The Long-Term Impacts of an Ohio Community College Student Support Program
The Fordham Institute
By Jeff Murray
Back in 2015, three Ohio community colleges launched the Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP), a comprehensive suite of supports meant to help new community college students persist in school and complete a degree in three years or less (the national average was 3.3 years at the time). ASAP is based on a similar program of the same name developed in the City University of New York (CUNY) system. It includes supports such as tuition and transportation assistance, work- and family-friendly class schedules, priority registration, and intensive advising from dedicated counselors.
….[E]valuation partner MDRC has continued tracking longer term outcomes for the original participants via a randomized controlled trial. I have reviewed three of MDRC’s previous studies (the third one, covering six years of data and with links to the others in the series, is here), and a fourth report has just been released, covering eight years of data since the start of the program….
….As of 2023 (eight years after initially enrolling), 46 percent of program participants earned a degree compared to 31 percent of control group students, an estimated 15 percentage point effect….Overall, ASAP appears to be one of the most effective postsecondary education initiatives in regard to graduation-rate increases among the numerous other rigorously evaluated programs cited by the researchers. Furthermore, 17.6 percent of program participants have gone on to earn a bachelor’s degree within eight years of starting community college with ASAP support, compared with 11.4 percent of control group students. That’s a 6.2 percentage point impact.
Labor market findings also remain positive. In year eight, program participants earned an average of $3,337 more than the control group, a 14 percent increase that is larger than the one observed at the six-year point. In fact, the impact on earnings has been gradually increasing since year four. This effect was due almost entirely to higher wages being earned by the treatment group participants, as both they and control participants were employed at similar rates, as had been seen in previous analyses….