Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

Panel: Innovations to Improve Financial Aid: Evidence from Recent Field Experiments

(Education)

Despite hundreds of billions of dollars that federal and state governments invest in financial aid every year, substantial socioeconomic disparities persist in college access and success. A growing body of research demonstrates that complexities in the financial aid process—from initially applying for federal financial aid through completing required financial tasks during the summer after high school—can deter students who appear otherwise academically-ready for college from successfully matriculating. Encouragingly, experimental evidence from several recent interventions shows that providing students and families with personalized information and access to assistance with financial aid can generate substantial improvements in college entry and persistence. Consistent with the theme of the Fall 2016 APPAM conference on making government more effective, the papers on our panel feature innovative, cost-effective strategies to improve access to financial aid for lower-income students. The papers on the panel share common themes of applying behavioral science insights and working in close collaboration with educational agencies and organizations to deliver effective outreach and support to socioeconomically-disadvantaged populations. In “Nudging at a National Scale: Experimental Evidence from a FAFSA Completion Campaign,” the authors report on a national field experiment, conducted in partnership with The Common Application, to encourage approximately 450,000 lower-income and first-generation college students to consider net costs when applying to college and to complete the federal financial aid application early in the calendar year. The authors capitalize on the large experimental sample to investigate a variety of mechanisms, including variations in content, advising availability, and message delivery method. In “Can Information Cause Students To Make Different Financial Decisions? A Field Experiment With 20,000 College Students,” the authors report on a field experiment in which several universities randomly assigned students to receive a letter informing them about educational costs, student loan debt, and degree progress. The authors similarly test the relative efficacy of intervention delivery method and investigate impacts of the letter on the decisions of heterogeneous subgroups. In “The Impact of Information: Evaluating a Financial Aid Promise on College Applications,” the authors report on a field experiment in which the University of Michigan randomly assigned students, parents, and school principals to receive a packet of information about financial aid eligibility. The packet promised each student a four-year full tuition scholarship if admitted to the university. The authors investigate the impact these packets had on application and admission rates at the university. Finally, in “Early Bird Gets The Worm? The Impact Of Application Deadlines On The Distribution Of State Grant Aid,” the author investigates the impact of changing state priority aid application deadlines on whether students receive state grant assistance. Leveraging variation within states and over time in aid deadlines, the author finds that earlier deadlines lead to lower-income students receiving a smaller share of state aid funding.