" />
This is where we post our commentary on current events, recommended links and news articles, and other items of interest that relate to the Institute's work.
« February 2010 | Main | April 2010 »
Today we released a new analysis of federal financial aid application rates and receipt at the California community colleges (CCCs), where we found that many students who are likely eligible for federal aid are not applying for it. As a result, CCC students are leaving behind as much as half a billion dollars in federal Pell Grant awards that could help pay for many education-related expenses.
There are several theories as to why community college students in California are applying for federal financial aid at low rates. Some say it’s because CCC students are more likely to attend part-time, and that part-time students everywhere are less likely to apply for aid than full-time students. Some say that Californians have higher incomes, and aren’t eligible for as much aid as students elsewhere. Yet, when looking at a variety of subgroups of community college students in California and other states – including full-time students and those who are likely eligible for Pell Grants – CCC students are still less likely to apply for federal aid than comparable students in the rest of the country.
Reasonable people can disagree about what causes this problem and how to solve it, but the bottom line is that California needs more college graduates and a stronger economy – and can’t afford to pass up hundreds of millions of dollars that could go towards supporting both.

Laura Szabo-Kubitz
Policy Associate
We recently attended the U.S. Department of Education’s negotiated rulemaking on “program integrity,” which is supposed to put some teeth back into the regulations that determine which colleges can – and can’t -- participate in federal student aid programs. Only students at participating colleges and in eligible programs can get federal grants and loans. Some of these regulations apply mainly to for-profit schools, which have the highest student debt and default levels and get most of their revenue from taxpayer-financed student aid.
Since the last rulemaking session, the topic of ‘gainful employment’ has gotten a lot of attention. Put simply, it’s the idea that college programs designed to prepare students for specific kinds of jobs (e.g., auto mechanics, chefs) actually do, and that the majority of students who attend those programs aren’t left high and dry at the end of the day with only a lot of debt and a worthless credential to show for it.
Some people are calling the Department's proposals a form of “price control”, saying that they would effectively cap the amount students could borrow, which would in turn cap the tuition colleges could charge for these programs. Putting aside the question of the Department’s specific proposal for now, since when did merely questioning the return on investment – both the student’s and taxpayer’s – become an attack on the free market? For more on just why we need better rules in this area, check out this new item from Higher Ed Watch: Students vs. Shareholders at Publicly Traded Career Colleges.
Debbie Cochrane
Program Director