Education: Administration and Implementation

The research team asked if institutional leaders provide tuition statements to incarcerated students. If so, the leaders were asked to provide de-identified student bills as part of their participation in the study. Five institutions provided these documents. If they responded, the researchers described what each institution offered to their team. It is important to note that their team received this information and documents from administrators, not students. Thus, they cannot make claims regarding whether incarcerated students actually receive institutional tuition or billing statements.

This research brief draws on focus groups conducted by the Research Collaborative on Higher Education in Prison at the University of Utah with incarcerated students and formerly incarcerated alumni of prison higher education programs. The researchers examine the perceptions of federal student aid among student participants in the Second Chance Pell Experiment across four institutions. Specifically, they share perceptions of the communications students receive from program staff and administrators regarding financial aid, including FAFSA, tuition statements, and refunds. 

This brief examines student and alumni understandings of federal student aid. Specifically, this brief explores their perceptions and understandings of the Pell Grant, eligibility for the Pell Grant—including lifetime eligibility used (LEU) limits—and how these perceptions might influence students' postsecondary educational journeys. 

This research brief draws upon three years of data collection through a national mixed-methods project, Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell. It highlights the perspectives of Pell recipients enrolled at four institutions of higher education participating in the federal experiment. Specifically, it focuses on students’ perceptions of the costs of postsecondary education and the Pell Grant. Overall, students report that they incur many expenses to participate in postsecondary education that are not covered by Pell. 

This research brief draws upon three years of data collection through a national mixed-methods project, Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell. It draws from the perspectives of higher education administrators and practitioners participating in the federal experiment. Specifically, it focuses on their perceptions and experiences as to whether the Pell Grant adequately covers the costs of providing high-quality postsecondary education in prison. Unquestionably, administrators and practitioners report that the Pell Grant alone is insufficient. In particular, they remark that various costs associated with the program cannot be covered by Pell, including one of their greatest needs: staff necessary to support existing and prospective students. Consequently, personnel in this sample often take on responsibilities with the prison higher education program that fall outside of their contracted duties with the college or university. 

The Second Chance Pell Experimental Sites Initiative, launched in 2015, has already impacted the landscape of prison higher education by increasing the number of colleges and universities providing in-prison postsecondary education. This research brief draws upon three years of data collection through a national mixed-methods project, Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell. Here, we include data collected from the staff at four higher education institutions in financial aid, admissions, and the registrar or related unit. The larger study focused on nine institutions participating in the Second Chance Pell Experiment. This brief focuses on a subset of four institutions that had the capacity to provide the research team with de-identified student data in a timely manner.

Launched in 2015, the Second Chance Pell Experiment allowed a select number of institutions of higher education to provide Pell Grants to incarcerated students. Seven years later, and on the cusp of Pell expansion, there are a few noteworthy impacts of the federal experiment:
» As of 2022, up to 200 institutions of higher education can participate in the federal experiment.
» Over 28,000 unduplicated students enrolled in postsecondary education through the Second Chance Pell Experiment from 2016 through 2021.
» Across the pilot’s first 2 years, institutions awarded approximately $35.6 million in Pell Grants to about 8,800 incarcerated students.

A lesser known yet critical area of knowledge and understanding is how, specifically, some incarcerated students are able to participate in the experiment and others are not. At the heart of this inquiry is certainly a question about college admissions, but one that is uniquely rooted in the context of equity and opportunity during incarceration. Until recently, the ways that incarcerated people became part of the experiment were largely unknown beyond anecdotal information from practitioners and participants. Consequently, serious questions about the Pell Grant in prison and issues of equity and access persist.

Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell is a mixed-methods research study examining the implementation and facilitation of the Second Chance Pell Experiment commenced in 2019, and includes data collected from staff, students, and alumni affiliated with nine higher education institutions. This brief provides an introduction and executive summary for all reports included in the series, titled Pell Is Not Enough.

This resource is a PowerPoint detailing the evaluation results of the implementation study for the Pathways from Prison to Post-Secondary Education Project. The RAND Corporation and RTI International were selected to evaluate the pilot projects. 

Produced by Incarceration Nations Network (INN) and its global justice partners, this document examines how virtual education is implemented behind bars, what it looks like around the world, the benefits and concerns of virtual education, and some do's and don'ts that allow education in prisons to continue. 

In collaboration with their global justice partners, the Incarceration Nations Network (INN) developed this virtual justice toolkit to examine research and practical experience from around the world regarding virtual (videoconference) technology in the justice system. This toolkit examines the following questions:

• What are the concerns about remote hearings?
• When should they be considered?
• What can be done to mitigate harm and allow justice to move forward at this urgent time?

This report summarizes the impact of BPI’s work on prison and education policy and the lives of the individuals who participate in and graduate from their programs.

The Bard Prison Initiative, in partnership with Incarceration Nations Network, is pleased to invite you to the 2023-2024 BPI Global Initiatives Virtual Lecture Series.

This lecture series is designed to foster connectivity and conversation for an international community of practitioners in different higher education contexts in prisons and carceral spaces around the world. In monthly virtual sessions, practitioners from across BPI’s Global Community of Practice will introduce us to their unique local experiences building educational opportunities for incarcerated people. The sessions will be an hour long.

This paper presents preliminary findings from a survey SHEEO administered to its members in 2018. The paper is organized around three main categories: access, program delivery, and reentry of program participants into society.

This web center was created to keep both financial aid community and prison education program administrators updated on tools, training, and news related to the implementation of financial aid in carceral settings.

In February of 2021, Ascendium supported Open Campus Media’s virtual convening of more than 100 attendees exploring the future of technology in postsecondary education in prison. Representatives from universities, advocacy groups, funders, and state corrections systems examined such topics as student perspectives on technology in prison education and the lifting of the Pell Grant ban. This summary highlights the day’s discussions.

This brief from the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education describes efforts to provide secure and cost-effective access to technology in correctional facilities to help strengthen and expand educational and reentry services.

This announcement from the U.S. Department of Education details new terminology related to the full implementation of the FAFSA Simplification and FUTURE Acts.

Other than statutory and regulatory requirements included in the document, the contents of this guidance do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public. This guidance is intended only to provide clarity to the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.