Bill Overview
Title: Jumpstart on College Act
Description: This bill directs the Department of Education (ED) to award grants to support early-college high schools and dual- or concurrent-enrollment programs. Specifically, ED must award grants to (1) institutions of higher education in partnership with one or more local educational agencies to assist them in establishing or supporting early-college high schools or dual- or concurrent-enrollment programs, and (2) states to assist them in supporting or establishing these schools or programs.
Sponsors: Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13]
Target Audience
Population: Students participating in early-college high schools or dual-enrollment programs
Estimated Size: 2250000
- The bill targets early-college high schools, which typically involve high school students between 15 and 18 years old.
- The bill could include those students who are enrolling in dual- or concurrent-enrollment programs, which also typically include high school students seeking college credits.
- High school enrollment statistics indicate that there are approximately 15 million high school students in the United States.
- Not every high school student will participate in early-college or dual enrollment programs, so the actual number impacted would be a subset of this number.
- Globally, the availability of similar early-college or dual-enrollment programs varies which can affect the direct applicability.
Reasoning
- The policy targets high school students who might benefit from additional educational opportunities through dual-enrollment and early-college programs.
- The budget limitations suggest that not all eligible students would have access to the programs initially—focusing on areas with existing partnerships and potential for growth might be prioritized.
- Common barriers to participation in such programs include geographical location, school resources, and individual student interest or readiness, which will affect the distribution of impact across the student body.
- The policy is likely to have varied effects depending on current access to college-level courses in high schools and the resources allocated by states and districts.
- Considering the commonness of students fitting within the targeted group, simulated individuals should represent a range of demographics from high-impact young beneficiaries to those uninvolved.
Simulated Interviews
student (rural Texas)
Age: 16 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This program could provide me with exposure to college courses, something that's not readily available in our area due to school budget constraints.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
student (suburban New York)
Age: 17 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I already have access to some AP courses, but more college classes might help me stand out in my college applications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
student (urban California)
Age: 15 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Participating in early-college programs could boost my confidence in pursuing STEM fields.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
student (Miami, Florida)
Age: 18 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The program sounds beneficial, but I doubt it will affect me this late in my high school career.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
student (rural Montana)
Age: 17 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm more interested in trade school options, so dual-enrollment isn't as relevant to my plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
student (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 16 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could really ease the transition to a four-year college, especially financially.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
student (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 15 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Dual-enrollment programs could provide deeper knowledge and exposure to college-level coursework while in high school.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
student (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 17 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While important, early-college is secondary to my arts focus, though it may support general education credits in college.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
student (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 16 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Vocational courses are more beneficial for me, but dual-enrollment options could add academic balance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
student (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As I've already secured college placement, this wouldn't impact me directly, but I see its benefits for younger students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $520000000 (Low: $420000000, High: $620000000)
Year 3: $540000000 (Low: $440000000, High: $640000000)
Year 5: $580000000 (Low: $480000000, High: $680000000)
Year 10: $660000000 (Low: $560000000, High: $760000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $850000000, High: $1150000000)
Key Considerations
- The program's reach and effectiveness will largely depend on the amount and distribution of grants.
- Potentially significant administrative set-up costs initially.
- Lack of immediate government savings but potential long-term societal and economic benefits.
- The expected participation rate will influence overall program effectiveness and cost.