Improving College Accessibility With a Simple Reform

For the poorest students, this knowledge could mean the difference between going to college and not.

Dollar symbol
National Journal
Fawn Johnson
See more stories about...
Fawn Johnson
July 11, 2014, 1 a.m.

Cur­rently, col­lege ap­plic­ants must wait to ap­ply for fed­er­al fin­an­cial aid un­til the second semester of their seni­or year in high school. That’s be­cause the ap­plic­a­tion re­quires in­come data from the pri­or cal­en­dar year. The res­ult is that mil­lions of col­lege ap­plic­ants don’t know how much they will have to pay un­til just be­fore they have to make their de­cision about which school to at­tend.

But what if stu­dents could ap­ply for fin­an­cial aid in the be­gin­ning of their seni­or year — us­ing their fam­ily’s tax in­form­a­tion from one cal­en­dar year earli­er? This would al­low ap­plic­ants — par­tic­u­larly those who plan to at­tend a pub­lic col­lege or uni­versity — to learn much more about their fin­an­cial-aid pack­ages far soon­er than they cur­rently do.

The pro­posed change has peppered le­gis­la­tion throughout the Cap­it­ol, as mem­bers of Con­gress pre­pare a slew of high­er-edu­ca­tion bills. And law­makers think it could make a big dif­fer­ence in en­cour­aging low-in­come stu­dents to at­tend col­lege.

Right now, Janu­ary is the earli­est that stu­dents can fill out their Free Ap­plic­a­tion for Fed­er­al Stu­dent Aid — and that’s as­sum­ing their par­ents have filed their taxes early for the year just ended. Of­ten, fam­il­ies file later. This means that some stu­dents don’t re­ceive their fin­an­cial-aid pack­ages un­til just a few weeks be­fore the en­roll­ment dead­lines for most col­leges. That’s too late for many stu­dents, says Megan Mc­Cle­an, dir­ect­or of policy and fed­er­al re­la­tions for the Na­tion­al As­so­ci­ation of Stu­dent Fin­an­cial Aid Ad­min­is­trat­ors. “A lot of times, our low-in­come stu­dents are first-gen­er­a­tion, and they’re the first ones to go to col­lege,” she says. “It’s bet­ter to have more time for the pro­cess.”

(J Heroun)Fil­ing the FAF­SA in the fall would al­low ap­plic­ants to know, be­fore they even ap­ply to col­lege, how much fed­er­al aid they are likely to re­ceive. And since most pub­lic col­leges rely on the FAF­SA to de­term­ine their aid pack­ages, stu­dents could learn of their po­ten­tial state and school grants at the same time.

For the poorest stu­dents, that know­ledge could mean the dif­fer­ence between go­ing to col­lege and not. If low-in­come stu­dents know be­fore ap­ply­ing that they have $5,000 avail­able in fed­er­al grant money, they might see post­sec­ond­ary school­ing as a vi­able op­tion. “By ju­ni­or year [of high school], they can tell you ex­actly what you can get,” says Re­pub­lic­an Sen. Lamar Al­ex­an­der of Ten­ness­ee, a co­spon­sor of one of the bills that would change the in­come ques­tion on the FAF­SA to the “pri­or pri­or year” — that is, the tax year two years be­fore the stu­dent enters col­lege.

This idea has bi­par­tis­an sup­port. It is part of an­oth­er, broad­er bill sponsored by Demo­crat­ic Sen. Tom Har­kin of Iowa, who chairs the Health, Edu­ca­tion, Labor, and Pen­sions Com­mit­tee, which will con­sider all fin­an­cial-aid pro­pos­als in the Sen­ate. House Re­pub­lic­ans also in­cluded the pro­pos­al in le­gis­la­tion de­signed to make the en­tire fin­an­cial-aid ap­plic­a­tion pro­cess less daunt­ing.

Last year, Mc­Cle­an’s group con­duc­ted an in-depth re­view of 160,000 FAF­SA ap­plic­a­tions. It found that about 70 per­cent of grantees would see no change in their awards if they used the “pri­or pri­or” year’s in­come on their ap­plic­a­tions. About 20 per­cent of grantees would see a change of more than $1,000, up or down, in their fed­er­al grants. Every­one else would see smal­ler changes.

All told, the re­search­ers said that 3 mil­lion grantees could see their fed­er­al fin­an­cial aid af­fected if the tax year is pushed back. That must be taken in­to con­sid­er­a­tion, Mc­Cle­an ac­know­ledges. But she notes that fin­an­cial-aid ad­min­is­trat­ors could change awards on a case-by-case basis if, for ex­ample, an ap­plic­ant’s par­ent loses his or her job between the two tax years.

And for every­one else? Fig­ur­ing out how to pay for col­lege — an in­cred­ibly stress­ful and daunt­ing pro­cess for many low-in­come stu­dents — could end up be­ing easi­er. 

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
2 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
3 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×