Research
Evaluating Universal FAFSA Policies: Evidence from Seven States
Abstract
In this paper, I study the adoption and expansion of universal FAFSA policies starting in Louisiana and six additional states. I leverage a synthetic differences-in-differences design, a synthetic control, and the canonical differences-in-differences design to study the causal effect of universal FAFSA policies using data from the US Department of Education’s Office of Federal Student Aid. This is national level administrative data that is not available publicly. This is the first paper to conduct a multi-state analysis on the topic of universal FAFSA policies using data that can directly speak to college enrollment effects and the effects of the policy on several policy groups of interest (i.e. first-generation students). I find that universal FAFSA policies that require local education agencies (LEAs) or students to complete the FAFSA increase state FAFSA submission rates by approximately 7.5 percentage points on average per year from the start of the policy. According to reduced-form estimates, this led to an increase of approximately three percentage points in college enrollment and two percentage points in financial aid receipt on average.
Documenting Inequality in Federal Higher Education Funding (with Peter Blair)
Abstract
This paper documents inequalities in higher education revenue sources by college selectivity from 1987-2015. We find the greatest inequalities exist in federal funding (excluding Pell Grants) and PIE (private gifts, investment returns, and endowment returns) across college selectivity. Both of these funding streams are disproportionately captured by Ivy-Plus universities and colleges at the upper end of the selectivity distribution. We find that the share of federal funding received by Ivy-Plus colleges closely matches inequalities found in the top-end of the income distribution, ranging from 14%-15%. We also examine expenditures by college selectivity and as expected find that federal funding aligns very closely with research expenditure. Interestingly, Highly Selective Public universities tend to be greater net investors in research relative to Ivy-Plus universities.
Differential Impacts of Small Reductions in Pell Grants: Evidence from Two Federal Policy Changes (with Ari Anisfeld & Dennis Kramer)
Abstract
In 2011, Pell Grants faced a $18 billion shortfall, due to a combination of rising post-recession college enrollment and increases in the maximum Pell Grant award. Congress responded with the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 which implemented four major changes to Pell Grant eligibility. This paper explores two of these policies and how they affected individual behavior. These two policies both led to small reductions in Pell Grant distributions in absolute terms, but on two different margins of the Pell distribution. The first policy eliminated Pell Grants for individuals on the margin of receiving the minimum amount of Pell Grants. The second policy reduced Pell Grants for individuals on the margin of receiving the maximum amount of Pell Grants. In the first policy, a loss of about $315 in Pell Grants led to a decrease of 9.3 percentage points in full-time enrollment rates. Individuals at this margin borrowed almost five times the amount they lost in Pell Grants. A heterogeneity analysis demonstrates that students in their first and second years of college tended to borrow at greater rates, while students in their third and fourth years withdrew at greater rates. In the second policy, individuals who lost about $287 in Pell Grants increased their borrowing by about the same amount they lost in Pell Grants ($264). This increase in borrowing was driven by students in their third and fourth years of college.
The Distributional Impact of Official Communications: Evidence from Two Massive FAFSA Renewal Experiments (with Ari Anisfeld & Dennis Kramer)
Abstract
We test the efficacy of the U.S. Department of Education’s (DOE) communication campaign on Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) renewal and explore what types of students respond to a reminder. Who is marginal to completing additional paperwork? Who is marginal to re-enrollment? We address these questions using the results from two massive national-scale RCTs which include roughly 10 million people each. In 2020 and 2023, the DOE randomized the recipients of a typical communication campaign. Unlike other large-scale campaigns, the DOE campaigns move a small, but significant proportion of students to re-submit FAFSA and re-enroll in college. Moreover, while we observe limited variation in who resubmits FAFSA, we see heterogeneity in who re-enrolls, prompting questions about the distributional consequences of the campaigns.
- Unlocking Potential: Analyzing the Impact of Second Chance Pell on Incarcerated Students
- Understanding the Effects of Loan Servicers on Student Success (with Dennis Kramer)
- Pathways from High School to Postsecondary Opportunities, American Academy of Arts & Sciences, April 2024.