For community colleges to reach their full potential as drivers of prosperity and equity, research partners HCM Strategists and the Community College Research Center (CCRC), argue that states must create strong, stable, coherent finance systems that enable and incentivize colleges to better meet pressing state interests and student needs. To do so, policymakers need clear, comprehensive and state-specific pictures of how current finance systems operate. College leaders need sufficient resources that can be deployed in service of their institutional priorities, including equitable attainment.

This presentation will share insights and recommendations from research that maps the community college finance systems in California, Ohio and Texas. These states vary in terms of location, demographics, and the size and structure of their community colleges, yet each has recently seen notable efforts to change aspects of their community college finance system. HCM identified and analyzed the policies that control each state’s major revenue streams, their implications for institutional behavior, and their effects on equity. Additionally, CCRC researchers will present findings from an institutional analysis conducted at 8 community colleges across California, Ohio, and Texas that examined institutional funding and choices leaders made about how limited resources should be allocated. It also analyzed the colleges’ student success initiatives–how they operate, who they serve, and their resource requirements–with a focus on the ways institutional policy and practice is affected by the local and state economic and political context.

Presenters

Martha Snyder, Managing Director of Postsecondary Education Transformation, HCM Strategists

Stephanie Murphy, Director of Postsecondary State Policy and Research, HCM Strategists

Nikki Edgecombe, Senior Research Scholar, CCRC

Maria Cormier, Senior Research Associate, CCRC

Taylor Odle, Assistant Professor of Educational Policy Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Paving the Way to Equitable, Adequate, and Effective Community College Funding

The results previewed here further support the use of MMA as compared to traditional test-based systems, with a few specific lessons for policy and practice. First, findings from the current study suggest that increased access to college-level courses improves students’ chances of completing college-level math and English courses. In other words, MMA’s potential to improve student outcomes is explained by the redistribution of students from developmental courses to college-level courses. Secondly, although research has shown that many students will succeed in college-level courses when given the chance to enroll in them, we find that the impact of MMA on student outcomes decreases over time. Therefore, to bolster long-term student success, MMA should be implemented alongside additional student supports. Finally, MMA has the potential to address disparities by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender if placement systems are designed with inclusive placement measures and implemented alongside targeted support programs post-placement to meet the needs of specific populations as they navigate college.

Presenters

Elizabeth Kopko, Senior Research Associate, CCRC

Using data from an original survey conducted at 16 campuses (including both community and four-year colleges) within a large, urban public higher education system, over 25 student interviews and administrative data, we describe patterns of behavior associated with working. Specifically, we answer the following research questions:

• What are the benefits and tradeoffs associated with working during college?
• How does working while enrolled, and the associated benefits and tradeoffs, vary by student characteristics, campus sector and employment type?

We find that students do make decisions about courses and campus engagement to accommodate their work schedule. For example, 68 percent of the students we surveyed report choosing a class or classes to accommodate their work schedule and 38 percent report that they spend less time on campus because of work. These types of tradeoffs could have long-run impacts on students, forcing them to take longer to graduate or reducing the likelihood they choose a course-intensive major, such as those in the STEM fields. On the other hand, we find that students also report benefits from working including widening their professional networks and improving their people skills.

Presenters

Adela Soliz, Assistant Professor of Higher Education and Public Policy, Vanderbilt University

Veronica Minaya, Senior Research Associate and Program Lead, CCRC

Amy E. Brown, Research Associate, CCRC

Joseph Hille, Research Assistant, CCRC

To date, there is no clear picture of how community colleges have used federal recovery funds, what institutional and student needs are being addressed by funds, and what needs are unmet. We do know that how much money each institution received depended on a variety of factors but was ultimately based on student enrollment levels. Unfortunately, the funding formula for the initial round of HEER funds disfavored community colleges with their high enrollments of both part-time students and distance learners. The subsequent funding acts adjusted their funding formulas to additionally include both non-distance and distance headcount enrollment of both full- and part-time students, with non-distance headcount enrollment (all full- and part- time students taking classes on-campus) weighted equally to full-time equivalent enrollment.

In this study, we collected data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Education Stabilization (ESF) Fund Transparency Portal and the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data Systems (IPEDS) to analyze how much community colleges have spent of their pandemic relief funds and to illuminate patterns by institutional and student characteristics. P

This analysis provides current and vital information on what has actually happened during the turbulence of the last three years, as well as providing assessments on how well critical policies have served their intent. Through this work, we inform policymakers, practitioners, and other researchers on funding and spending trends, drawing lessons to inform pandemic recovery efforts and to plan for future public health or other emergencies.

Presenters

Tia Monahan, Senior Research Assistant and PEAR Fellow, CCRC

Expanding the Adoption of Multiple Measures Assessment and Building the Research Base

Does Federal Work-Study Work for Students?

Community Colleges’ Spending of Federal Recovery Funds