How do Promise programs benefit students?

Paying for college may be the first substantial financial decision that a traditional-aged college student makes in their adult life. Research has consistently demonstrated that students and families confront a lack of clear information when it comes to paying for higher education. Students who are the first in their families to attend college often lack the cultural and social capital needed to navigate the financial aid process and other application hurdles. Some students choose not to apply for college for fear of taking on debt, especially in light of rising institutional sticker prices.

Promise programs are one solution to these barriers to college. A recent study using a large, nationally representative survey of high school students found that the introduction of a local Promise program increased the likelihood that students expected to earn a college degree by 9–15 percentage points.¹ The introduction of Promise programs had a particularly strong impact for low-income and racially minoritized students. Other researchers found that effects on actual college enrollment are similar whether Promise programs cover full or partial tuition. They concluded that the “free college” messaging can be as important in inducing students to attend postsecondary institutions as the actual amount of the grant award.² (Nonetheless, evidence shows that larger grants lead to greater student persistence and completion.)

While “free” college messaging is important, it is not enough on its own to increase enrollment, persistence, and eventual degree completion. Fewer administrative hurdles and less uncertainty in the aid process are also important. A University of Michigan study, for example, randomly selected low-income students in the state of Michigan to receive letters detailing a student’s eligibility for free tuition at the university. One arm of the treatment guaranteed students would receive free tuition for four years while another arm was guaranteed free tuition for one year contingent on demonstrating financial need in an annual review The application rate among students guaranteed free tuition for four years was 63%, compared to 44% in the annual review arm, and 35% in the control (or “business as usual”)³ group. Other studies have confirmed that scholarship or grant programs based on demonstrating financial need (like the Pell grant) have smaller effects on enrollment than simpler financial aid programs. Any additional paperwork is another hurdle, especially for underrepresented college students.

Research on financial aid outreach and college applications has consistently shown the importance of clear and explicit messaging, as well as the reduction of administrative burden (the added hassle of filing paperwork required of students to prove their income status) on college access. These lessons are critical for policymakers and other stakeholders to consider when designing Promise programs. If stakeholders are intent on providing aid to students with financial need, great care must be taken in designing an application process that does not create an administrative burden for low-income students. The “cost of complexity” in financial aid applications may deter low-income and first-generation students from even applying for aid and attending college.⁴ Simple applications and eligibility rules are key in the design of new Promise programs.