designer491/iStock/Getty Images Plus
For the first time in decades, Congress has expanded the Pell Grant program, allowing recipients to use the funds for programs as short as eight weeks. The introduction of Workforce Pell Grants could be a boon for Americans who are already working, especially adults who want to quickly upskill or retrain to access new or better jobs. But for many students coming straight from high school, Workforce Pell Grants are more complicated.
New high school graduates are at a time in their lives when the opportunity costs for attending college are the lowest they will ever be. Research shows that delaying college enrollment reduces the chances a student will ever begin postsecondary education and leads to significantly lower lifetime earnings.
For many first-generation and low-income students, their best shot at college success is immediately after high school. Using that shot—and the limited Pell dollars that come with it—on a very short program could limit their long-term career opportunities.
If 18-year-olds are pushed into short-term programs that only prepare them for one job, we could squander the chance to help them develop durable skills and knowledge that lead to success in their fourth job as much as their first.
All students should be able to carefully compare the pros and cons of short-term programs, versus an associate or bachelor’s degree program that provides greater and longer-lasting economic mobility.
As the Department of Education and higher education experts prepare to negotiate the regulations governing Workforce Pell implementation, they should carefully consider what safeguards are needed to ensure the program can fulfill its potential.
We must get this right.
To be eligible for Workforce Pell funds, state governors must ensure programs meet a number of program quality and learner outcome criteria. Not all short-term programs are equal, with many promising economic mobility and security but only providing small and immediate income bumps, followed by limited prospects for continued career and financial growth.
Graduates of short-term programs have modest earnings—around $24,000 in 2019—according to research from the nonpartisan Brookings Institution. Other research has shown that the greatest income boosts from short credentials go to adults with a GED or less, so Workforce Pell programs are likely to provide the biggest benefit to older students with no postsecondary education.
If properly implemented, the addition of Workforce Pell could help meet employer needs in high-demand areas, make it easier for working adults to move into new fields or quickly upskill, and strengthen the overall economy. If poorly implemented, students could enroll in programs that chew through their six years of maximum Pell Grant eligibility without any long-term benefit.
Another way in which Workforce Pell must fully realize its promise is by creating pathways for stackable credentials that work in reality, not just in theory.
Stackable credentials, if well implemented, provide a foothold into higher education, allowing students to build on short programs to gain skills and credentials that employers will value and starting them on the path to a more advanced and flexible degree, creating opportunities for professional and economic growth that go beyond learning one narrow job skill.
The Workforce Pell statute generally requires programs to be stackable, but current evidence shows that most learners do not stack individual short programs toward degrees. The best way for states to assess whether short-term programs offer stackable credentials is to prioritize approving programs with demonstrated track records of students using them as stepping-stones to further credentials and degrees. When evaluating whether to approve a program, states should assess the percentage of completers who go on to earn additional credentials and degrees, not just whether pathways exist on paper.
Students must also be well informed about how much of their Pell Grant eligibility they are using for each program; otherwise, students who hope to eventually complete an associate or bachelor’s degree could find themselves without enough Pell dollars left to reach their goals.
With this in mind, Workforce Pell regulations should require colleges to provide students with easy-to-understand information both about expected earnings from a Workforce Pell program and how much of their Pell Grant eligibility each program uses relative to their 600 percent lifetime limit. Colleges should have to notify students when they have used up 200 percent, and then 400 percent, of their Pell lifetime eligibility on Workforce Pell programs, so that students can properly track the proportion of their eligibility they have used on very short programs. Currently, colleges are informed when students use up 450 percent of their Pell eligibility, but students are never proactively informed about how much they have used and how much they have left.
Keeping the best interests of students top of mind should be the priority for the Department of Education and expert negotiators this week as they start the hard work of crafting effective regulations governing Workforce Pell. That should remain true, even as negotiators consider the range of competing voices on this issue.
In our public comments, we have detailed the policy priorities needed to make Workforce Pell a success. But the primary focus should be on the need for a clear and robust state approval process, to ensure that programs in different states are all meeting rigorous criteria and that students can stack credentials.
Short-term credentials might serve some students well, but we need to be cautious about how they are implemented, starting with carefully crafted regulations and approving a meticulously curated list of programs that meet or exceed the quality standards.
The Pell Grant program was created to help lift students from low-income families into the middle class. Now is the time to advance that vision by helping all students achieve their ambitions.
