Do Promise Programs Reduce Student Loans? Evidence from Tennessee Promise

Spending More or Spending Less? Institutional Expenditures and Staffing in the Free-College Era

“…From 2009 until 2011, other local programs developed across the state, expanding to two community colleges, and, by 2014, eight community colleges had some students eligible for one of the regional programs prior to the state's 2015-2016 rollout of Tennessee Promise. Using enrollment records from Tennessee Achieves, the coordinator of Knox Achieves, and the THEC, Odle et al (2021) describe this staggered rollout and provide campusby-year records of state and local promise-eligible enrollment proportions at each community college. While eight community colleges had some local promise students prior to Tennessee Promise, Odle et al (2021) show that, because of the FTFT and immediate high school to college enrollment requirements of these programs, which concurrently limit eligibility and the size of entering promise-program cohorts, only 13.9% of all FTFT students at community colleges were eligible for one of these programs prior to [2015][2016].…”

“…Using enrollment records from Tennessee Achieves, the coordinator of Knox Achieves, and the THEC, Odle et al (2021) describe this staggered rollout and provide campusby-year records of state and local promise-eligible enrollment proportions at each community college. While eight community colleges had some local promise students prior to Tennessee Promise, Odle et al (2021) show that, because of the FTFT and immediate high school to college enrollment requirements of these programs, which concurrently limit eligibility and the size of entering promise-program cohorts, only 13.9% of all FTFT students at community colleges were eligible for one of these programs prior to [2015][2016]. Despite this minimal level of treatment prior to the 2015-2016 academic year, it is possible community colleges altered their expenditure or staffing behaviors in response to these programs prior to the statewide Tennessee Promise.…”

“…To account for this possibility, we reestimate our DID models following Carruthers and Fox's (2016), House andDell's (2020), andOdle et al's (2021) implementation of a time-variant (or dosage) treatment indicator to exploit campus-level exposure to promise students. 14 Building from Odle et al's (2021Odle et al's ( ) public records, which covered 2007Odle et al's ( -2008Odle et al's ( through 2017Odle et al's ( -2018, we supplement the final year of our panel (2018)(2019) with records of Tennessee Promise student enrollments from the THEC's Tennessee Promise Annual Report (THEC, 2021). We then scale promise enrollment counts by FTE enrollment levels from IPEDS to observe what proportion of an institution's FTE was eligible for a local promise program or the statewide Tennessee Promise in each year from 2010-2011 through 2018-2019.…”

“…Dosage-Based Difference-in-Differences Impacts of Tennessee Promise on Expenditures per FTE (log), by Spending CategorySource. American Community Survey, Council of State Governments, IPEDS,Odle et al (2021), and THEC: 2010-2011 through 2018-2019 Table reports coefficients estimating treatment impacts with associated 95% confidence intervals. Given a dosage/continuous predictor, β estimates the impact of a 1 percentage point increase in promise-eligible FTE enrollment.…”

“…Dosage-Based Difference-in-Differences Impacts of Tennessee Promise on Staffing Per FTE (log), by Occupational Classification.Source. American Community Survey, Council of State Governments, IPEDS,Odle et al (2021), and THEC: 2010-2011 through 2018-2019. Note.…”