EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Even after decades of improvement efforts, completion rates at community colleges remain low, particularly among students who need developmental education. Food and housing insecurity – referred to as basic needs insecurity – contribute to low completion rates. Community college students face higher rates of basic needs insecurity than other students. Yet basic needs insecurity often goes unaddressed, particularly at these colleges, due to resource constraints.
Community colleges have started to support students’ basic needs in multiple ways. Campus-based hubs offering services like public benefits access, emergency aid, food pantries and case management have become increasingly popular. However, limited evidence exists on whether connecting with these hubs improves academic success.
The Advocacy and Resource Center (ARC) at Amarillo College (AC) in Texas is a well-established example of how a college can care for its students. In 2018, The Hope Center published a detailed case study of the college’s approach to AC’s “culture of caring” embodied by the ARC. At the time, the ARC served 13% of Amarillo College students, well short of the estimated two-thirds who endured basic needs insecurity. This report details our partnership with the college to conduct an evaluation advancing two institutional goals:
• Increase utilization of the ARC, particularly among students most at risk of leaving college, with a low-cost technology-enabled approach
• Estimate the academic impacts of connecting students to the ARC
We identified students who might benefit from the ARC: those from low-income households and those enrolled in developmental education coursework. Placement in developmental education signals insufficient K-12 preparation and/or gaps in enrollment, both of which are associated with poverty. We targeted personalized emails to a randomly selected group of these students informing them of and inviting them to the ARC for support. These emails had positive impacts on students at AC:
• Rates of visiting the ARC more than doubled from 22% to 56%
• Developmental education students were 20% more likely to pass developmental education courses, a crucial milestone
However, we did not find clear evidence that nudged students completed more credits, received higher grades, or passed other courses at higher rates. While we saw promising trends regarding retention and graduation, they may be due to chance.
As community colleges across the nation work to improve student success and help students recover from the pandemic, this evaluation offers two lessons:
• Insufficient information about existing basic needs supports keeps students from getting the help they need. The information barrier may be effectively overcome with personalized nudging, a low-cost solution
• Connecting students to basic needs supports helps students make academic progress, particularly those in need of developmental education