New models of funding higher education are
currently being considered in debates throughout America. One recent debate
concerns funding through “Pay It Forward” (PIF) programs. Since 2013, at least
24 states have considered legislation on PIF models of higher education
finance. While details differ, the rapid proliferation of PIF program proposals
shows a willingness to move from the current system of upfront payment to an
income-based system of payment after leaving college.
What
are “Pay It Forward” programs?
The National Association for College Admissions
Counseling (NACAC) has put together a map of states in which PIF
legislation has been introduced or passed. According to NACAC, 22 states have
considered PIF legislation, while a more recent report by the
Illinois Student Assistance Commission notes that at least 24 states have considered
such proposals. Some states (like Ohio) define PIF as a deferred tuition plan,
in which students would pay for college upon departure (not entry) from an
institution. Other states (like Florida) defined PIF as an income share
agreement, in which students would pay a portion of their income upon
separation from a higher education institution.
What
is deferred tuition?
Deferred tuition systems are higher education
finance systems in which students do not pay for their higher education at the
time of enrollment (upfront), but rather pay on the back end once they leave
college. These systems delay higher education payments until the time that
students enter the workforce and eliminate upfront tuition payments. By
allowing students to delay payments, there is a change in the expectation of
which generation pays for college. Under an upfront tuition system, it is
assumed that parental resources would be used to pay for college. However,
under a PIF plan the expectation is that students would pay for college
themselves. Students are best able to do this once they enter the workforce
following their post-secondary education. As such, payments are due, not at the
time of matriculation, but at a time when students have earnings.
Deferred tuition programs have been used with in
the past in the US. For instance, Yale University
conducted an experiment in the 1970s and students at the
University of California at Riverside proposed a similar model in 2012. Globally a number of
nations use a higher education financing system in which payments for the price
of education are deferred until after a student leaves college. D. Bruce Johnstone and Pamela
N. Marcucci in their 2010 book categorize Australia, England, Ethiopia,
Lesotho, Namibia, New Zealand, Rwanda, Swaziland, Tanzania, and Wales as
nations that use deferred tuition systems.
What
are income-share agreements?
The deferred tuition approach characterized in
the discussion above requires each student to pay the full cost of her
education (adjusted for any upfront subsidy or student aid). In contrast, an
“income share” approach to higher education finance dispenses (at least in
part) with the notion of a student-specific tuition amount. Instead, a special
tax – sometimes referred to as a “graduate tax” – is imposed on students after
they leave college. This tax is used to finance the cost of education received.
However, there is no specific link between the cost of a particular student’s
education and the amount paid under this tax. Instead, the tax depends on
income following college, such that students would be required to pay some percentage
of their income (say 3%) for a set amount of time following graduation (say 25
years). Under this scheme it is possible that high-earners could pay more than
the total cost of their education and low-earners would pay less than the total
cost of their education.
A number of companies have developed private
income share agreements. Some provide broad income share investments that can
be tied to higher education such as Upstart, Pave, and Cumulus Funding. Others, like the companies Lumni and 13th Avenue, provide funding only for students to attend higher education.
Where
could someone find out more about “Pay It Forward” models?
I currently have a working paper on PIF programs with Dhammika Dharmapala from the University
of Chicago.
The paper develops a theoretical
model of PIF programs. The results show that college access is enhanced by PIF
policies. The equilibrium level of subsidies for higher education depends
crucially on the pattern of income distribution and the extent to which
higher education either increases or decreases income stratification (the
difference between mean and median income). We show that the equilibrium level of subsidies to higher education
will not necessarily decline under PIF, and may increase in some equilibria due
to changes in college access for low income groups. Our work highlights
important increases in college access that can be achieved with deferred
tuition systems. We are considerably more wary of income share programs that
are not as clearly beneficial to college access, and raise moral and ethical
concerns.
The Forum on the Future of Public Education strives to bring the best empirical evidence to policymakers and the public. The Forum draws on a network of premier scholars to create, interpret, and disseminate credible information on key questions facing P-20 education