ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

May 22, 2003

The Honorable Judd Gregg

Chairman
Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
393 Senate Russell Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Gregg:

The Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance (Advisory Committee) is pleased to transmit its major
recommendation for reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA). Created by the Higher Education
Amendments of 1986, the Advisory Committee is an independent source of advice and counsel to Congress and the
Secretary of Education on student financial aid policy. The Committee’s most important legislative charge is to
make recommendations that maintain and enhance access and persistence of low- and moderate-income students in
postsecondary education.

The upcoming HEA reauthorization represents an important opportunity for Congress to make progress in solving
the nation’s core college access and persistence problem. In a December 31, 2002 letter to the Honorable John A.
Boehner, Chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, the Advisory Committee identified three key
dimensions for the nation’s neediest, low-income students:

•Those in middle school today do not—and cannot—know their total eligibility for federal, state, and
institutional financial aid resources. And, even if they did know their total eligibility, it is insufficient to ensure
financial access even to less expensive public colleges, even for those who are academically qualified.

•Nearing (and upon) graduation from high school, they face overly complex application forms, which inhibit
their transition to college and inordinately high unmet need, the gap between student aid and college expenses.
High unmet need causes students to undertake excessive levels of work and loan burden.

•Those who enter college, especially four-year colleges, against these financial odds must work far too many
hours, which reduces their eligibility for grant aid, and accumulate far too much debt in meeting college
expenses.

This unproductive pattern inevitably leads to diminished expectations and plans early on, low levels of enrollment
upon high school graduation, and disappointing rates of persistence and degree completion in college. Breaking this
pattern will require a major adjustment in the nation’s long run access and persistence strategy.

A Practical and Promising Solution

Fortunately, the broad outline of a solution is already known and at least partially in place in states like Indiana,
Oklahoma, and Washington. In those states, low-income middle school students and their families are assured of
financial access to four-year public colleges. With such an assurance, they know that adequate financial resources

80 F Street, N.W., Suite 413, Washington, D.C. 20202-7582 • Tel: 202/219-2099 • Fax: 202/219-3032

An independent committee created by Congress to advise on higher education and student aid policy
The Honorable Judd Gregg
May 22, 2003
Page 2

will be there if they work hard to become academically prepared. They know that grant aid in particular will be
sufficient to keep work and loan burden to manageable levels upon enrollment in college and through degree
completion. The success of these state efforts in advancing access and persistence is proof that, when low-income
students and their families are assured sufficient financial resources to be successful in college, their educational
expectations and plans, academic preparation, level of enrollment, and rate of persistence dramatically improve. If
combined with a highly simplified application for financial aid, and an improved, more transparent determination of
eligibility that eliminates the current counterproductive penalty on work, then an early assurance of financial access
and persistence will yield immediate and enduring progress toward equal educational opportunity.

The challenge in this reauthorization is for the federal government, in partnership with the states, colleges, and the
private sector, to implement systemic and long-lasting solutions to the nation’s core college access and persistence
problem. States that have already implemented such strategies must be encouraged to go further, broadening the
coverage and improving the effectiveness of their programs. States that have yet to adopt such a strategy must be
encouraged to implement one based on successful models. Colleges—both public and private—must also do their
share, by increasing the amount of grant assistance and support services for needy students to ensure degree or
certificate completion. Lastly, to the extent possible, the considerable resources of the private sector must also be
brought to bear. If all existing public and private access and persistence resources and programs are pooled to work
together, then significant progress can be made.

A National Access and Persistence Partnership

The Advisory Committee recommends the creation of a national partnership that links the federal government,
states, colleges, and K-12 schools across existing Title IV programs, in pursuit of measurable gains in access and
persistence for the nation’s neediest students who are academically qualified. This partnership should be based on
existing models that have been proven effective and should take full advantage of existing public and private
resources. To be successful, the partnership must have the following components:

•An Early Assurance of Financial Access. The partnership must integrate a financial assurance into existing
public and private early intervention, academic preparation, mentoring, and counseling programs in the state.

•Simplified Application and Adequate Grant Aid. The partnership must provide for easy application for
financial aid and assure financial access to four-year colleges, for both first-time students and two-year college
transfers, through a combination of existing funding sources and supplemental state grants.

•Enhanced Persistence. The partnership must provide continuing grant aid, adequate support services, and the
elimination of existing penalties for work that lower eligibility for need-based grant aid.

To the extent possible, the partnership should promote institutional policies that ease student transfers and improve
completion rates of low-income students. To be internally accountable, the partnership must hold participating low-
income students harmless against increases in tuition by increasing their financial aid as prices rise. Colleges should
maintain policies that are flexible enough to accommodate the diverse needs of low-income students. Colleges must
also be accountable; it is incumbent on private and public colleges and their partners to make every effort possible to
control their costs. The partnership also must systematically generate data, capable of monitoring and measuring the
partnerships’ impact on educational expectations and plans, enrollment, and persistence outcomes.

Lastly, there are several ways that such a partnership could be implemented. The partnership could take the form of
a modification to one or more existing Title IV programs or a competitive grant program. In recognition of the fact
that funding may not be available initially to meet the demands of all states that wish to participate, it could be
phased in gradually, in a scalable manner. For example, initial priority could be given to a limited amount of states
that, in conjunction with participating colleges, were able to develop innovative methods to provide a full assurance
of financial access to a significant number of middle school students. Regardless of the specific form that the
The Honorable Judd Gregg
May 22, 2003
Page 3

partnership takes, states and colleges should be encouraged to match federal funds to ensure that the additional grant
aid necessary to make good on the promise of financial access and persistence is forthcoming.

Benefits to Students and the Nation

This reauthorization offers the opportunity to put into place a creative and efficient partnership that can stem the
increase in the number of students for whom opportunity will be nothing more than an empty promise, and make
considerable progress toward renewing the nation’s commitment to access to college and the opportunity to persist.
The resulting statute could begin to insure that the hard work of the neediest Americans who will attempt to enroll in
college over the next decade will be rewarded.

While a problem several decades in the making cannot be solved overnight, a reinvigorated federal-state-
institutional partnership with private sector support is both desirable and feasible. It would ensure that the nation
confronts the serious college access and persistence problem head-on. It will also focus resources on a winning
long-term strategy to increase the amount of need-based grant aid that low- and moderate-income high school
graduates receive that will reduce the work hours and loan burden they currently face to a manageable level.

As always, the Advisory Committee members and staff would be pleased to discuss the proposal with you or provide
any technical assistance that is necessary. Please contact our staff director, Dr. Brian Fitzgerald, if we can be of
assistance.

Sincerely,

Dr. Charles Terrell

Chairperson

Enclosure

cc: Advisory Committee members

The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy (Identical letter sent)
Members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
Members of the Committee on Education and the Workforce
The Honorable Roderick R. Paige
The Honorable William D. Hansen
The Honorable Sally L. Stroup
 Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance

Reauthorization Proposal:
A Federal Partnership for Access and Persistence

Summary: The proposal would forge a new partnership among the federal government,
states, and colleges to create an assurance of access and persistence for low-income
students. The proposal is necessary because college-qualified low-income students face
financial and procedural barriers to enrollment throughout the education pipeline. The
proposal would attack this systemic problem by encouraging states to offer low-income
students an early assurance of financial access to college, a simplified financial
application process, and adequate grant aid to enroll and persist to degree completion.
The proposal would also encourage colleges to provide support services and additional
persistence grants to low-income students. The most effective early intervention
programs have demonstrated that an early assurance of financial access has generated
remarkable benefits for low-income students and their families: students who
successfully complete early intervention programs are more likely to be academically
prepared to attend college and more likely to enroll in college.

Background: The Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance has outlined the
access and persistence problems in its last two reports, Access Denied and Empty
Promises. In summary, the Advisory Committee has found: (1) middle school students
lack an assurance of adequate financial aid; (2) high school students face an overly
complex financial aid application process and inordinately high unmet need; and (3)
college students face an overwhelming level of work and loan burden in attempting to
persist to degree completion. The Advisory Committee is convinced that progress is
unlikely unless the Title IV access and persistence partnership among the federal
government, states, colleges, and K-12 schools is boldly reinvigorated during this
reauthorization.

An effective access and persistence strategy must be multidimensional; it should contain

three critical components: (1) An early assurance of financial access; (2) a simplified
application and adequate grant aid; and (3) persistence grants and support services. An
assurance of financial access to low-income middle school students would create
incentives for students to aspire to attend college, enroll in early intervention programs,
and prepare academically to attend college. A simplified application form that is aligned
with existing federal programs would make eligibility more transparent and application
less encumbered for high school students. Additional grant aid and support services at
college would reduce low-income students’ work and loan burden and improve the
likelihood that they will enroll in college and persist to degree completion.

Proposal: Congress should create a partnership that offers matching grants to states and
institutions to form partnerships that promote access and persistence for low-income
students. Congress could appropriate funds to states, especially those states that have a
demonstrated commitment to early intervention leading to college access. States could
have the flexibility to decide which low-income students to target the additional grant aid
to, but could be encouraged to give priority to low-income students who have participated
in a federal, state, community, or private early intervention program. The partnership
could encourage states to provide low-income middle school students with an early
assurance of financial access to a four-year college; it could establish a streamlined
application process that included automatic eligibility, enabling states to notify every 7th
grade student of his or her total drawing power on federal and state grant aid. The
partnership would allow states to offer financial incentives, in the form of additional
grant assistance, to high school students to participate in and complete early intervention
programs. Participation in such programs will increase the likelihood that the targeted
students will aspire to college and be academically prepared to enroll in college. The
partnership could also encourage participating colleges to attract, retain, and graduate
low-income students; institutions would receive matching funds to provide persistence
grants and additional support services. Finally, the partnership could further reduce the
work and loan burden of low-income college students by eliminating the student “work
penalty,” whereby a student’s grants decrease the more (s)he works to cover unmet need,
and thus ensuring adequate grant aid each year of college.

Key Features:

• The partnership could leverage additional federal funds with additional state and
institutional grant aid through matching requirements.

• It minimizes structural changes to existing federal programs and does not create new
federal programs to compete with those that already exist.

• It could leverage existing Title IV programs like SEOG and Work-Study to lower
unmet need and increase enrollment and persistence.

• It could be scalable and data generating; the partnership could initially be

implemented in a select group of states, or it could be gradually phased into every
state.

• It could be internally accountable, holding participating students harmless against

tuition increases and encouraging timely degree completion.

• Students could use their grant assistance at public and private accredited colleges.

• The federal government could encourage states to award available grant aid to
students that participate in an early intervention program; programs that utilize
strategies such as mentoring, counseling, academic support, providing financial
information, involving parents, and visiting college campuses.

• The partnership could take advantage of existing early intervention programs such as
TRIO, GEAR UP, I Have a Dream, and those operated by private (corporate and
philanthropic) firms.
• The federal government could ensure consistency of grant aid each year of college by
minimizing the current student “work penalty,” by which wages earned to cover
unmet need reduce grant aid in subsequent years, as a means of encouraging
persistence.

• Colleges could encourage academically qualified low-income students to attend their

school by offering matching grant aid, and by providing support services that help
students persist to degree completion.

Benefits: The proposed partnership would allow the federal government to leverage
existing Title IV programs to expand low-income students’ access to college; thus,
allowing the nation to produce more skilled workers. The partnership provides states
with the opportunity to strengthen their need based grant programs to offset the rising tide
of college costs. The partnership would also provide colleges with additional funds for
persistence grants and support services. States and colleges would benefit from a student
population that was more motivated, by an early assurance of financial access, to prepare
academically and to persist to degree completion. Students of low-income families
would also benefit from an early assurance of financial access, as it would encourage
them to have higher expectations to attend college and they would receive better
information with which to make plans to attend college. Students would also benefit
from the reduction of financial and procedural barriers to college access; students would
receive a simpler financial application, a clearer articulation of the financial aid available,
and consistent grant aid each year of college, through the elimination of the student
“work penalty.”