Chat with AGB Board BotTop Public Policy Issues Facing Governing Boards in 2025–2026:
Institutions brace for federal cuts and state budget shortfalls.
Published March 28, 2025
The financial outlook for colleges and universities over the next two years remains uncertain, influenced by proposed federal spending reductions from the new administration and varying projections for state budgets, where post-pandemic surpluses have diminished. While the future of the U.S. Department of Education is unclear, it is expected that core programs—such as student financial aid and support for disadvantaged and disabled students—would continue, regardless of any administrative changes. However, the student aid budget might face potential reductions.
Before gaining control of both houses of Congress and the White House in the 2024 elections, Republicans sought without success to scale back or eliminate such student aid programs as PLUS loans for graduate students and parents allowing them to borrow at below-market rates, College Work Study subsidies, and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants, an add-on to Pell Grants for students with “exceptional” need. The $32 billion Pell Grant program, which provides up to $7,395 a year to 6.5 million students, primarily from lower-income families,1 is facing a shortfall, and it is unlikely this Congress will appropriate more funds.2
A key priority for the new administration is to extend and expand the tax provisions from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which are set to expire at the end of fiscal year 2025. Additional priorities include increased funding for border security, immigration and deportation enforcement, energy production, and potentially national defense. These initiatives might contribute to a higher federal deficit, prompting Republican lawmakers to consider spending reductions and potential revenue measures to offset the impact. As a result, there might be increased pressure on federal discretionary spending.
That concern is unlikely to resonate with fiscal conservatives focused on reducing government spending. “We have to continue sounding the alarm for the American people that this country and their government are on a completely unsustainable fiscal path,” House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-TX) said shortly after the president’s inauguration.3 True to his word, Arrington’s Budget Committee approved a resolution calling for at least $1.5 trillion in cuts from the remainder of fiscal year 2025 through 2034. The full House approved the blueprint in February. It did not pinpoint the cuts, but among the prime targets are Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly called food stamps. Additional significant cuts likely will be sought in the federal student loan program as part of instructions to the House Education and Workforce Committee to cut a minimum of $330 billion from programs under its jurisdiction. Departing from the House’s approach of passing a single massive budget reconciliation, Senate leaders anticipated two separate budget reconciliation bills in 2025. The first, passed in January, dealt largely with the southern border, immigration, and defense spending. It did, however, call for unspecified education spending cuts of $1 billion. The Senate will take up the massive House budget reconciliation when it writes its second budget reconciliation bill later this spring.
Before these debates, Congress averted a government shutdown by passing a bill to fund the government through September 30, 2025, the end of the fiscal year, at near fiscal year 2024 spending levels. However, it was uncertain whether appropriated monies for education and research will in fact be spent, given the repeated actions by the White House to freeze current-year funding.
Impacts on Research
Still uncertain at this writing is the full scope of what will happen to federal support for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy, and other agencies that fund more than half of the $109 billion recently spent on medical and scientific research on campuses.4 Already the NIH announced it would reduce to 15 percent the amount of indirect costs that colleges and universities can take in addition to the amount of the grant. NIH said the move, instituted almost immediately, would save $4 billion a year. Indirect costs, called facilities and administrative (F&A) costs, have always been a bone of contention for cost-cutting lawmakers. Some universities’ indirect cost rates are far higher than 15 percent, including 56 percent at the University of Michigan.5
Matt Owens, a member of the advisory group to AGB’s Top Public Policy Issues report and president of the Council on Government Relations, an association of academic medical centers and research institutes, told the Washington Post, “This is a surefire way to cripple lifesaving research and innovation.”6
Barbara R. Snyder, president of the American Association of Universities, said indirect costs (for labs, utilities, and other expenses) are “real and necessary costs of conducting the groundbreaking research that has led to countless breakthroughs in the past decades. A cut to F&A reimbursements for NIH grants is quite simply a cut to the life-saving medical research that helps countless American families.”7
Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, called the move “short-sighted, naive, and dangerous. It will be celebrated wildly by our competitors, who will see this for what it is—a surrender of U.S. supremacy in medical research. It is a self-inflicted wound that, if not reversed, will have dire consequences on U.S. jobs, global competitiveness, and the future growth of a skilled workforce.”8
Research institutions have been here before. Congress did not adopt the president’s 2017 proposal to reduce the budgets of the NIH and the Department of Education by nearly 20 percent. Instead, lawmakers continued to increase funding for these agencies. At the time, there was broader bipartisan support in Congress for research and education spending. In the current environment, however, proposals aimed at restructuring federal departments and reducing personnel have gained traction. As part of a broader push for efficiency, the NIH may face consolidation, potentially merging or eliminating some of its 27 institutes and centers, many of which focus on specific medical areas such as cancer, cardiovascular health, or infectious diseases. While the extent of potential research budget reductions remains unclear, some universities and teaching hospitals—including Harvard University, Stanford University, and the University of Pittsburgh—have responded to the uncertainty by implementing faculty and staff hiring freezes.9
With Robert Kennedy Jr. appointed as Secretary of Health and Human Services, some in the medical, scientific, and pharmaceutical communities expressed concern about the future of drug and vaccine research and development. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order lifting a funding freeze, but by mid-March only monies for already-funded clinical trials had been released. Advisory councils that determine the last step in approvals for new grants have been unable to meet because of a travel freeze, delaying at best, new awards. At worst, freezes might mean the de facto cancellation of such advisory councils. A mid-March meeting of advisers to the Food and Drug Administration to determine the components of the vaccine for the 2025–2026 flu season was put off. Current and pending grants aimed at increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion have been cancelled.10 Efforts to dismiss 1,200 NIH probationary employees, along with a hiring freeze affecting early-career research scientists and the departure of senior scientists from the NIH’s intramural research labs, created significant disruption and uncertainty within the agency.11
Even if funding is restored and staffing reductions are paused by the courts, universities and researchers may have questions about whether the NIH and NSF—both facing administrative challenges and staffing changes—will have the capacity to effectively manage federal research grant programs.
While the free exchange of scientific information has been a cornerstone of research at U.S. universities, the federal government has become increasingly concerned in recent years about potential vulnerabilities in the research system, particularly in relation to countries such as China. “U.S. officials and others have raised concerns about various efforts of foreign governments—most notably the People’s Republic of China—to influence and exploit the openness of the U.S. research ecosystem. The acquisition of U.S. advances in science and technology, intellectual property, and talent by strategic competitors may pose a risk to U.S. national defense and global economic competitiveness,” a Congressional Research Service report said in 2024. U.S. universities, meanwhile, have expressed concerns about the administrative burden of certain recordkeeping and regulatory requirements introduced to address national security considerations. Both President Trump in his first term, and President Biden took steps to reduce the risks, including requiring applicants for federal funding to disclose any foreign support for their research.12 All foreign gifts and contracts, including research contracts, must be reported annually to the Department of Education under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, and this information is publicly available.13 But research institutions have raised concerns about the administrative complexity involved in compliance efforts, though only a small percentage involve Chinese scholars or others from countries with strained U.S. relations.
Endowment Gains Amid Federal Uncertainty
Amid concerns about potential cuts in federal support, colleges and universities had this good news: The 658 largest college and university endowments saw an average 11.2 percent gain on their investments in the year ending June 30, 2024, and over ten years these endowments grew 6.8 percent annually on average, the National Association of College and University Business Officers reported. Collectively these 658 endowments were worth $874 billion, with a median of almost a quarter-billion dollars. However, nearly 30 percent of the institutions surveyed had endowments of $100 million or less. Those surveyed spent $30 billion from their endowments. Almost half of those funds (48 percent) went to student financial aid; 17.7 percent for academic programs; 10.8 percent for endowed faculty positions and other recipients; 6.7 percent for operation and maintenance of campus facilities; and 16.6 percent on all other purposes. On average these colleges and universities covered 15 percent of their operating expenses with withdrawals from their endowments.14
While there was encouraging news about endowment performance, some higher education organizations expressed concern that Congress and the president’s administration might consider increasing the existing 1.4 percent excise tax on investment earnings from the largest endowments. See Federal Tax Legislation for more information.
Disparities in State Level Funding
There was good funding news for public colleges and universities closer to home. The strong economy allowed states to boost support for public higher education institutions by 10.2 percent for fiscal 2024, to $126.5 billion, according to the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO).15 Bolstered by federal stimulus funds during the pandemic, state spending was up 36.5 percent over five years, though there was variance among the states. State higher education leaders are watching closely to see what funding will look like over the next two years.
A recent SHEEO survey of members identified their top higher education priorities and concerns for 2025. Topping the list was state operating support, followed by economic and workforce development. Funding for student financial aid programs ranked third.16
Tom Harnish, SHEEO’s vice president for government relations and a member of the advisory group to AGB’s Top Public Policy Issues Facing Governing Boards report, observed, “While this [SHEEO survey] isn’t an exhaustive list of issues our states are facing, it foreshadows policy priorities in the 2025 state legislative sessions. With some states already having to make tough budget decisions, I think we’ll continue to see headlines around operating support, state funding for financial aid programs, and the conversation around college affordability and the value proposition.”17
The National Association of State Budget Officers forecast that after several “extraordinary years of widespread, substantial surpluses (and) record-setting revenue growth,” states can anticipate only modest growth in their budgets for fiscal year 2025 or even a slight decrease as the surpluses they used to cut taxes evaporate.18 It forecast a 0.3 percent overall decline in spending, though 31 states were expecting to spend more.
Declines in state operating expenses and student aid are a reality in at least five states; other states could join them. The University System of Maryland is facing budget cuts of $111 million across its several institutions and research centers, prompted by the state’s need to close a $3 billion budget deficit.19
The California State University and University of California campuses face anticipated drops in state appropriations due to reductions in the governor’s budget proposal.20 SHEEO reported that institutions in Louisiana and Arizona will be facing painful cuts.21 New Hampshire colleges and universities expect significant budget cuts and tuition increases.22 Utah institutions are facing a 10 percent cut in funds for classroom instruction, some $60 million, unless they reallocate dollars to programs in high-demand, high-wage majors or justify programs with low enrollment, most of which are in the liberal arts.23
State financial aid, which supports students attending both public and private institutions, is of vital importance. Several states fund a significant portion of their student aid out of earmarked lottery proceeds, partially isolating scholarships from state budget cuts.24 Nonetheless, in any state reining in higher education appropriations in 2025, reductions in financial aid seem inevitable, placing further pressure on colleges and universities experiencing enrollment declines due to changing demographics, high school graduates choosing to pursue non-traditional credentials, or the growing public questioning of the value of a college education.
State higher education leaders are also concerned about how Medicaid will fare in this year’s congressional budget debates, where it might be headed for considerable cuts. Medicaid is administered by states, which contribute about a third of the costs that topped $780 billion in fiscal year 2023. Medicaid spending dwarfs what many states contribute in support of higher education. If federal dollars are significantly reduced, states will either have to limit benefits, deny health coverage, reduce reimbursements to providers, or backfill as much of the shortfall as they can afford.25 Many states expanded eligibility for Medicaid because of increased federal subsidies provided by the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). If those are taken away, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates as many as 20 million Americans could lose health insurance26 and, funding for colleges and universities, discretionary items in state budgets, could be where state budget directors and legislative fiscal agencies look to backfill lost dollars.
While college closures continued apace in 2024, the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center had good news to report: Postsecondary enrollment rose 4.5 percent for fall 2024 and now stands above the 2019 pre-pandemic levels. Nearly 16 million freshmen and 3.2 million graduate students were enrolled in the 2024–2025 academic year. The freshman class grew by 5.5 percent, a particularly encouraging development at a time of widespread concern about Americans’ loss of trust in the value of college degrees.27 (The clearinghouse, a private nonprofit that collects and reports data from hundreds of institutions in a timelier fashion than the U.S. Department of Education, triggered alarms in fall 2024 when a statistical error led it to report that freshman enrollment was down.)
Fitch Ratings offered a more cautious assessment of higher education’s financial outlook in its 2025 report: “Uneven enrollment, rising competitive pressures, and continued margin pressures will add further strain on already struggling U.S. colleges and universities.”28
“Public funding has flattened as states return to normalized revenue growth expectations, and net tuition growth prospects are modest at best,” said Senior Director Emily Wadhwani. “This revenue trajectory is unlikely to be sufficient to fully offset still-elevated labor and wage costs, rising capital needs, and a sharply uncertain legislative landscape.” The freshman enrollment pipeline has “softened” and even “new international student enrollment remains highly susceptible to unfavorable shifts in both geopolitical sentiment and policy,” said Wadhwani. Fitch projected that net tuition growth will be no more than 2 percent to 4 percent. “Sector consolidation is likely to rise in 2025 through restructurings, divestitures, affiliations, mergers, and increasingly commonplace college closures. Even public institutions, which have long been more insulated from sector pressures, may be forced to consider drastic budgetary decisions to remain sustainable,” Fitch forecast.29
NCSL Task Force on Higher Education
The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) bipartisan Task Force on Higher Education Affordability and Student Outcomes released in October 2024 a report identifying what it considers the biggest challenges and anxieties facing the general public about higher education—perceptions of affordability and student debt, uneven student outcomes in employability and earnings, and declining public confidence. It laid out a state-led strategy to enhance the value of college degrees while also calling for greater policy coordination between the federal government and the states. “The task force believes the primary responsibility for enhancing the value of higher education lies within higher education itself. Certainly, state and federal policy has a role to play in advancing positive change, but the task force believes policy should seek to play a complementary role,” the NCSL report said. The task force exhorted “higher education to be the champion of its own change and urges it to adapt to meet the reality of today’s students and the new expectations that the public has of higher education.”30 How much or how little impact its recommendations will have on states, their higher education systems, and especially the federal government remains to be seen.
Paying for College
The affordability of a college education will remain a topmost concern for presidents and governing boards in the coming two years. Public concern remains high regarding the cost of college—particularly at private institutions—and the long-term burden of student loan debt, which some individuals continue to repay well into later stages of life. These concerns are compounded by weakening confidence and trust in higher education and rising doubt about whether college degrees are worth the price and still carry weight in the job market.
Institutions have brought the rising costs of tuition down to, or even below, the general inflation level, but have done that only after decades of steep, faster-than-average inflation. It does not mollify parents that private colleges discount their posted tuition by 56 percent on average,31 for all comers, according to the National Association of College and University Business Officers.
The College Board maintains that after adjusting for inflation, tuition and fees actually declined between 2014–15 and 2024–25 by 4 percent at both public and private four-year colleges and by 9 percent at community colleges. Still, at a time of public consternation about the price of eggs, the costs of a college education can be worrisome.
The College Board said the average prices for tuition and fees for full-time undergraduates in 2024–2025 were:
- Public four-year in-state: $11,610, $300 higher than in 2023–24
- Public four-year out-of-state: $30,780, $940 higher
- Private nonprofit four-year: $43,350, $1,610 higher
- Community colleges: $4,050, $100 higher
Apart from tuition discounts, these do not reflect the net prices after aid, such as Pell Grants, which one in three college students receives. But the costs of college, including room and board, are still considerable. Those costs on average reached $24,290 for in-state and topped $44,000 for out-of-state students at public four-year colleges and universities, and $58,600 at private four-year institutions. Unless community college students commute, housing and food raise their costs to $14,400.32
Net tuition and fees paid by first-time students at four-year colleges and universities have declined since peaking at public institutions in 2012–13 and have declined at private institutions since 2006–07.33 The College Board attributes much of this decline to increased institutional grant aid. It is far too early to tell whether these positive findings will continue over the next two years. Many fear public institutions and university systems may increase tuition to offset state budget cuts and to fund other costs, such as research, salaries and benefits, facilities, and energy; the same is likely to happen at those private institutions that rely on tuition to cover most of their operating costs. One can count on state and federal policymakers to watch tuition increases and cost-of-attendance increases closely.
With $1.7 trillion of student-loan debt still owed by 43 million Americans—some making payments for decades—and averaging $38,373, reluctance to borrow for college has grown.34 Former President Biden’s efforts to whittle the mountain down were largely rebuffed by the courts, though he did use executive authority to ease the burden on five million borrowers, including some who struggled to get loans forgiven after going into public service work. Congress established the Public Student Loan Forgiveness Program in 2007 through the College Cost Reduction and Access Act for those teaching in public schools and working in other public sector jobs such as military service, law enforcement, and public health, and who had paid off loans for ten years. The rules and procedures were so complex and confusing many who were eligible did not have their loans forgiven. Changes in 2023 led to a rise in successful applications for forgiveness.35 A presidential executive order would deny loan forgiveness to students whose public service involved working for non-government organizations “that advance illegal immigration, terrorism, discrimination, and violent protests.”36
Free College
In recent years, many states have addressed affordability and access by passing legislation that offers “free college” to some of their citizens. Tennessee was the first state to revive the idea in 2014, which was once prominent in many states several decades ago. Today, 33 states have some form of free college; Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, and New Hampshire joined the ranks last year.37 Most zero-tuition programs are for those seeking associate degrees and credentials at community and technical colleges. The Lumina Foundation reported that the country is making progress but still short of the goal set in the Obama Administration for 60 percent of U.S. adults ages 25–64 to have at least some education beyond high school. That figure reached almost 55 percent in 2023, up from 38 percent in 2009.38 While West Virginia ranks last, its educational attainment has climbed from 26 percent to 44 percent in that period. Sarah Tucker, chancellor of the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission, credits free tuition and dual enrollment of high school students with the progress.39 New York Governor Kathy Hochul proposed expanding the state’s free college program by granting free tuition to adult learners between the ages of 25–55 who pursue two-year degrees in high-demand fields.40 A Federal Trade Commission working paper once calculated that free tuition has led to a 26 percent increase in community college enrollment and a 20 percent increase in degree completions.41
Questions for Boards
- Looking to the immediate future, what does the board foresee regarding the financial health of the institution/system? How might reductions in government funding affect key operations of the institution(s)?
- How often does the board debate and discuss the affordability of our institution, or system institutions? Has the cost(s) of attendance been stable recently, increased, or decreased?
- How would possible reductions in federal student aid impact our institution or system? Do the board have a clear sense of levels of student debt?
- If our institution, or institutions of the system, have substantial research programs, how are they being affected by federal funding freezes, projected reductions in the NIH indirect costs, and changes to federal agency staff capacity?
- If our state has a free college program, has it made college more affordable than it was before its enactment? Has it changed the composition of our student body?
- Has the board considered the financial implications for a reduction in international students?
- If we are an affiliated foundation, what are the implications of institutional budget gaps? Does our foundation have a sustainable business model if institutional support is decreased? Does our foundation have the capacity to help our institution address urgent financial challenges while fulfilling our fiduciary obligation to sustain the long-term value of the endowment?
1. Cassandria Dortch, “Federal Pell Grant Program of the Higher Education Act: Primer,” Congressional Research Service, November 6, 2024, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/r/r45418.
2. “Pell Grant Shortfall Remains a Threat,” Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, July 12, 2024, https://www.crfb.org/blogs/pell-grant-shortfall-remains-threat.
3. “Chairman Arrington Delivers Opening Remarks at Meeting to Lay Groundwork for Budget Committee Priorities,” House Budget Committee, January 23, 2025, https://budget.house.gov/press-release/chairman-arrington-delivers-opening-remarks-at-meeting-to-lay-groundwork-for-budget-committee-priorities.
4. “Higher Education R&D Expenditures Increased 11.2%, Exceeded $108 Billion in FY 2023,” National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf25313#.
5. Don Jordan, “Update on NIH indirect cost rate cap,” University of Michigan Research, February 8, 2025, https://research.umich.edu/update-on-nih-indirect-cost-rate-cap/.
6. Dan Diamond, Carolyn Y. Johnson, and Lena H. Sun, “NIH cuts billions of dollars in biomedical funding, effective immediately,” Washington Post, February 8, 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2025/02/08/nih-cuts-billions-dollars-biomedical-funding-effective-immediately/.
7. Barbara R. Snyder, “Statement of AAU President Barbara R. Snyder on Cuts to NIH Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Research Costs,” Association of American Universities, February 7, 2025, https://www.aau.edu/newsroom/press-releases/statement-aau-president-barbara-r-snyder-cuts-nih-facilities-administrative-costs.
8. Ted Mitchell, “Statement by ACE President Ted Mitchell on Trump Administration Move to Slash Research Indirect Cost Rate,” American Council on Education, February 7, 2025, https://www.acenet.edu/News-Room/Pages/Statement-Trump-to-Slash-Research-Reimbursement.aspx.
9. Alan M. Garber, John F. Manning, Meredith Weenick, and Ritu Kalra, “Financial Stewardship,” Harvard University, March 10, 2025, https://www.harvard.edu/president/news/2025/financial-stewardship/.
10. Carolyn Y. Johnson and Joel Achenbach, “NIH reels with fear, uncertainty about future scientific research,” Washington Post, March 5, 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2025/03/05/nih-trump-turmoil-grants/.
12. Emily G. Blevins and Marcy E. Gallo, “Research Security Policies: An Overview,” Congressional Research Service, December 4, 2024, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12589.
13. “Section 117 Foreign Gift and Contract Data,” Federal Student Aid, U.S. Department of Education, https://fsapartners.ed.gov/knowledge-center/topics/section-117-foreign-gift-and-contract-reporting/section-117-foreign-gift-and-contract-data.
14. “U.S. Higher Education Endowments Report 6.8% 10-Year Average Annual Return, Increase Spending to a Collective $30 Billion,” National Association of College and University Business Officers, February 12, 2025, https://www.nacubo.org/Press-Releases/2025/US-Higher-Education-Endowments-Report-10-Year-Average-Annual-Return.
15. “Annual Grapevine Data show initial 10.2% increase in state support for higher education,” State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, February 1, 2024, https://sheeo.org/grapevine-fy24/.
16. “State Priorities for Higher Education in 2025,” State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, January 2025, https://sheeo.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Policy-Issue-Survey.2025.pdf.
18. “The Fiscal Survey of States: Fall 2024,” National Association of State Budget Officers, December 18, 2024, https://www.nasbo.org/reports-data/fiscal-survey-of-states.
19. Ellie Wolfe, “University System of Maryland Faces $111 million cut in Gov. Moore’s budget,” Baltimore Banner, January 16, 2025, https://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/education/higher-education/maryland-college-budget-cuts-5PWJ2TSRTNAKLBTE5IZFDN5L6Q/.
20. “Cal State system braces for possible cuts in classes, sports due to budget problems and enrollment decline,” EdSource, January 28, 2025, https://edsource.org/2025/csu-braces-for-possible-cuts-in-classes-sports-and-services-due-to-budget-problems-and-enrollment-drops/725712.
22. Ian Lenahan, “UNH Faces $15M to $20M in budget cuts. Tuition Hike coming, too.,” Seacoast/Portsmouth Herald, February 6, 2025, https://www.seacoastonline.com/story/news/local/2025/02/06/unh-budget-cuts-tuition-hike/78289525007/.
23. Courtney Tanner, “Utah lawmakers move forward with higher education bill despite faculty opposition.” Salt Lake Tribune, February 20, 2025, https://www.sltrib.com/news/education/2025/02/20/utah-faculty-oppose-hb265-bill/.
24. Pearson Brown, “SHEF: FY 2022 Issue Brief: Analyzing Lottery Proceeds as an Aspect of State Lottery Support for Higher Education,” State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, 2023, https://shef.sheeo.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/SHEF-Lottery-Funding_FY22.pdf.
25. Susanna Vogel, “Federal Medicaid cuts could shift $44.3B in costs to expansion states,” HealthCareDive, February 27, 2025, https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/federal-medicaid-cuts-shift-costs-expansion-states/740966/.
26. Elizabeth Williams, Alice Burns, Rhiannon Euhus, and Robin Rudowitz, “Eliminating the Medicaid Expansion Federal Match Rate: State-by-State Estimates,” Kaiser Family Foundation, February 13, 2025, https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/eliminating-the-medicaid-expansion-federal-match-rate-state-by-state-estimates/.
27. “Current Term Enrollment Estimates: Fall 2024,” National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, January 23, 2025, https://nscresearchcenter.org/current-term-enrollment-estimates.
28. “Deteriorating Outlook to Intensify for U.S. Colleges in 2025,” Fitch Ratings, December 4, 2024, https://www.fitchratings.com/research/us-public-finance/deteriorating-outlook-to-intensify-for-us-colleges-in-2025-03-12-2024.
30. “A State-Led Strategy to Enhance the Value of Degrees: The Findings of the NCSL Task Force on Higher Education,” National Conference of State Legislatures, October 2024, https://www.ncsl.org/education/a-state-led-strategy-to-enhance-the-value-of-degrees-the-findings-of-the-ncsl-task-force-on-higher-education.
31. “Annual NACUBO Tuition Discounting Study Finds Financial Aid Awards and Undergraduate Enrollment on the Rise at Private Colleges and Universities,” National Association of College and University Business Officers, May 14, 2024, https://www.nacubo.org/Press-Releases/2024/Annual-NACUBO-Tuition-Discounting-Study-Finds-Financial-Aid-Awards-on-the-Rise.
32. “Trends in College Pricing and Student Aid 2024,” College Board, October 2024, https://research.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/Trends-in-College-Pricing-and-Student-Aid-2024-ADA.pdf.
34. Melanie Hanson, “Student Loan Debt Statistics,” Education Data Initiative, Last Updated March 16, 2025, https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-statistics.
35. Melanie Hanson, “Student Loan Forgiveness Statistics,” Education Data Initiative, Last Updated August 28, 2024, https://educationdata.org/student-loan-forgiveness-statistics.
36. “Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Restores Public Service Loan Forgiveness,” White House, March 7, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restores-public-service-loan-forgiveness/.
37. Sara Chernikoff, “Map: Michigan Joins List of states that offer tuition-free community college,” USA Today, July 27, 2024, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2024/07/27/states-with-free-community-college/74536008007/.
38. “A Stronger Nation,” Lumina Foundation, https://www.luminafoundation.org/stronger-nation/report2025/#/progress.
39. Nadia Ramlagan, “WV’s free community college helps more residents attain degrees,” Public News Service, February 7, 2025, https://www.publicnewsservice.org/2025-02-07/education/wvs-free-community-college-helps-more-residents-attain-degrees/a95094-1.
40. Liam Knox, “New York Governor Proposes Free Community College,” Inside Higher Ed, January 16, 2025, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2025/01/16/new-york-governor-proposes-free-community-college-initiative.
41. Christopher Lau, “The Effect of Tuition-Free Community College,” Federal Trade Commission Working Paper No. 347, September 2020, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/effect-tuition-free-community-college/working_paper_347.pdf.
