Does Policy Design Matter? Comparing Universal and Targeted Approaches to Encouraging College Participation

Abstract

This article compares universal and targeted program designs in the federal and state programs to encourage participation in higher education. It begins by reviewing the policy design literature in political science. Then, using that literature, it compares the experiences of universally designed state policies (subsidies for low tuition) and targeted state policies (high-tuition/high-aid funding). It also compares the experience of a universally designed federal program (Pell Grants) with a targeted program (Stafford Loans). The analysis concludes that design had only a limited impact on program sustainability. However, the federal loan programs seemed more sustainable than the Pell Grant. Finally, the article notes the rise of a new design strategy, reverse targeting, evident in the state merit scholarship and federal tax credit programs. This design seems more politically popular than either of the conventional designs.