expanding the dream · expanding the dream: helping michigan reach racial equity in bachelor’s...

EXPANDING THE DREAM: Helping Michigan Reach Racial Equity in Bachelor’s Degree Completion

Introduction

Michigan’s economy depends on having skilled workers. In the past, high school graduates

could enter the middle class by getting jobs in the manufacturing sector immediately after

graduation and moving eventually into skilled, higher‐paying positions. Today, however,

technological advances and offshore production have greatly decreased the need for low-

skilled, entry‐level labor, and their prospects will likely be made worse by the economic

fallout from COVID-19, one result being that many businesses have been forced to scale

down or close altogether. A high school diploma by itself has far less value in the job

market than in past decades, and employers increasingly prefer to hire skilled workers with

a postsecondary credential such as a degree, certificate or license. Consequently, workers

with some level of postsecondary education have better wage and employment outcomes.

Governor Whitmer has declared the “Sixty by 30” campaign to establish a state goal of 60%

of Michigan residents completing a postsecondary certificate or degree by the year 2030.

Her plan to achieve that includes implementing a financial aid program for older students,

strengthening financial aid for traditional students, and providing incentives for schools to

increase their student completion rate of the Free Application for Financial Student Aid

(FAFSA).1 It should be noted that this is a relatively modest state goal; of the 44 states with

a postsecondary attainment goal, half have set it at 60%, while only three have set it at a

lower level (55%) and 19 states have set it higher (most ranging from 65% to 70% and

Oregon at 80%).2

Unfortunately, however, Michigan college students face increasingly high tuition costs.

Many nontraditional students, those who are age 25 and older and who are often raising

Michigan League for Public Policy, 1223 Turner Street, Suite G1, Lansing, MI 48906-4369

Phone 517.487.5436 • Fax 517.371.4546 • www.mlpp.org • A United Way Agency

Peter Ruark, Senior Policy Analyst | May 2020

All 61% 59% 4% 8% $18.80

Less Than High School 34% 31% 11% 18% $11.11

High School 56% 54% 5% 10% $15.10

Some College 64% 62% 4% 8% $16.04

Bachelor's or Higher 73% 72% 2% 5% $28.72

Employment Outcomes Improve with Higher Education for Michigan Workers

(Age 18-64)

Source: Economic Policy Institute analysis of 2018 Current Population Survey data

MICHIGAN LEAGUE FOR PUBLIC POLICY | WWW.MLPP.ORG

Labor Force Employment Under- Participation to Population Unemploy- employment Median Rate Ratio ment Rate Rate Wage

Educational Attainment by Race in Michigan in 2018 (Age 25 Years and Over)

American Community Survey 5-Year Statistics (2018)


Race/Ethnicity Less than 9th Grade

9th-12th Grade, No Diploma

Regular HS Diploma

GED or Alternative Credential

Some College, No

Degree

Associate Degree

Bachelor's Degree or

Higher

White 2% 5% 25% 4% 23% 10% 31% African American 3% 10% 26% 6% 29% 9% 18%

Latinx 15% 12% 21% 6% 20% 7% 20% Native American 6% 10% 25% 9% 27% 10% 14% Asian 5% 5% 10% 1% 8% 5% 66%

children and/or in the workforce, cannot get state financial aid. Financial aid even for

“traditional students” (those who enter college immediately after high school graduation)

hasn’t kept up with tuition costs, leading many students—particularly students from

households with low incomes and students of color—to take on an unprecedented level

of student loan debt that will follow them far beyond credential attainment. Such debt

can be expected to depress spending by recent college graduates and young

professionals, causing local businesses and the state coffers to lose out on revenue

even during strong economic periods. Some individuals may avoid college altogether to

avoid the expenses and debt, robbing the state labor pool of potential skilled workers.

Michigan Has Stark Racial Disparities in Educational Attainment

Of particular concern are the racial disparities in access and completion of

postsecondary education. In Michigan, only 14% of Native American, 18% of African

American and 20% of Latinx adults age 25 or over possess a bachelor’s degree or higher,

compared to 31% of White adults and 66% of Asian adults.3 Native American, Latinx and

African American adults also tend to lead the other two racial groups in the percentage

without a high school diploma.4

For African American Michigan residents, educational attainment varies among popu-

lation centers, ranging from higher than 35% in some southeast Michigan suburbs such

as Farmington Hills and Southfield to below 10% in some medium-sized cities such as

Saginaw, Muskegon and Benton Harbor.5

There are several possible explanations for the educational disparity among Black

population centers. One explanation may be that higher education seems out of reach to

many who live in high-poverty cities that are distant from major population centers, such

as Benton Harbor. Another may be that some medium-sized cities were historically

dependent on manufacturing jobs and college was not seen in decades past as

important for achieving middle-class economic security. Another explanation could be

that college-educated African Americans, like college-educated individuals in general,

tend to move to areas of the state with more opportunities and better-paying jobs, such

as Southeast Michigan or the Lansing or Grand Rapids areas, rather than move to or

return to high-poverty cities like Benton Harbor and Muskegon. In the latter scenario,

cities with more poverty may experience a vicious cycle in which even if they increase

2 Michigan League for Public Policy | May 2020

May 2020 | Michigan League for Public Policy 3

the number and percentage of high school

graduates who go on to college, those

graduates are less inclined to return and spend

their money locally to generate economic

activity. Importantly, there are educational

disparities resulting from the impact of

economic inequality on children and their

school readiness, school funding systems that

do not recognize the added costs of teaching

children in high-poverty schools, and lower high

school completion rates.

Racial Disparities Exist in Access to

and Completion of a Four-Year Degree

Likely contributing to the racial disparities in

Michigan’s educational attainment are the

disparities in enrollment and completion within

Michigan’s public universities. In a study of

Black student representation in public universi-

ties in 43 states, the Education Trust found that

Michigan falls far short in African American

racial equity in bachelor’s degree attainment

and university representation relative to state

demographics:

Michigan is one of eight states that would

have to more than double the number of

African American students earning

bachelor’s degrees to match state

demographics.6

In its share of Black undergraduates

enrolled at public four-year institutions

relative to its share of Black residents,

Michigan is third-worst (39th out of 41

states measured) in the nation. While the

Black share of the state population that is

age 18-49 with a high school diploma but

no bachelor’s degree is 17.1%, the share of public university undergraduates who are Black is only 8.7%.7

Michigan is similarly third-worst in its share of bachelor’s degrees earned by Black students relative to its share of

Black residents. The share of bachelor’s degree holders (with degrees earned at four-year universities) who are

Black is only 6.8%, but it should be closer to 17.1% in order to match the Black share of the state population age

18-49 with no bachelor’s degree.8

While around half of the states studied have double-digit gaps between the shares of Black and White graduates

who are awarded a bachelor’s degree, Michigan is one of six states with gaps greater than 15 percentage points

(15.8). The average state gap is only 7.7 percentage points.9

African American Educational Attainment for the Population

25 Years and Over (Cities with African American Population of at

Least 4,000)

Source: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2018


City African American

Population Bachelor's Degree

or Higher

Farmington Hills 11,348 4,973 44%

Ann Arbor 4,430 1,623 37%

Southfield 36,820 13,157 36%

Sterling Heights 4,871 1,168 24%

Kentwood 5,987 1,432 24%

Oak Park 11,045 2,443 22%

Lansing 14,894 3,095 21%

Westland 9,864 1,878 19%

Romulus 5,307 1,001 19%

Grand Rapids 21,897 3,636 17%

Taylor 5,611 896 16%

Battle Creek 6,050 929 15%

Harper Woods 5,041 766 15%

Eastpointe 9,021 1,366 15%

Warren 14,120 2,090 15%

Kalamazoo 8,418 1,241 15%

Detroit 344,598 42,009 12%

Pontiac 18,215 2,044 11%

Roseville 5,434 606 11%

Highland Park 6,589 732 11%

Inkster 10,733 1,160 11%

Flint/Beecher 34,926 3,547 10%

Muskegon 7,733 714 9%

Saginaw/Buena Vista 16,028 1,316 8%

Muskegon Heights 4,719 318 7%

Benton Harbor/Fair Plain 7,185 398 6%


Michigan Public University Success Rate by Race (Students Entering College

in 2012-2013 School Year)

Race/Ethnicity Earned a Credential in:

Total Credentials

Total Bachelor’s

Degree 4 Years (2017)

5 Years (2018)

6 Years (2019)

All 49% 67% 73% 42,172 41,545

Native American 33% 50% 59% 175 160

Asian 61% 74% 80% 2,489 2,478

African American 27% 46% 55% 1,696 2,664

Latinx 43% 61% 69% 1,400 1,387

White 52% 71% 78% 31,059 30,539


Source: State of Michigan Center for Educational Performance and Information

Of Michigan students who enrolled in a four-year public university for the first time in the

2012-2013 school year, 80% of Asian and 78% of White students received a credential

(usually a bachelor’s degree) within six years, while only 69% of Latinx, 59% of Native

American and 55% of African American students did so.10 The disparity is especially

pronounced with African American students, as barely above one quarter graduated

within four years—far below most other racial groups.11

There is also some segregation in the distribution of Michigan’s students of color among

Michigan’s fifteen public universities, with African American students comprising 30% of

Eastern Michigan University’s 2017 freshman cohort, but only 4% of that of its

geographical neighbor, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor.12 In the Upper Peninsula,

students at Michigan Technological University and Northern Michigan University are 89%

and 85% White, respectively. Native American students comprise only 1% of students at

both universities, but comprise 6% of the students at the other university in the Upper

Peninsula, Lake Superior State.13 (For a detailed table, see Appendix A.)

The disparities in four-year degree attainment have implications for Michigan’s economic

future. Skilled workers help attract and keep businesses in the state, spend more in their

local communities, pay more in taxes, and are less likely to become unemployed or need

public assistance. On the other hand, not addressing racial and income disparities in

postsecondary access and completion keeps a segment of the population out of the

skilled labor pool, increases family economic vulnerability, slows the revitalization of

struggling communities, wastes an opportunity to increase state revenues, and makes

the state a less desirable place for highly educated persons of color to move to.

Disinvestment in State Funding for Universities Has Resulted in Large

Tuition Increases

Michigan has drastically cut funding to its public universities in the past twenty years.

The largest cuts came during the period between 2000 and 2010, during which time total

funding for university operations was slashed by nearly $38.5 million, not accounting for

inflation. Between 2010 and 2020, $10.6 million of the cut had been restored, but after

adjusting for inflation, universities received $667 million less in 2020 than they had in

2000 and $243 million less than they had in 2010. If each university had had its allotment

for Budget Year 2000 increased just for inflation each year, the total appropriation for

university operations in 2020 would have been $2.14 billion rather than $1.47 billion.14

The state disinvestment in public universities has led to sharp increases in tuition to

make up the difference. Whereas in 2000, universities received approximately $6,949 per

full-time equivalent (FTE) student in tuition and $10,040 per FTE student in state

appropriations, with the student share of the cost of university operations going from

41% to 70%. This puts Michigan’s student share of college expenses at sixth-highest in

the country, and highest in the Midwest. Illinois students, by comparison, pay only 35% of

college operational expenses, as the state pays twice per FTE student what Michigan

does.15

1999-2000 2009-2010 2019-2020 Since 2000 (Difference) Since 2010 (Difference)

Central Michigan University $80,478,312 $82,436,000 $89,227,800 $114,792,956 ($25,565,156) $96,725,501 $7,497,701)

Eastern Michigan University $81,903,067 $78,212,100 $77,556,000 $116,825,203 ($39,269,203) $91,769,428 ($14,213,428)

Ferris State University $52,110,400 $50,017,100 $56,032,800 $74,329,427 ($18,296,627) $58,687,091 ($2,654,291)

Grand Valley State University $53,715,559 $63,758,300 $73,388,500 $76,619,000 ($3,230,500) $74,810,198 ($1,421,698)

Lake Superior State University $13,392,280 $13,059,200 $14,361,000 $19,102,530 ($4,741,530) $15,322,889 ($961,889)

Michigan State University $303,826,465 $291,841,700 $288,799,400 $433,373,130 ($144,573,730) $342,429,699 ($53,630,299)

Michigan Tech University $51,848,777 $49,302,100 $50,568,100 $73,956,253 ($23,388,153) $57,848,153 ($7,280,053)

Northern Michigan University $48,818,439 $46,438,200 $48,909,100 $69,633,828 ($20,724,728) $54,487,823 ($5,578,723)

Oakland University $47,212,698 $52,220,800 $53,432,500 $67,343,425 ($13,910,925) $61,272,782 ($7,840,282)

Saginaw Valley State University $24,955,312 $28,517,700 $30,807,700 $35,595,851 ($4,788,151) $33,460,974 ($2,653,274)

University of Michigan-Ann Arbor $338,861,239 $325,347,400 $322,773,600 $483,346,162 ($160,572,562) $381,743,296 ($58,969,696)

University of Michigan-Dearborn $25,777,192 $25,437,100 $26,327,200 $36,768,168 ($10,440,968) $29,846,381 ($3,519,181)

University of Michigan- Flint $22,175,509 $21,498,900 $23,893,200 $31,630,786 ($7,737,586) $25,225,531 ($1,332,331)

Wayne State University $238,066,723 $220,329,200 $203,413,900 $339,574,503 ($136,160,603) $258,521,184 ($55,107,284)

Western Michigan University $116,517,837 $112,766,800 $112,290,100 $166,199,148 ($53,909,048) $132,313,859 ($20,023,759)

Public University Averages $1,499,659,809 $1,461,182,600 $1,471,780,900 $2,139,090,370 ($667,309,470) $1,714,464,788 ($242,683,888)

Annual Operations Funding

University Operations Appropriations Over the Past Two Decades

2019-2020 Appropriation if Increased for Inflation...

Note: Inflation calculated by the Michigan League for Public Policy using the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Detroit CPI-U (not seasonally adjusted, February figures). Source: Michigan House Fiscal Agency, Higher Education Appropriations Reports (https://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/HigherEducationAppropsReports.asp, accessed January 6, 2020).




In Midwest, Michigan Students Pay the Largest Share of University

Expenses (2018)

Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, State Higher Education Finance: FY 2018, 2019

(https://sheeo.org/project/state-higher-education-finance, accessed December 2019)


State Funding Per

Student (FTE) Net Tuition Per Student (FTE)

Student Share of College Expenses

State Dollars National

Rank Dollars

National Rank

Percent National

Rank

Michigan $6,150 34 $14,288 3 70% 6

Indiana $6,435 31 $10,191 13 62% 14

Ohio $5,698 42 $8,163 23 59% 17

Minnesota $7,363 21 $8,873 19 55% 21

Wisconsin $6,189 33 $6,307 34 50% 27

U.S. $7,853 — $6,788 — 47% —

Illinois $14,587 4 $7,767 25 35% 43

As a result of state disinvestment, tuition at nearly all universities has tripled in nominal

dollars since 2000, and more than doubled after adjusting for inflation. Most of the

increase took place between 2000 and 2010, while Michigan was in a recession and also

struggling with structural budget shortages due to tax cuts. Michigan State University,

for example, went from a sticker-price tuition level of $5,004 for the 1999-2000 academic


Note: This does not factor in university revenue from non-state sources, such as donations or endowments. Tuition figures are before application of state or federal financial aid. Figures are adjusted for inflation by the Higher Education Cost Adjustment (HECA).

Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO): State Higher Education Finance FY 2018 (https://sheeo.org/project/state-higher-education-finance, accessed December 2019)

As State Support for Michigan Universities Goes Down, Student Tuition Goes Up Student Share of Operations

Costs: 70%

Student Share of Operations

Costs: 41%

Inflation calculated by the Michigan League for Public Policy using the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Detroit CPI-U (not seasonally adjusted, February figures).

Note: All figures are for in-state resident tuition and fees. When available, figures are given as undergraduate averages; otherwise, they are given as freshman/sophomore year averages.

Source: Michigan House Fiscal Agency, Higher Education Institutional Data Inventory (HEIDI) Summary Data Reports (https://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/HigherEducation_HEIDISummaryReports.asp, accessed December 6, 2019)

Tuition Increases at Michigan Public Universities Over the Past Two Decades

Annual Tuition Increase 2019-2020 Tuition

if Raised Only for Inflation...

1999- 2000

2009- 2010

2019- 2020

2000> 2010

2010> 2020

2000> 2020

Since 2000

Since 2010

Central Michigan University $3,630 $9,248 $13,253 155% 43% 265% $5,178 $10,851

Eastern Michigan University $3,635 $8,399 $13,658 131% 63% 276% $5,185 $9,855

Ferris State University $4,118 $9,480 $13,245 130% 40% 222% $5,874 $11,123

Grand Valley State University $4,108 $8,845 $13,180 115% 49% 221% $5,860 $10,378

Lake Superior State University $4,034 $8,315 $12,255 106% 47% 204% $5,754 $9,756

Michigan State University $5,004 $11,383 $15,645 127% 37% 213% $7,138 $13,356

Michigan Tech University $4,758 $12,278 $17,639 158% 44% 271% $6,787 $14,406

Northern Michigan University $3,146 $7,510 $11,592 139% 54% 268% $4,487 $8,812

Oakland University $3,989 $9,188 $14,528 130% 58% 264% $5,690 $10,781

Saginaw Valley State University $3,512 $6,900 $10,814 96% 57% 208% $5,009 $8,096

University of Michigan-Ann Arbor $6,333 $12,400 $16,540 96% 33% 161% $9,033 $14,549

University of Michigan-Dearborn $4,463 $9,216 $13,529 106% 47% 203% $6,366 $10,814

University of Michigan-Flint $3,800 $8,332 $12,478 119% 50% 228% $5,420 $9,776

Wayne State University $3,818 $9,319 $14,691 144% 58% 285% $5,446 $10,934

Western Michigan University $3,944 $8,858 $13,646 125% 54% 246% $5,626 $10,393

Public University Averages $4,266 $9,311 $13,779 118% 48% 223% $6,085 $10,925



year to $15,645 for 2019-2020.16 If MSU had increased its tuition only for inflation during

that time, its 2019-2020 tuition would have been only $7,138. Although many states

around the country have increased their college costs for students, Michigan’s tuition

has been ranked by The College Board to be the sixth-highest average tuition in the

nation.17

Tuition Restraint Is too Little, too Late to Contain Costs to Students

In Budget Year 2012, after a decade of state funding cuts to Michigan universities and

the resulting tuition increases, Michigan put into place a tuition restraint requirement in

which universities must either keep tuition increases below a specified maximum

percentage or forfeit their allocation increases. While this is a sound strategy for

discouraging further large increases, it does not address the $667 million funding cut to

universities between 2000 and 2020, nor does it make up for the more than doubling of

tuition (after adjusting for inflation) during that time. The damage to students due to

higher out-of-pocket costs has already been done, and all tuition restraint accomplishes

is to limit the extent of further damage.

Budget Year

Tuition Restraint Level

University Operations

Change from Previous Year

2010 — $1,461,182,600

2011 — $1,420,344,900 ($40,837,700)

2012 7.1% $1,207,234,700 ($213,110,200)

2013 4.0% $1,243,451,700 $36,217,000

2014 3.75% $1,265,320,700 $21,869,000

2015 3.2% $1,339,958,200 $74,637,500

2016 3.2% $1,360,557,600 $20,599,400

2017 4.2% $1,400,345,000 $39,787,400

2018 3.8% or $475 $1,428,345,000 $28,000,000

2019 3.8% or $490 $1,456,911,800 $28,566,800

2020 4.4% or $587 $1,471,780,900 $4,869,100


Note: Where a percentage and dollar amount are given, the greater of the two is the tuition restraint limit.

Source: Michigan House Fiscal Agency, Higher Education Appropriations Reports (https://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/HigherEducationAppropsReports.asp, accessed January 6, 2020)

Tuition Restraint and University Operations Funding, 2010-2020

A superior but more costly alternative to tuition restraint would be tuition reduction,

which would require significant investment by the state. The ideal tuition reduction

solution, though politically and fiscally unattainable in the current environment, would be

to use Budget Year 2000 funding as a baseline and restore the $667 million by which

current year funding falls short of that year, appropriating $2.1 billion for university

operations while requiring universities to charge tuition at 2000 levels adjusted for

inflation. Short of that, the state could explore what level of funding would be adequate

for incentivizing each university to decrease tuition by a significant percentage, and

commit to that level of funding with an increase for inflation each year in exchange for

the university only raising its tuition for inflation.

North Carolina offers two models to keep tuition affordable that may be instructive. One

is the Fixed Tuition Program, which fixes tuition rates for all resident bachelor’s degree-

seeking incoming students at all UNC institutions for eight consecutive semesters.18

This provides predictability for students and their families as they financially plan for

their college expenses. Another is the North Carolina Promise, in which three

universities in Fall 2018 began charging in-state undergraduates just $500 tuition per

semester, and out-of-state students just $2,500 per semester.19 One drawback with

Michigan adopting something similar to the North Carolina Promise is that, because it is

only used at a limited number of universities, it has the potential to create a situation in

which Michigan universities become segregated by income.

At least one Michigan university has a tuition scale in which students can attend free

based on household income. University of Michigan—Ann Arbor has the Go Blue

Guarantee, which provides free tuition for students from families with incomes at or

below $65,000 and assets below $50,000, and tuition support for students from families

with income between $65,000 and $180,000. While this may sound like an ideal program


Percent of Educational Appropriations*

Public Student Aid Per FTE Student

State Percent National

Rank Dollars National

Rank

Indiana 19.2% 6 $1,233 7

U.S. 9.6% — $752 —

Minnesota 9.0% 21 $666 20

Illinois 4.1% 33 $592 21

Wisconsin 8.8% 23 $545 25

Ohio 3.8% 35 $218 40

Michigan 0.1% 48 $4 48

Michigan Devotes Fewer Public Student Aid Dollars Per Student

Than Any Other State


*Public student aid refers to state-funded financial aid that goes to students at public institutions. There were 48 states in which this could be measured. Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, State Higher Education Finance: FY 2018, Tableau Visualization Data, 2019 (https://sheeo.org/project/state-higher-education-finance, accessed December 2019)

for other Michigan universities to adopt, the Go Blue Guarantee is funded in large part by

private donations and thus would be difficult to replicate across universities via state

policy.20

Financial Aid

Michigan currently has three need-based financial aid programs: the Tuition Incentive

Program, which serves students from Medicaid-eligible households; the Michigan

Tuition Grant, which is available only to students attending a private, not-for-profit

institution; and the Michigan Competitive Scholarship, for which eligibility is based on

both need and merit. Michigan also offers the Indian Tuition Waiver, which waives all

community college and public university undergraduate tuition costs for members of

federally-recognized Native American tribes, and reimburses universities and

community colleges for the foregone tuition.

While Michigan has three need-based financial aid programs, the Tuition Incentive

Program is the only program in which need is based on household income rather than

estimated family contribution and specifically targets students from families with low

incomes. To be eligible, a student must have been in a family that had a qualifying form

of Medicaid for 24 months—in other words, had been below 130% of the poverty line—

within a 36-consecutive month period between age nine and high school completion.

Students as young as 12 who are identified as meeting the Medicaid eligibility

requirement are sent notifications encouraging them to complete the TIP application,

and must also file a Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form. TIP provides

two years of tuition-free community college in Phase I, and up to $500 per semester

($2,000 total) for third- and fourth-year classes at a public university or a private not-for-

profit four-year college. Students receiving TIP are also often eligible for other financial

aid such as the federal Pell Grant, the Michigan

Competitive Scholarship, and, if attending a

private not-for-profit, the Michigan Tuition Grant.

Unfortunately, Michigan is the stingiest state in

the nation for financial aid, devoting the fewest

financial aid dollars per full-time equivalent

community college or public university student

($4 in 2018, compared to $1,233 by Indiana),

and devoting the smallest share of educational

appropriations to financial aid for students at

public institutions (.1%, compared to 19.2% by

Indiana). While five of the six Upper Midwest

states are below the national average in both of

these categories, Michigan is significantly lower

than its peers.21

Recognizing that addressing college costs is a

key component of increasing the number of

Michigan residents with postsecondary

credentials, Governor Whitmer has introduced



two additional financial aid programs to address the expenses of postsecondary

education and to better prepare the future labor force. Michigan Reconnect would

provide debt-free tuition (as a last-dollar aid program) for up to two years for students

over age 25 who have a high school diploma but not a two- or four-year degree, and the

Michigan Opportunity Scholarship would provide high school graduates with two years

of either tuition-free community college or tuition-reduced study at a four-year college or

university. Legislature enabling Michigan Reconnect has been passed with bipartisan

support and was scheduled to begin in the 2020-2021 school year, but funding for it was

pulled from the budget due to the need for emergency funding to respond to the

coronavirus.

During the COVID-19 emergency period in Michigan, Gov. Whitmer also proposed what

she called a GI Bill for the workers who served on the frontlines of the coronavirus by

providing essential services to the public, such as grocery store workers, health workers,

child care providers and sanitation collectors. The program, called Future for Frontliners,

would provide “a tuition-free pathway to college or a technical certificate to essential

workers who don’t have a college degree.”22 Details of the proposal were not available at

the time of this writing.

The proposed Michigan Opportunity Scholarship would expand the concept of Phase I of

the Tuition Incentive Program to a broader population and reach low-income students

further up the income scale. Path I, like Phase I of the TIP, provides graduating high

school students with two years of tuition-free postsecondary education at a community

college toward a certificate, an associate degree, or a transfer to a four-year institution.

However, while the TIP is available only to students from Medicaid-eligible families who

enroll within four years of completing their high school diploma, Path I of the Opportunity

Scholarship would be available to all students regardless of income level who enroll the

fall immediately following graduation. If the student wishes to attend a four-year public

or a private not-for-profit college or university rather than community college, Path II of

the Opportunity Scholarship provides $2,500 in tuition assistance annually for the first

two years. Path II, unlike Path I, is income-targeted, and is available only to students

from families with an annual household income below $80,000.

Taken together, the Tuition Incentive Program and the Michigan Opportunity Scholarship

are a significant step in ensuring that students from families with low incomes who want

to get a bachelor’s degree have a path to do so—for the first two years of the four-year

degree. However, it is also important that such students be able to complete the final

two years of bachelor’s degree work without incurring a large amount of debt, and the

Opportunity Scholarship provides no help for the third and fourth year. Medicaid-eligible

students attending public universities during the third and fourth year can receive $1,000

per year from Phase II of the TIP, along with a maximum of $1,000 from the Competitive

Scholarship and additional aid from the Pell Grant. However, this falls far short of the

average public university tuition of $13,777 per year, and to pay the difference, students

would need to work a significant number of hours, take out student loans or receive last-

dollar private or institutional scholarships.

It is encouraging to note that there has been a significant increase in the use of the TIP

for the third and fourth year at each of Michigan’s 15 public universities, from a total of

1,645 in the 2012-13 school year to 6,226 in the 2017-18 school year. However, each

School Year

Institution 2012-2013

2013-2014

2014-2015

2015-2016

2016-2017

2017-2018

Central Michigan University 134 161 191 191 506 575

Eastern Michigan University 154 160 166 185 457 532

Ferris State University 234 238 212 283 372 477

Grand Valley State University 184 213 271 306 285 712

Lake Superior State University 63 61 61 74 86 91

Michigan State University 15 14 145 17 134 571

Michigan Technological University 50 51 37 34 125 165

Northern Michigan University 105 105 108 124 136 158

Oakland University 74 86 96 115 442 523

Saginaw Valley State University 86 98 110 101 236 287

University of Michigan-Ann Arbor 99 125 131 132 513 548

University of Michigan-Dearborn 58 89 131 133 232 267

University of Michigan-Flint 63 51 49 58 175 202

Wayne State University 185 193 204 244 623 556

Western Michigan University 141 165 129 187 538 562

Total 1,645 1,810 2,041 2,184 4,860 6,226

Use of the Tuition Incentive Program (TIP) Phase II at Michigan's

Public Universities

Source: Michigan Department of Treasury, Student Scholarships and Grants Annual Reports (https://www.michigan.gov/mistudentaid, accessed January 6, 2020)


year there are between 930,000 and 1.02 million children in families who receive

Medicaid. Given that TIP eligibility is based on a student’s family having had a qualifying

form of Medicaid for 24 months within a 36-consecutive month period when the student

was between age nine and high school completion, a yearly total of 6,226 third- and

fourth-year students using TIP at public universities appears to be a very small

percentage of the total college-age individuals who would be eligible.

Many students and their families may mistakenly believe that they will not qualify for

enough financial aid for college to be affordable. Because completion of the FAFSA is

required for all public student aid programs, the governor has initiated the “FAFSA

Challenge” that provides recognition and monetary prizes to high schools that

significantly increase their FAFSA completion rate, with the goal of increasing the

statewide FAFSA completion rate from 56% in 2019 to 75% in 2020. However, students

from families with low incomes or who are unfamiliar with the college application

process may find filling out the FAFSA and providing income verification onerous, and

many would likely benefit from assistance from a high school counselor.

To achieve a 75% FAFSA completion rate, Michigan should commit to and invest in

increasing its number of high school counselors. Michigan ranks near the bottom in the

nation for counselor-student ratios with 729 students per counselor, and it is estimated

that the state would need to hire 1,100 more counselors at a cost of $80-100 million



State Average

Debt Rank Percent with

Debt Rank

Minnesota $32,317 9 68% 3

Michigan $32,158 10 59% 17

Wisconsin $31,705 13 64% 7

Ohio $30,323 18 60% 16

Illinois $29,855 22 66% 4

Indiana $29,064 26 57% 24

Average Debt of Those with Student Loans and Percent of Graduates with College Debt in Midwest States, 2018

Source: The Institute for College Access and Success, Student Debt and the Class of 2018 (14th Annual Report), September 2019 (https://ticas.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/classof2018.pdf, accessed October 25, 2019)


more per year just to reach the still-high national average of 482 students per

counselor.23 High schools in low-income communities with low college attainment need

more than pep talks and incentives for raising their FAFSA completion rates; they need

state support and investment to back it up.

Three states—Illinois, Louisiana and Texas—go further than Michigan’s FAFSA Challenge

by requiring FAFSA completion as a requirement for high school graduation. Louisiana

was the first state to do so, with the policy in place beginning in the 2017-18 school year.

Louisiana brought its completion rate for public school students up from approximately

50% in 2015 to 85% in 2019, including an 83% rate for economically disadvantaged

students, an 82% rate for homeless students and an 86% rate for African American

students. (The Latinx rate was relatively lower at 69%, but that is still higher than

Michigan’s overall FAFSA completion rate.)24 This is something that Michigan may want

to consider in the future, but because it is important that such a requirement not become

yet another hurdle to graduation for struggling high school seniors, a FAFSA mandate for

graduation must be backed up with money for additional counselors and other student

supports.

College Debt Affects Many Students,

but Disproportionately Affects Stu-

dents of Color

In the class of 2018, 59% of college

graduates took out student loans and owed

an average of $32,158 on those loans, putting

Michigan in the top ten of high-debt states.

While a high level of student debt can

depress spending among those with

bachelor’s degrees and professional salaries,

these figures do not include students who

took out loans but did not graduate. Such

students are at a greater disadvantage than

their degree-holding counterparts, as the

salaries for those with “some college, no

degree” are considerably less on average

than those with a bachelor’s degree.

There are glaring racial disparities in the United States and in Michigan in the amount of

debt students graduate with. Nationally, Black graduates, upon earning their bachelor’s

degree, owe on average $23,400 while their White peers owe $16,000.25 Over the next

few years, the black-white debt gap more than triples from $7,400 to $25,000.26 Black

graduates are also more likely to take out student loans (81%) than White students

(63%).27

In Michigan, while it is difficult to pinpoint by race the extent of debt, there are glaring

disparities in the rate of default of those who live in communities of color compared to

those who live in majority-White communities. Statewide, 15% of student loan holders

are in default, but when the default rates are broken down by ZIP code, communities of

color have a default rate that is twice as high at 30%.28 Michigan leads the Midwest in

both the percentage point gap (18 percentage points) between majority-White

Michigan Leads Midwest in Share of Student Loan

Holders in Communities of Color who are in Default



communities and communities of color, but also in the communities of color default

rate, which is sixth highest in the nation. Saginaw and Genesee counties have

particularly high default rate disparities, with 29 and 28 percentage points,

respectively.29

A recent study shows that, when taking out private loans or refinancing student loans,

there may be racial disparity in the interest paid by students with low incomes or

students of color based on the institutions they attend. The study found that some

lenders charge more interest to borrowers taking out a private loan to attend a

community college than to those attending a four-year college, and that borrowers who

refinance their student loans with some lenders pay more if they attended a historically

Black college or university or a Hispanic-serving institution.30

Granting Equal University Access to Undocumented Students is Good

for Our State

One way to help more students of color in Michigan access a university education and

attain a bachelor’s degree is to allow Michigan’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals

(DACA) residents and other undocumented immigrants to attend Michigan’s public

universities at in-state tuition levels and have the same access to financial aid. However,

Michigan’s two need-based financial aid programs for public universities both exclude

students who are not “a U.S. citizen, permanent resident, or approved refugee.”31 While

excluding DACA immigrants from financial aid is done ostensibly to save the state

money, that rationale ignores the fact that enabling Michigan’s DACA immigrants to

increase their value in the job market will benefit Michigan’s economy. Higher-earning

residents pay more in taxes, spend more money in their local economies and are often

better able to contribute to the social life of their communities through philanthropy and

civic engagement.

County All Majority-White Communities

Communities of Color

Genesee County 23% 18% 46%

Wayne County 20% 11% 31%

Kalamazoo County 17% 16% 33%

Saginaw County 17% 9% 38%

Berrien County 15% 10% 31%

Kent County 12% 9% 24%

Oakland County 11% 9% 23%

State All Majority-White Communities


Percent Rank Percent Rank Percent Rank

Michigan 15% 14 12% 22 30% 6

Ohio 15% 15 13% 14 27% 9

Wisconsin 11% 35 9% 35 25% 11

Indiana 15% 12 14% 10 24% 16

Minnesota 9% 48 8% 47 21% 21

Illinois 11% 31 9% 39 19% 27

National 13% — 11% — 17% —

Student Loan Default Share in Michigan's


Note: The majority-white communities are based on credit records for people who live in zip codes where at least 60% of the population is white, and communities of color values are based on credit records for people who live in zip codes where at least 60% of the population is African American, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, another race other than white, or multiracial.

Source: Braga, McKernan, and Quakenbush, "Debt in America: An Interactive Map," Urban Institute, 2019. Figures are tabulations of data from a major credit bureau (2018) and the

American Community Survey (2017)


Because Michigan’s universities are structurally independent and can set their own

policies for admission and institutional aid, there is variance among the fifteen

universities in their policies and practices regarding DACA and other undocumented

immigrants. The National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good, housed at the

University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, has evaluated universities around the country on

accessibility for undocumented immigrants with regard to admissions, tuition, financial

aid and general support.32 Among Michigan universities, Grand Valley State University,

Oakland University and University of Michigan—Ann Arbor were rated most accessible,

while Eastern Michigan University was rated least accessible.33 Inaccessibility is rated

not only on the basis of policy itself, but also whether the information is clear on the

university’s website (i.e. are DACA students specifically mentioned, or does the website

give the impression that they are treated the same as international students for tuition

purposes?).

Prison Postsecondary Education

There is an unfilled skills need in Michigan that can be met, at least in part, by enabling

incarcerated individuals to take college classes and leave prison with a degree or other

credential. Earning a degree while in prison can also greatly reduce an individual’s

chance of recidivism by 43%, and every dollar invested in prison education saves four to

five dollars in cost savings related to recidivism.34 Prison education also improves

Name Admissions Tuition Financial

Aid General Support

Central Michigan University ★★★ ★★★★ ★★★ ★★

Eastern Michigan University ★ ★ ★ ★

Ferris State University ★★★ ★★ ★★ ★★

Grand Valley State University ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★★

Lake Superior State University ★★ ★★ ★★ ★★

Michigan State University ★ ★★ ★ ★

Michigan Technological University ★ ★★ ★ ★

Northern Michigan University ★ ★★ ★★ ★★

Oakland University ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★

Saginaw Valley State University ★ ★★ ★ ★

University of Michigan-Ann Arbor ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★★ ★★★★

University of Michigan-Dearborn ★★ ★★★ ★★ ★★

University of Michigan-Flint ★★★ ★★★ ★ ★★

Wayne State University ★★ ★★★ ★ ★

Western Michigan University ★★ ★★ ★★★★ ★★★

Inclusivity and Support for Undocumented Students at Michigan's Public Universities (National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good)

Note: Four stars denote most accessible; one star denotes least accessible. Source: University of Michigan, National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good, MI Listing of Undocu-Accessible Public Campuses, updated November 2018 (https://uleadnet.org/mi-undocu-map, accessed February 26, 2020)


behavior and morale within the prisons and benefits incarcerated individuals’ self-

identity, mental health, and social and familial relationships.35 Yet there are two major

barriers to such individuals having access to college: a lack of education and training

opportunities in many Michigan prisons and prohibitions against incarcerated students

receiving most public financial aid.

Incarcerated students have been barred from receiving Pell Grants since 1994 when

then-President Clinton signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. The

Vera Institute for Justice estimates that if the Pell Grant ban were lifted, about 463,000

incarcerated people nationally would be eligible for Pell Grants.36 A program developed

in 2016, the federal Second Chance Pell Experimental Sites Initiative, provides the

equivalent of a Pell Grant to about 12,000 individuals nationally each year, including 583

Michigan prison residents taking classes from 110 course offerings in the fall of 2017.37

Of Michigan’s financial aid grants, only the Tuition Incentive Program is currently

available to individuals in prison, having been made available to that population in the

2020 budget. However, the TIP is restricted to only those who have been out of high

school for less than ten years, and many prison residents do not fit that eligibility

criteria. Most individuals who could benefit from college programs must rely on private

donations to participate.

While all prisoners have the right to take college classes by mail in Michigan, many

Michigan prisons do not have any face-to-face college instruction within their walls. This

leaves behind many incarcerated individuals who would do well in such programs and

contribute to the economy after their release. Michigan should develop a plan to make

college instruction available to a larger number of prison residents who wish to

participate.

Recommendations

University Funding and Tuition Costs

Replace or augment the current tuition restraint system with a tuition reduction system.

Universities that reduce their tuition costs by a given percentage would be awarded a

comparable increase in state funding, with long-term assurance of that funding if they

keep their tuition at the reduced rate adjusted for inflation.

Financial Aid

Enact the proposed Michigan Opportunity Scholarship that provides two years of tuition-

free community college. For students who aspire to attain a four-year degree, this helps

to ensure that finances will not be a barrier during the first two years.

Strengthen financial aid for students in their third and fourth year of receiving a bachelor’s

degree at a public university. While the first two years of college are covered by the Tuition

Incentive Program and/or the proposed Michigan Opportunity Scholarship, depending on

a student’s income level, the final two years are not covered by as much financial aid and

can prompt students to take out expensive loans or work more hours than they can

handle while in school.

Increase the number of high school guidance counselors in schools that serve large

numbers of students with low incomes and students of color. A 729:1 student-counselor



ratio does not enable students, especially those from households with low incomes or who

aspire to be first-generation college students, to receive the kind of guidance they need in

seeking out college options and financial aid. Michigan should invest the money needed to

ensure that all high schools have an adequate number of counselors.

Increase outreach by public agencies and nonprofit service providers that serve families with

low incomes to make them aware of the Tuition Incentive Program. One reason for the

underutilization of the TIP by college-age individuals from Medicaid-eligible families may be a

lack of information about financial aid that is available. Michigan should invest in increasing

the outreach to families receiving public assistance to let them know about TIP and other

financial aid that is available.

Explore ways to strengthen FAFSA promotion, including requiring FAFSA completion as a

prerequisite for high school graduation with ability for some populations to opt out. While the

FAFSA Challenge is a good start, it should be evaluated after a couple years to determine

whether it is sufficient in encouraging enough students to go to college to meet Michigan’s

postsecondary credential goal.

University Access for Undocumented Residents

Grant in-state tuition eligibility to in-state DACA residents at all Michigan public universities. As

part of the drive to achieve 60% of residents having a postsecondary credential by 2030, the

governor’s budget should include boilerplate in university funding appropriations bills that

clarifies that in-state DACA residents pay the same level of tuition as other in-state residents.

Remove the citizenship or permanent residency requirement from the Tuition Incentive Program

and the Michigan Competitive Scholarship. For the Tuition Incentive Program, the language that

states that a student “be a United States citizen and a resident of this state according to

institutional criteria” would need to be removed from boilerplate language in the higher

education appropriations bills. The bills do not contain similar language for other need-based

financial aid programs, so changes to eligibility for those programs can be done

departmentally.

University Education in the Prisons

Make more state aid available to those in Michigan’s prisons who otherwise qualify. Michigan

recently made the Tuition Incentive Program available to incarcerated individuals. The state

should go further and make other financial aid available as well, including Michigan Reconnect

program for students 25 years and older, the other longtime state need-based financial aid

programs (the Michigan Competitive Scholarship and the Michigan Tuition Grant), and the

proposed Michigan Opportunity Scholarship.

Increase the number of university and community college prison programs. Michigan’s

Department of Corrections should work with state universities to increase the number of

prisons offering face-to-face university instruction, with the goal of making college

opportunities available to all prisoners with interest who qualify, regardless of where they are

housed.

App

endi

x A

: Rac

ial M

akeu

p of

Mic

higa

n's

15 P

ublic

Uni

vers

ities

(B

ache

lor's

Deg

ree-

See

king

Coh

ort

Star

ting

in F

all 2

017)

Na

tive

Am

eri

ca

n

As

ian

A

fric

an

A

me

ric

an

L

ati

nx

W

hit

e

2+

R

ac

es

U

nk

no

wn

N

R

Ali

en

*

Inst

itutio

n na

me

Tot

al

Coh

ort

#

%

Rac

e

%

Inst

. #

%

R

ace

%

Inst

. #

%

R

ace

%

Inst

. #

%

R

ace

%

Inst

. #

%

Rac

e %

In

st.

#

%

Inst

. #

%

In

st.

#

%

Inst

.

Cen

tral

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsit

y 3,

828

9 7%

0%

38

2%

1%

25

4 7%

7%

10

2 7%

3%

3,

096

11%

81

%

81

2%

237

6%

9 <1

%

Eas

tern

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsit

y 2,

119

11

8%

1%

40

2%

2%

639

17%

30

%

75

5%

4%

1,15

6 4%

55

%

66

3%

82

4%

48

2%

Fer

ris

Sta

te U

nive

rsit

y 78

4 0

0%

0%

8 <1

%

1%

21

1%

3%

22

2%

3%

651

2%

83%

27

3%

37

5%

18

2%

Gra

nd V

alle

y S

tate

Uni

vers

ity

3,85

2 11

8%

<1

%

61

4%

2%

262

7%

7%

178

12%

5%

3,

178

12%

83

%

124

3%

3 <1

%

31

1%

Lak

e S

uper

ior

Sta

te U

nive

rsit

y 40

7 26

20

%

6%

3 <1

%

1%

11

<1%

3%

8

1%

2%

325

1%

80%

0

0%

9 2%

25

6%

Mic

higa

n S

tate

Uni

vers

ity

7,70

9 14

11

%

<1%

30

4 18

%

4%

545

15%

7%

28

2 20

%

4%

5,27

5 19

%

68%

20

3 3%

73

1%

1,

008

13%

Mic

higa

n T

echn

olog

ical

Uni

vers

ity

1,15

6 10

8%

1%

10

1%

1%

16

<1

%

1%

27

2%

2%

1,02

5 4%

89

%

20

2%

15

1%

32

3%

Nor

ther

n M

ichi

gan

Uni

vers

ity

1,30

6 13

10

%

1%

10

1%

1%

41

1%

3%

44

3%

3%

1,11

4 4%

85

%

36

3%

35

3%

11

1%

Oak

land

Uni

vers

ity

2,23

8 7

5%

<1%

72

4%

3%

27

9 8%

12

%

63

4%

3%

1,67

5 6%

75

%

71

3%

47

2%

20

1%

Sag

inaw

Val

ley

Sta

te U

nive

rsit

y 1,

758

10

8%

1%

12

1%

1%

260

7%

15%

61

4%

3%

1,

276

5%

73%

36

2%

59

3%

43

2%

Uni

vers

ity

of M

ichi

gan-

Ann

Arb

or

6,20

6 5

4%

<1%

80

7 46

%

13%

27

3 7%

4%

26

5 19

%

4%

3,86

7 14

%

62%

19

5 3%

56

4 9%

22

5 4%

Uni

vers

ity

of M

ichi

gan-

Dea

rbor

n 91

3 1

1%

<1%

68

4%

7%

51

1%

6%

56

4%

6%

68

6 3%

75

%

30

3%

17

2%

4 <1

%

Uni

vers

ity

of M

ichi

gan-

Flin

t 64

7 3

2%

<1%

8

<1%

1%

59

2%

9%

24

2%

4%

41

5 2%

64

%

22

3%

64

10%

52

8%

Way

ne S

tate

Uni

vers

ity

2,15

2 6

5%

<1%

24

7 14

%

11%

48

3 13

%

22%

76

5%

4%

1,

193

4%

55%

48

2%

55

3%

43

2%

Wes

tern

Mic

higa

n U

nive

rsit

y 3,

127

7 5%

<1

%

49

3%

2%

476

13%

15

%

142

10%

5%

2,

286

8%

73%

93

3%

18

1%

51

2%

Tot

al M

ichi

gan

Uni

vers

ities

38

,202

13

3 10

0%

<1%

1,

737

100%

5%

3,

670

100%

10

%

1,42

5 10

0%

4%

27,2

18

100%

71

%

1,05

2 3%

1,

315

3%

1,62

0 4%

*A n

onre

side

nt a

lien

is a

per

son

who

is n

ot a

citi

zen

or n

atio

nal o

f th

e U

nite

d S

tate

s, is

in t

his

coun

try

on a

vis

a or

tem

pora

ry b

asis

, and

doe

s no

t ha

ve t

he r

ight

to

rem

ain

inde

fini

tely

.

Sou

rce:

Nat

iona

l Cen

ter

for

Educ

atio

n S

tatis

tics

' Int

egra

ted

Pos

tsec

onda

ry E

duca

tion

Dat

a S

yste

m (

http

s://

nces

.ed.

gov/

iped

s/u

se-t

he-d

ata,

acc

esse

d 8/

7/20

19)

MIC

HIG

AN

LEA

GU

E FO

R P

UB

LIC

PO

LIC

Y |

WW

W.M

LPP

.OR

G

Endnotes

1. Website of the Office of Governor Gretchen Whitmer, 2020 State of the State Fact Sheet: Expanding Postsecondary Education (https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499_91277---,00.html, accessed February 3, 2020).

2. Education Strategy Group, unpublished PowerPoint slide from a presentation given on February 14, 2020.

3. American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (2018), tables B15002 B-I.

4. American Community Survey, ibid.

5. American Community Survey, ibid.

6. Nichols, Andrew Howard and J. Oliver Schak, Broken Mirrors: Black Student Representation at Public State Colleges and Universities, The Education Trust, March 2019.

7. Nichols, ibid.

8. Nichols, ibid.

9. Nichols, ibid.

10. State of Michigan Center for Educational Performance and Information (https://www.mischooldata.org/CareerAndCollegeReadiness2/SuccessRatesDataFiles.aspx, accessed on January 12, 2020).

11. State of Michigan, ibid.

12. National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/use-the-data, accessed 8/7/2019).

13. National Center for Education Statistics, ibid.

14. Source: Michigan House Fiscal Agency, Higher Education Institutional Data Inventory (HEIDI) Summary Data Reports (https://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/HigherEducation_HEIDISummaryReports.asp, accessed December 6, 2019). Inflation calculations by Michigan League for Public Policy using the Detroit CPI-U.

15. State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO): State Higher Education Finance FY 2018 (https://sheeo.org/project/state-higher-education-finance, ac-cessed December 2019).

16. Michigan House Fiscal Agency, Higher Education Institutional Data Inventory (HEIDI) Summary Data Reports (https://www.house.mi.gov/hfa/HigherEducation_HEIDISummaryReports.asp, accessed December 6, 2019).

17. The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2019, using data from The College Board Annual Survey of Colleges and the National Center for Education Statis-tics IPEDS Fall 2017 Enrollment Data (https://research.collegeboard.org/trends/college-pricing/figures-tables/published-state-tuition-and-fees-public-four-year-institutions-state, accessed February 19, 2020).

18. The University of North Carolina System website (https://www.northcarolina.edu/future-students/fixed-tuition-program, accessed February 19, 2020).

19. The University of North Carolina System website (https://www.northcarolina.edu/future-students/nc-promise, accessed February 19, 2020).

20. University of Michigan website (https://goblueguarantee.umich.edu/, accessed February 18, 2020).

21. State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, State Higher Education Finance: FY 2018, Tableau Visualization Data, 2019 (https://sheeo.org/project/state-higher-education-finance, accessed December 2019).

22. Website of the Office of Governor Gretchen Whitmer (https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499-527530--,00.html, accessed April 30, 2020.)

23. National Association for College Admission Counseling and American School Counselor Association, State-by-State Student-to-Counselor Ratio Report: 10 Year Trends, publication date unspecified. Cited in French, Ron, “The real state of Michigan education: Improving outcomes costs money,” Bridge Magazine, February 12, 2019 (https://www.bridgemi.com/talent-education/real-state-michigan-education-improving-outcomes-costs-money, accessed February 12, 2019).

24. Louisiana Department of Education, The State of Financial Aid in Louisiana: A Report of the Louisiana Financial Aid Working Group , November 2019.

25. Scott-Clay, Judith and Jing Li, Black-White Disparity in Student Loan Debt More than Triples after Graduation, Urban Institute, October 20, 2016.

26. Scott-Clay, ibid.

27. Huelsman, Mark, The Debt Divide: The Racial and Class Bias Behind the “New Normal” of Student Borrowing, Demos, 2015 (http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mark-Debt%20divide%20Final%20(SF).pdf, accessed October 25, 2019).

28. Braga, McKernan, and Quakenbush, "Debt in America: An Interactive Dashboard," Urban Institute, 2019. Figures given are Urban Institute tabulations of data from a major credit bureau (2018) and the American Community Survey (2017).

29. Braga et al., ibid.

30. Student Borrower Protection Center, Educational Redlining, February 2020 (https://protectborrowers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Education-Redlining-Report.pdf, accessed March 2, 2020).

31. Michigan Department of Treasury, Tuition Incentive Program: Fact Sheet for Academic Year 2019-20 and Michigan Competitive Scholarship: Fact Sheet for Academic Year 2019-20 (https://www.michigan.gov/mistudentaid/0,4636,7-372-89024---,00.html, accessed February 26, 2020).

32. University of Michigan, National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good website (https://uleadnet.org/mi-undocu-map, accessed February 26, 2020).

33. University of Michigan, ibid.

34. Vera Institute of Justice citation of Davis, Bozick, Steele, Saunders, and Miles, Evaluating the Effectiveness of Correctional Education: A Meta-Analysis of Pro-grams That Provide Education to Incarcerated Adults, RAND Corporation, 2013 (https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/postsecondary-education-in-prisonfactsheet-for-corrections-leaders.pdf, accessed February 19, 2020).

35. Lerman, Amy and Jacob Grumbach, Qualitative Evidence on the Impact of Prison Higher Education, The Prison Education Project, date unknown (https://prisonuniversityproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/PUP-Lerman-White-Paper.pdf, accessed March 5, 2020).

36. Oakford, Brumfield, Goldvale, Tatum, diZerega and Patrick, Investing in Futures: Economic and Fiscal Benefits of Postsecondary Education in Prison, Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality and Vera Institute of Justice, January 2019 (https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/investing-in-futures.pdf, accessed February 19, 2020).

37. Vera Institute for Justice, Fact Sheet: Second Chance Pell Experimental Sites Initiative, June 2018.

expanding the dream · expanding the dream: helping michigan reach racial equity in bachelor’s...

Documents