degree (First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education).

In a study of the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), X. Chen found first-generation students earned an average of 18 credits in their first year, compared with 25 credits earned by students whose parents had a bachelor’s degree or higher. First-year credit accumulation bears an important relationship to long-term postsecondary outcomes. For example, earning fewer credits in the first year may not only prolong the time to degree, but is strongly associated with leaving postsecondary education without earning a degree (First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education).

In a study of the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), X. Chen found first-generation students were less likely than their peers whose parents were college graduates to take courses in various academic areas, including mathematics, science, computer science, social studies, humanities, history, and foreign languages. They also tended to earn fewer credits if they took courses in these areas (First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education).

In a study of the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), X. Chen found first-generation students were more likely than other students to withdraw or repeat courses they attempted (First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education).

In a study of the Postsecondary Education Transcript Study (PETS) of the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), X. Chen found first-generation students were less likely than students with college-educated parents to earn a bachelor’s degree even after taking into account many related factors, including students’ demographic backgrounds, academic preparation, enrollment characteristics, credit production, and performance (First-Generation Students in Postsecondary Education).

Credit Accumulation: The percentage of students earning sufficient credits toward on-time completion in their first year: 30 credits for full-time and 15-credits for part-time students. Prior credits from Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), dual enrollment, and transfer are not counted, nor are noncredit remedial courses. Credit is earned based on institutional standards. Measures twelve-month cohorts by credential level and student enrollment status and attendance intensity (e.g., first-time full-time [FTFT], transfer full-time [TFT], first-time part-time [FTPT], transfer part-time [TPT]). Disaggregated by academic preparation, economic status (at entry), race/ ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, and program of study (at entry) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Other metrics related to credit accumulation: Remedial course enrollment and completion (if applicable); Average credit load per term or year; Summer or intersession credits earned; Enrolled at least half time (for part-time students); Continuous enrollment (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Credit accumulation indicators have been incorporated into early warning systems and advising technology, like Civitas and Starfish, to make the data useful for students and advisors. Policymakers also have incorporated credit-based momentum measures into many outcome-based funding models to shape state funding  (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Credit Completion Ratio: The number of credits completed, divided by the number of credits attempted by first-year students. Prior credits from AP, IB, dual enrollment, and transfer are not counted. Credit is earned based on institutional standards. Measures twelve-month incoming cohorts by credential level and student enrollment status and attendance intensity (e.g., FTFT, FTPT, TFT, TPT). Disaggregated by academic preparation, economic status (at entry), race/ ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, and program of study (at entry) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Other metrics related to credit completion ratio: Percentages of remedial courses among uncompleted credits; Percentage of D’s, F’s, W’, I’s among uncompleted credits; Percentage of uncompleted credits that were retakes; Percentage of D’s, F’s, W’s, I’s in high-enrollment courses; Grade point average by term and year; Course engagement/interaction by course completion; Course format/modality by course completion (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

The credit completion ratio improves institutional understanding of credit accumulation and student academic momentum in the first year by focusing in on courses passed versus courses attempted. For policymakers, both the credit completion and accumulation metrics are primary tools to show academic progression and help design and shape policy and funding decisions, and are incorporated in some Outcomes Based Funding (OBF) formulas (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Program of study selection: The percentage of students in a cohort who demonstrate a program of study selection by taking nine credits (or three courses) in a meta-major in the first year. Meta-majors include: education; arts and humanities; social and behavioral sciences and human services; science, technology, engineering, and math; business and communication; health; trades. Measures twelve-month incoming cohorts by credential level and student enrollment and attendance intensity (e.g., FTFT, FTPT, TFT, TPT). Disaggregated by academic preparation, economic status (at entry), race/ ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, and program of study (at entry) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Other metrics related to program of study selection: Percentage of students undeclared at entry; Number of major changes; Likelihood of meeting requirements for entry to intended major; Availability of intended major (e.g., wait lists); Availability of detailed degree maps for intended major; Availability of prerequisite courses in sequence for intended major (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Concentration in a program of study is an early indicator of student progression through higher education, offering more information about how and why some students falter. If an institution finds that large proportions of their students are not concentrating in a major early in their collegiate careers, then the institution can adjust advising, course registration, and scheduling practices to encourage students to concentrate earlier and build momentum toward their degrees. While not specifically geared toward students for consumer purposes, program of study selection is another progression metric that can enhance academic advising and course selection (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Collect data on students’ course enrollments. Course-enrollment data are necessary to analyze the milestones and on-track indicators discussed in this report. Some higher education systems may only be collecting information on whether particular students enrolled in a specifi ed term, how many units they completed, their grade-point average, or other aggregated information about their experiences. Such data are not suffi cient for monitoring the progress and behaviors that our framework comprises. Term-by-term information on individual course enrollments adds a level of detail about students’ patterns of enrollment that is very useful for diagnosing where students are falling off track, which in turn points to ways to target changes to policies and practices. (Advancing by Degrees).

Institutions ask key questions during planning programs:What is the full scope of programmatic offerings at this college? Do the college’s programs align to the local labor market and/or four year transfer partner? Has the college validated its program offerings with employers? What are the high-level program groupings? Which general education courses align best to each meta-major? How can the college integrate developmental education to ensure it serves as an on-ramp into meta-majors for students? (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Institutions ask key questions about student intake: How will the college place students into meta-majors? How does the college communicate meta-majors to prospective students? How does the college help students make informed choices about meta-majors? Are there self-serve resources for students that are aligned with and complement advising services? What type of staff education, training, and documentation is required to ensure consistency? (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Guided Pathways academic program structure: Programs are fully mapped out and aligned with further education and career advancement (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways academic program structure: Critical courses and other milestones are clearly identified on program maps (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways academic program structure: Student learning outcomes are specified across programs (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways academic program structure: High school and other feeder curriculum is designed to prepare students to enter college programs in particular fields (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways new student intake: Academic plans, based on program maps, are required (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways new student intake: Students are required to enter exploratory majors and choose specific programs on a specified timeline (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways new student intake: Assessment is used to diagnose areas where students need support instead of being used to sort students into remediation or college-level courses (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways new student intake: Instruction in foundation skills is integrated into and contextualized with critical program courses instead of being narrowly focused on college algebra and English composition (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways instruction: Faculty collaborate to define and assess learning outcomes for entire programs rather than on individual courses (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways instruction: Faculty are trained and supported to assess program learning outcomes and use results to improve instruction (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways instruction: Supporting motivation and metacognition is an explicit instructional goal across programs (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways progress monitoring and support: Student progress on academic plans is closely monitored, with frequent feedback (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways progress monitoring and support: Students can see how far they have come and what they need to do to complete programs (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways progress monitoring and support: Early warning systems identify students at risk of failing critical courses and initiate timely interventions (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Guided Pathways progress monitoring and support: Advisors work closely with program faculty, with a clear division of labor for monitoring student progress (CCRC, What We Know About Guided Pathways).

Cost for Credits Not Completed: The per-student expenditures by the institution for credits attempted but not completed by first-year students. Disaggregated by credential level, academic preparation, economic status, race/ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, and program of study (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Additional metrics related to Cost for Credits Not Completed include: Number of credits attempted, not completed; E&R per credit; Total E&R for credits attempted, not completed; Total and average net tuition paid by students for uncompleted credits (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Time to credential: The average time accumulated from first date of entry to the institution to date of completion for all completers in a given year. Measures all completers in a given year by credential level attained. Disaggregated by race/ethnicity, gender, age, academic preparation (at any time), economic status (at any time), first-generation status, program of study (at exit), and part-time (at any time) and transfer status (IHEP, Toward Convergence). 

Credits to credential: The average credits accumulated from first date of entry to the institution to date of completion for all completers in a given year. Measures all completers in a given year by credential level attained. Disaggregated by race/ethnicity, gender, age, academic preparation (at any time), economic status (at any time), first-generation status, program of study (at exit), and part-time (at any time) and transfer status (IHEP, Toward Convergence). 

Other metrics related to Time and Credits to Credential: Average number and percentage of transfer credits accepted (if applicable); Number of course D’s, F’s, W’s, I’s or retakes; Major declaration/major changes; Stopout or continuous enrollment rates; Cumulative debt by time or credits to credential (IHEP, Toward Convergence). 

Assign students to advisors with mandatory monthly check-ins in the first year.  (Proactive Advising)

Use behavioral “nudges” (texts/emails) to encourage registration, advising, and milestone course completion (Community College Daily)

Establish rapid-response microgrants for students facing financial emergencies (HELPS Grants)

Train faculty on culturally responsive pedagogy, metacognition strategies, and inclusive course design (STEM Faculty)

Students complete college-level math and/or English in the first or second year (Advancing by Degrees).

Students complete a college-success course or other first-year experience program (Advancing by Degrees).

Student completion of college-level math and English. A 2009 study of California Community College student outcomes by C. Moore et al. showed that degree-seeking students were more likely to complete (i.e., earn a certificate, degree, or transfer) if they completed college-level math and English, with a grade of C or better, early in their enrollment. Students who completed a college-level math course within two years of initial enrollment were nearly three times as likely to complete as students who did not finish college-level math in that time period. Students who completed a college-level English course within the first two years were more than twice as likely to complete as those who did not (Steps to Success).

Student completion of Success Courses. Many colleges offer courses designed to help students succeed in college and in their careers. These courses are often called college orientation or college success courses. A 2009 study of California Community College student outcomes by C. Moore et al. showed that completing such a course appears to help some students earn a degree or certificate or to transfer. Older students and traditional-age, part-time students who completed a success course had higher completion rates. Completing a success course did not appear to make a difference for full-time, traditional-age students. The study found that black students in the CCC who finished a success course were less likely to complete than black students who did not take such a course, and that taking a success course was unrelated to completion for Asian students. It may be the case that success courses in the CCC are aimed at students with more risk factors rather than being more widely available to all students, complicating the relationship of taking a success course and completion (Steps to Success).

Gateway course pass rates disaggregated by race, Pell status, and first-gen status (Toward Convergence).

Gateway course completion disaggregated by instructional modality (in-person, online, hybrid) (Institute for Higher Education Policy).

Gateway courses: A dominant feature of academic histories that cannot really be assessed until the end of the second year following college entry is the extent to which students successfully completed credits in a range of “gateway” courses. It is at this point that the postsecondary curricular story line fully emerges, with ratios of participation in the “gateways” between those who ultimately earned degrees and those who did not running 6:1 in American literature, 4:1 in general chemistry, and more than 3:1 in precalculus, micro/macroeconomics, introduction to philosophy, and world civilization. These gaps in curricular participation argue for academic administrators to identify their key gateway courses and regularly monitor participation (The Toolbox Revisited).

Gateway courses: College and community college expectations for their first-year students in those gateway courses—expressed through examinations, paper and laboratory assignments — need to be more public. Examples such as those offered by the American Diploma Project in its report, Ready or Not: Creating a High School Diploma That Counts (2004), should be shared with larger audiences than policymakers and others who habitually read such reports. Parents should see those assignments even if they don’t understand them; high school teachers should ponder them to assess whether their exiting students are likely to be prepared; and, most importantly, high school students have got to see them as road signs to their next education destination. The Toolbox Revisited advocates making these examples part and parcel of admissions packets, publicity brochures, and Web sites. There is risk in this: Some students may be scared away. But there is no better way to enhance articulation and preparedness than to display what students can expect (The Toolbox Revisited).

Gateway Course Completion: The percentage of students completing college-level, introductory math and English courses tracked separately in their first year. Prior credits from AP, IB, dual enrollment, transfer, and College Level Examination Program (CLEP) do count. Credit is earned based on institutional standards. Measures twelve-month incoming cohorts by credential level and student enrollment status and attendance intensity (e.g., FTFT, FTPT, TFT, TPT). Disaggregated by academic preparation, economic status (at entry), race/ ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, and program of study (at entry) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Other metrics related to gateway course completion: Enrollment in prerequisite remedial courses by subject (if applicable); Completion of prerequisite remedial courses by subject (if applicable); Enrollment in gateway courses by subject; Number of attempts to complete gateway courses by subject; Average time to complete gateway courses by subject; Completion of both gateway courses; Availability of remedial and gateway courses in sequence; Percentages of D’s, F’s, W’s, I’s in gateway courses by subject; Course engagement/interaction by gateway course completion; Course format/modality by gateway course completion (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Cost for Completing Gateway Courses: For all gateway course completers in a given year, the per-student expenditures associated with all developmental and gateway courses attempted before gateway course completion, tracking English and math courses separately. Disaggregated by credential level, academic preparation (at any time), enrollment status, attendance intensity (at any time), economic status (at any time), race/ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, and program of study (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Additional metrics related to Cost for Completing Gateway Courses include: Net tuition cost to students to complete gateway courses; Enrollment in developmental courses (if applicable); Completion of developmental courses (if applicable); Number of developmental course attempts (if applicable); Enrollment in gateway courses; Number of attempts to complete gateway courses; Completion of both gateway courses; Availability of developmental and gateway courses in sequence; Percentage of D’s, F’s, W’s, I’s in gateway courses; E&R expenditures per credit (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Better align curriculum and assessment with high schools to improve college readiness and help students who struggle to complete college-level math courses in their first year (Advancing by Degrees).

Require entering students to take first credit-bearing math and English courses immediately (after completing any required developmental courses) — or at least ensure that early advising stresses the importance of taking a math course early in the college career (Advancing by Degrees).

Ensure adequate course offerings and flexible scheduling to address needs of part-time and older students who struggle to complete a “success” course in the first year (a course designed to help students achieve in college and in their careers) (Advancing by Degrees).

Better advising for new students about the advantages of such “success” courses (Advancing by Degrees).

Require degree-seeking, nontraditional students to enroll in a success course (Advancing by Degrees).

As colleges encounter new degree-seeking students who need remediation but who do not enroll in basic skills courses (or at least do not enroll in the first term), administrators can adopt system-wide definitions of college readiness, and standardized procedures for assessment and placement across the colleges (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter new degree-seeking students who need remediation but who do not enroll in basic skills courses (or at least do not enroll in the first term), administrators can ensure that all degree-seeking students are assessed for college readiness and directed to appropriate courses (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter new degree-seeking students who need remediation but who do not enroll in basic skills courses (or at least do not enroll in the first term), administrators can use results of the Early Assessment Program to give students the senior year to remedy identified deficiencies in college readiness (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter new degree-seeking students who need remediation but who do not enroll in basic skills courses (or at least do not enroll in the first term), administrators can require early enrollment and completion of basic skills course work (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of basic skills students completing needed remediation, administrators can ensure that policies support innovative practices such as intensive summer orientation programs for new developmental students (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of basic skills students completing needed remediation, instructors can contextualize basic skills instruction into content courses (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of basic skills students completing needed remediation, administrators can implement learning communities for developmental students (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of basic skills students completing needed remediation, administrators and policymakers can incorporate incentives for colleges to increase success in basic skills courses (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of basic skills students completing needed remediation, instructors can redesign developmental courses into modules so students only repeat needed sections (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of basic skills students completing needed remediation, instructors can provide brief brush-up courses for students who test near proficiency levels (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of basic skills students completing needed remediation, instructors can enroll students in college-level courses and provide supplementary instruction/summer sessions for nearly-proficient students (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter  low percentages of students completing college-level math in first two years, administrators can better align curriculum and assessment with high schools to improve college readiness, and use the Early Assessment Program to send early signals about college readiness to high school students (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter  low percentages of students completing college-level math in their first two years, administrators can ensure early advising that focuses on the importance of taking math early in college career (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of students completing college success courses administrators can ensure adequate course offerings and flexible scheduling

As colleges encounter a low percentage of students completing college success courses administrators can improve advising for new students about advantages of such courses (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of students completing college success courses administrators can require degree-seeking, non-traditional students to enroll in a success course (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of first-year degree-seeking students reaching a threshold of credit accumulation, administrators can increase use of college success courses, early advising, etc. (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of first-year degree-seeking students reaching a threshold of credit accumulation, administrators can improve financial aid counseling to emphasize benefits of full-time enrollment (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of first-year degree-seeking students reaching a threshold of credit accumulation, administrators and policy makers can consider lower per-credit fees for enrolling in a full-time credit load (state action required) (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of first-year degree-seeking students reaching a threshold of credit accumulation, administrators and policy makers can encourage full-time attendance through provision of financial aid and other incentives (state action required) (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of first-year degree-seeking students reaching a threshold of credit accumulation, administrators and policy makers can  provide financial aid for enrollment in summer terms (state action required) (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a low percentage of first-year degree-seeking students reaching a threshold of credit accumulation, administrators can offer on-line summer courses (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter students attaining a low credit completion ratio in first year, administrators can use early alert systems and improved tutoring services to provide more academic assistance (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter students attaining a low credit completion ratio in first year, administrators can limit course drops and repeats or impose extra fee for course withdrawal past a certain date or for repeating a course (state action required to allow campus-based fees) (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a high percentage of course enrollments for which students registered late, administrators can limit late registration or impose extra fee for registering late (state action required to allow campus-based fees) (Steps to Success).

As colleges encounter a high percentage of course enrollments for which students registered late, administrators can use college success courses to teach students about more effective enrollment patterns (Steps to Success).

First year “Gateway Course Completion” dashboards show how many students have successful completed their required math and English gateway courses in their first academic year (National Student Clearing House).

Gateway course completion in the first year is a key momentum point that predicts student success, and the proportion of students meeting this momentum point indicates to an institution whether students began their college careers on the right track. In one respect, it is the best measure of true college readiness. For this reason, policymakers too must be keenly aware of and aim to use this and other completion measures when they are designing and shaping programming, policy, and funding. Performance on this metric also can inform institutional efforts to help students build academic momentum early through counseling and technology-enabled advisory systems (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Frequent failed attempts at prerequisite remediation or gateway courses require institutions to spend money delivering courses that do not result in credit accumulation, and this decreases institutional efficiency. These failed attempts also require students to spend money and financial aid that does not help them progress toward a degree. Quantifying the cost of the various steps toward completing a gateway course can help institutions focus on ways to increase efficiency and decrease both student and institutional expenses. Federal and state policymakers, who subsidize developmental and gateway course attempts, also have a vested interest in students progressing toward completion in an efficient manner, especially in light of time limits on Pell Grant and Direct Loan eligibility (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

% of students enrolled in default meta-major course sequences. Evidence of inefficient course-taking patterns at community colleges has spurred policy conversations about how to ensure effective course sequences. Structural reforms, like guided pathways, seek to reduce major switching as a means to streamline student course taking and eliminate unnecessary credits (Shuddle, Lauren T, Ryu, Ronson, Brown, Stanley Raymond).

% of gateway courses offered with program-specific contextualization (e.g., statistics for health) (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Institutions ask key questions during planning:  Does the college want to implement meta-majors? What are the college’s goals? What building blocks are already in place (e.g., first-year experience, orientation, mapped pathways)? What related technical software and hardware infrastructure is currently in place (e.g., SIS, LMS, early alert, course dev, placement and scheduling)? Who will lead this implementation? Which other stakeholders need to know about this? What is the communications strategy? How much will it cost to implement? (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Clear program maps exist and include term-by-term course recommendations for each program or meta-major (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Existence of clearly defined meta-majors that align with labor market demand and institutional offerings (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Integrated planning tools (SIS, LMS, early alert, degree audit, etc.) exist and are used to support student progression (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Institutional communications strategy for explaining pathways/meta-majors to students and families. Make information about meta-majors and their course progressions into specific programs of study accessible to students from the point of entry in the college all the way to completion. Information on advising, student services, and career counseling, including labor market information on earnings data and career ladders, can be linked to each meta-major and easily accessible to students (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Faculty and advisors are trained on how to use degree maps to support student decisions making  (Jobs for the Future, Meta-Majors).

Students believe they will graduate with the skills and knowledge to be successful in the job market and in the workplace (Strada-Gallup, Crisis of Confidence).

Students believe their major will lead to a good job (Strada-Gallup, Crisis of Confidence).

Students speak often with faculty or staff about their career options (Strada-Gallup, Crisis of Confidence).

Students have at least one university official initiate a conversation with them about their career options (Strada-Gallup, Crisis of Confidence).

Students believe their school is committed to helping their students find a rewarding career (Strada-Gallup, Crisis of Confidence).

Students meet with an academic advisor before registration and at least once per term. Advisors should interact with students before each registration period and interact with them multiple times each term, especially during students’ first year (Community College Research Center).

Cost of Excess Credits to Credential: The per-student expenditures for excess credits to credential for all completers with excess credits in a given year. Measures all completers in a given year by credential level. Disaggregated by enrollment status, attendance intensity (at any time), academic preparation (at any time), race/ethnicity, economic status (at any time), age, gender, program of study (at exit) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Additional metrics related to Cost of Excess Credits to Credential include: Excess credits earned by transfers by number/percentage of prior credits accepted; Total (instead of average) cost of excess credits to credential; Total and average net tuition cost to student of excess credits to credential (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

The American School Counselor Association (ASCA) recommends a student-to-counselor ratio of 250:1. Schools meeting or bettering this 250:1 benchmark often report higher rates of college counseling engagement, FAFSA completion, applications submitted, and ultimately, enrollment (ASCA).

An additional high school counselor is predicted to induce a 10 percentage point increase in four-year college enrollment (Hurwitz and Howell, 2013).

percentage of Graduates Who Found their Counselor Very Helpful: The percentage of graduates in the school who reported on the 2005 CCSR senior survey that the counselor has been very helpful in helping them plan what to do after high school. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Counselor Press for Academic Achievement: The average of graduates’ reports on the 2005 CCSR senior survey of the extent to which counselors in their school: (1) helped select courses needed for work or admission to college; (2) encouraged taking AP/honors courses; (3) encouraged continuing education after high school; and (4) talked about colleges/schools that were suited to the student’s interests and abilities. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The student-level version of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Teacher/Counselor Structured Support: The average of graduates’ reports on the 2005 CCSR senior survey of the extent to which teachers or counselors helped students with the college search and application process. Students were asked the extent to which teachers or counselors: (1) encourage students to apply to several different schools; (2) talk to students about what college would be like; (3) help students fill out applications for colleges or vocational/technical schools; (4) help students find scholarships to apply for; (5) help students decide which school to attend; (6) help students plan how to pay for tuition and other expenses; and (7) help students with college application essays or personal statements. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The student-level version of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

The American School Counselor Association (ASCA) recommends a student-to-counselor ratio of 250:1. Schools meeting or bettering this 250:1 benchmark often report higher rates of college counseling engagement, FAFSA completion, applications submitted, and ultimately, enrollment (ASCA).

An additional high school counselor is predicted to induce a 10 percentage point increase in four-year college enrollment (Hurwitz and Howell, 2013).

percentage of Graduates Who Found their Counselor Very Helpful: The percentage of graduates in the school who reported on the 2005 CCSR senior survey that the counselor has been very helpful in helping them plan what to do after high school. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Counselor Press for Academic Achievement: The average of graduates’ reports on the 2005 CCSR senior survey of the extent to which counselors in their school: (1) helped select courses needed for work or admission to college; (2) encouraged taking AP/honors courses; (3) encouraged continuing education after high school; and (4) talked about colleges/schools that were suited to the student’s interests and abilities. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The student-level version of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Teacher/Counselor Structured Support: The average of graduates’ reports on the 2005 CCSR senior survey of the extent to which teachers or counselors helped students with the college search and application process. Students were asked the extent to which teachers or counselors: (1) encourage students to apply to several different schools; (2) talk to students about what college would be like; (3) help students fill out applications for colleges or vocational/technical schools; (4) help students find scholarships to apply for; (5) help students decide which school to attend; (6) help students plan how to pay for tuition and other expenses; and (7) help students with college application essays or personal statements. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The student-level version of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Ratio of advisors (including success coaches, academic advisors, peer mentors, support staff, etc.) to students. Effective advising offers: ongoing guidance across a student’s college journey; tailored services that align with individual levels of need; coordination of both academic and nonacademic resources; intentional, timely outreach; and support that is customized to each student’s unique circumstances (Community College Research Center).

The metric Cost of Excess Credits to Credential measures the financial outlay by the institution for students taking excess credit hours to credential. Because of the multitude of factors affecting this metric, it is imperative to determine whether efficiency is changing due to more students taking more excess credits, the expenditures per credit, or both over time. Changes in expenditures per credit over time can be controlled for by using the expenditures per credit in the year the credit was taken, instead of the year the student completed, for more precision. If costs increase largely due to excess course taking, institutions can proactively address degree pathways and academic advising to improve efficiency and help students complete more quickly and at a lower cost. The metric also provides institutions and policymakers with another piece of the cost–of-college puzzle, identifying a possible intervention strategy to reduce costs for both students and taxpayers. By creating efficient pathways to a credential, institutions and students can minimize excess credits to credential, lessening the cost per completer for the institution, student, and taxpayer (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Collect data on student use of campus services and participation in special programs. Many institutions implement special programs or services to help students, but they fail to collect student-level data associated with those programs and services or to integrate that information with other data. Without such data, it is impossible to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and services in improving student outcomes (Advancing by Degrees).

Engage and assist students in completing critical steps for college entry. Low-income and first-generation students often face challenges in completing the steps to college entry, such as taking college admissions tests, searching for colleges, submitting college applications, and selecting a college. Students may not be aware of these steps, may lack information on how to complete them, and may not receive sufficient support and advice from those around them (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Ensure students prepare for, and take, the appropriate college entrance or admissions exam early. College entrance exams, both the practice exams and actual exams, represent a potential barrier for students interested in a four-year college. However, students may not know about the exams or may not know how to prepare for them, and they may not follow through in scheduling or taking the exams. high schools should make sure that students interested in attending a four-year institution prepare for and take the practice exams by 11th grade, and the actual exam before 12th grade. Students who wait until their senior year to take the actual exam could miss a college application deadline or not have an opportunity to retake the test (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Assist students in their college search. Students should receive assistance in finding a postsecondary program that matches their qualifications, interests, and goals. Schools should set up one-on-one meetings with students to discuss the types of schools that are a good fit for them to consider and submit applications. School staff should help students coordinate their career interests and future plans, encouraging students to consider factors such as: Geography/location; Tuition cost; Financial aid; School size; Admission requirements; Retention rates; Demographics; Available majors. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

High schools should organize trips for students to visit college campuses. These visits can introduce students to college and the college environment, inform students about the college application and selection process, and help them consider different college options. These trips should be more than a campus tour  —  students should have a chance to explore campus resources, observe campus life, and interact with college students. For example, students can shadow college students, possibly alumni from their high school, throughout their day, attending classes, eating lunch, and walking around campus together. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Assist students in completing college applications. By providing one-on-one assistance with college applications, schools can ensure that students submit applications that are complete, on time, and of sufficient quality. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Schools should provide students who plan to attend a four-year college with hands-on assistance in completing their college applications. high schools should work with students to ensure that their applications are complete, submitted by deadlines, and (if applicable) of sufficient quality for acceptance. Because each student’s needs and interests are unique, the What Works Clearinghouse panel recommends that, to the extent possible, school staff provide assistance to students one-on-one or during small workshops or classes designed to assist students with completing college applications, writing application essays, or reminding them about application deadlines. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

The What Works Clearinghouse panel suggests that schools develop mechanisms for clearly communicating timelines for application milestones that occur over the course of the year. Schools can provide a handout that lists the key dates that students need to consider for the application process in their junior and senior years. The components of a timeline could include college entrance exams, college applications, the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and state financial aid forms, admission acceptances, and financial aid and housing acceptances. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

In later high school years, students still need one-on-one attention  —  from a counselor, a teacher, an administrator, or program staff  —  to facilitate and encourage rigorous course taking. A high school might schedule drop-in hours for students to receive academic advising and assistance with selecting courses from a teacher, counselor, or other staff person. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Schools and districts also should provide continuing professional development or counseling for counselors, registrars, teachers, and other staff on college prep course requirements, so that they can serve as an informative resource for students. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Get Your Data; Know Your Data: The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center’s StudentTracker service is both widely available and relatively affordable ($595 per high school per year at the time of this writing). Despite this, too few districts and schools are subscribing to the service and accessing the postsecondary outcomes data of up to eight graduating classes of high school students. Districts and schools should be accessing this data to understand what happens to their students after high school graduation. Those postsecondary outcomes are important for understanding how well students are being prepared to make their next steps following high school graduation. Data from the NSC can make those efforts much easier. Even if districts and schools only make use of the preconstructed charts and never dive into the granular-detail data, they will still be getting access to valuable insights that are not easily accessible through other means (Using Data to Lift Completion Likelihood).

Map the Postsecondary Pipeline: As described above, students’ matriculation patterns tend to be place-based and proximate to their high school. That pattern emphasizes the importance of districts and schools knowing how students fare when they matriculate. Using data to understand the percentages of students heading to a given set of institutions and then understanding how the students do when they get there is critical. It also starts new conversations. For example, a district sending 40% of its students to an institution delivering a 30% second-year persistence rate should be asking why students are stumbling and what can be done to connect them with supports, better prepare them before arriving on campus, or both. Districts with better alternative destinations for their students can be changing the postsecondary advising conversation with students and parents. If meaningful progress cannot be made with an institution regarding students’ outcomes, districts and schools should consider advising toward alternative pathways that would offer a higher likelihood of completion (Using Data to Lift Completion Likelihood). 

Put Completion on the Forefront for Students: Students make college-going decisions on the basis of all kinds of factors: cost and affordability, location, academic programs, family advice, institutional reputation, where their friends are going, campus atmosphere and amenities, and even the institutions’ sports teams. These factors and more combine to comprise the concept of “fit” in fit and match. But our experience is that too few students are putting the likelihood of completion toward or at the top of their list of deciding factors. Tools like the College Scorecard allow students to look up completion rates for institutions, and this brief’s analysis emphasizes the importance of considering completion in this critical decision (Using Data to Lift Completion Likelihood).

A study by Wei-Cheng Mau, Amber Fernandes investigated differences in use of and satisfaction with career counseling services as a function of sex, race, and age based on a nationally representative sample of college graduates of different ages, gender, and ethnicity. Finding that Hispanic students were less likely to use career counseling services, they recommend employing outreach efforts that target this group and that are tailored to increase use may be helpful. Counseling professionals need to take a proactive role in reaching this population. For example, Flores and Spanierman (1998) have suggested that flyers be posted in the community at establishments that serve these targeted students. Providing information and making a presentation at a Hispanic American student association meeting may be more appropriate than waiting for students to seek counseling help at the center. Consideration should be given to taking programs and services to locations where various subpopulations of students naturally congregate (Bishop, 1990). The ability to reach out effectively to minority students will be increasingly important, and service delivery systems must be adapted to accommodate such populations (Characteristics and satisfaction of students who used career counseling services).

Counselors who are interested in increasing the use of services by nontraditional students may want to make themselves more available and flexible during evenings and weekends when those students are more likely to be on campus and enrolled in classes. Creativity in programming that would make nontraditional students more aware of the programs and services available on campus should be applied. Rayman (1999) has made several excellent suggestions on how to be responsive to the needs of nontraditional students (Characteristics and satisfaction of students who used career counseling services).

Use multiple measures to assess postsecondary readiness and place students. Most open-access institutions require incoming students to take brief standardized assessments in math, reading, and writing. The results of these assessments are used to place students in either developmental or college-level courses. However, there are concerns about misplacement rates arising from single placement tests used in isolation. One way to improve college readiness assessment (and therefore to reduce misplacement) is to use multiple measures  —  such as high school GPA, the number of years since high school graduation or equivalent, the number of courses taken in the subject (e.g., English or math), and the highest level taken in the subject (e.g., Algebra I or Algebra II)  —  to inform placement decisions (What Works Clearinghouse, Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education).

Require or incentivize regular participation in enhanced advising activities. Advising, guidance, and counseling services help students determine academic majors, understand the relationship between school and subsequent employment, and address a variety of academic and personal issues. Some colleges have created more intensive advising experiences, often called “enhanced advising” or “intrusive advising.” Enhanced advising replaces the quick, transactional structure of traditional advising (e.g., a focus on class schedules, degree requirements, and financial aid procedures) with a more holistic structure in which advisors ask deeper questions and engage with students to help them succeed. Mentoring programs that aim to build relationships between students and knowledgeable adults on goal-oriented academic planning may also be considered enhanced advising (What Works Clearinghouse, Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education).

Offer students performance-based monetary incentives. Performance-based incentives are monetary awards that students receive when they meet specific academic benchmarks. These awards supplement students’ financial aid packages, which may be based on need (e.g., Pell grants) or past achievement (e.g., state merit aid grants). The short-term goal of such initiatives is to encourage students to perform better in (and successfully complete) their classes. A longer-term goal is to support students’ progress through developmental education and course requirements to increase degree attainment (What Works Clearinghouse, Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education).

Compress or mainstream developmental education with course redesign. Participation in accelerated developmental experiences, referred to interchangeably as “intensive,” “compressed,” “condensed,” or “time-shortened” models, can minimize the negative effects of being placed into developmental education. Students who register for more than one sequential course in a semester are more likely to enroll in the second course, thereby improving retention. Accelerated courses that mainstream developmental education students into college-level work with contextualization or supplemental instruction also help students achieve the goals and outcomes of the college level course assignments. Acceleration may promote persistence and academic success because the reduced time in developmental education also reduces the opportunity for external factors, such as work or family responsibilities, to hinder students’ success (What Works Clearinghouse, Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education).

Teach students how to become self-regulated learners. Traditional academic instruction emphasizes learning content. Many students, including those in developmental education, arrive on college campuses with little knowledge about how they learn and which study strategies might work best. Schools and teachers should attempt to incorporate self-regulated learning strategies into existing subject-matter coursework. The training should encourage students to monitor and reflect on their learning and focus students on the parts of the learning process that they have control over. Typically, teaching students to become self-regulated learners involves demonstrating how to (a) approach a task, (b) implement that approach or strategy, (c) evaluate how well the approach or strategy worked, and (d) decide what to do next (What Works Clearinghouse, Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education).

Implement comprehensive, integrated, and long-lasting support programs. Some institutions have implemented comprehensive and integrated support programs that incorporate a variety of components. Although many colleges offer multiple supports to their students, what differentiates this practice from business as usual is the intentional focus on integrating these supports and incentivizing participation in the long term. One example is the City University of New York’s (CUNY’s) Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). ASAP provides a comprehensive, integrated package of student services, monetary incentives, linked courses, an ASAP seminar, and other supports. The program’s implementers sent consistent, strong messages to ASAP students to enroll full time, take their developmental classes early, and graduate within three years (What Works Clearinghouse, Strategies for Postsecondary Students in Developmental Education).

Colleges and universities that are serious about addressing systemic racial inequities in student outcomes should allocate sufficient resources to ensure that academic advisors can offer students of color critical culturally engaging support. Allocating sufficient resources requires providing professional development opportunities and ensuring that academic advisors have manageable caseloads to spend a significant amount of their time learning about the realities of students of color, reflecting on their own practice and grappling with questions about how it can be more culturally engaging, and cultivating relationships with educators in culturally relevant curricular and cocurricular programs on their campuses (Revisiting the Role of Academic Advising in Equitably Serving Diverse College Students).

Institutions of higher education should ensure that advisors are evaluated and rewarded for having commitments and investing substantial energy in cultivating the ability to provide culturally engaging advising. Doing so might mean the prioritization of supporting activities that enhance culturally engaging academic advising skills through the allocation of professional development funding, annual performance reviews, and recognition awards (Revisiting the Role of Academic Advising in Equitably Serving Diverse College Students).

Colleges and universities should also consider the importance of providing culturally engaging academic advising in hiring practices. While it is increasingly common for institutions of higher education to ask about and consider a candidate’s experience with diversity and difference, the attention given to these factors can be superficial. Academic advisor search-and-hiring processes can more meaningfully center on a candidate’s capacity to provide culturally engaging support to their students and advocate equity on their campuses. Such processes might involve including explicit language about prioritizing abilities to provide humanized, proactive, and holistic support to advisees. Such approaches might also warrant explicit interview questions and search committee conversations about a candidate’s knowledge of diverse communities, their commitment to providing culturally engaging support, and evidence of their providing such support in the past or alternatively their capacity to do so (Revisiting the Role of Academic Advising in Equitably Serving Diverse College Students).

On the ground, academic advisors should engage in continuous reflection on their own practice and how they might more effectively integrate humanized, proactive, and holistic approaches into the ways in which they support students. They can ask themselves questions that require self-reflection, such as: How can I approach interactions with students to cultivate more meaningful relationships with them? How do my students know I really care about them? What opportunities do I need to deepen my knowledge about so I can proactively encourage students to take advantage of them? What relationships do I need to strengthen on campus to ensure that I am able to be an effective conduit to the larger support network? The many demands most academic advisors face and the reality that they might not have been socialized into prioritizing these types of support means such reflection will likely be difficult for many people. Over time and with practice, however, such continuous reflection can become easier and even normalized (Revisiting the Role of Academic Advising in Equitably Serving Diverse College Students).

Academic advisors should also make efforts to cultivate relationships with ethnic studies programs and other curricular and cocurricular units that provide culturally relevant learning opportunities across their institutions. Such connections are vital to academic advisors developing the capacity to provide holistic support and serve as a conduit to transformative learning environments for students of color on their campuses. Cultivating these networks can also break down organizational silos and maximize the likelihood that educators in such culturally relevant learning environments are more equipped to reach out to advisors for support when it is necessary to proactively, holistically, and effectively serve their students (Revisiting the Role of Academic Advising in Equitably Serving Diverse College Students).

Academic advisors should invest time and energy in understanding the unique issues their students of color often face. Higher education scholars have generated a plethora of research on the experiences of students of color, which can serve as an ample resource for academic advisors. However, advisors have a much broader range of resources available to them, such as culturally relevant literature from ethnic studies, diversity and equity programming on their respective campuses, and the wide range of digital resources (e.g., digital stories, blogs and vlogs, and online communities) college students of color create themselves and are now available online. These forms of knowledge can be critical tools for advisors who seek to enhance their capacity to find common ground with their students (Revisiting the Role of Academic Advising in Equitably Serving Diverse College Students).

Institutional leaders must consider the investment of additional resources in academic advising services so that advisors can take the time to provide humanized, holistic, and proactive academic advising for students of color (Characteristics of Academic Advising That Contribute to Racial and Ethnic Minority Student Success at Predominantly White Institutions).

Academic advisors working with students of color should make every effort to incorporate a human element into advising and demonstrate that they care about and are committed to their students’ success. For advisors to be viewed as authentic, they should avoid being overly empathetic or completely disengaged. An overly empathetic advisor may seem disingenuous and patronizing to a student of color, and a completely disengaged advisor may give an impression that he or she is disinterested in the student. To be perceived as authentic human beings, advisors can share their own personal stories and struggles with their advisees. Advisors can also humanize academic advising by using the advisee’s name during meetings, talking about pop culture or social activities with students, learning to pronounce an advisee’s name correctly, sending an advisee useful individualized resources between meetings, inquiring about their advisees’ home life, and being honest about the student’s academic standing (Characteristics of Academic Advising That Contribute to Racial and Ethnic Minority Student Success at Predominantly White Institutions).

Advisors should provide holistic academic advising. This means that advisors should both try to understand nonacademic challenges faced by students of color that might be influencing their academic experiences. For example, Asian American students encounter immense pressure to succeed, which results from both high family expectations and racial stereotypes that perpetuate assumptions that all Asian Americans are overachievers (Museus, 2008; Museus & Kiang, 2009). This pressure has been associated with negative psychological consequences, and Asian American students who are more likely than other groups to underutilize counseling services (Kim & Omizo, 2003; Suzuki, 2002). This can be detrimental for many Asian American students who come from communities that are already economically under-resourced and who are at risk. Understanding such nonacademic factors can enable advisors to more effectively understand the issues that their students face and when they should refer their racial and ethnic minority students to other offices on campus to address such issues (Characteristics of Academic Advising That Contribute to Racial and Ethnic Minority Student Success at Predominantly White Institutions).

Those working in academic advising offices should frequently ask themselves how they can make their delivery of services more proactive and less passive. Beyond typical academic-advising duties (e.g., helping students plan their course taking activity or fulfillment of graduation requirements), for example, advisors should consider proactively introducing or accompanying students of color to activities, events, and networks that will expose them to faculty members and peers with similar interests. Advisors should also consider how they can more fully incorporate intrusive advising practices into their work, including systems of monitoring and early intervention systems (Characteristics of Academic Advising That Contribute to Racial and Ethnic Minority Student Success at Predominantly White Institutions).

The information and assistance an effective counselor provides can have considerable and long-lasting benefits for his or her students, boosting college outcomes years after they graduate high school. Schools and districts can help students do better not just by improving teacher performance, but by supporting more effective counseling, as well (Better School Counselors, Better Outcomes).

Improving access to effective counselors may be a simpler and more cost-effective way to increase educational attainment than improving access to effective teachers. There are far fewer counselors than teachers, so it is probably cheaper, and possibly easier, to deliver training to them. Counselors’ limited (and often nonexistent) training on college advising means that even basic training may have large effects on postsecondary outcomes. And because counselors already work in nearly every U.S. high school, improving their effectiveness may be a more attainable goal than increasing student access to highly personalized (and often expensive) interventions aimed at improving college access (Better School Counselors, Better Outcomes).Those working in academic advising offices should frequently ask themselves how they can make their delivery of services more proactive and less passive. Beyond typical academic-advising duties (e.g., helping students plan their course taking activity or fulfillment of graduation requirements), for example, advisors should consider proactively introducing or accompanying students of color to activities, events, and networks that will expose them to faculty members and peers with similar interests. Advisors should also consider how they can more fully incorporate intrusive advising practices into their work, including systems of monitoring and early intervention systems (Characteristics of Academic Advising That Contribute to Racial and Ethnic Minority Student Success at Predominantly White Institutions).

Implement credit transfer “comeback” programs, which can forgive institutional debt and unlock transcripts for stopped out students, improving re-enrollment and degree attainment (Removing the Institutional Debt Hurdle).

Rates of anxiety and/or depression among students, disaggregated by race (The Hope Center).

Percentage of students indicated experiencing clinically significant symptoms of anxiety and depression in the previous two weeks (The Hope Center).

Percentage of students stopping out of college who report that mental health was one of their reasons for stopping out (The Hope Center).

Percentage of students reporting barriers to getting mental health support (e.g., availability, affordability or lack of insurance coverage, lack of awareness, fit, social stigma) (The Hope Center).

State-level insurance expansion policies (The State of Medicaid Expansion Decisions).

Availability of campus-based health plans (U.S. Government Accountability Office)

Campus health fairs and enrollment assistance for Medicaid/Marketplace (Health Insurance Marketplace).

Embedded academic advising on health insurance usage (Health Insurance Marketplace).

Federal laws currently allow full-time students to remain on parental plans through age 26 (Healthcare.gov).

Institutional mandate for campus-wide health plan availability (American Council on Education).

% of households or students experiencing food insecurity (Food Systems Journal).

Food pantry utilization rates. Pace University’s pantry, Provisions, allows students to swipe their student ID card at each visit. This enables the university to collect usage data — recording who uses the pantry, how often, and demographic information. This information is then used to assess how effectively the pantry supports students facing food insecurity (Pace University).

SNAP enrollment among college students. The State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV) provides public dashboards showing both student enrollment in SNAP and estimates of potential eligibility (based on FAFSA income ≤ 200% of the federal poverty level) across institutions, genders, and racial groups (Virginia State Council of Higher Education).

Rates of food insecurity among college students. According to a survey administered by The Hope Center for Student Basic Needs, two-in-five survey respondents reported experiencing food insecurity. “Food insecurity” is categorized using USDA measures as having low, or very-low food security (The Hope Center).

Campus basic-needs center presence, such as Pace University’s food pantry, Provisions (Pace University).

Students running Campus Kitchens or food pantries (Campus Kitchens Project) 

Partnerships that make donated food accessible to students, like MarketBoxx at HBCUs (MarketBoxx).

Many institutions now have a food pantry, but that often is not enough to significantly reduce food insecurity on campus. As noted in Use of Public Resources and Campus Supports, awareness is a major barrier to students accessing support. To effectively reduce food insecurity on campus, colleges should ensure that their resources are robust and promoted widely. Bunker Hill Community College’s DISH Food Pantry provides an excellent example of both. The DISH Food Pantry provides students with refrigerated lockers, increasing accessibility for students who cannot visit during operating hours. The pantry also partners with Food for Free to provide students with microwavable meals to make the resource accessible to students without a kitchen (The Hope Center).

Advocate for SNAP eligibility expansions for students (The Hope Center).

Remove Student Barriers to SNAP. Due in part to the complex requirements and administrative burdens created by the program, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently found that two-thirds of students who are likely eligible for SNAP, and 6-in-10 students who are both food-insecure and likely eligible for the program, do not report receiving benefits. Federal policymakers should overhaul and simplify SNAP eligibility rules and ensure that all students with low incomes (who are at high risk of food insecurity) are able to seamlessly qualify for benefits. Congress should streamline SNAP eligibility by allowing enrollment in higher education to satisfy activity and participation requirements and putting students with low incomes on equal footing with other individuals who are eligible for SNAP, or by simplifying the student exemptions to ensure all groups of low-income students at risk of food insecurity can qualify without needing to satisfy the 20-hour-per-week work rule (The Hope Center).

Improve Outreach to Students About Public Benefits.  Federal policymakers should expand awareness, outreach, and enrollment in SNAP and other support programs that could reduce basic needs insecurity among students who qualify under the current rules. For example, federal agencies should build on a recent interagency Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Departments of Education and Agriculture to strengthen SNAP outreach and issue additional guidance clarifying that many students with low incomes could be eligible for SNAP under the current exemptions without needing to qualify through the 20 hour-per-week work exemption, such as students enrolled in community college and other career-focused programs that result in high employability, as well as those who are anticipating receiving federal work-study (The Hope Center).

The USDA, in partnership with the U.S. Department of Education, should issue regular guidance and resources that promote data-sharing and outreach strategies to reach students who may be eligible for benefits but are unaware that they may qualify (The Hope Center).

State/federal funding that can be used for campus food security programs, such as the Community Food Project Competitive Grant Program (National Institute of Food and Agriculture).

% of students experiencing housing instability or homelessness. Housing insecurity is defined by challenges that prevent someone from having a safe, affordable, and consistent place to live. Homelessness is the most severe form of housing insecurity — not having a fixed, regular, and adequate place to live (The Hope Center).

Housing cost burden (% of income spent on housing). The already high (and increasing) cost of housing — primarily rent and related fees — is one of the more difficult student basic needs to address. When a student faces housing insecurity, they are more likely to experience other insecurities, such as lack of adequate food, transportation, and health care access (The Hope Center).

Student mobility rate due to housing

Number of affordable units per low-income household (National League of Cities).

Percent of students experiencing housing insecurity and/or homelessness (campus data) (The Hope Center).

Presence of a high-functioning Basic Needs Task Force on a campus to create an ecosystem of supports to address students’ basic needs (The Hope Center).

Emergency housing funds and rental assistance for students (Bipartisan Policy Center).

Proactive healthy housing inspections in neighborhoods (National Center for Healthy Housing).

Basic Needs Hub: One of the best ways to target the interconnected nature of basic needs insecurity is by creating a comprehensive, coordinated office (a “basic needs hub”) to help students navigate the wide variety of programs and ensure they receive all possible support. Lee College’s Student Resource and Advocacy Center provides a good model for other institutions to start this work (The Hope Center).

Remove Student Restrictions to Federal Housing Supports. Students are often subject to severe federal restrictions that limit them from most federal and state housing assistance. Since 2005, U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) public and assisted housing programs and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) have contained rules that prevent the vast majority of college students under age 24 from receiving support, based on the mistaken assumption that all college students have access to on-campus housing or are otherwise financially supported by their family. Congress should remove a damaging policy routinely included in the HUD appropriations bill, which denies housing access to students, and also pass the Housing for Homeless Students Act, which would allow students to live in LIHTC housing if they’ve experienced homelessness within the last seven years (The Hope Center).

Financial aid received by students for non-tuition costs is generally counted as “income” for determining a family’s HUD program eligibility, which significantly and unfairly disincentivizes students in supported families from seeking higher education. Congress should remove these restrictions in HUD programs and exclude all financial aid from being counted as income (The Hope Center).

Rent regulation / eviction protection for student tenants (Freedom for All Americans).

Incentives for affordable housing near campuses (Freedom for All Americans).

Allow emergency aid from the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG) to be used to help students stay in school during critical periods. The FSEOG is a federal grant, administered by the Department of Education, used to provide extra financial assistance to students with demonstrated exceptional financial need. Evidence suggests emergency micro-grants are efficient temporary measures in cases where students experience housing instability and can contribute to the increased rate of college graduation. BPC has previously recommended allowing institutions to use a portion of their funds for micro-grant programs and recommends changes to the FSEOG allocation formula to increase support for low-income students. Rather than distributing FSEOG funds to institutions based on previous award amounts and cost of attendance, as under the current formula, BPC’s proposal prioritizes institutions that effectively serve large numbers of low-income students (Bipartisan Policy Center).

Use the Moving to Work (MTW) demonstration to target Housing Choice Vouchers for community college students. Public housing authorities (PHAs) like the Tacoma PHA in Washington have used the flexibility permitted under MTW to prioritize federal HCV funding for community college students experiencing housing insecurity. Other MTW PHAs in jurisdictions with large low-income student communities could consider implementing similar pilot programs. BPC’s J. Ronald Terwilliger Center for Housing Policy has recommended expanding HUD’s MTW demonstration to a full program to allow more widespread use of innovations like this one (Bipartisan Policy Center).

Support reforms to allow students to live in Housing Credit-financed units under certain conditions. The bipartisan Affordable Housing Credit Improvement Act includes provisions to ensure that formerly homeless youth and residents of Housing Credit properties seeking to further their education are not prevented from living in tax-credit subsidized units. While there would still be restrictions on student eligibility under the program, these proposed reforms acknowledge the need for greater flexibility to meet the needs of people experiencing housing insecurity who want to further their education (Bipartisan Policy Center).

Add questions about postsecondary enrollment status to the American Housing Survey. Originally recommended by HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research, this reform would help ensure data visibility to properly track housing insecurity and homelessness among the college student population using the country’s most important instrument for gathering housing data (Bipartisan Policy Center).

Collaborate with universities and community colleges to achieve housing and zoning reforms. Most higher education institutions have a vested interest in ensuring the affordability of their nearby housing markets, since most of their students will require off-campus housing. State and local jurisdictions seeking competitive grants such as HUD’s new PRO Housing grants can work with colleges and universities to conceptualize inclusionary zoning and land use reforms that will ultimately increase the supply of affordable housing (Bipartisan Policy Center).

% of households with broadband + device (computer/laptop) access (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students with no internet access at home, by family income and race/ethnicity (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students with no internet access by main reason for not having access (i.e. too expensive, the home lacked a computer or a computer adequate for internet use) (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students who use the internet at home, disaggregated by sex, race/ethnicity, age, family income, and parent educational attainment (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Among students who use the internet anywhere, those reporting using it at home, at school, at a library or community center, or at someone else’s home (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students who use the internet at home by means of internet access (i.e. through a high-speed internet service installed at home, mobile internet service or data plan, satellite internet service, dial-up service, or some other service) (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students who used spreadsheet or word processing software every day (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students who used email every day (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students who participated in real-time discussions on the internet every day (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students who used the internet to understand issues such as health/illness, financial matters, or environmental issues every day (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Student reports of connectivity issues affecting coursework (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Campus device-lending service usage (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Percentage of students who reported that they had missed assignments or been unable to fully participate in academic activities due to a lack of internet or technology access during the current academic term (The Hope Center).

Internet equity programs (state broadband subsidies). For example, the Student Freedom Initiative is helping Historically Black Colleges and Universities and other community institutions access funds made available through the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD, $42.45 Billion) and Digital Equity (DE, $2.75 Billion) programs implemented by the Department of Commerce / National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) (Student Freedom Initiative).

Presence of campus tech support centers (CSUCCESS Program).

Device loan programs by libraries or IT services (e.g., Wi‑Fi hotspot lending) (CSUCCESS Program).

Digital literacy workshops for students and families (CSUCCESS Program).

The nonprofit organization EducationSuperHighway aims to provide high-speed internet access to all U.S. public school students. In the 2015 State of the States report, EducationSuperHighway (2015) stated that an additional 20 million students were connected to high-speed internet over the past 2 years and that 38 governors had committed to the initiative of connecting their states’ classrooms to high-speed broadband (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

The State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA) works to ensure that students have equitable access to DLR, both inside and outside of the classroom. In the 2016 report The Broadband Imperative II: Equitable Access for Learning, SETDA identified three strategies that policymakers and educators can use to improve equity of access outside of school: reaching out to families about the necessity of out-of-school access, leveraging community partnerships, and sharing out-of-school access options (Fox and Jones 2016). These strategies rely on community buy-in, such as local businesses offering internet access on their premises to students (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Some school districts are putting wireless routers on buses or providing mobile Wi-Fi hotspots so that students can access the Internet outside of the classroom. In California, the Coachella Valley Unified School District helped low-income residents obtain access by outfitting school buses with high-speed internet for use by students on the way to and from school and in the evening hours for homes near the parked buses (U.S. Department of Education n.d.). The Vail School District in Arizona implemented a similar initiative (Fox and Jones 2016) (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

When Cincinnati Public Schools decided to offer partially-online advanced placement courses, the school system provided mobile hotspots, called Kajeet SmartSpots, to students who did not have home broadband access (Meyer 2016). These hotspots not only allowed students to attend their AP classes, but also to complete homework

Forsyth County Schools in Georgia partnered with the Cumming-Forsyth County (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Chamber of Commerce to disseminate a list of organizations and businesses in the community that offered free Wi-Fi hotspots (Fox and Jones 2016) (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Funding programs and providing devices for students are local-level strategies to increase student internet access to DLR outside the classroom. School District 87 of Bloomington, Illinois provided sixth- through eighth-graders with a digital learning device to use at both school and home (Fox and Jones 2016). Since over half of the students did not have athome internet access, the district also decided to allocate funding to provide low-income households with access to the district’s internet connection (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom). 

Cincinnati’s Kajeet SmartSpots program caught the interest of Green Bay Area Public Schools in Wisconsin. Instead of supplying mobile hotspots, however, the school district allowed students to “check-out” a SmartSpot laptop or other device, similar to borrowing a book from the library (Meyer 2016) (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

The national nonprofit organization EveryoneOn works as a liaison between internet service providers and families that cannot afford broadband internet (Meyer 2016). The organization negotiates with internet service providers for more affordable prices for high-speed internet service and computers, and then helps inform families about these opportunities in their areas (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

State broadband funding/subsidies for low-income households (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Institutional regulations requiring inclusive technology access (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

North Carolina launched the Wireless Networking Initiative, a statewide procurement effort that resulted in 95 percent of participating school districts having Wi-Fi access points in every classroom (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

New Jersey formed a statewide buying consortium for broadband services in schools that resulted in 16 percent savings on monthly costs and an average internet access bandwidth increase of 152 percent (Student Access to Digital Learning Resources Outside the Classroom).

Transportation costs for an average commuter postsecondary student as a percent of their total living expenses (D. Price and D. Curtis).

Percentage of community college students who commute to campus (The Hope Center).

Percentage of community college campuses that have transit stops within walking distance (The Hope Center).

Percentage of two-year and four-year students who rely on a vehicle or public transportation to get to class (versus walking or riding a bike) (The Hope Center).

% of students driving, using public transit, biking, or walking to get to campus (The Hope Center).

Percentage of students who reported that they had missed class or work because of a transportation problem during the current academic term (The Hope Center).

Route convenience, frequency and schedules. Inconvenient routes, infrequent trips and limited trip scheduling also pose a problem for college students. Transit is often planned with the work commuter in mind and college students’ schedules may not align with frequent ride times. Students may not be served by transit which seeks to transport to business hubs and central business districts (Trellis Strategies and D. Price and D. Curtis).

Affordability. Public transportation is expensive, especially for low-income students who may not be able to afford the up-front costs of monthly or term-length transit passes, and thus pay the most expensive “per-ride” fees to get from home to college (Trellis Strategies and D. Price and D. Curtis).

Housing and work proximity. In many communities, it is too expensive to live near transit lines, especially rail, and students get pushed further away from the most desirable transit lines, having to rely on buses with multiple transfers to get from home to school (Trellis Strategies and D. Price and D. Curtis).

Transportation reliability and quality. The reliability and quality of public transit is undermined by operational deficits faced by transit systems, leading to over-crowded trains and buses, and to loewe quality rides without space to sit and without acces to Wi-Fi that could enable transit times to be productive for school work (Trellis Strategies and D. Price and D. Curtis). 

Complete Streets” collaboration to build streets that enable safer access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders of all ages and abilities. Typical elements that make up a Complete Street include sidewalks, bicycle lanes (or wide, paved shoulders), Shared-use paths, Designated bus lanes, Safe and accessible transit stops, Frequent and safe crossings for pedestrians, including median islands, Comfortable and accessible public transportation stops, Accessible pedestrian signals, Curb extensions, Narrower travel lanes, Roundabouts and more (Smart Growth America).

University Transit Passes: Most research on university transit passes has identified benefits of offering free or reduced cost transit passes to students. A 2001 study found that offering transit passes to students may reduce the cost of attending college by $2,000, and only cost the university $30 per student, on average (Trellis Strategies).

Public transit coverage & service frequency near campus (The Ithacan).

Student transit subsidy availability (The Ithacan).

Fare-free transit zones for students. In 2024, Tufts University began piloting a free MBTA pass, providing transit across the Boston region, for students enrolled at its fine arts school. George Washington University trialed subsidized WMATA transit passes for students in 2021, and has continued that partnership (Streetsblog USA).

Zoning policy promoting affordable housing near transit hubs. Investing in quality transit-oriented development (TOD) and locating it in previously segregated areas could help connect people to much-needed services and advance access to equitable opportunities (Urban Institute).

Allow for mixed-use developments near existing bus stops and transit hubs. Many zoning laws only allow for buildings to have one use, like single-family housing or retail. By raising building heights and expanding land uses, developers can help increase density and ridership in nearby stations and bring folks closer to transit to limit car use. Paired with incentives for affordable housing, local leaders can bring those with lower incomes closer to urban centers, rather than pushing them away (Urban Institute).

Reduce parking minimums for new developments. This can reduce asphalt, leading to lower surface temperatures and perhaps disincentivizing car dependency. It can also free space for housing units or green space. To increase ridership, transit agencies can consider expanding access to public transportation by adding stops along sparse lines, building more bus and train shelters, and adding bus lanes to potentially lower travel times (Urban Institute).

Use existing federal dollars to fund projects. Local policymakers can draw on federal supports for these multistep, multistakeholder TOD projects. The Federal Transit Administration offers grants for transportation planning and capital investments that can help local governments address both public transit and housing needs in their development plans. The Biden administration has invested billions in improving public transit and climate-friendly infrastructure to support local governments in this work. For instance, the plan included $213 billion to produce and preserve affordable housing units in traditional homes and commercial buildings while working to eliminate exclusionary zoning laws. The administration also hopes to invest $85 billion to modernize existing transit systems (Urban Institute).

Include residents from the start. Involving residents in the design process, understanding the affordability implications of development in a neighborhood, and advocating for the needs of long-time, lower-income residents to developers and other stakeholders are important to avoid displacement and to champion community interests (Urban Institute).

Establish community-benefit agreements. When projects are meant to protect communities from issues like gentrification, these agreements can promote benefits for existing residents, like rent control or good-paying jobs (Urban Institute).

% of student-parent families receiving subsidies (NCSL, Double Duties).

Child care accessibility (spots per child enrolled student) (NCSL, Double Duties).

Usage of campus-based child care centers (NCSL, Double Duties).

Reports of student-parent dropouts due to care barriers (NCSL, Double Duties).

Among parenting students, percent who reported they had missed three or more days of class in the previous term because of problems with childcare arrangements (The Hope Center).

State funding policies for student-parent child care grants (EdNC).

Regulations supporting on-campus childcare facilities (EdNC).

On-site campus child care with sliding-scale fees (Community College Daily).

Partnerships with local child care providers offering student discounts (Community College Daily).

Institutional budgeting to support campus-based child care centers. Child care profit margins are tight and public subsidies aren’t meeting needs to ensure child care providers earn a living wage and that families can afford care. If a college wants to prioritize retention and graduation of its student parent population, it’s worth considering whether its budget can support center operations rather than expecting a child care center to break even on its own (New America, Funding for Campus Based Child Care for Student Parents).

Partnering with Head Start and Early Head Start Programs. More than 1.5 million student parents are enrolled in community colleges, and around half of them have at least one child under age 6. Many student parent families qualify for Head Start, which is why the Kids on Campus initiative was created to help co-locate more Head Start programs at community colleges. Head Start provides families with free access to high-quality early childhood education and other services. For colleges that don’t have the resources or experience to run a child care center, but want to meet the child care needs of their student parents, partnering with Head Start is a smart option. When colleges have space to lend to a Head Start program, they can help Head Start reduce or eliminate rent costs, allowing them to focus on critical services for student parent families. In turn, colleges can support access to high quality care for some of their student parents via connecting them to Head Start (New America, Funding for Campus Based Child Care for Student Parents).

Child Care and Development Fund Subsidies. The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) helps families afford child care. The federal program provides funding to states, who then provide subsidies to eligible families with children under 13. States design their subsidy programs within federal guidelines and make a variety of choices about eligibility that can impact how accessible subsidies are to those enrolled in postsecondary education. Campuses with child care centers should explore if and how they can accept state subsidy dollars so that eligible student parents can use them on campus (New America, Funding for Campus Based Child Care for Student Parents).

Contracts for State Funded Preschool Spots. Some states offer free preschool for all families or families that meet income eligibility criteria. Campuses can explore entering agreements with state programs to offer preschool spots on campus (New America, Funding for Campus Based Child Care for Student Parents).

College Foundation Support. Some campuses raise funds for child care for student parents through their foundations. For example, Utah Valley University received a large donation to help them construct a child care center that expanded capacity to serve student parents. College foundations can help support child care on campus by creating and marketing funds that donors can contribute to in support of basic center operating costs, facilities, or subsidies for student parent families (New America, Funding for Campus Based Child Care for Student Parents).

Bond financing to build or renovate spaces used as child care facilities. Linn Benton Community College in Oregon dealt with this challenge by financing renovations to a building through a bond. They worked to bring a local ballot measure that ultimately allowed them to finance renovations to a building to bring it to current child care center standards (New America, Funding for Campus Based Child Care for Student Parents).

Work study opportunities. Some campuses hire federal work study students to help in campus child care centers as assistants. This can help offset staffing costs where appropriate, and sometimes allow for Early Childhood Education students to get practical experience in their field of study (New America, Funding for Campus Based Child Care for Student Parents).

State/federal subsidy eligibility for student‑parents (Raising Expectations for Institutional Intervention). 

Institutional policy granting schedule flexibility for student-parents (Raising Expectations for Institutional Intervention). 

Community college child care grants. For example, the North Carolina Community College Child Care Grant is state aid directed to help student parents at North Carolina community colleges pay for child care. The North Carolina General Assembly (NCGA) has allocated this funding to North Carolina’s 58 community colleges since 1993, and it is administered through the North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS). Financial aid teams at each college are tasked with getting their student parents connected with the funding (EdNC).

Policies making it easier for student-parents to receive child care assistance. Georgia, Oregon and Washington amended their subsidy policies to make it easier for student parents to receive child care assistance. As of 2022, the Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning considers student parents a priority group among applicants to the state’s subsidy program. Oregon’s HB 3073 (2021) eliminated the required work hours for student parents receiving child care subsidies. The bill also allowed for additional paid hours of care so parents can study. Washington’s HB 5237 (2021) removes a requirement that parents must be enrolled full-time and work a minimum number of hours. It also added pursuit of an associate degree as an approved educational activity for eligibility (NCSL, Double Duties).

Policies providing student-parents additional financial support for child care. Legislatures in Minnesota and North Carolina appropriated funds for additional financial support for child care to student parents. North Carolina community college students who have completed at least 50% of their credential can apply for a $1,000 Finish Line Grant to put towards child care or other living expenses. Student parents in Minnesota can qualify for $6,500 per child each academic year through the state’s Postsecondary Child Care Grant Program (NCSL, Double Duties).

Policies improving data collection on students who are also parents. Connecticut and Illinois passed legislation to help lawmakers better understand the number of postsecondary students who are also parents and their ability to find on-campus child care. Connecticut’s HB 6565 (2023) requires the state’s Department of Education to conduct an assessment of child care needs of the student body and existing child care services and facilities on community colleges, technical colleges and state university campuses. Illinois SB 267 (2021) requires public institutions of higher education to annually collect data on students’ parental status. Furthermore, institutions that operate on-campus child care centers must report the total number of children served each semester specifying how many are children of students (NCSL, Double Duties).

Of students who participate in career and technical education (CTE) coursework, the percentage that concentrate in an in-demand pathway, as defined by regional labor market data (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

Rate of completion of a career pathway program while in high school (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Share of high school graduates earning a career readiness certificate by high school completion (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Share of high school graduates earning a military or workforce certification by high school completion (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Share of high school graduates possessing marketable trade skills by high school completion (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

The High-Quality CTE Pathway Participation measure presents a particular challenge to define. Definitions of quality may take into account one or more of the following: (a) High-Skill: The pathway presents the opportunity for students to move beyond the high school program into an aligned postsecondary program in that field of study; (b) High-Wage: The median wages for the occupations that the pathway is preparing students for are at or exceed a living wage in the state; (c)  In-Demand: The pathway leads to significant job openings now and into the future. A region or state can determine that through a combination of looking at volume of jobs regionally or statewide, annual openings, and growth projections. At the state level, this information should be considered relative to the state’s size and economy (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

“High quality” goes beyond labor market alignment. Pathways should include access to early postsecondary credit in the field of study, work-based learning opportunities, industry credential opportunities where appropriate, and clear and direct links between academic and technical coursework. This combination of quality elements is arguably just as important as alignment to labor market. Whether a particular community considers these elements at the regional or state level should be guided by the mobility of their students. In places where students are highly mobile and likely to move, understanding migration patterns for students could help communities look beyond their own boundaries to identify what pathways best serve students as well as those that serve the local economy. In places where very few people leave the community/region, a much more localized look at the data makes sense (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

Kentucky has systematically analyzed labor market information to identify the top five priority industry sectors and specific fields within them that meet rigorous skill, demand, and wage thresholds. The state has brought together K-12 districts, postsecondary institutions, and employers to design career pathways that meet the needs of the identified industries. The Department of Education tracks district-by-district pathway offerings to examine alignment to the high-demand industry sectors. It also reviews the number of juniors and seniors concentrating in pathways leading to the top occupations in those high-demand pathways. Both measures are captured on a “heat map” and used to target assistance and bring transparency to the state’s work. At the same time, as part of the program approval process, the Department of Education disallows local districts from using state or federal funds to support pathways that are not aligned with these priority industries and occupations. That policy has been key to phasing out pathways that lack labor market relevance (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

Tennessee has a statewide initiative to create alignment between K-12, postsecondary institutions, and employers for students to have clear and guided pathways to move seamlessly into the workforce. Alongside Tennessee Promise and Tennessee Reconnect, the Tennessee Pathways program directly supports the statewide attainment goal, Drive to 55. The program is structured around three key elements to support student success: high quality college and career advising, early postsecondary and work based learning opportunities in high school, and seamless vertical alignment as a result of effective partnerships. Regional coordinators are housed at institutions across the state to foster partnerships between high schools and local colleges and employers. Grounded in regional labor market information, 122 pathways at 74 high schools across the state have been certified. The state has begun to track enrollment in these pathways to examine how students fare beyond high school, as compared to students enrolled in career technical education pathways without the certification (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

South Carolina has incorporated pathway participation metrics into their state accountability system. Their school and district report cards capture data on pathway participation, course completion, credential attainment, the types of industry credentials earned by career cluster, and participation in dual enrollment as part of students’ pathway coursework. By transparently reporting on pathway metrics, South Carolina has signaled the value of career readiness programs with students and families  —  and empowered them with information to guide their decision to enroll (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

CTE Access: Number of CTE participants as calculated for the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act (Perkins V). State-specific calculations for a Perkins V CTE participant is defined in the law as an individual who completes not less than one course in a CTE program or program of study of an eligible recipient (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

CTE Access: Number of CTE participants as calculated for Perkins V enrolled in high-wage, in demand career pathways (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

Success within CTE Programs: Number of CTE concentrators as calculated for Perkins V. State-specific calculations for a Perkins V CTE concentrator is defined in the law as: (a) At the secondary school level, a student who is served by an eligible recipient and has completed at least two courses in a single CTE program or program of study; (b) At the postsecondary level, a student who is enrolled in an eligible recipient and has (i) earned at least 12 credits within a CTE program or program of study or (ii) completed such a program if the program encompasses fewer than 12 credits or the equivalent in total (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

Success within CTE Programs: Number of CTE concentrators as calculated for Perkins V enrolled in high-wage, in-demand career pathways (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

Success within CTE Programs: Number of CTE concentrators who have completed sustained work-based learning experiences such as internships, apprenticeships and/or clinicals (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

Success within CTE Programs: Number of CTE concentrators who have completed advanced coursework such as Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate, and/or dual or concurrent enrollment courses (secondary). State-specific calculations for the Perkins V postsecondary credit attainment indicator, which is defined in the law as the percentage of CTE concentrators graduating from high school having attained postsecondary credits in their CTE program or program of study through a dual or concurrent enrollment program or another credit transfer agreement (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

Success within CTE Programs: Number of CTE concentrators that have completed higher-level coursework (postsecondary) (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

Success within CTE Programs: Number of CTE concentrators who have earned recognized postsecondary credentials such as industry certifications, postsecondary certificates and/or degrees. State-specific calculations for Perkins V credential attainment indicators are defined in the law as: (a) The percentage of CTE concentrators graduating from high school having attained a recognized postsecondary credential; and (b) The percentage of [postsecondary] CTE concentrators who receive a recognized postsecondary credential during participation in or within one year of program completion. State-specific calculations for the WIOA credential attainment indicator (D), which is defined as the percentage of those participants enrolled in an education or training program (excluding those in on-the-job training and customized training) who attain a recognized postsecondary credential or a secondary school diploma, or its recognized equivalent, during participation in or within one year after exit from the program. A participant who has attained a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent is included in the percentage of participants who have attained a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent only if the participant also is employed or is enrolled in an education or training program leading to a recognized postsecondary credential within one year after exit from the program (Achieving Inclusive CTE). 

Student Participation in CTE: Average number of Carnegie credits and percentage distribution of total credits earned by public high school graduates, by course type and subject area (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Student Participation in CTE: percentage of public high school graduates who concentrated in a career and technical education (CTE) subject area, by CTE coursetaking pattern and CTE subject area (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Student Participation in CTE: percentage of public high school graduates who earned Carnegie credits in each career and technical education (CTE) subject area and, among those graduates, average number of credits earned and percentage who concentrated in each CTE subject area (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Student Participation in CTE: Average number of career and technical education (CTE) Carnegie credits and percentage distribution of total CTE credits public high school graduates earned, by grade level (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Student Participation in CTE: percentage distribution of public high school graduates with each career and technical education (CTE) coursetaking pattern, by selected student race/ethnicity categories and gender (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Public School Teachers of CTE: percentage of public school teachers of grades 9 through 12, by field of main teaching assignment and selected demographic and educational characteristics (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Public School Teachers of CTE: percentage of public and private elementary and secondary schools hiring for at least one open teaching position, and among schools with at least one opening schoolwide, percentage hiring in various subject-matter fields, by selected school characteristics (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Public School Teachers of CTE: Among public and private elementary and secondary schools that were hiring for at least one open teaching position in a specific field, percentage that found it very difficult or were not able to fill the opening, by subject-matter field of opening and selected school characteristics (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

CTE Coursetaking: percentage of public and private high school graduates who earned at least one Carnegie credit in selected career/technical education courses in high school, by selected student and school characteristics (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

CTE Coursetaking: Number of 2013 public high school graduates and percentage ever enrolled in postsecondary education by June 2016 or June 2021, and selected postsecondary outcomes among 2013 public high school graduates ever enrolled in postsecondary education by June 2021, by high school career and technical education (CTE) concentrator status (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

CTE Coursetaking: Among 2013 public high school graduates ever enrolled in postsecondary education by June 2021, percentage of high school career and technical education (CTE) concentrators who earned postsecondary degrees/certificates and whose highest postsecondary degree/certificate was in the same field or a different field as their high school CTE concentration, by field of CTE concentration during high school and highest postsecondary degree/certificate earned (NCES, Career and Technical Education Statistics).

Number and percentage of CTE program offerings considered “in demand.” Recent studies of CTE offerings indicate that CTE programs are frequently misaligned with projected job openings in local regions. (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

CTE Alignment with the Labor Market: One study of CTE programs in high schools in West Virginia found that only about half of the state’s CTE programs were aligned to at least one occupation in high demand among employers in the region (Assessing the Alignment between West Virginia’s high school Career and Technical Education Programs and the Labor Market).

CTE Post-Program Outcomes – Placement: Number of CTE concentrators placed in postsecondary education, advanced training or the workforce after completing a CTE program as calculated for Perkins V. State-specific calculations for Perkins V placement indicators are defined in the law as: (a) The percentage of CTE concentrators who, in the second quarter after exiting from secondary education, are in postsecondary education or advanced training, military service, or a service program under the National and Community Service Act; are volunteers in the Peace Corps; or are employed; (b) The percentage of [postsecondary] CTE concentrators who, during the second quarter after program completion, remain enrolled in postsecondary education; are in advanced training, military service, or a service program under the National and Community Service Act; are volunteers in the Peace Corps; or are placed or retained in employment (Achieving Inclusive CTE). 

CTE Post-Program Outcomes – High-Wage, High-Demand (HWHD) Placement: Number of CTE concentrators who were enrolled in high-wage, in-demand career pathways and were placed in postsecondary education, advanced training or the workforce after completing a CTE program as calculated for Perkins V. State-specific calculations for WIOA employment rate and education and employment rate indicators (Achieving Inclusive CTE). 

CTE Post-Program Outcomes – Wages: Number of CTE concentrators who, after completing a CTE program, earned at or above the state’s definition of “high wage”  (Achieving Inclusive CTE). 

CTE Post-Program Outcomes – HWHD Wages: Number of CTE concentrators who, after completing a CTE program, earned at or above the state’s definition of “high wage” and were enrolled in high-wage, in-demand career pathways (Achieving Inclusive CTE). 

Opportunity gaps: When analyzing opportunity gaps, state or local leaders look at the gap between the percentage of career pathways enrollees, CTE participants or CTE concentrators who are members of a particular learner group and the percentage of learners in the community who are members of that learner group (Achieving Inclusive CTE).

Performance gaps: When considering performance gaps, state or local leaders analyze the gap between the percentage of learners in a particular learner group who meet a performance target and the percentage of all learners who meet that performance target (Achieving Inclusive CTE). 

Number of CTE program areas available in high schools, and which program areas are most and least common statewide and by region (a cluster of neighboring counties with similar labor market characteristics) (Aligning career and technical education with high-wage and high-demand occupations in Tennessee).

percentage of high school graduates who graduated from schools with at least one available CTE program area, and how this varies by region (Aligning career and technical education with high-wage and high-demand occupations in Tennessee).

percentage of high school graduates who complete at least one CTE concentration (Aligning career and technical education with high-wage and high-demand occupations in Tennessee).

Statewide and for each region, how many CTE concentrators would need to change program areas to match the distribution of workers in the labor market? For each program area, how does the percentage of high school graduates who completed a concentration compare with the percentage of workers employed in corresponding occupations? (Aligning career and technical education with high-wage and high-demand occupations in Tennessee).

For each region, which CTE program areas correspond to projected low-, moderate-, and high-wage occupations? What percentage of projected jobs are in program areas that correspond to high- wage occupations? What is the percentage of CTE concentrators in these program areas? How do the median annual wages in occupations that correspond to each program area vary by education level? (Aligning career and technical education with high-wage and high-demand occupations in Tennessee).

For each region, which CTE program areas correspond to projected low-, moderate-, and high-demand occupations? What percentage of projected jobs are in CTE program areas that correspond to high- demand occupations? What is the percentage of concentrators in these program areas? (Aligning career and technical education with high-wage and high-demand occupations in Tennessee).

Career pathway system characteristics and design features, including these basic characteristics: (a) Primary target population (e.g., low-income adults, participants with limited English-language proficiency, disadvantaged youth); (b) Length of the pathway (e.g., less than one year, one to two years, or over two years in duration); (c) Industry focus (e.g., health care, manufacturing, construction); (d) Academic goals, the credential to which the career pathway program leads (e.g., certificate, Associate’s degree, Bachelor’s degree); (e) Sources of funding (e.g., federal, state, or foundation funding) (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Information on career pathway system design, including: (a) Sequence of education and training offerings: This includes the specific elements of the pathway instruction for a particular occupation or industry sector; (b) Skill assessments: This includes industry-approved technical skill assessments, based on industry standards, and state-developed or state-approved assessments, particularly where industry-approved standards do not exist; (c) Supportive services: This includes child care, transportation assistance, and tutoring; (d) Case management: Sometimes also referred to as proactive advising, this can assist participants in identifying their needs for supportive services, and it can help participants arrange for access to those services; (e) Employer involvement: This included efforts to encourage an active role for employers in pathway design and support and in the assessment of participant competencies (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Career pathway participant characteristics, including: (a) percentage of low-income: Most of the pathway systems reviewed target lower-income adults and collect data on this characteristic; (b) Other characteristics: other participant characteristics that are relevant to targeting and assessing results (e.g., the percentage of participants requiring remediation, percentage with English language deficiency) (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Career pathway implementation metrics, including: (a) Enrollment: the change in the number of participants enrolled in career pathway or bridge programs from one year to the next; (b) Pathway programs in use: Most include a measure of the change in the number of career pathway programs or bridge programs from year to year; (c) Funding level: the change in the amount or percentage of funding devoted to career pathways or bridge programs from year to year; (d) Number of participants who use various support services and other program features (e.g., case management, mentoring); (e) Number of employers engaged in pathway design and delivery; (f) Adherence to program design standards set by the state; (g) Market penetration (e.g., percentage of developmental education courses incorporated into a career pathway) (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Transition metrics (following participants across education and training funding sources or settings). For example, career pathway initiatives in Minnesota, Washington, and Wisconsin have undertaken “pipeline” studies that examine the transitions of adult education, ESL, and developmental education participants from these settings into and through postsecondary programs (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Interim education and training outcomes for participants, including: (a) Passing grades: The number and percentage of participants who obtain a passing grade in a bridge course or developmental education course in the pathway; (b) Skill gains: The number and percentage of participants who attain the intended reading, writing, or mathematics levels (or gains targets) based on comparison of pre and post-program assessment results. Metrics of this type are required for Adult Education and for WIA youth programs; (c) Postsecondary enrollment: The number and percentage of participants enrolling in one or more credit bearing postsecondary courses. This metric is similar to the skill-gains requirement for Adult Education and WIA youth programs, but those do not require entry into credit-bearing courses; (d) Academic course completion: The number and percentage of participants obtaining a passing grade in one or more college-level academic courses within a postsecondary program of study; (e) Postsecondary program retention: The number and percentage of participants returning for the second semester of a postsecondary program (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Pathway education and training outcomes. Technical skill attainment is a required measure under Perkins postsecondary programs, as is receipt of an industry-recognized credential, certificate or diploma. Attainment of a degree or certificate is a required measure for WIA youth programs, as well as for WIA adult programs in states where the common measures have not been adopted. Outcomes measures can include: (a) Program completion: the number and percentage of participants completing a career pathway program; (b) Postsecondary program completion: the number and percentage of participants completing a postsecondary program and obtaining a credential; (c) Grade Point Average: the cumulative GPA of participants; (d) Apprenticeships: the number of participants completing a registered apprenticeship program. (Under WIA and Adult Education, entering an apprenticeship program also counts as entering employment.); (e) Short-term programs: the number of participants who complete a short-term vocational program; (f) Technical diploma: the number of participants who obtain a one-year or two-year technical diploma; (g) Associate’s degree: the number of participants who obtain an Associate’s degree in a vocational or academic transfer program; (h) Postsecondary program completion: the number of participants who complete at least one postsecondary program of any type (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Labor market outcomes, including: (a) Employment: the number and percentage of postsecondary completers who obtain employment. This is a required measure for Adult Education, Perkins postsecondary programs, and WIA youth, adult, and dislocated worker programs; (b) Program-related employment: the number and percentage of postsecondary program completers who obtain employment in an industry or occupation related to the postsecondary program; (c) Employment retention: the number and percentage of postsecondary program completers who retain employment. This is a required measure for Adult Education, Perkins postsecondary programs, and WIA adult and dislocated worker programs; (d) Earnings gains: the average earnings gain for postsecondary program completers who obtain employment. Longer-term earnings gains at 18, 24, or 36 months. WIA adult and dislocated worker programs must report on average earnings for the second and third quarters following exit but not on earnings gains; (e) Full or part-time employment of graduates (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A career pathway as a well-articulated sequence of quality education and training offerings and supportive services that enable educationally underprepared youth and adults to advance over time to successively higher levels of education and employment in a given industry sector or occupation. The career pathway approach reorients existing education and workforce services from a myriad of disconnected programs to a structure that focuses on the individuals in need of education and training and their career paths, and it provides clear transitions, strong supports, and other elements critical to the success of participants (The Alliance for Quality Career Pathways Approach).

Adopting the career pathway approach means redesigning the delivery of education, training, and employment services to be much more integrated, aligned and participant-centered. In tight fiscal environments, it can be financially prudent for partners at the state and local levels to commit to supporting a shared strategy, rather than for them to implement separate — or even competing — approaches (The Alliance for Quality Career Pathways Approach).

A state career pathway system is a partnership of state-level agencies, organizations, and employers or an industry that provides a supportive policy environment for local/regional career pathway systems and programs and promotes the quality, scale, and sustainability of career pathways (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is a partnership among local and/or regional agencies, organizations, institutions, and employers or an industry. It includes specific structural elements such as multiple entry and exit points and supportive services and navigation assistance. The system generally consists of linked and aligned career pathway programs. The partnership follows six key guiding principles: (1) Adopt and articulate a shared vision; (2) Demonstrate leadership and commitment to institutionalizing career pathways; (3) Ensure that career pathways are demand-driven, focus on sectors/occupations, and deeply engage employers; (4) Align policies, measures, and funding; (5) Use and promote data and continuous improvement strategies; (6) Support professional development (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is comprised of the following structural elements that make up the career pathway: (a) A well-articulated sequence of education and training offerings; (b) Multiple entry points that accommodate participants entering at differing skill levels (including adults and out-of-school youth with very low basic skills); (c) Multiple exit points at successively higher levels of education and employment that are aligned with marketable, stackable, “creditable” credentials; and (d) Supportive services and navigation assistance for participants in the pathways (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Ideally, a career pathway that focuses on educationally underprepared adults and youth starts with basic skill “bridge” programs. They provide seamless transitions for participants to earn marketable credentials in demand-driven fields that bear or articulate to postsecondary credit (i.e., are “creditable”) and accumulate to higher credentials (i.e., are “stackable”). The pathway should lead to employment paying self-sufficient or family-supporting earnings and offering opportunities for advancement. (More robust career pathway systems may include stackable credentials that provide wages well beyond self-sufficiency.) The specific credentials included and the length of the career pathway will vary based on the industry or occupation (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is managed by a partnership that adopts and articulates a shared vision. Partners adopt a shared vision of the career pathway system and a governance structure (formal or informal) that clearly delineates each partner’s roles and responsibilities (e.g., through a memorandum of understanding) (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is managed by a partnership that demonstrates leadership and commitment to institutionalizing career pathways. Partners demonstrate collaborative leadership and a commitment to building, sustaining and scaling up career pathways. This approach becomes the way they do business on a regular basis (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is managed by a partnership that ensures that career pathways are demand-driven, focuses on sectors/occupations, and deeply engages employers. The career pathway system is responsive to the specific, dynamic contexts of the regional labor market and significantly engages multiple employers within a sector or occupational area in an interactive, ongoing working relationship (through sector strategies where applicable) (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is managed by a partnership that aligns policies, measures, and funding. Partners align related policies, performance and accountability measures, and funding for career pathways, including through the use of aligned and braided funding across funding streams (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is managed by a partnership that uses and promotes data and continuous improvement strategies. Partners are data-driven and focus on continuously improving efforts by measuring participants’ interim and ultimate outcomes as well as process indicators (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is managed by a partnership that supports professional development. Partners support robust and ongoing professional development for career pathways practitioners and administrators (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A local/regional career pathway system is an extensive undertaking that almost always encompasses more than a single partnership or program. Usually, a series of career pathway programs are linked together to form a local/ regional system (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Career pathway programs are the building blocks of career pathways. They blend a set of interventions in a specific industry or occupation and are aligned in a longer-term career pathway leading to marketable, stackable, “creditable” credentials. Career pathway programs are comprised of the following interventions: (a) Learner-centered approaches to instruction and occupational training, including contextualization, dual enrollment, acceleration, and prior learning assessment; (b) Appropriate and meaningful assessment of participants’ skills and needs (including accessibility needs for participants with disabilities); (c) Supportive services, including academic supports (e.g., tutoring and advising); non academic supports (e.g., child care, transportation, and financial assistance); career exploration; and, navigation assistance through the career pathway program and, ideally, into retained employment; and (d) Quality work experiences, including job placement assistance and, ideally, quality sector/occupation-specific pre-employment work experiences (e.g., internships, apprenticeships) (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

A state career pathway system is a partnership of state-level agencies, organizations, and employers/industry that provides leadership and a supportive policy environment for local/regional career pathway systems and programs and that promotes the quality, scale, and sustainability of career pathways. Partners at the state level may include the state workforce agency, adult basic education, postsecondary education, economic development, and human services. (For more information, see the Six Key Elements of Career Pathways developed by the U.S. Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Labor.) Partnerships also should include agencies focusing on youth, people with disabilities, and those in the corrections system (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

At the state level, governors, legislators, and state agency heads can be important stakeholders who can demonstrate leadership and commitment to institutionalizing career pathways. Under the guiding principle of “demand-driven, sector/occupational based, and employer engagement,” the roles of the state partnership are to ensure that local/regional career pathways are responsive to specific and dynamic regional labor market contexts, and to significantly engage multiple employers in an interactive, ongoing relationship, ideally through a connection to any state sector strategy (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

The state system partnership should align related policies and performance measures and braid funding at the state level. In addition, it should develop statewide policies that specifically support career pathways. Policies and measures should be aligned both horizontally across agencies and vertically within each agency among state, regional and local levels of government. Finally, the state system should include professional development opportunities for local/ regional staff and state-level staff involved in career pathways (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

States may be at different stages of system development. For example, in some states, a local area or region may have developed a robust career pathway system with multiple career pathways in the absence of a state system. In other states, highly visionary and committed state leaders may be leading the way and helping local areas and regions develop career pathway systems. In still other states, the two levels may be emerging together, albeit at different paces given funding opportunities and leadership (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

The U.S. Department of Labor developed six key elements of Career Pathways. These are: (1) Career Pathways build cross-agency partnerships and clarify roles. Key cross-agency partners at the local and state levels are engaged to participate in the initiative. Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and formalized; (2) Career Pathways identify sector or industry and engage employers. Sectors and industries are selected, gap analysis is conducted, and employers are engaged in the development of career pathways; (3) Career Pathways design programs and provide a clear sequence of education courses and credentials that meet the skill needs of high-demand industries; (4) Career Pathways identify funding needs and sources. Necessary resources are raised and/or leveraged to develop and implement career pathway programs; (5) Career Pathways help align federal, state, and local legislation or administrative policies to promote career pathway development and implementation; (6) Career Pathways measure system change and performance. Measures are used to assess and determine system change and performance including policy changes for system-wide change (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways (i.e., a clear sequence of education coursework and/or training credentials) are aligned with the skill needs of industries important to the regional or state economies in which they are located, and reflect the active engagement of employers in targeted industry sectors regarding the skill requirements for employment or career progression in high demand occupations (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways include the full range of secondary, adult education, and postsecondary education options, including registered apprenticeship, with a non-duplicative progression of courses clearly articulated from one level of instruction to the next, with opportunities to earn postsecondary credits and lead to industry-recognized [and/or] postsecondary credentials (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways include curriculum and instructional strategies that make work a central context for learning (contextual learning) and help students attain work readiness skills (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways include, as appropriate for the individual, integrated education and training that combine occupational skills training with adult education services, give credit for prior learning, and adopt other strategies that accelerate the educational and career advancement of the participant (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways lead to the attainment of an industry-recognized degree or credential, which may include stackable credentials of value in the labor market and that articulate progressively to higher-level credentials or degrees (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways help a worker enter or advance within a specific sector or occupational field, regardless of their skills at the point of entry (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways include academic and career counseling, wrap-around support services particularly at points of transition, and support the development of an individual career plan (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways are organized to meet the particular needs of adults, including childcare, accommodating work schedules with flexible and non-semester-based scheduling, alternative class times and locations, and the innovative use of technology (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Career pathways have the goal of increasing an individual’s educational and skills attainment and employment outcomes (Six Key Elements of Career Pathways).

Adapt pathway programs of study to prioritize door-opener dual enrollment courses to provide foundational industry exposure and ensure students have many options as they transition to postsecondary. When appropriate, incorporate strategic dual enrollment courses, which increase students’ opportunity to earn credentials or degrees that launch high-wage, high-growth careers (JFF, Promising Credentials).

Identify and adapt postsecondary health science programs of study (for example) to increase the credential applicability of recommended foundational door-opener dual enrollment courses such as Medical Terminology or Anatomy and Physiology (JFF, Promising Credentials).

To support students through multiple stages of academic and career development, identify and pursue strategic opportunities to align and streamline industry-recognized credentials to stackable associate’s degree-level credentials. Every step must align with promising careers in the region (JFF, Promising Credentials).

Provide training for guidance counselors and advisors to review degree opportunities, dual enrollment, and labor market information with students. Ensure that support staff have the resources to communicate career growth, wage data, and course outcomes directly to students. Embed labor market discussions into sustained career advising (JFF, Promising Credentials).

Vet data and program outcomes with regional industry leaders to determine labor market needs that cannot be identified by external evaluations. Work with industry leaders to identify in-demand employability and technical competencies (JFF, Promising Credentials).

Develop systems for career exploration that incorporate student interest, passion, and career exposure to help youth make informed choices about their futures (JFF, Promising Credentials).

Conduct further analysis to account for students who relocate, including job opportunities in neighboring labor markets (JFF, Promising Credentials).

Identify barriers, particularly those faced by historically marginalized populations, to enrollment in dual credit courses. The goal is to increase the number of students who can access dual credit coursework. This includes providing early supports for academic readiness in English and math (JFF, Promising Credentials).

State departments of education could evaluate the alignment of CTE programs with workforce demands to help school districts address unserved, high-demand occupations. They could help develop new high school CTE programs aligned to high-demand occupations in each region (Assessing the Alignment between West Virginia’s high school Career and Technical Education Programs and the Labor Market).

State departments of education could restructure programs that do not align to high-demand occupations or conduct additional analyses on whether programs align to other occupations in the region or around the state. If a region is preparing students for occupations that are not available in the region, these leaders might want to consider whether there is an opportunity to attract new industries to the region that would align to these CTE programs and thus would have a well-prepared potential workforce (Assessing the Alignment between West Virginia’s high school Career and Technical Education Programs and the Labor Market). 

Expanded income support during training Unemployment Insurance in the United States is typically offered for a maximum of 26 weeks, although this may be expanded during national or local recessions. Other safety net programs for prime-age workers are limited and, increasingly, may prioritize work over training to maintain eligibility. Strittmatter (2016) noted that, in Germany, most workers engaged in training have some form of income support; in the United States, only one-in-five training participants receive income support. Workers who must choose between training and a return to employment are likely to face strong financial incentives to return to work, even if it means accepting low-wage work or returning to an industry clearly in decline. Recent proposals for wage insurance or reemployment insurance over the short- to medium-term could make engagement in, and completion of, training more feasible for a significant segment of the workforce (What works in Career and Technical Education).

Support for capacity building among public sector training providers, especially community colleges. Given the greater fiscal variability at the state level, a federal role in supporting CTE provision, especially during economic downturns, is likely to be essential to avoid capacity constraints that limit effective training. Federal funding for programs aimed at individual workers should be accompanied by funding for CTE programs (What works in Career and Technical Education).

Improved student access to information about program quality and expected outcomes. Additional investments in training opportunities for individual workers need to be accompanied by well-designed access to information. As noted throughout, training often raises earnings and employment, but results vary dramatically by the training provider, field of study, and across individuals with different work and career histories. At a minimum, workers in need of training support should have answers to the following questions: (a) How often do individuals with similar education, work experience, and prior earnings complete a particular CTE program? (b) What are the earnings and employment outcomes of individuals who complete this CTE program? Prior to completing the program, were the education, employment, and earnings of those completing the program similar to mine? (c) What are the employment and earnings of workers who have been dislocated from jobs in my industry but do not engage in some form of training? (What works in Career and Technical Education).

Example of Emerging State Career Pathway System – Virginia’s Career Pathways: This interagency effort developed out of a Governor’s Task Force in 2008 that brought together leaders from the Office of the Governor, the Department of Labor and Industry, the State Council of Higher Education, the Virginia Community College System, the Virginia Department of Education, the Virginia Economic Development Partnership and other state agencies. This task force created a set of coordinated strategies for building a statewide workforce development and education pathway. The principal purpose was to develop a workforce customized to the needs of industry and responsive to regional labor market demand. Through a combination of state, federal and private investments, Virginia is expanding upon this work to create industry-specific career pathways that extend from middle school through retirement age in each region of the state. These activities include scaling up the promising PluggedInVA model, which combines basic skills instruction and GED preparation with industry certifications and for-credit college coursework. Participants graduate with a GED, an industry certification, a Career Readiness Certificate, a digital literacy certificate, at least 12 community college credits and experiences with local employers. Virginia’s progress in career pathways is suggested by the Governor’s inclusion of both proposed legislation and budget amendment in his workforce package presented for consideration in Virginia’s 2013 General Assembly and by the creation of a new Director of Education and Workforce Development who acts as a liaison between the Secretariats of Education and Commerce and Trade (A Framework for Measuring Career Pathways Innovation).

Youth with justice system involvement: Two studies assessing the impact of employment-related programs on youth with justice involvement observed positive findings. In a random assignment study of the Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart program (National Council on Crime and Delinquency 2009), the program improved employment and earnings. The Avon Park Youth Academy and STREET Smart program serves youth ages 16 to 18 who are transitioning out of a secure custody residential facility in Florida, and its vocational training component includes opportunities for work-based learning through on-the-job training. In a subgroup analysis of JOBSTART, a program providing basic skills education, occupational training, support services, and job placement assistance to youth who had dropped out of school, young males with prior justice system involvement experienced statistically significant gains in earnings in the fourth year after random assignment (Cave et al. 1993). A large-scale evaluation of the Reentry Opportunities Employment grant program is currently under way and will examine impacts on youth with involvement in the justice system (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Youth with prior or current foster care involvement: Although few studies have examined the labor market outcomes of youth with prior or current foster care involvement, two have found positive impacts. In an RCT of an intervention helping youth transition out of foster care, youth in the program earned an average of $611 more than youth who did not participate in the program (Valentine et al. 2015). Youth who participated in the program received counseling, referrals to other services, financial assistance, group social and learning activities, and educational and vocational coordination. In a quasi-experimental study of the Foster Youth Demonstration Project, which provided youth with job preparation and educational and supportive services, youth with foster care involvement who participated in services longer were more likely than those participating for fewer quarters to secure a paid job (Institute for Educational Leadership 2008) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Youth experiencing homelessness: A study including two experiments found positive employment impacts of a social enterprise intervention and an Individual Placement and Support (IPS) program for homeless youth. An RCT comparing a social enterprise to the IPS program for homeless youth reported that 39 % of youth who participated in a social enterprise program reported any paid employment, compared to 32 % of youth in the IPS program over the 20-month study period. However, this difference was not statistically significant. (Ferguson 2018). The youth who participated in the social enterprise intervention attended vocational and small-business classes and received clinical or case-management services. Youth in the IPS program met individually with their employment specialist, a case manager, and a clinician at least once weekly to discuss life goals such as employment (Ferguson 2018). In another study of youth receiving shelter services including temporary housing, skills training, and referral services, youth who received these services showed no significant improvement in employment status when compared to those receiving day treatment (Thompson et al. 2002) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Youth parents or expectant parents: An RCT of the Young Parents Demonstration (YPD) examined the provision of enhanced services to improve educational and employment outcomes for youth parents and those expecting a child. The core program components offered to all study participants typically included education, training, and employment-focused services as well as supportive services. The enhancements offered to the treatment group included mentoring or guided employment, education, training, and related supports. The study found positive earnings impacts for the first two rounds of grantees through the first two years after random assignment. However, overall, the enhanced services had no impact on employment and earnings (Trutko et al. 2018) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Youth disconnected from education or employment: The Performance Partnership Pilots provides services for disconnected youth, defined as individuals between ages 14 and 24 who are low income and either homeless, in foster care, involved in the juvenile justice system, unemployed, or not enrolled in or at risk of dropping out of an educational institution. In a synthesis of the local evaluations of the first cohort of pilots, of the six types of interventions implemented, three demonstrated evidence of improving expected youth outcomes  —  case management services for out-of-school youth, combined case management and WIOA services for out-of-school youth, and a two-generation education and training program for pregnant and parenting youth. However, one of the three local evaluations examining case management for disconnected youth also found evidence of negative effects of participation in career preparation and subsidized employment (Maxwell and Yañez 2020) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Youth who have experienced trauma: Two models of trauma-informed approaches for youth have been rigorously evaluated: the Attachment, Self-regulation, and Competency (ARC) model and the Sanctuary Model. The ARC model focuses on improving three areas impacted when youth experience trauma  —  attachment, self-regulation, and resiliency (Berk et al. 2018). For youth ages 13 to 19 in a residential environment, use of the ARC model reduced post-traumatic stress disorder and improved behavior (Hodgdon et al. 2013). The Sanctuary Model  —  initially developed for adults but more recently adapted to in-school youth and children  —   develops an understanding of trauma, uses a framework for addressing disruption, and includes an implementation toolkit (Berk et al. 2018). In a residential setting, one combined experimental and quasi-experimental study found that youth in locations that had implemented the Sanctuary Model had greater self-control, reduced verbal aggression, and used fewer negative coping strategies after six months (Rivard et al. 2005). In addition, trauma-informed approaches are also used for adults with barriers to employment in settings outside of WIOA, and this strategy could be applicable to some adult job seekers within WIOA programs (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

How many students at a college or university are taking internships? The National Survey of College Internships (NSCI) found that far fewer college students (just 21.5%) reported taking an internship than previously reported. Prior studies have estimated that 50%-60% of college students have taken an internship. NSCI’s data from 12,130 students suggest that these estimates may be too high, though the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic should be considered (National Survey of College Internships).

Are there differences in internship participation by race, gender, first-generation college student status, and so on? The National Survey of College Internships (NSCI) found that internship participation may vary by racial identity, first-generation status, and other attributes of students, disciplines, and institutional characteristics (National Survey of College Internships).

Which students are experiencing obstacles to internships, what are these obstacles, and how can we change our programs to ensure equitable access to internships for all students? The National Survey of College Internships (NSCI) found an alarming number of non-interns (67.3% or 6,407 students) wanting to take an internship but not being able due to a variety of obstacles, thus revealing a considerable issue with equitable access. College and universities should pay more attention to adequately advertising internship positions, exploring how to reach busy and/or working students, and engaging employers in creating more internships or other more accessible forms of work-based learning (e.g., online internships, campus-based experiences, etc) (National Survey of College Internships).  

Length of internship program: The National Survey of College Internships (NSCI) found the average length of an internship to be 18.3 weeks, a considerable investment in student (and employer) time (National Survey of College Internships).  

Student satisfaction with internship: The National Survey of College Internships (NSCI) found students on average reported being very satisfied with their internship experiences, but 1 in 4 reported less than satisfactory experiences. The large number of students reporting high rates of satisfaction is good news for higher education, but the 25% of students with less than satisfactory experiences indicates that considerable work remains to ensure that all students have access to a high-quality experience (National Survey of College Internships). 

Quality of supervision and mentoring: The National Survey of College Internships (NSCI) found students rated their supervisors’ support for their well-being (M=4.2 on a 1-5 scale) more highly than their task-specific mentoring (M=3.45). These results suggest that while supervisor support appears to be of high quality, colleges, universities, and employers could provide more training for supervisors on how to be effective mentors with respect to task performance (National Survey of College Internships).

Are students experiencing racial, gender, or other forms of discrimination during the internship experience? The National Survey of College Internships (NSCI) found that while the number of students reporting discrimination at the internship site on the basis of their race, gender, sexuality, disability status, and/or other personal attributes is relatively low (3.3%), the fact that 86 students reported such behaviors is cause for concern. Campuses should provide training and resources for students, academic advisors, and internship supervisors regarding anti-discrimination policies in the workplace and what to do in the event that a student experiences inappropriate behavior or treatment (National Survey of College Internships).

The amount of funding dedicated to workforce development programs as a percentage of total educational funding in a state (Education to Workforce Framework).

State investment in workforce preparation and development (that is, the amount states spent on education, training and recruitment of workers with programs concentrating on improving the skills base and job placement of a state and/or community’s labor base) (C2ER, State Investment in Workforce Development on the Rise).

Federal funding for workforce preparation and development (e.g., through U.S. Department of Labor programs) (C2ER, State Investment in Workforce Development on the Rise).

Does the state provide workforce development funding through the following sources: (a) the department of labor and/or economic development; (b) the state education agency; (c) the state higher education office; (d) the community and/or technical college system; (e) other departments? (Education Commission of the States, Workforce Funding).

Redesigning for equity in workforce development would ensure job quality for all workers, increase competitiveness, and drive inclusionary growth (CAP, A Design for Workforce Equity).

Apprenticeships benefit apprentices and employers alike. Apprentices learn on the job, obtain credentials, contribute to meaningful work, and earn a salary. Employers have loyal and productive workers, higher retention rates, and the opportunity to train apprentices according to their own standards and procedures (Urban Institute, Public Sector Apprenticeship).

When governments hire apprentices, returns to the public sector are especially high. Apprentices hired from the local community reduce the need for other training programs. As with private employers, government agencies can use apprenticeships to fill job openings and those vacated by retiring employees, maintaining staffing and service continuity (Urban Institute, Public Sector Apprenticeship).

Public sector apprenticeships can attract and expose young people to diverse career opportunities in government. Engaging and training young people for public sector careers can upgrade the quality and quantity of public services, thereby benefiting all residents (Urban Institute, Public Sector Apprenticeship).

Finally, when public officials use apprenticeships for their own talent development, they can be more convincing in persuading private employers to do so as well (Urban Institute, Public Sector Apprenticeship).

Examples of workforce development initiatives focusing on manufacturing, professional, scientific, and technical services: (1) the American Apprenticeship Initiative (AAI) aimed to increase registered apprenticeship in nontraditional occupations, such as manufacturing, healthcare, and computer/IT, and to populations typically  underrepresented in apprenticeship, including women and people of color; (2) Pledge to America’s Workers sought commitments from companies to provide job training and apprenticeship opportunities. Several manufacturing companies were part of this initiative, pledging to expand workforce training in the sector; (3) Manufacturing USA is a network of 14 institutes dedicated to advancing manufacturing innovation, which also involves workforce development. These institutes focus on research and development in manufacturing technologies and creating training programs to develop skilled workers for advanced manufacturing jobs (C2ER, Powering Industry Growth Through Workforce Investment).

Functions of a local workforce system: The programs, services, and activities implemented by organizations in local workforce systems serve five major functions: (1) Providing employment services to help workers of all ages explore career interests, find jobs, and advance; (2) Providing education and training to prepare workers for careers by developing occupational and technical skills; basic academic skills, such as reading, writing, and math; and career readiness skills, such as teamwork, critical thinking, professionalism, conflict resolution, and communication; (3) Providing supportive services can include both personal or academic supports to help people be successful in education, training, or work; (4) Supporting employers’ human resources needs, including defining hiring needs and job requirements, advertising for available positions, recruiting and screening candidates, onboarding new employees, and supporting and upskilling incumbent workers; (5) Improving job quality and access for job seekers and workers by working with employers to adopt “high road” strategies (better pay, predictable schedules, and other benefits) or advocating for changes, such as in local or state wage policies, hours, and working conditions (Urban Institute, Guide to Learning about Local Workforce Systems).

Organizations in local workforce systems perform various functions and take on varying roles, depending on their organizational type and mission. Organizations involved in local workforce systems can be grouped into the six categories: (1) Service providers offer education, training, employment, and supportive services and include a range of organizations, such as community and technical colleges, high schools, American Job Centers, trade schools, unions, and community organizations; (2) Government agencies oversee public workforce programs and funding; (3) Employers and industry and business groups hire and provide training to workers and may partner with local organizations to oversee, design, and deliver programs; (4) Foundations and philanthropic organizations provide financial resources to workforce programs and organizations, primarily through grants. Corporations may also support workforce initiatives as part of corporate responsibility efforts; (5) Unions and advocacy organizations seek to change employer practices, working conditions, and workforce policies; (6) Collaborative entities bring together partners in the workforce system to identify workforce needs; plan, develop, and implement strategies to meet those needs; and raise funds to support these strategies (Urban Institute, Guide to Learning about Local Workforce Systems).

The people who use the programs and services provided through local workforce systems fall into five general categories: (1) Unemployed workers are jobless, looking for work, and available for work. Underemployed workers have part-time, temporary, intermittent, or low-wage work that does not provide enough income to live stably; (2) Youth, typically defined as people ages 16 to 24, may be participating in high school vocational or career technical education programs, attending high school equivalency or adult education classes, enrolled in postsecondary education and training, or receiving employment services; (3) Adults with low basic skills lack the math, reading, writing, or English proficiency skills required to enter postsecondary education or secure a middle- or high-wage jobs; (4) People with personal challenges to work have circumstances that make it difficult to complete training or secure a job, such as a disability, criminal history, housing insecurity, or lack of access to affordable child care; (5) Workers seeking career change or advancement may be experiencing job loss or insecurity, want to work in a more interesting field, or desire to move up from entry-level work. (Urban Institute, Guide to Learning about Local Workforce Systems).

Coordination and Systems Change: In the context of local workforce systems, systems change refers to strategies that focus on improving coordination, collaboration, and alignment across actors, policies, and programs in the local workforce system toward specific objectives. Examples of shared objectives include improving accessibility to services for a target population to increase employment outcomes or meeting skilled labor gaps in a specific sector. Organizations within a local workforce system can undertake system change activities toward shared goals, including the following activities: promoting knowledge sharing; developing shared goals, strategies, and plans; using scarce resources more efficiently and effectively. Coordinated approaches to improving employment and training outcomes and meeting stakeholder needs in local areas include sector strategies or partnerships that focus on local or regional needs of a specific sector, collaboration between training providers and employers, and career pathway strategies that coordinate. Collaborative entities create or implement coordinated approaches or systems change strategies (Urban Institute, Guide to Learning about Local Workforce Systems).

Identifying and Leveraging Multiple Sources of Funding: Local workforce system programs and services rely on various funding sources from federal, state, and local government, as well as funding from private sources. Local workforce development organizations and policymakers overseeing workforce funding streams use a variety of funding models and initiatives, including the following: (a) Blended and braided funding, where individual organizations leverage multiple public and private funding streams to provide a set of programs and services; (b) Collaborative funding models, which pool funding from various foundations and philanthropies to support programs and initiatives with similar models or goals; (c) Performance-based funding, which distributes funds based on participant outcomes (such as completion or earnings) rather than outputs (such as enrollment numbers); (d) Public-private funding, where activities or programs are funded by a partnership between employers or philanthropies and public entities; (e) Social impact bonds, which use private-sector investor funds for workforce programs to create improved outcomes and pass on part of the savings achieved to investors (Urban Institute, Guide to Learning about Local Workforce Systems).

Many local workforce system organizations and programs collect, analyze, and disseminate data to identify needs, inform policy making, measure program progress, and improve programs. Strategies using data to inform and improve local workforce system activities include the following: (a) Data sharing of participant information between agencies and organizations to allow education, training, and employment programs to better meet participant needs and examine participant outcomes, such as educational attainment, job attainment, and wages; (b) Labor market information analysis to identify local area employment growth by sector and potential skills gaps in the local workforce; (c) Performance measurement to help education, training, and employment programs identify successes and challenges and improve; (d) Evaluation of programs to determine effectiveness or return on investment, leading to additional funding, program changes, or program replication (Urban Institute, Guide to Learning about Local Workforce Systems).

Integrated service delivery: Creating more closely integrated services across programs has been an important principle of Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), as well as the goal of many recent initiatives aimed at generating efficiencies and reducing challenges in reaching self-sufficiency for individuals and families. Integration of services and programs can impact all areas of operations, including case management approaches, training, staffing, funding, and administration. Additionally, integration aims to reduce siloing, or separation and isolation, of programs and services, thus supporting increased access and improved efficiencies (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Co-location, consolidating administrative structures, and cross-training. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO 2011) identified both co-location (that is, being located within the same building or facility) and consolidating administrative structures as ways to increase efficiency and improve coordination. At the agency level, 14 states consolidated core WIOA programs under a single agency, thus reducing or removing barriers to coordination. At the local level, the emphasis on co-location, as well as alignment and program coordination under WIOA, enabled partners to work together and streamline services (Dunham et al. 2020) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Shared data and data systems. The Employment and Training Administration encourages states to consider implementing integrated case management data systems across WIOA partner programs (U.S. Department of Labor 2020), and some research supports data-sharing policies to increase participants’ access to different benefits (Adams and Spaulding 2018; Durham et al. 2019). Koller and Paprocki (2015) note the benefits of shared data systems between partners within American Job Centers (AJCs) include reducing burden related to data entry and increased ability to track services provided to customers across other programs (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Pooled funding and cost sharing. Under WIOA, AJC partners must contribute to infrastructure costs, whether or not they are co-located. As of 2018, this was not the practice in many AJCs, and the expectation for contributing toward infrastructure costs corresponded directly with co-location (Brown and Holcomb 2018) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Public funding is made available for workforce development programs

Public sector apprenticeships exist nationwide but remain a very small segment of the government workforce. One prominent example of public safety services using an apprenticeship program is the California firefighting apprenticeship program, which has been operating for more than 25 years and has employed more than 10,000 apprentices across 175 fire departments. In Boston, an emergency services apprenticeship program was started in 2018 to attract more diverse candidates and address staffing shortages for emergency medical technicians (EMTs) across the city. These programs provide employment on-ramps to careers, while ensuring residents receive consistent, high quality services from critical government agencies (Urban Institute, Public Sector Apprenticeship).

Example of youth public sector apprenticeship in Kentucky (Automotive technician specialist). In 2018, Kentucky launched several pilot apprenticeship programs as part of a broader strategy related to filling critical skill gaps in the commonwealth’s talent pipeline. One program was designed to train automotive technician specialists working for the Transportation Cabinet. The program was created to cultivate the next generation to fill current and future automotive technician jobs across the state’s 12 transportation districts. An equipment garage supervisor put his projected staffing concerns in stark terms when he stated, “In 3 to 5 years, 70 % of people in this garage might be retired, and [the apprenticeship program] will be a good way to get good, qualified candidates [whose skills] are up to date.” The program also helped apprentices rapidly gain the two years’ work experience required for the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) certification exam, preparing apprentices for a career in both the public and private sectors (Urban Institute, Public Sector Apprenticeship).

Example of youth public sector apprenticeship in Colorado (Teaching assistant). Colorado is facing general teacher shortages in rural areas, as well as increased statewide demand for specialists like early childhood educators, counselors, and ESL instructors. To meet such local needs, CareerWise Colorado established a paraprofessional youth apprenticeship program in 2019 and has since worked with the Cherry Creek, Denver, Estes Park, and Thompson public school districts to employ high school students in the local elementary schools. Across these four districts every year, 20 to 30 youth apprentices work as teaching assistants with early childhood and elementary-age children. During their program, apprentices divide their time between finishing high school classes, working in elementary schools, and taking college courses to further their teaching education. Overall, the program has been successful for school districts, apprentices, students, and parents. School districts see apprenticeships as an obvious solution for their staffing requirements and goals to bring more diverse, local staff to the classroom. Apprentices also benefit from the opportunity to learn whether teaching is right for them. Students benefit by having educators and counselors who are as racially and ethnically diverse as their classes. The program’s success has spurred additional school districts in Colorado and other states to consult CareerWise on using this model (Urban Institute, Public Sector Apprenticeship).

Example of youth public sector apprenticeship in Maryland (Building maintenance technician). Prince George’s County Public Schools (PGCPS), like many school systems in the US, has a talent shortage across a range of occupations beyond teaching, including core administrative and building maintenance roles. To meet PGCPS’s talent needs and help young people find career opportunities and employment, the school district started a “school-to-work” apprenticeship model. Select students start an apprenticeship while in high school and transition into full employment in the school system after completing the program. The first program at PGCPS was launched in 2018 with a building maintenance apprenticeship program including 20 students in 11th grade. Despite the challenges for on-the-job learning amid COVID-19, all 20 students in the first cohort graduated and are continuing the final years of their apprenticeships with PGCPS or an industry partner of the school. Hiring for the program’s second year paused because of COVID-19, but plans to hire another cohort of 11th graders in the 2021–22 academic school year are under way. PGCPS leaders hope this example will create interest among other school departments to start apprenticeship programs. As the program coordinator noted, “We have many departments like IT, food services, HR, transportation that could all potentially benefit from an apprenticeship program.”

To create a more equitable workforce, policymakers must boldly shift away from presumptions based on the skills narrative to facilitate conditions in which employment risks and insecurities generated during economic change are shared equitably by everyone who has a stake in the economy (CAP, A Design for Workforce Equity).

Workforce development thinking must shift so that the sole focus is no longer on upskilling but rather on creating a new system in which aggregating employer demand is determined by equity considerations. Supply-side job training interventions alone are insufficient to broadly manage changing employment effects and planning decisions when measured against factors such as stagnant wages, stalled compensation, and increased affordability issues. In order to drive the pursuit of inclusive economic growth, public policy must systemically align multiple mismatches in the labor market (CAP, A Design for Workforce Equity).

Example of increased state funding for workforce development programs: Minnesota’s FY2020-21 biennial budget proposed more funding for Youth and Young Adult workforce development programs. Minnesota provided state funding for the Youthbuild program, Youth at Work Competitive Grants, and a Youth Program offer a construction career pathway for at-risk youth and young adults who have dropped out of school, youth with industry-recognized credentials and pre-apprenticeship training in residential construction; and provide summer and year-round employment and training services to low-income and at-risk youth, ages 14 to 24, through a partnership with the Local Workforce Development Boards and Youth Committees. However, the Department of Employment and Economic Development proposed a 6 % decrease in workforce development for FY2020-21 (C2ER, State Investment in Workforce Development on the Rise).

Example of increased state funding for workforce development programs: New Jersey has enhanced and refocused its investment in workforce development and apprenticeship programs over the past two years. There was a 32% increase in funding for workforce development programs in FY2019. The vast increase in funding is the result of additional support being put into the state’s Manpower and Employment Services and the Work First New Jersey program. The focus of these funding increases being employment and training services, strengthening of workforce development programs in the state. FY2020 budget proposal continues that commitment to workforce initiatives (C2ER, State Investment in Workforce Development on the Rise).

Example of increased state funding for workforce development programs: California has proposed an 11% increase in funding for workforce development programs in FY2020. The Governor’s proposed budget has included increased investment for pre-apprenticeship and apprenticeship programs and the state’s High Road Training Partnership program, a sector partnership initiative of the California Workforce Development Board (C2ER, State Investment in Workforce Development on the Rise).

Legislation such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in 2021 and the CHIPS and Science Act in 2022 have created training opportunities and encouraged workforce development in the manufacturing and PSTS sectors. These policies aim to strengthen and modernize the U.S. workforce by advancing research, expanding STEM education, and equipping workers with the skills needed for a competitive, innovation-driven economy. Both federal and state policymakers have emphasized developing the workforce for these industries. In fact, approximately 40% of all state business incentives directly targeting workforce preparation and development are either in the manufacturing or professional, scientific, and technical services (PSTS) industries (C2ER, Powering Industry Growth Through Workforce Investment).

Some states are supporting growth by partnering with academic institutions to provide training and recruitment, such as the Virginia Talent Accelerator Program. Other states work with middle and high school students to encourage career exploration and engage them with relevant work opportunities such as the Massachusetts high school Apprenticeship Challenge, Nebraska’s Developing Youth Talent Initiative, and the New York Youth Jobs Program Tax Credit. By supporting workforce development, states hope to encourage growth within priority industries, like manufacturing. Below are some recent examples of how states are leveraging their workforce preparation and development programs to land major manufacturing projects (C2ER, Powering Industry Growth Through Workforce Investment).

Georgia Quick Start helped the state land Hyundai’s first dedicated electric vehicle facility in the U.S. in Bryan County, GA. Their workforce training program will provide customized workforce training free-of-charge. This incentive also helped Georgia secure a Kia training facility in 2008. The evolution of the program to meet modern workforce needs played a key role in helping Georgia land this state-of-the-art facility  —  a $7.59 billion investment that is projected to create over 8,000 direct jobs (C2ER, Powering Industry Growth Through Workforce Investment).

Schneider Electric’s plant expansion increases the company’s energy storage capabilities to meet growing demand. The Missouri One Start program will provide customized recruitment assistance, along with resources to train and upskill new and existing employees. The company invested $73.6 million into the expansion project and received over $4 million in awards from the BUILD Program ($2,000,000), Missouri Works Program ($2,102,697), and Missouri One Start ($150,000). The project will create 241 additional jobs at the plant in Columbia, MO (C2ER, Powering Industry Growth Through Workforce Investment).

Hyundai Steel Plant: This first-of-its-kind site marks Hyundai’s inaugural North American steel facility to support automotive manufacturing. To support the workforce the Louisiana Community and Technical College System (LCTCS) will develop a new local workforce training center. Hyundai will also have access to LED FastStart’s workforce recruitment and training services. The agreement leaves potential for $100 million in performance-based grant awards for infrastructure improvements. Hyundai’s $5.8 billion investment in Donaldsonville, LA will create over 1,300 direct jobs (C2ER, Powering Industry Growth Through Workforce Investment).

Ohio partnered with Anduril to create a 5 million square foot advanced defense manufacturing facility for autonomous systems, weapons, and other U.S. national defense products. The $1.5 billion endeavor in Pickaway County, OH represents the largest single job creation and new payroll project in the state’s history. In addition to a $70 million award from the Ohio Future Fund, JobsOhio helped secure the project by offering their Job Creation Tax Credit and their Talent Acquisition Services program tools to Anduril. According to the State Business Incentives Database, the Job Creation Tax Credit provides a refundable and performance-based tax credit applied toward the company’s commercial tax liability. JobsOhio’s Talent Acquisition Services will identify talent challenges and build sustainable talent recruitment strategies for companies to help them acquire human capital (C2ER, Powering Industry Growth Through Workforce Investment).

A common focus of workforce development programs is offering an incentive for employers to provide training by reimbursing or allowing a tax credit against the training costs. Both the Minnesota Automation Training Incentive Pilot Program and Arizona’s Rapid Employment Job Training Grant offer reimbursement for training costs. Minnesota reimburses training costs for small businesses to train existing workers in new automation technology. Employers can apply for grants up to $25,000 to cover the cost of training workers who work full time and earn at least 120% of the federal poverty wage. As a direct response to COVID, Arizona’s program reimburses the cost of training for hires made after March 1, 2020. Virginia created the Worker Training Tax Credit to incentivize businesses to not only provide training but also collaborate with middle and high schools to provide manufacturing training or instruction. Companies can receive a 35% tax credit for training costs, up to $500 per worker and $1,000 if the worker’s income is below the state median wage. For employers that provide training to middle and high school students, they are eligible for the 35% tax credit on direct training costs (C2ER, New Workforce Development Programs).

In Massachusetts, the Advanced Analytics-Data Science Internship Program reimburses the cost of intern stipends for students with postsecondary degrees, Bachelor’s and above, who intern with a research institution or small business. The reimbursement ranges from $20-$40/hour depending on the education level of the intern (C2ER, New Workforce Development Programs).

North Carolina’s Golden LEAF Opportunities for Work program provides grants up to $500,000 to help the state prepare for job growth, especially jobs that require postsecondary degrees. The program accomplishes this goal through re-engaging individuals in the workforce, providing skills training and postsecondary opportunities, and addressing barriers to employment in rural and economically distressed communities. The program targets “disconnected” youth, people who are underemployed, and those experiencing long term unemployment (C2ER, New Workforce Development Programs).

Percentage of student borrowers in the following repayment categories, as defined on the College Scorecard — making progress, paid in full, and deferment — 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 years into the repayment phase of the loans (Education to Workforce).

Average number of student loans. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Average number of open student loans reported in the last 6 months. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Average number of open student loans opened in the last 6 months. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Average number of student loans, including deferred student loans, never delinquent or derogatory. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Average number of student loans, including deferred student loans, ever 60 or more days delinquent or derogatory in the last 24 months. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Average number of student loans, including deferred student loans, ever 90 or more days delinquent or derogatory in the last 24 months. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Average balance on open student loans reported in the last 6 months. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Average monthly payment on open student loans reported in the last 6 months. (Data source: Credit reporting data on student debt from Experian) (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Rate of loan default, disaggregated by race and type of institution. In 2017, the U.S. Department of Education released groundbreaking data showing that half of Black or African American borrowers who first entered college in the 2003-04 academic year defaulted on their student loans within 12 years. Black or African American borrowers who started college in 2011-12, almost a decade later, have continued to face high default rates (Center for American Progress).

Rate of loan default among borrowers who do not finish college, disaggregated by race (Center for American Progress).

Geographic distribution of average household student loan balances and average loan delinquency compared to median income (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

A zip code’s percentage of minority population compared to its loan delinquency rate. A study by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth found that in the Washington, D.C. metro region, for example, zip codes in the northeastern part of the District of Columbia and east of the Anacostia River and adjacent suburbs—all of which have the largest shares of African Americans and Latinos—also have delinquency rates that range from somewhat high to extremely high. The same pattern holds in Los Angeles, where areas with large African American or Latino populations, such as Compton, Linwood, and Huntington Park, are also where delinquency is highest (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

A zip code’s loan delinquency rate compared to its median income levels. A study by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth found a positive correlation between the share of minorities in a zip code and loan delinquency rates is highest for the middle of the income distribution. Among zip codes with a median income of about $20,000, for example, zip codes with a large share of Latinos and those without have approximately the same rates of delinquency. But among zip codes with a median income of around $60,000, those with large Latino share have much higher rates of loan delinquency than those without (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

Percent of adults who currently have education-related debt. A May 2015 report by the Federal Reserve found that twenty-three percent of adults have education debt of some kind, with 15 percent of all respondents having such debt for their own education, 6 percent for their spouse’s/ partner’s education, and 6 percent for their child’s or grandchild’s education (Federal Reserve, Economic Well Being).

Method of financing student loans: Education debt is not exclusively financed through student loans, as 14 percent of respondents with education debt report that they have credit card debt from educational expenses, 5 percent used a home equity loan to pay for education, and 11 percent have some other non-student loan debt that was used to pay for education (Federal Reserve, Economic Well Being).

Payment delinquency: Among respondents who borrowed for their own education, those who failed to complete an associate degree or bachelor’s degree, those who attended for-profit institutions, and those who were first-generation college students are more likely to be behind on their payments than others.

Type of loans (e.g., Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, Perkins Loans, Private Loans, Direct PLUS Loans to Parents or Guardians) borrowed by undergraduate students, by race and ethnicity. Data reveal disparities in how students from different racial and ethnic backgrounds financed their postsecondary education, with Black or African American students being more likely than those from other groups to incur large amounts of educational debt. (Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education).

Advocate for more federal level support. Pew research points to three actions that the Department of Education and Congress could take to boost repayment success among struggling borrowers: (1) Identify at-risk borrowers before they are in distress—in particular, by using risk indicators such as borrowers missing payments early, repeatedly suspending payments, and having previously defaulted; (2) Provide loan servicers with resources and comprehensive guidance on how to prioritize interactions and engagement with high-risk borrowers; (3) Continue to eliminate barriers to enrollment in affordable repayment plans to build upon the Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking Resources for Education (FUTURE) Act. The act authorizes data sharing between the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Education to streamline burdensome and duplicative income verification requirements for enrolling in income-driven plans. If effectively implemented, the act is a step in the right direction, but policymakers can do more to restructure the student loan repayment system, such as simplifying the process for direct and targeted outreach to those borrowers most at risk for—or already facing problems with—delinquency and default. These changes should be implemented in conjunction with clear and consistent repayment-management rules for servicers and other Department of Education contractors and with oversight mechanisms to ensure that those rules are successfully applied (Pew, Student Loan Default).

A study by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth found that middle-class minorities are hurt the most by student loan delinquency. With respect to longstanding group and individual income and wealth gaps between minorities and the overall population, debt-financed higher education is not the solution, and may even be contributing to the problem. The fact that, among minorities, the middle class is most strongly affected implies the problem is structural racism, not poverty (Washington Center for Equitable Growth).

To address structural barriers and improve financial security for older borrowers struggling with student loan debt, federal policymakers could consider canceling debt for long-term borrowers. As Urban research has shown, canceling debt for older borrowers who have been in repayment or default for more than two decades would provide significant relief for those most harmed by structural racism. Finalizing a new rule proposed by the Department of Education would provide such relief for these borrowers (Urban Institute, Ensuring Americans Can Retire Free from Student Loan Debt).

Establish fair repayment terms. Currently, defaulted borrowers must pay more per month to exit default than they would under income-driven repayment plans, and they may also face wage garnishments that exceed this amount. New America and Urban research suggests the Department of Education could ensure defaulted borrowers don’t pay more monthly than they would in repayment plans to prevent further financial strain (Urban Institute, Ensuring Americans Can Retire Free from Student Loan Debt).

Encourage employers to match contributions to student loan payments. As outlined in the Secure 2.0 Act (PDF), employers can treat student loan payments as contributions to retirement savings and match these payments as contributions to employees’ retirement accounts. Recent research projects that this Secure 2.0 provision could enable employees with student loans to spend about 3 percent more on everyday needs during their working years while earning a matching contribution from their employer to their 401(k) retirement account (Urban Institute, Ensuring Americans Can Retire Free from Student Loan Debt).

Let older borrowers keep their Social Security benefits. To protect the financial well-being of older borrowers, especially those with the lowest incomes, federal policymakers could stop the garnishment of Social Security benefits (PDF) when a student loan is in default (Urban Institute, Ensuring Americans Can Retire Free from Student Loan Debt).

Policymakers could also consider ways to prevent new borrowers from accumulating unaffordable debt, including reshaping parent PLUS loans, so parents don’t borrow more than they can repay (Urban Institute, Ensuring Americans Can Retire Free from Student Loan Debt).

Provide more grant aid for higher education. Policymakers could reduce reliance on student loans in communities most affected by structural barriers to wealth-building by increasing Pell grant amounts and establishing a need-based living stipend (Urban Institute, Ensuring Americans Can Retire Free from Student Loan Debt).

Require degree programs to set students up for gainful employment. Establishing guardrails could help prevent students from taking on federal loans for programs that don’t pay off. These guardrails could mirror the Department of Education’s new standards for for-profit and career-oriented programs, which include debt-to-earnings ratios and a minimum earnings threshold. Federal policymakers could also consider setting tuition-to-earnings ratios or rules that combine multiple metrics (Urban Institute, Ensuring Americans Can Retire Free from Student Loan Debt).

Per pupil expenditures. For elementary and secondary schools, data are reported annually at the state, district, and school levels through the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) Per Pupil Expenditure Transparency website. Disparities in funding can be assessed vertically at the federal, state, and local levels, as well as horizontally between schools within the same district or postsecondary institutions within the same state (Education-to-Workforce Framework).

Equity Factor, a measure that indicates variance in per-pupil funding within a state (see this brief by New America for more information) (Education-to-Workforce Framework). 

Expenditures per student: Education and related (E&R) expenditures per full-time equivalent (FTE) student based on 12-month enrollment. Measured population is twelve-month FTE enrollment calculated using 12-month instructional activity credit hours in IPEDS (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Additional metrics related to expenditures per student include: Distribution of students by credential level or program of study; Instructional expenditures per FTE student and as a percentage of E&R expenditures; Salaries as a percentage of instructional expenditures; Student support expenditures per FTE student and as a percentage of E&R expenditures; Administration expenditures per FTE and as a percentage of E&R expenditures; E&R expenditures as a percentage of total education and general expenditures; FTE faculty/staff per FTE student (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Expenditures per Completion: Education and Related (E&R) expenditures divided by the number of completions in a fiscal year. Measures all credentials conferred in a given year. Additional related metrics include: Distribution of completions by award level and program of study; Change in number of completions over time; Change in E&R over time (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

The Expenditures per Completion metric is a proxy for the resources required to educate students through to credential completion. It is a proxy because the data are not readily available to assign actual costs to individual students as they progress (or do not progress) toward completion. As such, this metric captures the costs associated with both completers but also non-completers, by comparing the resources spent to educate all students in a given year with the number of credentials awarded by the institution in that same year. Initiatives like CBD and the Voluntary Institutional Metrics Project already use the expenditures per completion metric to measure the cost associated with achieving the ultimate goal of degree completion (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Colleges can use data on per-student expenditure to track trends in their spending per student over time and in relation to peer institutions. Expenditure measures can help colleges determine how changes in spending over time impact resource allocation to core educational functions, such as instruction and student services, which can help contextualize changes in student completion rates. When interpreting trends in expenditures per student, institutions should evaluate whether changes in the metric resulted from changes in enrollment, changes in expenditures (or available revenues), or both, for better interpretation and use (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

For students, the per-student expenditure metric is not usually a concern or consideration in the decision-making process, but may be indicative of how much an institution makes available to spend on students relative to other institutions. 

The per-student expenditure metric can be useful for policymakers in clarifying the causes of price increases. It is a widely held belief that increases in student tuition and fees are the result of surges in college spending, but analysis from the Delta Cost Project shows that institutional spending has not risen as fast as prices. Rather, they find that a decrease in public subsidies is a primary contributor to price increases. (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Financial incentives for students: Performance-based incentives are monetary awards disbursed to students based on meeting specific academic benchmarks, and are intended to supplement (not replace) students’ financial aid packages. By identifying and incentivizing short-term goals (such as maintaining a minimum level of enrollment, successfully completing coursework, or participating in advising programs), these initiatives support students’ progression through college (EW Framework).

State Higher Education Funding: Tuition at public colleges depends on what states allocate for higher education, with students paying more when state investment falls or fails to keep pace with inflation. The unpredictability of state budget processes can also make it difficult for students to budget for the cost of college and risks negatively impacting college persistence (National College Attainment Network, State Higher Education Funding).

Create a Federal-State Partnership: Less than 23% of public bachelor’s degree institutions are affordable for a student receiving the average Pell Grant and community college students don’t fare much better – with just 41% of institutions affordable. Congress should create a federal-state partnership that incentivizes states to invest in need-based aid and in stabilizing or reducing the cost of college. Doing so would provide additional support to students from low-income backgrounds.(National College Attainment Network, A Federal-State Partnership).

State Higher Education Funding: Participating members of the National College Attainment Network (NCAN) identified state funding for higher education as a high priority. A Florida-based organization mentioned that a state-held council, which meets annually to discuss policy, regularly identifies state higher education funding as a top priority. Members in Ohio noted that higher education institutions typically receive little funding from the state and pointed to increased federal and state funding allocated in light of the pandemic as extremely beneficial. Some interviewees suggested that increased federal and state funding for postsecondary education, as appropriated in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, would be helpful for the state to continue long term. Interviewees also mentioned that the funding flexibilities extended during the pandemic should continue as well. In other interviews, some NCAN members expressed a lack of confidence in understanding the landscape of higher education funding and how it differed from policy priorities around financial aid (NCAN, Building Momentum at the State Level).

Spending per student enrolled in certification/training program/apprenticeship

Percentage of undergraduates who received any aid and any federal, nonfederal, state, institutional and employer aid, by control and level of institution (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Average amount received by undergraduates who received any aid and any federal, nonfederal, state, institutional, and employer aid, by control and level of institution (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Percentage of undergraduates receiving any state grant aid and average amount received, by selected institutional and student characteristics (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Percentage of undergraduates receiving need-based state aid and average amount received, by selected institutional and student characteristics (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Percentage of undergraduates receiving merit-based state aid and average amount received, by selected institutional and student characteristics (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Percentage of undergraduates receiving any institutional grant aid and average amount received, by selected institutional and student characteristics (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Percentage of undergraduates receiving need-based institutional aid and average amount received, by selected institutional and student characteristics (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Percentage of undergraduates receiving merit-based institutional aid and average amount received, by selected institutional and student characteristics (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Percentage of undergraduates receiving private employer aid and average amount received, by selected institutional and student characteristics (NCES, Trends in Undergraduate Non Federal Grant and Scholarship Aid).

Student confidence in their ability to pay back student loans. A study by Jobs for the Future found that while Black students and female students of all backgrounds were more likely than other students to rely on loans to pay tuition, they also felt less confident in their ability to pay back those loans after graduation. While Latine students were not more likely than other students to rely on loans, they too were more likely than white students to not feel confident in their ability to pay back those loans. This research showed that Black students were 45% less likely than white students to feel confident they could pay back their loans, while Latine students were 16% less confident than white students. (Jobs for the Future, Unveiling Disparities).

Net Price: The average cost of attendance (COA) for an institution less all grant aid in a given year. Net Price = COA – All Grant Aid. The Cost of Attendance follows federal definitions for costs associated with a year of college, including tuition and fees; room and board (determined by living arrangements); books and supplies; and other expenses, like travel and personal items Grant aid includes grants from all sources (federal, state or local, institutional, and other). Measured population includes all first-time, full-time students and all full-time undergraduates by credential level; includes all students, not just aid recipients; excludes out-of-state students. Population is disaggregated by credential level, economic status (at that time), academic preparation, race/ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, program of study (at that time) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Additional metrics related to net price include: Percentage of students applying for aid; Percentage of students receiving grant aid (by type or source); Net price for students receiving grant aid; Net price by dependency status; Net price divided by average income within quintiles; Net price for part-time, transfer, out-of-state students; Net price by year in college; Number of hours worked; Number of dependents (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Unmet need: The average net price for an institution less the average expected family contribution (EFC) in a given year. Unmet Need = COA – All Grant Aid – EFC = Net Price – EFC. Measured population includes all first-time, full-time students, and all full-time undergraduates by credential level; includes all students, not just aid recipients; excludes out-of-state students. Population is disaggregated by credential level, economic status (at that time), academic preparation, race/ethnicity, gender, age, first-generation status, program of study (at that time) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Additional metrics related to unmet need include: Percentage of students applying for aid; Percentage of students receiving aid; Percentage of students with unmet need and their average unmet need; Unmet need for aid recipients by type or source; Unmet need by year in college; Part-time, transfer, and out-of-state unmet need; Student payment methods for meeting unmet need; Completion rates by level of unmet need; Number of hours worked; Number of dependents (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Student Share of Cost: The percentage of Education and Related (E&R) Expenditures covered by net student tuition revenue versus institutional subsidies in a fiscal year. Additional metrics include: Sticker price and net price; Net tuition revenue per 12-month FTE enrollment; E&R per 12-month FTE enrollment; Subsidy per 12-month FTE enrollment. This metric is drawn directly from the Delta Cost Project, which refers to it as the net tuition share of E&R. The metric quantifies the proportion of education-related expenditures paid for by net tuition revenue relative to other institutional resources, such as state and local appropriations, investment or endowment incomes or other revenues generated by the institution — or what Delta Cost calls the “subsidy share.” (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Double Pell: The Pell Grant has served as the cornerstone of financial aid for students from low-income backgrounds pursuing higher education since its creation in 1972. This need-based grant provides crucial support for around 7 million students each year, or about one-third of undergraduates. At its peak, the maximum Pell Grant was worth more than 75% of the average cost of attendance at a four-year public university. Today, it covers less than 30%. Congress should restore the maximum Pell Grant to 50% of this cost, or roughly double the current amount. Congress should then tie the Pell Grant to inflation to sustain its purchasing power (NCAN, DoublePell for College Affordability).

Implement Credit Transfer “Comeback” Programs. Programs like the Ohio College Comeback Compact have forgiven institutional debts and unlocked transcripts for stopped‑out students, significantly improving re‑enrollment and degree attainment (Ohio College Comeback Compact).

A CSA, or Child Savings Account, is a savings account whose proceeds are designated to pay for a student’s higher education after age 18. These accounts are often created by a state or local government or nonprofit organization and intended to encourage more students to pursue postsecondary education. Many CSA programs offer savings incentives for families from low-income backgrounds who make their own deposits or engage in activities related to college preparation or financial literacy. Investment growth in the accounts can be tax-free at the federal or state level (NCAN, College Access and College Savings).

College Savings Accounts: The Minnesota Kids Investment and Development Savings (MinneKIDS) Act is a bill that would allow the state of Minnesota to create a 529 college savings program to help children build savings for their future, such as college, technical school, apprenticeships and more. Accounts would be opened by the state for every baby born after June 2026, with small deposits made to seed the account. Accounts grow through family contributions and incentives, such as savings matches. Savings help pay for postsecondary education. Research shows that kids with college savings accounts are 3x more likely to attend college and 4x more likely to graduate (Minnesota Kids Investment and Development Savings).

Policymakers should use net price results to evaluate how institutions and states spend their aid dollars and determine whether their practices align with the priorities of the federal government in lowering the net price for low-income students.

Policymakers could use the metric of unmet need in tandem with net price to assess the full scope of financial burden that is placed on students and families and adjust financial aid policies accordingly — or encourage institutions to do so.

The Student Share of Cost metric is highly relevant to policymakers because it quantifies the impact of decreased state support for higher education — and its direct impact on students. As per-student state investment has declined, students and families have had to pick up an increasing share of college costs, affecting their ability to access and succeed in college, especially for low-income students with fewer resources to draw on. A report using Delta Cost Project data noted that decreased state funding is responsible for almost 80% of the rise in public education tuition between 2001 and 2011. While more recent analysis shows a slight increase in per-student state and local funding for public colleges and universities (5.4% between 2013 and 2014), longer-term trends in state disinvestment in higher education have had a major impact on college affordability. State policymakers should work to restore appropriations to at least pre-recessions levels, and institutions should realign institutional aid practices to address the financial hardships of low-income students and families, who were unduly burdened by cuts (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Need-Based Student Aid: The price of higher education is ever rising, and students are bearing a greater proportion of this burden. Meanwhile, attainment is more important now than ever before. Unfortunately, students with limited resources have far worse outcomes than those from higher-income families. States can support students who may not have the financial means by investing in need-based aid (National College Attainment Network, Need-Based Student Aid).

Equitable Free College: “Free college” has become a major policy discussion at the state and federal levels. Generally, states have implemented “free college” programs that cover the full cost of tuition and fees at a public, in-state, two-year (and, in some cases, a four-year) institution. An example of a more equitable approach would be for states to implement a “first-dollar” program (National College Attainment Network, Need-Based Student Aid).

In-State Tuition for Undocumented Students: Students brought to the US as children deserve the chance to complete their education, but they face unique barriers to college access and affordability. To best support these students, for example, states should allow undocumented students to pay in-state tuition and provide need-based aid for those who are income-eligible (National College Attainment Network, Access and Affordability for Undocumented Students).

Support All Our Students: All students regardless of their race, ethnicity, or immigration status deserve the opportunity for affordable higher education. To support this goal, Congress should allow students from low-income backgrounds who are DACA/TPS recipients or those meeting similar requirements to be eligible for federal financial aid (NCAN, Support All Our Students).

Need-Based Aid: Of the National College Attainment Network’s (NCAN’s) state policy priorities, need-based student aid was the issue with the greatest number of NCAN members identifying it as a higher priority for their state. Members often discussed need-based aid as an essential component of support for achieving better postsecondary access and attainment outcomes. While many states that identified this issue area as a higher priority currently offer some level of need-based student aid, many expressed that support levels are too low (e.g., Ohio). Most states (e.g., California, New York, Ohio, Tennessee) mentioned the importance of including support for students’ basic needs and the true cost of attendance (housing, food, broadband, transportation, etc.) within aid programs (NCAN, Building Momentum at the State Level).

Access and Affordability for Undocumented Students: Another NCAN state policy issue is access and affordability for undocumented students. Interviewees in multiple states identified supports for undocumented students as a high priority but expressed concerns regarding the political viability of such policies (NCAN, Building Momentum at the State Level).

Equitable Free College: Members in California discussed the California College Promise program, which provides support for a variety of costs for students at community colleges. In Ohio and Texas, interviewees highlighted free-college programs that exist at the local level. Members in these states suggested that regional partnerships with community colleges may continue to be the source of free college for the time being. In other states (Florida, New York, Tennessee), members expressed concerns that free-college efforts may be susceptible to political challenges and would be unlikely to move forward. In those states, it was suggested that the label of “free” may be a hang-up. Some interviewees mentioned that policymakers may believe that free- or affordable-college opportunities are already being provided in their state, limiting the political will to expand such programs beyond community college or consider expanding aid available through current programs. (NCAN, Building Momentum at the State Level).

Standardize Financial Aid Award Letters: Financial aid award letters can be difficult to decipher, and their formatting can vary from institution to institution. They can characterize PLUS loans as “awards,” fail to explain what “work-study” requires, and obscure the bottom line. Students need and deserve clarity – about how much they will receive in grant funding, how much they will need to take out in loans and how much they will pay out of pocket. Congress should require standardized terms and formatting for award letters to help students make informed postsecondary decisions. (NCAN, Standardize Financial Aid Award Letters).

Improve Loan Counseling: Student loans play a considerable role in how college students finance their education today. As student loan borrowing grows in prevalence, policymakers are increasingly aware of the need to improve its system of lending to students. An area of policy reform that would improve borrower experience and has bipartisan consensus is that borrowers should have more effective loan counseling. The U.S. Department of Education should ensure student loan counseling is consumer-tested with students and balances an informative process with one that does not create barriers to aid. Counseling provided to borrowers should include the cumulative student loan debt accrued and should advise borrowers to not to take on more debt than their expected starting salary (NCAN, Student Loan Counseling).

Reform Work-Study: The Federal Work-Study program allows institutions to provide funding for students to work, either on or off campus (with limitations), to earn money that can be used to defray the cost of a higher education. Institutions of higher education receive a lump sum of dollars from the federal government, and then determine which students are eligible for work-study awards based on their enrollment. Currently, the total lump sum for each college is determined in part by the length of time an institution has participated in the Federal Work-Study program. This formula gives an advantage to older institutions, including elite ones enrolling fewer low-income students, over younger colleges. Congress should rework this outdated formula to target funds to schools with the largest portions of students from low-income backgrounds. Lawmakers should also increase investment in FWS, which at current funding levels can only support 10% of Pell Grant recipients (NCAN, Improve Federal Work-Study).

Strengthen AmeriCorps: National and community service programs play an important role in the college access and success movement. Support for service programs, such as AmeriCorps, will help more underrepresented students engage with advisers and others who can help them navigate the path to (and through) postsecondary education. AmeriCorps participants may be eligible to receive an Education Award, which provides as much as the maximum Pell Grant in scholarship aide or to pay off student loans, in return for their service (NCAN, Support AmeriCorps for College Success).

Cumulative Debt: The median amount of debt student borrowers incur while attending an institution or program. Includes all sources of student debt—federal, state, institutional, and private loans. Measures all undergraduate borrowers who leave the institution in a given year (completers and non-completers, but disaggregated). Disaggregated by credential level, completion status, economic status (at any time), enrollment status, attendance intensity (at any time), program of study (at exit), race/ethnicity, academic preparation (at any time), age, gender, first-generation status (IHEP, Toward Convergence). 

Other metrics related to cumulative debt include: Percentage of students borrowing overall and by type of loan; Loan debt by type of loan; Loan debt by dependency status; Cumulative loan debt across all institutions attended for transfer students (if available) (IHEP, Toward Convergence). 

Loan repayment rate: The percentage of borrowers in a cohort who make at least $1 of progress on their loan principal in a fiscal year, measured at one, three, five, and 10 years into repayment. Measured as the share of all borrowers entering repayment who have either paid in full or are in active repayment. Disaggregated by undergraduate versus graduate status, completion status, economic status (at any time while enrolled), program of study (at exit), race/ethnicity, enrollment status, attendance intensity (at any time while enrolled), academic preparation (at any time while enrolled), age, gender, first-generation status (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Cohort default rate (CDR- federal three-year rate): The percentage of borrowers who enter repayment in a fiscal year and default in three fiscal years. Disaggregated by undergraduate versus graduate status, completion status, economic status (at any time while enrolled), program of study (at exit), race/ethnicity, enrollment status, attendance intensity (at any time while enrolled), academic preparation (at any time while enrolled), age, gender, first-generation status (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Other metrics related to loan repayment and default rates include: Incidence of deferment, forbearance, and delinquency; Use of income-driven repayment plans; Average amount of defaulted loan; Loan repayment and cohort default rates by loan type; Student Default Risk Index (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Debt data can be used to inform student decisions in the same way as net price, providing prospective students with a better understanding of how students in similar situations fare at the institution. Median cumulative debt seeks to quantify both affordability and financing methods used by typical students at each institution. While total loan volume across an entire institution, available on the Federal Student Aid Data Center, is a useful data point for evaluating broader trends regarding student loans, the median cumulative debt better demonstrates what is required financially of a typical student (IHEP, Toward Convergence). 

Understanding student loan debt is a necessary component to measuring institutional performance for policymakers and institutions alike, as financing can impact student access, progression, and completion. Specifically for cost metrics, the distinction among median debt among students of different economic statuses is essential, as high costs limit access to low-income students and further stratify higher education. With the disaggregates and submetrics, especially specific to low- and moderate-income students, institutions can use these data to develop better, more targeted counseling and services for populations who may be at risk of high student loan debt. Institutions and policymakers also can use the disaggregated debt data to help craft financial aid policies to reduce debt, especially for the most economically vulnerable students, as they are more likely to take on loan debt (IHEP, Toward Convergence). 

To build on current practice, institutions are encouraged to integrate the Cohort Default Rate data they receive from the Department of Education with student-level data in their student information systems in order to conduct additional analysis. With this integration, institutions can disaggregate default rates by completion, economic status, and credential level—including by graduate and undergraduate student status—to determine which students default. With additional support from ED, institutions also can attempt to extend the CDR time frame beyond three years, disaggregate by loan type, and recalculate CDRs based only on debt accumulated at their institutions. CDRs are also an important consumer information tool for prospective students and families because a high cohort default rate signals that students may have a difficult time repaying their loans, and default has serious credit consequences for students. Policymakers also use CDRs to set basic standards that institutions must meet to receive federal financial aid dollars (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Implement Credit Transfer “Comeback” Programs. Programs like the Ohio College Comeback Compact have forgiven institutional debts and unlocked transcripts for stopped‑out students, significantly improving re‑enrollment and degree attainment (Ohio College Comeback Compact).

Percentage of grade 12 students who complete the FAFSA by June 30 (Education-to-Workforce).

Rates of FAFSA completion. Students who report completing a FAFSA are more likely to enroll in college, enroll in a four-year rather than a two-year college, and enroll full time rather than part time compared to students who do not complete an application (Education-to-Workforce).

Rates of FAFSA completion for low-income students: Students from low-income households who complete a FAFSA are 127 % more likely to enroll in college in the fall after graduating high school than their peers who do not. One study found that, among students who applied and were admitted to college, there was a 29 % difference in enrollment  —  84 % of students who were admitted and completed the FAFSA enrolled in a four-year college, compared with 55 % enrollment by students who were admitted but did not complete the FAFSA (Education-to-Workforce).

Student reasons for not completing a FAFSA. (e.g., among fall 2009 ninth-graders who graduated from high school and reported, or their parents reported, not completing a FAFSA, 33 % thought they or their family could afford school or college without financial aid; 32 % thought they or their family may be ineligible or may not qualify for financial aid; 28 % did not want to take on debt; and 23 % did not have enough information about how to complete a FAFSA) (Stats in Brief, Why didn’t students complete a FAFSA).

The percentage of eligible high school seniors who complete the FAFSA by June 30. The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) eases the burden of college affordability by providing access to federal  —  and in some cases, state and institutional  —  financial aid. Completing the FAFSA significantly increases the odds that a student will enroll in a postsecondary institution directly after high school, with 90 % of students who complete the FAFSA seamlessly enrolling, compared to just 55 % of non-completers. Students who complete the FAFSA are also more likely to persist in their college coursework and obtain a degree. To increase FAFSA completion, one of the highest-leverage strategies is to provide high school principals and counselors with access to student-level data that they can use to target support to the students who need it most. To further tailor support, we also encourage tracking additional, more nuanced FAFSA data, such as flagging students who have started, but not submitted the application, as well as students who have submitted, but not completed the form. According to data from the National College Attainment Network (NCAN), more than 66,000 fewer students have completed the FAFSA by the end of May 2020 compared to the same time in 2019. Nationally, this equates to over a 3-percentage point decrease. With many families facing financial hardship, it is more important than ever to ensure students complete the FAFSA. (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

% of students completing a FAFSA. A study of the 2009 high school Longitudinal Study conducted by the National College Attainment Network found that students from the lowest socioeconomic quintile who completed a FAFSA were 127% more likely to be enrolled in the fall following high school graduation than their counterparts without a FAFSA completion. Among high school graduates from the class of 2013, 37.4% of students from the lowest SES quintile who did not complete a FAFSA had a postsecondary enrollment in November 2013, compared to 83.8% of students from the highest quintile who did not complete a FAFSA. Contrast these figures with students who did complete the FAFSA: 85% of students from the lowest quintile who completed a FAFSA had a postsecondary enrollment in November 2013, compared to 97.8% of students from the highest quintile who completed a FAFSA. The findings show that FAFSA completion associates with a narrowing of the postsecondary enrollment gap based on socioeconomic status by about 34 percentage points. (NCAN, Survey Data Strengthen Association Between FAFSA Completion and Enrollment).

Reasons why students do not complete a FAFSA. In a study by the National Center for Education Statistics, parents or students reported the following reasons for not completing a FAFSA: (a) they could afford school or college without financial aid (33% of respondents who reported not completing a FAFSA); (b) they thought they would be ineligible or may not qualify (32%); (c) they did not want to take on debt (28%); (d) they did not have enough information about how to complete a FAFSA (23%); (e) they had no plans to continue education after high school (22%); (f) they did not know you could complete a FAFSA (15%); they thought the FAFSA forms were too much work or too time-consuming (9%). (NCES Stats in Brief, Why Didn’t Students Complete a FAFSA?).

percentage of Prior Graduates Who Completed the FAFSA:The percentage of 2004 graduates, the prior cohort, in the school who reported on the 2004 CPS Senior Exit Questionnaire that they had completed the FAFSA. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future).

Completed the FAFSA: Student reported on the 2005 CPS Senior Exit Questionnaire completing the FAFSA. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Student Leadership Network’s CollegeBound Initiative (CBI) places full-time directors of college counseling in high-need public schools. One of the program’s objectives is to support students in completing financial aid applications by providing comprehensive financial aid counseling, helping complete the FAFSA application, and conducting one-on-one meetings with families (Student Leadership Network).

Increase families’ financial awareness, and help students apply for financial aid. Financial aid plays an important role in making college affordable and improving access to college, especially for first-generation students and students from low-income families. However, these students and their families often have limited knowledge of financial aid opportunities and may overestimate the cost of college. high schools can ensure that students take the necessary steps to obtain financial aid by educating students and their parents early in high school about college affordability and the availability of financial aid and by helping them identify potential sources of aid. Students benefit from hands-on assistance in meeting financial aid deadlines and completing application forms (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Organize workshops for parents and students to inform them prior to 12th grade about college affordability, scholarship and aid sources, and financial aid processes. high schools should inform students and parents about financial aid and the cost of college early in high school. The What Works Clearinghouse panel recommends that high schools organize separate workshops to inform parents and students about financial aid. The workshops should address misconceptions about college costs and build awareness of financial aid (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

The What Works Clearinghouse panel recommends holding an initial workshop on college affordability in 9th or 10th grade, ensuring that students and parents understand the cost of college and the aid available to make it affordable. A workshop on scholarship and aid sources should occur in 10th grade so that students and parents can begin to think about the sources of different forms of aid. Although students complete the FAFSA in their senior year, information about the financial aid application process should be covered in the junior year to prepare students for the process (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

College affordability. Students who think that college is too expensive or who lack information about the availability of aid may not take the necessary steps early in high school to prepare for college. The What Works Clearinghouse panel recommends that high schools provide information about college affordability  —   both the cost of college and ways to cover the cost  —  starting in 9th grade. Schools can create a worksheet that displays potential costs for college next to potential sources of financial aid to demonstrate the realistic cost to families. Students should receive information on the typical tuition cost for two- and four-year colleges, differences between public and private institutions, and tuition estimates for local and regional colleges  (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

High schools can provide a worksheet that has a side-by-side comparison of the cost of these schools and should help students and parents distinguish the different types of college costs, including tuition, fees, room and board, and books and supplies. Students need to understand the types of financial aid available to cover these costs, including grants, loans, scholarships, tax credits, and work-study programs. Descriptions of financial aid, loan obligations, and grants can be confusing for individuals who may have limited interactions with banks and lending agencies; accordingly, conversations should be developed in a manner that is understandable to the student and his or her family. The workshops should encourage students and parents to estimate their financial aid eligibility using a tool to forecast eligibility based on FAFSA (e.g., FAFSA4caster, www.fafsa4caster.ed.gov). (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Scholarship and aid sources. One workshop should assist students in navigating the vast array of financial aid sources to identify relevant opportunities. A list of available federal and state grants and their eligibility requirements can help students determine likely sources of aid. During the workshop, high schools also can provide a list of local and regional sources of scholarships available for students, as well as websites on which they can search more broadly for scholarships (e.g., www.fastweb.com, www.latinocollegedollars.org). Although high school advisors often maintain information on scholarship opportunities, students may not access this information unless they regularly visit a school’s advising office. high schools can disseminate scholarship information during the workshop and follow up with updated or additional information on the school’s website or in its monthly newsletter. Schools can designate a staff member to collect and update financial aid, scholarship, and grant opportunities for students (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Financial aid application process. high schools should hold workshops to inform students and parents about the financial aid application process, including details about the process for submitting the FAFSA. Students should understand the information that is needed to complete the FAFSA and should know about the online and hardcopy versions of the application. high schools should explain that the FAFSA plays a role in determining eligibility for federal loans and grants as well as state grants, scholarships, and other forms of aid. Informing students about key concepts, such as the estimated family contribution (EFC), can help students understand the meaning of their financial aid materials. Students should understand the steps in the process that occur after submitting the FAFSA, including receipt of the student aid report and a financial aid package (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Workshops on financial aid should be held for parents as well as for students. high schools should develop a plan for engaging parents and encouraging them to become invested in the financial aid and college application processes. For example, a parent institute that includes sessions on financial aid and other aspects of the college entry process could be held throughout the school year. Inviting parents to informal social gatherings at the school, such as picnics or family dinners, can encourage parent involvement as well. Offering child care at these events can make it easier for parents to attend and participate. The workshops for parents should discuss how they can help students complete the financial aid process and encourage them to assist students in meeting key deadlines. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Help students and parents complete financial aid forms prior to eligibility deadlines. In addition to workshops providing information about financial aid, high schools should hold workshops to assist high school seniors and their parents in completing the FAFSA form, to answer student questions, and to explain the information requested on the form. The workshops should include volunteers who are knowledgeable on the FAFSA and can provide one-on-one help in completing the application form. high schools should reach out to financial aid officers from local colleges who can train teachers or volunteers on the FAFSA and who can assist individual students during the workshop. Students should be notified of the information needed to fill out the FAFSA, such as income information from parents’ tax forms, before the session. high schools can coordinate with the school library or computer lab so that students can complete the FAFSA on the Internet. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Even though high schools can reach a broad group of students through line-by-line assistance at a workshop, students may have complex questions specific to their financial situation or may be uncomfortable raising questions at a group meeting. Therefore, high schools should provide individual assistance or counseling following a workshop to further assist students in completing the FAFSA or other aid applications. For high schools that provide mentoring services, mentors can provide one-on-one assistance if they are knowledgeable about financial aid or if they receive training. Individual financial aid counseling also can be helpful for answering questions about the Student Aid Profile, award letter, or financial aid decisions that are made after a student submits the FAFSA. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

The role of FAFSA Verification in exacerbating summer melt: A 2020 study from Rice University found that one-third of Houston Independent School District college-intending students were flagged for FAFSA verification (i.e., a process requiring a student to submit additional documents such as tax transcripts and W-2 forms so the financial aid office at their college can see that the information on these documents matches the student’s FAFSA application) and that racial and ethnic minorities were especially at risk of verification. The study also found that students flagged for FAFSA verification were five percentage points more likely to delay their college enrollment than students who were not flagged for verification. Overall, results suggested reducing FAFSA verification and/or providing support to students and families managing the process might be a way to improve college enrollment rates and reduce summer melt. (Holzman, B., & Hanson, V. S., Summer melt and free application for federal student aid verification.)

Counselors set up systems for success. This includes: (a) Create a FAFSA completion tracker for the students on your caseload; (b) Identify local resources to support families in the financial aid process, such as free local tax prep resources; (c) Train your team (and yourself!) in FAFSA completion and financial aid processes in your state. If your student population includes students without documentation or with DACA, research alternative financial aid support. (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

Counselors support juniors to complete FAFSA4Caster. This includes: (a) Host a workshop (or workshops) during junior year to introduce key concepts like the cost of college, financial aid options and documents needed to complete financial aid. Consider collecting tax documents at this time to prepare to support your students for FAFSA completion senior year; (b) Create and deliver checklists for juniors to gather the information they’ll need to complete FAFSA4Caster; (c) Support juniors to complete FAFSA4Caster, either on their own, in workshops or in one-on-ones; (d) Once FAFSA4Caster is complete, schedule time with each junior on your caseload to review their EFC and cross-examine their wish list. Make adjustments, as necessary, to ensure there are financial fits; (e) Where needed, connect families with local resources for tax completion. (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

During students’ senior year, counselors help students and families complete FAFSA and the financial aid process. This includes: (a) As a college counseling team, meet regularly to review progress-to-date on FAFSA submission to identify needs and triage support; (b) Host a workshop, office hours or one-on-ones to help students and families complete FAFSA; (c) Help students identify and complete the necessary financial aid steps for the colleges on their wish lists. Some colleges may require additional forms; (d) If students are applying to private colleges, support them to complete the CSS Profile (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

Counselors review and evaluate student aid offers as they arrive. This includes: (a)  Remind students to submit offer letters for analysis; (b) Support students to review and compare letters, identifying the total anticipated out-of-pocket cost of college and anticipated loan payments after college; (c) If necessary, support students and families to appeal financial aid offers. (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

According to KIPP’s Financial Aid Checklist, before the end of junior year students should: (a) Create their FSA ID which they’ll need to complete FAFSA. (Visit: fsaid.ed.gov); (b) Complete the FAFSA4Caster to get an early estimate of their potential financial aid. (Visit: fafsa.ed.gov/spa/fafsa4c); (c) As they build their college wish list, review every option to determine if it’s a “financial fit,” ensuring to include options that are more affordable on their list; (d) Begin gathering the documents they’ll need to submit FAFSA in the fall: Social Security number (if applicable); Family taxes and earnings from previous year; Information on investment, checking and savings accounts; (e) Begin researching scholarships. Create a simple tracker with scholarship names, links, requirements and submission dates (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

According to KIPP’s Financial Aid Checklist, in October and November of Senior Year, students should: (a) Work with their family to submit FAFSA. They can use the IRS Data Retrieval Tool to populate with tax information. (Visit: fafsa.ed.gov); (b) Review their Student Aid Report (arrives a few days after FAFSA submission) to ensure all the information is accurate; (c) Continue researching potential scholarships; (d) Apply for scholarships as deadlines approach; (e) Review the financial aid requirements for every college they plan to apply to. Make plans to submit any additional financial aid forms on time. (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

According to KIPP’s Financial Aid Checklist, in January and February of Senior Year, students should: (a) complete FAFSA verification, if required; and (b) Check in with colleges to ensure they have all the information they need for financial aid (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

According to KIPP’s Financial Aid Checklist, from March through May of Senior Year, students should: (a) Submit financial aid offers to their counselor so they can review together; (b) If needed, work with their counselor to submit financial aid offer appeals; (c) Analyze each award letter to better understand their out-of-pocket cost and future loan payments; (d) Prepare to submit a deposit to their selected college by May 1 (KIPP, Supporting Students to Find Their Match).

Louisiana has consistently been one of the leading states for FAFSA completion rates for the past several years. In addition to requiring students to complete the FAFSA to graduate from high school, the state maintains a statewide data system that includes student-level FAFSA completion data. The Louisiana Office of Student Financial Assistance (LOSFA), which manages the data, shares reports to schools on a weekly basis. Louisiana also includes FAFSA submission data on its School Finder information platform to provide parents and community members with meaningful data on students’ postsecondary preparation (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

The Michigan College Access Network (MCAN) manages a statewide, public-facing FAFSA tracker that enables individuals to view FAFSA completion data by school, enrollment, region, and county and compares current completion rates to the previous year. Schools and districts can use this tracker to monitor their progress relative to their peers across the state. To spur competition, the tracker also features a leaderboard of the top schools in the state by both overall completion rate and growth from the previous year. This competition is further supported by the College Cash Campaign, which provides incentives to schools for meeting certain benchmarks (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

Vancouver Public Schools (VPS), located in Washington, shares student-level data through an online portal. Managed by the Washington Student Achievement Council (WSAC), the state’s higher education coordinating board, the portal allows all high school counselors and principals to have real-time data on students who have not only completed the FAFSA, but also who have missing information or errors on their application, or who have started, but not completed the form. VPS conducts trainings with school staff on how to analyze and leverage this data to focus the support they provide to students and families (EdStrategy, From Tails to Heads).

uAspire helps underrepresented students access capital from which they can build a better future through financial aid advising, training counselors, and policy (uAspire).

Simplify the FAFSA: The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) effectively serves as the gateway to higher education for millions of students each academic year. However, the complex and extensive nature of the FAFSA has resulted in the significant underutilization of federal aid. The implementation of the FUTURE Act and the FAFSA Simplification Act will eliminate unnecessary FAFSA questions and help create early awareness of financial aid options among younger students. FSA should continue working to decrease the burden caused by the audit-like verification process. (National College Attainment Network, Fix FAFSA)

LEARN MORE Universal FAFSA Completion with Supports: Data show FAFSA completion increases the likelihood of enrollment and persistence in higher education. States should require FAFSA completion for high school graduation, with a robust opt-out option for students with special circumstances. And counselors, advisers, and students should be provided with the support needed to meet the requirement. (National College Attainment Network, Universal FAFSA Completion with Supports).

Student-level FAFSA Data Sharing: Through agreements with Federal Student Aid, states can access student-level data on FAFSA submissions, completions, and more. Nearly every state has signed an agreement to receive this data, and these agreements also permit states to pass this data along to districts, schools, and other approved organizations. Having access to student-level FAFSA completion data can help districts, schools, and community organizations: Drive FAFSA completion campaigns; Change postsecondary advising practices; IncreFAFSAase FAFSA completion rates; Better connect students with the financial aid that would make their postsecondary pathways more affordable (NCAN, FAFSA Data Sharing).

High school educators and college access counselors hold information sessions to help students and families understand the process and timeline for FAFSA submission this year (U.S. Department of Education, Better FAFSA Toolkit).

High school educators and college access counselors support students as they create a StudentAid.gov account by giving time to do it with trained school personnel or volunteers (U.S. Department of Education, Better FAFSA Toolkit).

High school educators and college access counselors set FAFSA completion goals for your or key partners’ high schools and use available data to know your school’s current submission rate  (U.S. Department of Education, Better FAFSA Toolkit).

High school educators and college access counselors train teachers, support staff and volunteers on how to fill out the FAFSA (U.S. Department of Education, Better FAFSA Toolkit).

High school educators and college access counselors visit ed.gov/Better-FAFSA to access resources like the Financial Aid Toolkit for counselors and the roadmap for counselors and advocates (U.S. Department of Education, Better FAFSA Toolkit).

High school educators and college access counselors Develop a roadmap for their school and community support providers (U.S. Department of Education, Better FAFSA Toolkit).

Advocate for extending Pell grant eligibility to short-term, for-credit certification programs. Reducing financial barriers to accessing postsecondary certificate programs is critical to improving financial security for vulnerable segments of the population. Because available evidence does not support the current threshold of 600 hours for Pell eligibility, there is a strong case for extending Pell grant eligibility to students in short-term, for-credit certificate programs that require at least 150 hours (Urban Institute).