Place-based promise scholarships are a relatively recent innovation in the space of college access and success. Although evidence on the impact of some of the earliest place-based scholarships has begun to emerge, the rapid proliferation of promise programs largely has preceded empirical evidence of their impact. We utilize regression discontinuity and difference-in-differences analyses to investigate the causal effect of the Pittsburgh Promise on students’ immediate postsecondary attainment and early college persistence outcomes. Both analytic approaches yield similar conclusions. As a result of Promise eligibility, Pittsburgh Public School graduates are approximately 5 percentage points more likely to enroll in college, particularly four-year institutions; 10 percentage points more likely to select a Pennsylvania institution; and 4 to 7 percentage points more likely to enroll and persist into a second year of postsecondary education. Impacts vary with changes over time in the program structure and opportunities, and are larger for those responsive to the Promise opportunity, as instrumental variable-adjusted results reveal. Although the Pittsburgh Promise represents a sizeable investment, conservative cost–benefit calculations indicate positive returns. Even so, an important question is whether locally funded programs such as the Pittsburgh Promise are economically sustainable in the long run.

No abstract

Large differences often exist between a college's sticker price and net price after accounting for financial aid. Net price calculators (NPCs) were designed to help students more accurately estimate their actual costs to attend a given college. This study assesses the accuracy of information provided by net price calculators. Specifically, we compare NPC estimates of financial aid to actual aid packages for a sample of low-income, first-time college students at seven postsecondary institutions which all utilize the federal template NPC. We find that NPC estimates of grant aid correlate highly with actual grant aid on average, but variation in individual financial aid packages among socioeconomically similar students can be substantial. We offer four recommendations. First, NPC aid estimates should include information on variability, and potentially, on sources of that variability. Second, a basic metric of academic merit such as SAT/ACT scores and GPA should be an optional addition to the federal template NPC. Third, institutions should update the data underlying their NPCs annually. Finally, we recommend that institutions use the "Explanations and Caveats" options on the federal NPC template to include additional information that may be helpful for students and families in anticipating their likely college aid and expenses. Our findings have implications for federal policy related to NPCs.

No abstract

No abstract