The majority of Americans believe in the value of higher education—not only as a pathway to individual opportunity, but also as a critical driver of workforce development and economic growth. Higher education helps prepare students for high-demand, high-wage careers, and fills gaps in local and national job markets. But for students to complete postsecondary degrees and credentials, they must first be able to afford them. National College Attainment Network (NCAN) members, students, and parents know that cost remains the largest barrier to higher education.

NCAN and its members are committed to improving college accessibility and closing affordability gaps—which disproportionately impact students from low-income backgrounds and those who will be the first in their families to attend college. To address students’ unmet financial need, we must first understand and document the extent of the problem. The Affordability Gap—NCAN’s annual study on college costs within the public postsecondary sector—identifies the prevalence of “unaffordable” public bachelor’s-granting institutions and community colleges across the United States for students from families with low to moderate incomes. Recent cuts to higher education and safety net programs may reduce funding for need-based aid and student support, making this analysis particularly timely.

Calculating Affordability

Measuring affordability is complicated. There are many factors that determine whether families can pay, or feel comfortable paying, the price of a postsecondary program.

NCAN proposes that for each institution in our sample, the total price of college for an in-state student, plus an additional $300 to account for emergency expenses, should not exceed the combined total of grant aid, loans, Federal Work Study (FWS), an estimated expected family contribution (EFC), and a student’s summer wages. These metrics are defined as follows:

• Total price: For in-state students living on campus (bachelor’s-granting institutions); for in-state students living off-campus, not with family (community colleges). Sourced from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).
  
• Emergency expenses: NCAN uses a $300 constant to approximate unforeseen expenses that may present an obstacle for students’ postsecondary success. Notably, this is an annual amount and likely an underestimate of what a student might incur through an emergency expense.
  
• Grant aid: Average amount of federal, state, local, and institutional grant aid awarded to full-time, first-time, undergraduate students. (IPEDS)
  
• Student loans: Average amount of federal loans disbursed to full-time, first-time undergraduate students. (IPEDS)
  
• Federal Work Study: Average institutional disbursement of Federal Work Study dollars (total FWS disbursement/number of FWS recipients at each institution). FWS data comes from Federal Student Aid’s campus-based program report.
  
• Expected Family Contribution: We use federal Pell Grant Program Annual Data Report data to calculate an EFC value in a given academic year, by subtracting the average Pell Grant amount from the maximum Pell Grant amount. Although EFC was discontinued starting with the 2024-25 FAFSA award year, IPEDS’ releases have not yet caught up with that academic year and we maintain the use of EFC for this analysis at present.
  
• Summer Wages: Calculated as a state’s minimum wage multiplied by 40 hours per week for 12 weeks. Minimum wage data is sourced from the US Department of Labor.

Put more simply, an institution meets NCAN’s criteria if:

When an institution’s total price plus emergency expenses exceeds the sum of grants, loans, Federal Work Study, our proxy for EFC, and three months of summer earnings at minimum wage, NCAN refers to the remaining cost as an “affordability gap” for students. The gap represents the average cost unmet by the various financial aid sources included in our model.

NOTE: The number of institutions reporting data may vary across both report releases and academic years. For the institutional sample analyzed in this report, NCAN includes all institutions that have reported price, grants, and loans data from IPEDS. Institutions missing one or more of those metrics were excluded from the sample. This year, our sample size is 1,137 institutions. This includes 600 community colleges and 537 bachelor’s-granting institutions. More detailed information on methodology and data is available upon request. For a full list of sources used in this analysis, please see the appendix below.

VIEW NCAN'S UPDATED STATE AFFORDABILITY PROFILES

Research Findings

Key Takeaways (Institution N = 1,137)

For the average institution in our sample, in 2022-23 (the latest year with complete data), NCAN finds that:

• A little over one-third (35%) of public bachelor’s-granting institutions were affordable
• Fewer than half (48%) of community colleges were financially within reach, on average
• The average affordability gap at public bachelor's-granting institutions was $1,555
• The average affordability gap at community colleges was $486

These findings continue to sound the alarm about the cost barriers facing students at public postsecondary options nationwide, and more generally, underscore the persistent challenges that students from low- and moderate-income families face when it comes to paying for postsecondary education.

NCAN’s comprehensive findings from the latest Affordability Gap report are below.

Questions about the research can be directed to Louisa Woodhouse, Senior Associate, Policy and Advocacy, at woodhouse@ncan.org.

DIVE DEEPER INTO THE DATA WITH THIS INTERACTIVE DASHBOARD

Public Bachelor’s-Granting College and Universities (Institution N = 537)

• Based on our sample and methodology, there were 14 states where aid sources did not cover the cost of any public bachelor’s-granting institutions (CT, DE, IA, KS, ND, NE, NH, OH, OR, RI, SC, SD, VT, WI)
• 27 states had a higher percentage of unaffordable public bachelor’s-granting institutions than the national average (65% or higher).
• In only 11 states did more than 50% of public BA programs meet NCAN’s criteria (AK, AZ, CA, FL, IL, ME, MO, NM, OK, WA, WY).
• Based on our formula, the average public bachelor’s-granting institution was financially within reach for students in only 11 states. In other words, 39 states exhibited affordability gaps at the average public bachelor’s-granting institution.
• 26 states have a larger affordability gap for public bachelor’s-granting institutions, on average, than the national average gap for the sector.

Public bachelor’s-granting colleges and universities were established specifically to offer a lower-cost alternative to students than private higher education institutions, and to support the growth and development of the local workforce in each state. While unmet need for students at the average public bachelor’s-granting sector has shrunk in the last year, there is still work to be done to ensure that students at these institutions have sufficient funds to cover the cost of their education. Putting public bachelor’s-granting institutions financially within reach is especially critical for low- and moderate-income students because bachelor’s degrees are associated with higher earnings, lower unemployment rates, and greater economic security for families.

The national average affordability gap in this year’s report is smaller than those in years past, continuing a trend seen in last year’s analysis. However, other data points paint a worrisome picture of the cost of public bachelor’s-granting institutions across the country. With more than a quarter of states exhibiting zero public bachelor’s-granting options that meet NCAN’s criteria, the need for increased higher education funding, and specifically need-based financial aid, is clear.

Community Colleges (Institution N = 600)

• Based on our sample and methodology, there were five states with zero affordable community colleges (HI, ND, NH, RI, and UT)
• 22 states had a higher percentage of unaffordable community colleges than the national average 
• In 27 states, at least half of community colleges were financially out of reach, on average
  
• In our sample, there were only nine states where at least 75% of community colleges met NCAN’s criteria, and only six states where all community colleges were affordable (CT, IN, KY, ME, MN, VT)
• Students, on average, had unmet need at community colleges in 20 states
• 26 states had an average affordability gap at community colleges that was larger than the national average gap for institutions in that sector

Our analysis shows that fewer than half of the community colleges in our sample are priced within reach for students. The percentage of affordable institutions in this year’s sample was slightly lower than in last year’s analysis. This finding is particularly concerning, given that community colleges – often with open enrollment policies and lower costs of attendance than bachelor’s-granting institutions – are designed to be a more financially accessible option for students. 

This year, the average affordability gap at community colleges almost doubled, suggesting that even in the sector largely considered to be the most cost-effective, students are facing consistent and increasing financial barriers to attainment. However, a national gap of less than $500 at community colleges, on average, suggests that a relatively minimal increase in financial aid awards – ideally by way of federal, state, or local grant funding – could alleviate or eliminate the barriers that students currently experience, paving the way to more financially manageable postsecondary options.

Discussion

Examination of trend data from the last several years of NCAN’s analysis reveals that in academic year 2022-23, public bachelor’s-granting institutions became more financially accessible, while the affordability of community colleges worsened – both in terms of the share of institutions within reach and the amount of unmet need facing students. NCAN hypothesizes that several factors are shaping the trends seen in this year’s sample.

Public bachelor-granting institutions likely appear to have a lower cost per student due to: 

• A historic $400 increase in the federal Pell Grant for award year 2022-23, which brought the maximum Pell Grant up to $6,895
  

Community colleges, compared to last year, appear less affordable because of:

• A decrease in institutional grant aid, on average, due to the loss of Higher Education Emergency Relief (HEERF) funding administered during the pandemic 
  
• An increase in cost of attendance driven by rising housing costs
  

Our findings are unusual this year, in that affordability improved at bachelor’s-granting institutions, yet worsened at community colleges. There are several reasons why these factors seem to have had different impacts across sectors. First, the $400 increase in the Pell Grant – an undeniable win for all students – likely impacted students in bachelor’s-degree programs more than students at community colleges because of the higher cost of attendance and greater likelihood of full-time enrollment, which are factored into a student’s Pell Grant eligibility. 

The loss of HEERF dollars was not specific to community colleges, but the absence of this federal aid source was more impactful for institutions in that sector, as the community college sector received more HEERF funding per student compared to others during the pandemic. As a result, the loss of direct-to-student funding widened students’ unmet need more significantly at community colleges. The impact of HEERF dollars, which notably helped to close financial gaps for the 2021-22 academic year, is a strong argument for continued direct-to-student federal aid programs, which students often use to help meet their basic needs. 

The cost of living, and particularly the cost of housing, increased financial barriers, especially for community college students. NCAN’s model includes the cost of off-campus housing (not with family) for community college students and on-campus housing for those in bachelor’s-degree programs. These costs are included as an element of the price variable in IPEDS data, which NCAN factors into our model. In 2022-23, housing prices rose widely across the United States following the COVID pandemic. This increase drove up the average cost of attendance at community colleges, as determined in the NCAN model and as reported by IPEDS. 

When conceptualizing affordability, we can measure either the percent of institutions that meet NCAN’s criteria by category (sector, state, etc.) or by count. Both considerations are important, as they each highlight meaningful information about which options are financially within reach and accessible to students. In some cases, states may exhibit high percentages of affordable institutions driven by small sample sizes. For many students who live in rural or remote areas, far from the postsecondary institutions in their state, college may remain inaccessible. Conversely, states with many colleges and universities benefit from rankings based on the raw count of institutions that meet NCAN’s definition. However, some of these states perform less well when examining the percentage of institutions that meet that benchmark.

Our findings this year continue to emphasize the need for increased funding for higher education, at the federal, state, and local level. NCAN’s analysis suggests that, unsurprisingly, the $400 Pell Grant increase had a direct impact on helping students meet their financial need at public bachelor’s-granting institutions in 2022-23. Meanwhile, the loss of HEERF funding had a negative impact at community colleges across the country. While Pell funding has increased since the 2022-23 academic year, the maximum award has stayed stagnant since FY24, and the gains made to the Pell Grant are eroding. 

With the largest cut to federal safety-net programs in decades signed into law in the recent budget reconciliation bill, additional funding is needed at the state level to protect access and support for postsecondary education. State-level higher education funding is often slashed in the wake of significant cuts to federal spending on programs like Medicaid and SNAP, as states face downstream pressure from the loss of federal support. Instead of diminishing state-level education spending to fill other budgetary gaps, now is the time for states to bolster their investments in need-based financial aid programs and operational support for public colleges. Further cuts to these programs will only widen affordability gaps for low- and moderate-income students across the country, limiting their ability to pursue and attain postsecondary education, and prepare to enter our nation’s skilled workforce. 

Appendix

More NCAN Resources

• NCAN Federal Policy Priorities
  
• Strengthen Pell Grants
  
• NCAN's 2024 Affordability Gap report