Document Tag: evaluation

When Care Isn’t Enough: Administrative Burden in Federal Higher Education Pandemic Emergency Aid Implementation (2022)

Departing from traditional financial aid policies, during the pandemic the federal government
introduced emergency aid to higher education for the first time. This study examines the implementation
of that program, including students’ need for and access to the resources and the processes they navigated
to obtain help. We identify multiple forms of administrative burden present, and using both survey data
and focus groups, explain how they affected students and institutions. The psychological costs of
administrative burden were particularly substantial and should be addressed in future programming.

Emergency Aid Distribution in West Texas Community Colleges (2023)

related to food and housing instability, inadequate health care and rising attendance costs. In fact, the U.S.
Department of Education recently released the first-ever national estimates of food insecurity and homelessness
and found that college students are more likely to face these issues than the general population. These financerelated
challenges have a significant and negative impact on a student’s academic performance and are
associated with stopping-out and dropping-out of college – even when the financial challenge amounts to a
relatively small dollar amount. Emergency Aid (EA) programs are one approach that colleges use to assist students
with these unforeseen challenges.
The threats students have faced in meeting their basic needs while in college have increased significantly in the
last 15 years, with less than half of all public community colleges today meeting criteria for being affordable. The
COVID-19 pandemic compounded these affordability issues as the entire sector forced students out of housing,
shut down dining halls, and shifted their instructional model overnight.
In response, Believe in Students and the then-startup mobile app called Edquity – now Beam – partnered with three
colleges in West Texas to provide emergency aid funding over two school years, from fall of 2020 through spring
of 2022, to help keep students in school as well as in their homes with their families intact. In total, $835,750
was disseminated throughout this period to help 1,937 students address food, housing, transportation, and other
expenses.
One of the partner institutions involved, Odessa College, was able to provide persistence and graduation data for
the students who received emergency aid through this program. This data shows that over 90% of all aid recipients
persisted in college the following semester or earned their degree. This outcome is particularly noteworthy
considering the national persistence rate for public two-year institutions (students continuing their education at
the same or a different institution) was 61.5% in fall 2020, while the retention rate (students returning to the same
institution) was 52.4%.
This report describes the unique partnership between community colleges in West Texas, Believe in Students,
and Beam, sharing information about how the dollars were used by students and how the partners adapted as a
result of the project. The findings and recommendations shared here are scalable to other campuses in Texas, and
the student outcomes will serve the region’s workforce and help meet the state’s 60X30 attainment goals and
workforce needs.

Connecting Students to Basic Needs Hubs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Evaluation of a Cross-Sectoral Partnership (2023)

Reducing basic needs insecurity among community college students is an equity imperative for improving college attainment, particularly given the challenges the pandemic introduced. One popular approach is co-locating campus support services to help students access support (beyond financial aid), including public benefits and emergency aid. Some institutions operate their own basic needs hubs, while others engage outside providers. This study evaluates a campus-based cross-sectoral approach at two community colleges in King County, Washington. Together, the United Way of King County and area colleges and universities operate “Benefits Hubs” for students, offering support from peer navigators and helping them access financial resources and information. However, many students experiencing basic needs insecurity do not use hubs—a problem shared by many other student support services. Is it possible to increase students’ use of hubs through low-cost outreach? Does that outreach also improve students’ academic outcomes? Evaluators examined these questions during the COVID-19 pandemic, a time when students’ needs for support were especially high, and staff were particularly constrained. The colleges collectively identified a group of approximately 3,000 low-income students who might be eligible for public benefits and thus find the Benefits Hubs’ support useful. Those students were divided at random into two groups. Beginning in fall 2020, staff sent the first group emails encouraging them to use hubs. The second group did not receive that outreach but still had access to hubs. A comparison of the two groups following that outreach revealed whether sending those emails—a strategy widely known as “nudging”—those students improved their use of hubs and/or their odds of academic success in terms of grades and retention. The results are mixed and largely inconclusive. On the one hand, outreach modestly increased students’ use of Benefits Hubs. It also reached students in several target demographic groups—older students and those from marginalized communities who are at heightened risk of basic needs insecurity. This suggests that informational barriers contribute to basic needs insecurity and may be partially overcome with inexpensive outreach strategies. However, the benefits of outreach dissipated over time, potentially because the targeted students shared information with their peers who did not receive the emails, and then those students also used hubs. Even with the additional outreach efforts, most targeted students did not use hubs and academic improvements were not evidenced. As community colleges continue to recover from the pandemic and support students to graduation, providing basic needs supports to help students afford college may help. There are several reasons why this evaluation might understate the benefits, including analytic limitations and how the pandemic affected the program. Recent legislation and philanthropy are funding many basic needs hubs, making it especially important to engage in ongoing assessment to develop strategies for strengthening their use and ensuring maximum equitable impact.

Do expenditures other than instructional expenditures affect graduation and persistence rates in American higher education? (2010)

During the last two decades, median instructional spending per full-time equivalent (FTE) student at American 4-year colleges and universities has grown at a slower rate than median spending per FTE student in a number of other expenditure categories, including academic support, student services and research. Our paper uses institutional level panel data and a variety of econometric approaches, including unconditional quantile regression methods, to analyze whether these non-instructional expenditure categories influence graduation and first-year persistence rates of undergraduate students.

Our most important finding is that student service expenditures influence graduation and persistence rates and their marginal effects are higher for students at institutions with lower entrance test scores and higher Pell Grant expenditures per student. Put another way, their effects are largest at institutions that have lower current graduation and first-year persistence rates. Simulations suggest that reallocating some funding from instruction to student services may enhance persistence and graduation rates at those institutions whose rates are currently below the medians in the sample.

Connecting College Students to Alternative Sources of Support: The Single Stop Community College Initiative and Postsecondary Outcomes (2020)

Single Stop U.S.A.’s Community College Initiative was designed to improve the well-being of low-income communities by connecting individuals to public benefits and other institutional and community resources to address nonacademic barriers to college completion. Through offices located on community college campuses, Single Stop provides students with a range of free services, including screenings and applications for public benefit programs; tax services, financial counseling, and legal services; and case management with referrals to a wide variety of resources and support programs across the institution and community. This report presents an evaluation of the Single Stop program and its impact on students’ postsecondary outcomes. The authors examined the Single Stop program at four community college systems: Bunker Hill Community College, City University of New York, Delgado Community College, and Miami Dade College. The analysis indicates that use of Single Stop was associated with improved postsecondary outcomes. The findings suggest that access to alternative financial resources from government benefit programs alongside a network of institutional and community support programs can offer valuable support to college students.

#RealCollege: The Work and Activism of Sara Goldrick-Rab (2023)

“In the film Hungry to Learn Sara Goldrick-Rab appears wearing a
“#RealCollege” t-shirt. On the back of the shirt is written “it’s not ALL
about Harvard,” referring to the work of the #RealCollege movement in
breaking down stereotypes of the privileged college student in order to reveal
the reality of what college is like for a growing number of students from
poor, working-class, and middle-class backgrounds. Today’s college students
are, increasingly, not the stereotype of a carefree college student but instead
struggling to make it through school while juggling financial and familial
responsibilities. Goldrick-Rab’s work has not only uncovered this important
reality but works to draw attention to it in order to create change.”

Book Chapter from “The Future of American Higher Education: How Today’s Public Intellectuals Frame the Debate”
Edited By Joseph L. DeVitis