Search

Many college students experience basic needs insecurity, which includes a lack of--or fear of the lack of--access to healthy food, stable housing, reliable transportation, affordable child care, physical and mental health care services, the internet and technology, and other necessities students need to survive and thrive in a postsecondary academic setting. This evaluation report focuses on measuring the extent to which students used basic needs services at select institutions supported by Basic Needs Initiative (BNI) grantees in the 2020-21 and 2021-22 academic years and the impact of using services on students' short-term academic outcomes, including enrollment intensity (credits attempted), credits earned, grade point average, and fall to winter/spring retention. Education Northwest partnered with four BNI grantees on this report--Arkansas Community Colleges, Auburn University's Hunger Solutions Institute, John Burton Advocates for Youth, and United Way of King County--to access student-level data on the use of basic needs services, student demographics, and academic outcomes from 20 postsecondary institutions in Arkansas, Alabama, California, and Washington. This report has three key findings with implications for practice: (1) Collecting data on students' use of basic needs services and linking it to student demographic and outcome data was a new activity for many of the institutions included in this report, and the basic needs services data had several limitations; (2) Very few students in our sample used basic needs services, suggesting a large gap between students' reported needs and their access to services; and (3) Access to basic needs services had a positive impact on the number of credits students attempted and earned was positively related with retention.

In spring 2023, The Research and Planning Group for California Community Colleges (The RP Group) partnered with the CEO Affordability, Food & Housing Access Taskforce of the Community College League of California (CCLC) to assist in survey data collection efforts and provide updated data trends regarding California Community College (CCC) students' food and housing security. Over 66,000 students from 88 California Community Colleges responded to the survey, revealing that two out of every three CCC students grapple with at least one basic needs insecurity. Nearly half of CCC students are food insecure, almost 3 out of 5 are housing insecure, and about 1 in 4 are homeless. The first section of the report describes the overall rates of basic needs insecurity across all survey respondents, as well as variations in these rates across colleges and regions. The report's second section further describes rates of basic needs insecurity by specific groups of students. The third section details associations between students' work and academic experiences and their basic needs insecurity. Finally, the fourth section reports the utilization of public assistance by students who need support. [Katie Brohawn, Tammeil Gilkerson, and Alyssa Nguyen contributed to this report.]

In 2022, the Center for the Study of Social Policy and Project SPARC conducted research to better understand the barriers experienced by parenting students participating in CalWORKs, California's cash assistance program for families with children. This brief highlights findings from the research on parenting students' experiences with housing.

An ongoing struggle for affordable housing in Southern California has led many predominately White, middle, and upper middle- class families to seek home ownership in divested urban communities. This phenomenon, known as gentrification, can benefit a community by increasing property values, but often comes at a cost to longstanding, Black and Brown residents of the neighborhood. Prior research has identified areas of harm including residential displacement, declining enrollment, and segregation of neighborhood schools. This qualitative case study addressed two questions: the impact of gentrification on the Black and Brown students attending the neighborhood school; and the strategies needed to balance competing interests between gentrifiers and longstanding families. The study's findings made it abundantly clear that inequitable district and site- based policies combined with White families' self- serving interests adversely affect the minority student experience. Operating as a counterweight to the harm, interview and observation data suggested that mindful school leadership and uniting parent interests played an integral role in establishing equitable practices, policies, and access. Moreover, the data showed that the probability of leader reflectiveness and mindfulness was intensified when school leadership and active parents were themselves people of color. The implications of the study may help shape district and school policies in communities experiencing gentrification.

The "2023 Pro-Kid Policy Agenda for California" is the comprehensive state-level roadmap to ensure that all children have the necessary services and supports to reach their full potential. California has an obligation to end systemic injustices that create barriers to kids of color, as well as kids living in poverty, undocumented kids, and kids in the foster care system, from growing up healthy and ready for college, career, and civic life. This work has only become more urgent as the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to have a disproportionate impact on the lives of California's kids, especially children of color. Kids are increasingly experiencing stress, social isolation, and disconnectedness, and youth mental health issues have reached crisis proportions. In addition, the learning loss and lack of preventive health care because of the pandemic threatens this entire generation of children. Policymakers are urged to use the "Pro-Kid Agenda" as a guide to take long overdue action now to ensure California's systems for children are equitable, well-funded, high-quality, and accountable to kids' success. Doing right by all kids is not only the right thing to do, but it is also essential to state's future and ability to thrive. California's continued economic growth and strong democracy is dependent on a healthy and educated workforce. State policymakers need to make smart, strategic, and quality investments in California's children to address poverty and close the widening income divide. Working together, policymakers can build a California where all kids have the chance to live out their dreams. The "Pro-Kid Agenda" can help get there. The "Agenda" was developed by Children Now, California's whole-child research, policy development, communications, network building, and advocacy organization that covers the full range of children's issues prenatal to age 26, including early learning and development, TK-12 and higher education, health, family and economic supports, and child welfare. Children Now plays a lead role in more than 90 coalitions across the state and coordinates The Children's Movement of California, a network of more than 5,000 diverse organizations statewide, ranging from direct service, business, labor, youth, and parent organizations to civil rights- and community-based groups. [For "2022 Pro-Kid Policy Agenda for California," see ED617381.]

It is difficult to overstate the importance of segregation for race- and ethnicity-based school funding disparities in the United States. In many respects, unequal educational opportunity depends existentially on segregation. Racial and ethnic disparities in wealth accumulation are perpetuated over generations, ensuring persistent segregation even after explicitly racist housing discrimination was outlawed. This process has had serious and lasting implications for many important outcomes, including modern school funding equity. The mutually dependent relationship between economic and racial/ethnic segregation simultaneously depresses revenue and increases costs in racially isolated districts, creating a self-sustaining cycle of unequal opportunity and unequal outcomes. The descriptive analysis presented in this report examines this process, both nationally and with a focus on seven metropolitan areas: Baltimore (Maryland), the Bay Area (California), Birmingham (Alabama), Hartford (Connecticut), Kansas City (Kansas/Missouri), San Antonio (Texas), and the Twin Cities (Minnesota/Wisconsin).

This report provides a closer look at the well-being of the early care and education (ECE) workforce in California, using data collected by the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment (CSCCE) through the 2020 California Early Care and Education Workforce Study. For decades, low levels of public investment in this sector have kept the ECE workforce--largely women of color and immigrant women--in a grim financial bind. During the first year of the pandemic, the majority of early educators continued to work in person--risking their health and that of their families--while K-12 schools closed for distance learning. This report reveals new details on the economic realities of life as an early educator during the COVID-19 public health crisis. [Additional funding for this paper was provided by the TIME'S UP Foundation and the Blue Shield of California Foundation.]

This study explores the ways in which local students experience housing instability--and how cross-sector strategies can better identify and serve these students. The report accompanying this brief considers a rich set of school administrative data, collected over the course of three school years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic: 2016-17 through 2018-19. Early evidence suggest the COVID-19 pandemic has and will continue to exacerbate the crisis of housing instability; some who had previously experienced housing stability are, for the first time, experiencing some form of housing instability, and others who previously experienced some form of housing instability may now face even greater or more frequent instability. The report's findings highlight the importance of strengthening systems for identifying students who are experiencing housing instability, improving data systems for recording and maintaining this information, and using such data to inform policy and practice not only in schools and districts, but throughout the county. Needs are greater than prior to the pandemic, adding to the strength of calls for integrated county- and state-wide responses to this ongoing crisis in housing and more. [For the full report, see ED624057.]

Community colleges are mission-driven institutions committed to access and community needs. They serve a diverse population: The majority of students are employed, so they have to balance work with school; about one-third are first-generation, so they are navigating an unfamiliar system for the first time in their families; and 15% are single parents, juggling child care along with course load. With this understanding that students are people with complex needs and responsibilities, community colleges are innovating in the ways they are delivering wraparound supports -- sometimes referred to as basic needs supports -- that address nonacademic barriers to college success. (Common examples of wraparound supports are mental health supports and services, emergency funds and stipends, and housing and food assistance.) Enhanced wraparound supports can lead to higher rates of retention and completion for students. This Policy Brief explores supports offered by individual institutions, as well as broader and coordinated approaches that encompass states or entire systems. It cites examples from current state legislation and programs that support these efforts.

The "2022 Pro-Kid Policy Agenda" for California is the comprehensive state-level roadmap to ensure that all children have the necessary services and supports to reach their full potential. California has an obligation to end systemic injustices that create barriers to kids of color, as well as kids living in poverty, undocumented kids, and kids in the foster care system, from growing up healthy and ready for college, career, and civic life. This work has only become more urgent as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic continues to have a disproportionate impact on the lives of California's kids, especially children of color. Children and youth are increasingly experiencing stress, social isolation, and disconnectedness, and youth mental health issues have reached crisis proportions. In addition, the learning loss and lack of preventive health care because of the pandemic threatens this entire generation of children. Policymakers are urged to use the "Pro-Kid Agenda" as a guide to take long overdue action now to ensure California's systems for children are equitable, well-funded, high-quality, and accountable to kids' success. Doing right by all kids is not only the right thing to do, but it is also essential to California's future and ability to thrive. California's continued economic growth and strong democracy is dependent on a healthy and educated workforce. State policymakers need to make smart, strategic, and quality investments in California's children to address poverty and close the widening income divide. Working together, policymakers can build a California where all children have the chance to live out their dreams. The "Pro-Kid Agenda" can help get there. The "Agenda" was compiled by Children Now, California's whole-child research, policy development, communications, network building, and advocacy organization that covers the full range of children's issues prenatal to age 26, including early learning and development, K-12 and higher education, health, family and economic supports, and child welfare. The organization plays a lead role in more than 90 coalitions across the state and coordinates The Children's Movement of California, a network of more than 4,600 diverse organizations statewide, ranging from direct service, business, labor, youth, and parent organizations to civil rights- and community-based groups. [For "2021 Pro-Kid Policy Agenda for California," see ED610739.]

The 2021 PACE/USC Rossier poll provides key insights into Californians' perceptions of higher education issues during the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically equity and affordability. A large percentage of Californians acknowledge that college affordability is an important educational issue, and they generally express support for increased access to courses through remote options, increased funding for community colleges, loan forgiveness, and equitable admissions practices. However, public opinion on these issues is more nuanced; for example, Californians are concerned that increased access to educational opportunities could compromise the quality of higher education, and they believe that universities should consider only academic and extracurricular qualifications in admissions to college, not race or income. There are important differences in perceptions of these higher education issues across the lines of political affiliation and race.

With the philanthropic support of the Art for Justice Fund and Michelson 20MM Foundation, the Campaign for College Opportunity produced this research brief that provides an overview of the current state of higher education for currently and formerly incarcerated students. This brief provides descriptive demographics on California's incarcerated and paroled populations, a policy landscape analysis detailing the environment in which higher education is made accessible to incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals, and the voices of formerly incarcerated students from all three segments of California's public higher education system describing the barriers and opportunities they encounter in California's public colleges and universities. Finally, the brief includes a series of recommendations for campuses and California to dismantle post-incarceration barriers and create more opportunities for incarcerated and formerly incarcerated students to improve their lives and the economic health of California. [Funding for this report was provided by the Art for Justice Fund and the Michelson 20MM Foundation.]

This report, commissioned by the Bay Area Geographic Leads Consortium, explores how five county offices of education and local school districts pivoted to reach, teach, and support the holistic needs of students experiencing homelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic. The report documents the rising number of students experiencing homelessness as well as the causes and consequences of childhood homelessness. It also describes how educators faced unique challenges and creatively found solutions to educating students without a stable home or an appropriate place to attend school remotely. Each county offers promising examples of ways to provide instruction and learning supports to students without homes and meaningful ways to deliver urgently needed social-emotional, mental health, and well-being assistance to students and families, including meeting basic needs such as food and shelter. The report also describes innovative ways that the counties addressed technology and connectivity gaps that resulted from the shift to distance learning and collaborated with community-based partners.

"The 2021 Pro-Kid Policy Agenda for California" is the comprehensive state-level roadmap to ensure that all children have the necessary supports to reach their full potential. California has an obligation to end systemic injustices that create barriers to kids of color, as well as kids living in poverty and undocumented kids, from growing up healthy and ready for college, career, and civic life. This work has only become more urgent as the COVID-19 pandemic is having a disproportionate impact on the lives of California's kids, especially Black and brown children, and other children of color. Children and youth are increasingly experiencing stress, social isolation, disconnectedness and serious mental health issues. And the learning loss and lack of preventive health care because of the pandemic threatens this entire generation of children. Policymakers are urged to use the "Pro-Kid Agenda" as a guide to take long overdue action now to ensure California's systems for children are equitable, well-funded, high-quality, and accountable to kids' success. "The Agenda" was compiled by Children Now, California's whole-child organization focused on the range of issues critical to improving children's well-being, including early learning and development, K-12 and higher education, children's health, family and economic supports and foster care. The organization plays a lead role in more than 90 coalitions across the state and coordinates The Children's Movement of California, a network of more than 4,100 diverse organizations statewide, including direct service, business, civil rights, youth, parent, faith-based, and community groups. "The Agenda" reflects the top priorities of each of those coalitions and members. [For "2019-20 Pro-Kid Policy Agenda for California," see ED593288.]

Community schools are an evidence-based strategy to advance a "whole child" approach to education by offering integrated student supports (e.g., health care or housing assistance), expanded and enriched learning time, family and community engagement, and collaborative leadership and practices. This brief examines how local government and nonprofit agencies in two California counties--Los Angeles and Alameda--have provided technical assistance to support community school initiatives. The community schools strategy is more relevant than ever during the time of COVID-19, as unemployment rates skyrocket and many parents, especially those from lower-income communities, report concerns that their children will fall behind academically as a result of school closures. Community schools--which are growing in popularity across California, with initiatives present or emerging in Los Angeles, Oakland, and many other districts--are especially well-positioned to meet the myriad needs of students and families during this crisis. By providing a well-coordinated and comprehensive set of supports, even in a distance learning environment, community schools can help respond to the digital divide and address essential supports such as food delivery and health care.

In 2018, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative engaged the John W. Gardner Center for Youth and Their Communities at Stanford University (Gardner Center) to partner with public school districts in San Mateo County, CA to examine the barriers to educational success that homeless and highly mobile students face. Given the increasing prevalence of homelessness and unstable living arrangements among youth nation-wide, and particular challenges related to income inequality and rising housing costs in San Mateo County, this partnership aims to identify factors that may promote academic achievement among this vulnerable population. This report presents results for the first of three stages of this investigation into the prevalence and distribution of youth experiencing housing instability in San Mateo County, breaking the school districts into three geographically-based sub-groups. The first stage describes youth enrolled in the Sequoia Union High School District and its eight feeder elementary school districts. This report aims to address three key research questions: (1) What is the size and distribution of the homeless and highly mobile student population in Sequoia area school districts during the last three to five years? (2) To what degree do circumstances vary for this student population (e.g., in terms of chronicity of homelessness, instability of current living arrangements, placement in foster care, newcomer immigrant background, family structure)? and (3) How does being homeless or highly mobile affect students' educational outcomes?

Structural racism and class-based inequities help shape career and educational opportunities for women in the United States. As women make career and education gains, women of color (WOC) do not have access to the same level of opportunity. This report shares findings from interviews with parenting and unhoused WOC who attend the California State University (CSU), a mission-driven public university system that provides access to higher education for many Californians. These conversations reveal that parenting and unhoused women experience the following challenges and policy gaps: (1) Stigma; (2) Financial Aid; (3) Basic Need Insecurity; and (4) Childcare and Housing Resources.

The 2019-20 Pro-Kid Policy Agenda for California is the comprehensive roadmap at the state level to ensure that all children have the necessary supports to reach their full potential. California has an obligation to end systemic injustices that create barriers to kids of color, as well as kids living in poverty and undocumented kids, from growing up healthy and ready for college, career, and civic life. Policymakers are urged to use the Pro-Kid Agenda as a guide to ensure California's systems for children are equitable, well-funded, high-quality, and accountable to kids' success. The Agenda was compiled by Children Now, the only research, policy development, and advocacy organization covering the full-range of key children's issues, from prenatal through age 26, including early childhood development, K-12, higher education, children's health, foster care, and youth justice. Children Now coordinates The Children's Movement of California--a member-based constituency supporting kids that now includes more than 3,000 business, parent, labor, civil rights, faith, and community organizations. The organization also leads, co-leads or participates in more than 80 coalitions around the state. The Agenda reflects the top priorities of each of those coalitions and their members.

Public perceptions of college students and their needs have not evolved. Likewise, embedded in the minds of policymakers is a traditional picture of higher education's mission as largely focused on teaching and learning. To some extent, this is true for college staff, as well. As a result, shifting the paradigms around social, economic, and workforce issues is difficult, both at the campus and policy levels. Yet, if we are to achieve the levels of postsecondary and economic success necessary for individual, family, and state prosperity, addressing policy in these areas is critical. The WSSN [Working Students Success Network] initiative responded to this reality by taking aim at the myriad systemic barriers impeding low income student college completion. WSSN sought to change institutional practices to ensure that more students would succeed and show that state policies can affect whether such innovations take root and expand to scale. State policies on postsecondary budgets, financial aid access, childcare subsidy eligibility, and transportation and housing assistance are critical to student success. That is why the odds of changing outcomes for students partially depend on supportive state policies. With this in mind, the WSSN state policy work brought together state agency managers, institutional leaders, state advocates, and national policy experts to develop strategies to effect change in the three key pillars: (1) Education and employment advancement--education, job readiness, training, and placement; (2) Income and work supports--access to student financial aid, public benefits, tax credits, and free tax assistance; and (3) Financial services and asset building--financial education and coaching linked to affordable products and services to help families build self-sufficiency, stabilize their finances, and become more economically competitive. [Amy-Ellen Duke and Wayne Talioferro wrote the four state case studies included in this publication.]

This report documents how the current immigration context is affecting the nation's youngest children, under age eight, based on interviews and focus groups in 2017 with more than 150 early childhood educators and parents in six states--California, Georgia, Illinois, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. This study was motivated by widespread reports that children and families are being harmed by the Trump Administration's immigration policy priorities. This report documents impacts on young children of immigrants, whether their parents have some form of lawful immigration status or are undocumented. [For the companion report, see "Immigration Policy's Harmful Impacts on Early Care and Education" (ED582817).]

Concerns about college costs and affordability are widespread, but who is impacted and what does that impact look like in California? Twenty-two higher education and financial aid experts with a broad array of experiences and viewpoints were asked these questions to understand more about college affordability and the policymaking landscape in California. Among the responses, there was resounding agreement that California has a college affordability problem, despite the state having long prioritized keeping tuition low or even free. Key takeaways include: (1) Affordability issues disproportionately affect lower income, underrepresented, and non-traditional students, including community college students in particular who have access to less financial aid than students at four-year institutions; (2) Affordability challenges contribute to inequities in college enrollment, completion, and student debt burdens, with low-income and minority students less likely to enroll in or complete college, and more likely to have borrowed for college; (3) Housing and food insecurity issues plague students across all types of colleges, adversely impacting students' ability to enroll, graduate, or minimize student loan debt; and (4) Existing state aid programs are not designed to sufficiently address non-tuition costs of college, including housing, food, textbooks, and transportation, particularly in high-cost areas of the state. According to every one of the experts, improving college affordability in California requires better supporting students' ability to pay for non-tuition costs such as housing, food, and transportation, with most experts believing that additional aid is especially needed at community colleges. Additionally, experts universally agreed that equity requires targeting available aid to low-income students, lower-middle-income students, non-traditional students, and particularly vulnerable students who face the greatest financial burdens in covering college costs and who often have the greatest difficulty in navigating the complex system surrounding college costs and financial aid. [Monica Griffith drafted this report.]

As housing prices increase in cities across the country, many teachers are finding it harder to afford to live in the districts in which they teach. Teacher salaries aren't keeping up with the rising cost of living. These challenges are contributing to widespread teacher turnover, which is known to have negative effects on students. Teachers are getting second jobs, moving in with many roommates, moving out of the districts where they teach to areas with lower housing costs, or leaving the profession altogether. Some cities have begun to address these issues by providing affordable housing options for teachers. Already, some of these efforts have been shown to increase teacher retention rates. Across the country, cities with high costs of living, as well as rural areas with low housing inventory, have taken steps to address the high cost of housing for educators. Several studies point to the effectiveness that these efforts have had on both teacher recruitment and retention. This document is a brief look at the projects that are emerging to provide affordable teacher housing.

Economically discriminatory zoning policies--which say that people are not welcome in a community unless they can afford a single-family home, sometimes on a large plot of land--run counter to American ideals and yet are pervasive in America. In most U.S. cities, zoning laws prohibit the construction of duplexes, triplexes, quads, and larger multifamily units on at least three quarters of available land. These policies--coupled with private practices such as racial steering by real estate agents--carry an ugly underlying message: some people are better than others because of how much money they make or the color of their skin. The first part of this report explains the ways in which the U.S. Constitution provides federal authority to reduce harmful local zoning ordinances and reviews the evidence on three key reasons why the federal government should exercise its authority: (1) to reduce economic and racial segregation and discrimination; (2) to improve housing affordability and health; and (3) to fight climate change. The second part briefly reviews the experiences in several cities and states seeking exclusionary zoning reform, with a focus on Minneapolis, Oregon, California, and Virginia. The third part outlines eight leading federal reform ideas, which include efforts to provide incentives for state and local reform through new funding carrots, attaching conditions to the receipt of existing federal funding, and employing a private right of action against government discrimination in federal court. The fourth and final part of the report concludes with recommendations on the best paths forward for the Biden administration and Congress.

Although the United States is touted as a country where anyone could be successful regardless of social class or national background, upward social mobility is hard to attain. Less than one in 10 children born into poverty will reach the top of the income distribution. For many individuals, postsecondary education has historically been a way out of poverty. To increase the number of college degree holders, officials at all levels of government and philanthropic foundations have created initiatives targeted to postsecondary institutions. Given that community colleges provide open access to college at an affordable cost, these institutions have received significant attention in promoting the completion agenda. Latinos, in particular, are a population that can contribute significantly to increasing attainment rates. By 2065, it is projected that nearly one in four U.S. residents will be Latino, up from nearly one in five in 2015. However, only 23 percent of Latinos over the age of 25 have earned an associate's degree or higher -- the lowest rate among any racial and ethnic group currently reported. As the second largest population group in the United States, increasing Latino student college completion is essential to increasing our attainment rates. Institutions looking to create or enhance initiatives that increase access and success should identify programs that work well in one community and adapt the model to account for their specific communities. To provide readers with successful models and strategies, the Association of Community College Trustees (ACCT) interviewed five initiatives at community colleges that have seen positive outcomes. These nationally recognized initiatives were chosen because of their demonstrated commitment to serve students and the community at large. Many of these institutions also serve a substantial number of Latino students, targeting a population that can substantially contribute to the national completion agenda. It is hoped their collective experiences can provide key strategies for success.

These technical appendixes accompany the study, "Who Is Losing Ground with Distance Learning in California?" The study explores key issues California families experienced around distance learning in spring 2020. Using data from the Census Household Pulse Survey, a weekly survey conducted in 2020, the authors document how the COVID-19 pandemic altered Californian households. The findings show that distance learning has widened gaps for children of color, children in low-income families, and children of less-educated parents. The report also offers several recommendations as state and local policymakers consider strategies to improve distance learning and mitigate learning loss. The appendices include: (1) Census PULSE Household Survey; and (2) Additional Tables and Figures. [For the full report, see ED611459.]

The birth of a child can be a simultaneously joyous and challenging time for families. Virtually all parents will struggle with the enormous physical and emotional demands of parenting a very young child, but for too many California families those challenges are additionally compounded by poverty, housing instability, lack of social support, or domestic violence during the early years of parenthood and childhood. Such adverse circumstances can create significant strain within households, introducing stress that disrupts children's development and increases the likelihood of short and long term unfavorable outcomes for both parents and children. Voluntary home visiting is a proven early childhood strategy that helps parents provide the best foundation possible for their children's early development through support, guidance, coaching, and resources. This brief is intended to set the stage for further discussions about how to expand and enhance early childhood home visiting in California.

For the last five years, the California Department of Education (CDE) has reported a steady increase in homeless K-12 students in the state. In the academic year 2018-2019, over 207,000 California K-12 students were without appropriate, consistent and stable housing. Unhoused K-12 students are disproportionately LGBTQ+, migrants, students of color, and students with disabilities, exacerbating existing inequities. Homelessness among young people has also been shown to negatively impact both immediate educational performance and long-term outcomes. The existing homelessness system of care fails to respond effectively to the scale and scope of this problem. Stigma, lack of funding, unclear eligibility criteria, and disjointed coordination impede youth access to housing opportunities and associated services. As a result, there is an immediate need for additional resources and programmatic restructuring at both the state and federal levels to offer unhoused K-12 youth the support they need to thrive. This policy brief analyzes the efficacy of policies and practices responding to unhoused students in the state of California and makes recommendations for policy and programmatic improvement.

This report focuses on pathways to postsecondary education (PSE), including high school completion, for pregnant and parenting teens. Although birth rates among teens have declined in the United States over the last 20 years, one in seven adolescent females (14.4 percent) is expected to give birth before age 20 with females of color (24 percent of Hispanics and 21 percent of African Americans) more than twice as likely to have a child when compared with white females (10 percent) (OAH 2014). For too many of these adolescents, parenthood marks the end of their high school careers and aspirations for attending college. This is unfortunate because completing high school and earning a postsecondary degree or credential are critical for the economic well-being of both teen parents and their children. Very little is known about pathways to PSE for pregnant and parenting teens. Although some studies have focused on programs to prevent subsequent pregnancies among teen parents (Klerman 2004), research is lacking on effective approaches for preparing these students for college. This report represents a first step towards filling that gap. Drawing on a literature and program review, analysis of a small online survey conducted with Health Teen Network (HTN), and consultations with experts in the field, "Pathways to Postsecondary Education," examines barriers and promising approaches to support educational success for pregnant and parenting teens. Among the findings are: (1) More than two out of three young single mothers aged 18 to 24 are poor, and almost half of their children are poor; (2) Only about half of teen mothers receive a high school diploma by the age of 22, compared with about nine in ten women who do not have a child during their teen years; and (3) A survey supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation found that a third of the young women surveyed reported that becoming a parent played a major role in their decision to leave school. This report features eight programs that provide a range of academic and other supports and services to support pathways to PSE, including high school completion, among pregnant and parenting teens: (1) Florence Crittenton High School (FCHS) in Denver, Colorado; (2) Cal-SAFE in California; (3) New Heights in Washington, DC; (4) The Care Center in Holyoke, Massachusetts; (5) Keys to Degrees at Endicott College in Massachusetts; (6) Student Parent HELP Center (SPHC) at the University of Minnesota; (7) Generation Hope, a program started by a former teen mother in Washington, DC; and (8) The Jeremiah Program, a residential program in the twin cities of Minnesota. A list of experts consulted is appended. [This report is a product of IWPR's Student Parent Success Initiative.]

A 1997 study by Lomas and Garside suggests a 62% prevalence rate of ADHD [Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder] amongst homeless, which prompts a need for further elucidation of this relationship. This study sought to examine the relationship between Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and the homeless youth population aged 18-24. The overall focus was to investigate the prevalence rate of ADHD in homeless youth 18-24 and to examine the relationship between ADHD diagnosis (utilizing WURS [Wender Utah Rating Scale] and ASRSv1.1 [Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale]) and relational variables. A structured survey instrument was developed to collect interview data on demographics, employment status, substance abuse and housing instability variables. Twenty-four homeless youths (n = 24, 20 males, 4 females; age range, 18-24, mean age = 21.71 years) were randomly approached (n = 85 approached) and verbally screened for study inclusion based upon reported age between 18 to 24 years. Participants were administered the ASRS-v1.1 and WURS dichotomous response structured survey instruments to determine ADHD diagnosis. Study data suggests a higher prevalence of ADHD in ages 18-21 (WURS 75%; ASRS-v1.1 88%) than ages 22-24 (WURS 56%; ASRS-v1.1 88%). Data suggests a marginally higher rate of ADHD diagnosis in males (ASRS-v1.1 95%; WURS 75%) than females (ASRS-v1.1 75%; WURS 75%). Participants in the 18-21-age cohort experienced an average of 68 days of housing instability while participants in the 22-24-age cohort experienced a proportionally higher average of 278 days of housing instability. Both age cohorts (18-21 and 22-24) suggested a 100% rate of unemployment and substance abuse. Data suggests a higher prevalence of ADHD in homeless youth aged 18-21 (WURS 75%; ASRS-v1.1 88%) that were newly homeless (avg. days experienced housing instability, 68), which may suggest that ADHD symptomatology could be a vulnerability factor influencing youth homelessness. The following are appended: (1) Structured Interview; (2) Consent Form; (3) Survey Instrument ASRS-v1.1: Sample Questions; (4) Survey Instrument WURS: Sample Questions; and (5) Recruitment/Interview Protocols.

After doubling during the Great Recession, tuition at California's public universities has leveled off: since 2012, it has increased by a modest 2.5 percent at the University of California (UC) and has not risen at all at the California State University (CSU). However, tuition is now at all-time highs at UC ($11,442), CSU ($5,472), and the California Community Colleges ($1,104). Given these realities, as well as discussions about college affordability at the federal level, it is not surprising that Californians are concerned about college costs. The November 2018 PPIC Statewide Survey found that 58 percent of Californians think that affordability in higher education is a big problem. Because the amount of financial aid available increases as tuition goes up, at least half of the students across California's three public segments pay no tuition. However, non-tuition costs are significant, especially for students from low-income families. State financial aid programs are focused mostly on tuition, so students must cover costs that add up to thousands of dollars. And these costs are rising: taken together, housing, transportation, and book costs have increased 24 percent since 2012. The benefits of a college education are well documented, and higher education has major implications for economic growth, equality, and social mobility. Given that more than half of the students in California's public K-12 schools are economically disadvantaged, affordability is crucial to the state's future. Making four-year institutions affordable is especially beneficial, because students who start at four-year colleges are more likely to earn bachelor's degrees than those who start at community colleges. For these reasons, the state and its higher education system need to do more to help lower-income students earn college degrees without incurring large amounts of debt. [This publication is part of a briefing kit that highlights California's most pressing higher education challenges in eight key areas. For the complete briefing kit, see ED603851.]

"Stress factor" is defined as any internal or external influence that makes it more difficult for a school or district to carry out its basic mission of providing a high quality education to all its students, as well as to ensure that its students succeed on state and federal accountability measures. This report identifies 11 such stress factors. "Internal" stress factors include teacher layoffs, larger class sizes, fewer instructional days, fewer counselors, cutbacks in summer school, and security threats. "External" stress factors are declining enrollments, increasing childhood poverty, high unemployment, foreclosures, and health insurance coverage. In February 2013, EdSource sent e-mail surveys on these stress factors to California's 30 school districts with the largest enrollments. This report describes the multiple challenges faced by the school districts as "stress factors," and shows whether these stresses have increased, diminished, or stayed the same since 2011-12 and, in some areas, since 2007-08 before the recession began. [For a related report, see "Schools under Stress: Pressures Mount on California's Largest School Districts" (ED606405).]