## Part A **: Supporting Statement for**  **Paperw ork**  **Reduction Ac**  **t Submission**

**Effectiv eness of**  **Promising Strategies in Federal College A** **ccess Programs: Study** 

**of Student Messaging in** 

**GE AR** **UP**

Prepared for: Marsha Silverberg **U.S. Department of Education** 555 New Jersey Ave, NW

Room 502I Wa shington, DC 20208
- 5500

Submitted by: **Ab t A**  **ssociates Inc.** 55 W heeler Street Cambridge, MA 02138**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising Strategies in Federal College Access Programs** 

**Abt Associates Inc. Table of Contents**  **▌ pg**  **. i**  

## Part **A: Supporting Statement for Paperw**  **ork Reduction Ac**  **t Submission**  **Table of Contents Part A: Supporting Statement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submission**  **................................ ......**  **i A.**  **Justification ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **............................. A**  **- 1**  Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. A

- 1 A.1 Circumstances Making the Collection of Information Necessary

................................ .. A

- 6 A.2 Purposes and Use of the Information Collection

................................ ............................ A

- 7 A.2.1 Data to Be Collected

................................ ................................ ....................... A

- 7 A.3 Use of Information Technology and Burden Reduction

................................ ................. A

- 9 A.4 Efforts to Identify Duplication

................................ ................................ ........................ A

- 9 A.5 Efforts to Minimize Burden in Small Businesses

................................ ........................... A

- 9 A.6 Consequences of Not Collecting the Information

................................ ......................... A

- 10 A.7 Special Circumstances Justifying Inconsistenci es with Guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6

.. A

- 10 A.8 Consultation Outside the Agency

................................ ................................ ................. A

- 10 A.8.1 Federal Registrar Announcement

................................ ................................ A

- 10 A.8.2 Consultations Outside the Agency

................................ ............................... A

- 10 A.8.3 Unresolved Issues

................................ ................................ ......................... A

- 10 A.9 Payments or Gifts to Respondents

................................ ................................ ................ A

- 10 A.10 Assurance of Confidentiality

................................ ................................ ........................ A

- 10 A.11 Quest ions of a Sensitive Nature

................................ ................................ .................... A

- 11 A.12 Estimate of Response Burden

................................ ................................ ....................... A

- 11 A.13 Estimate of Total Capital and Startup Costs/Operation and Maintenance Costs to Respondents or Record

- Keepers

................................ ................................ ................... A

- 12 A.14 Estimates of Costs to the Federal Government

................................ ............................. A

- 12 A.15 Changes in Burden

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ A

- 12 A.16 Plans for Analysis, Publication and Schedule

................................ ............................... A

- 13 A.16.1 Analysis Plans

................................ ................................ .............................. A

- 13 A.16.2 Timeline and Publication plans

................................ ................................ .... A

- 15 A.17 Approval to Not Display Expiration Date

................................ ................................ .... A

- 16 A.18 Exceptions to Item 19 of OMB Form 83

- 1

................................ ................................ ... A

- 16 References

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. A

- 17**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **1** 

## A. **Justification Introduction**  The U.S. Department of Education (ED) will conduct a demonstration to test the effectiveness of a promising strategy to improve college

- related outcomes in the federal college access program Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergradu ate Programs (GEAR UP). The demonstration will use a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design to test the effectiveness of sending customized messaging to students , first during the summer after high school graduation , and then in the fall and spring of th eir expected first year of college. This study is being sponsored by ED’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES) , in collaboration with the Office of Postsecondary Education, and implemented by Abt Associates Inc. and its partners, Survey Research Management (SRM), Program and Policy Insight (PPI), Digital Design Group (DDG), and consultant Ben Castleman ( together, the “ study team ”). **Overview of the GEAR UP Program** Section 404H of the Higher Education Act of 1965, amended by the 2008 Higher Education Opportunities Act ( HEOA ) (20 USC 1070A

- 27) authorizes the GEAR UP program. The program provides funding

– over $300 million in FY 2014

– to state agencies and local partnerships to sup port disadvantaged students in obtaining a high school diploma and to prepare them for success in postsecondary education. Grantees are expected to provide a comprehensive set of intervention services such as academic support, counseling, mentoring, and outreach to disadvantaged middle and high school students, as well as information about college financial aid options and the benefits of postsecondary education to students and their families. State grantees may, and partnership grantees must, focus on a co hort of students (typically all those in 7 th or 8 th grade) and provide services to them through high school, though funds can be used to serve other students as well. State GEAR UP grantees are required to, and local partnership can, also provide scholarsh ips to help participating students pay for college attendance. Importantly, starting with the 2008 H igher E ducation O pportunity Act , GEAR UP grantees may now apply for a seventh year of funding to support students into their first year of college in order to improve college enrollment and persistence

. The first group of grantees with this funding, those awarded grants in FY 2011, will begin providing extended services to 2016

- 2017 seniors transitioning to postsecondary education the following year. **Overview of the Student Messaging**  **in GEAR UP Demonstration**  T his demonstration is designed to address a new need among GEAR U P grantees for strategies to serve students during the 7 th year. According to recent focus groups conducted by Abt with GEAR UP grantees, grantees find it difficult to reach every GEAR UP student on a one

- on - one basis while in high school, or to track and support students as they leave s chool and transition to college, particularly since students may be scattered across a variety o f postsecondary institutions both in and out of state. Nationally, a s many as 40 percent of first

- generation, low

- income high school seniors intending to go to college fail to enroll the following fall, with information gaps, logistical complexities, and concerns about in fitting identified as primary explanations of this “summer melt” (Castleman and Paige, 2014). Of those who matriculate, many students drop out during their first**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **2** year or fail to re

- enroll the second year (NSC, 2014 b), and p ersistence is lower among students from low

- income and high minority high schools (NSC, 2014a)

. The demonstration will investigate a particular promising approach emerging from recent rigorous research of approaches to improve college matriculation ( Castleman & Page 2013) and college persistence (Castleman & Page, 2014) thr ough low

- cost student messaging, which may enhance the existing GEAR UP services. C ustomized messages will be sent to students identified as seniors , who intend to go to college, in high schools th at are part of the GEAR UP program

. The messages, delivered via a digital format (phone texting) , will remind students about tasks related to enrolling in and persisting in college. All students will continue to be eligible for any regular GEAR UP services provided. Outcomes for this study will include college enrollment , FAFSA completion, and persistence, which will be drawn from administrative data. Student messaging will proceed in two phases and comprise two independent treatments . Phase 1 messages (Tre atment 1) will be sent during the summer that follows students’ senior year in high school. Phase 2 messages (Treatment 2) will be sent during what would be students’ first year of college if they enroll in college directly after high school. Students ran domly assigned to Treatment 1 will receive a minimum of 10 messages designed to relay information that students may not be aware of or may not have easy access to. The messages will inform students about key enrollment

- related tasks they need to complete s uch as submitting a deposit, filling out the housing form, submitting their proof of health insurance form, registering for classes, etc. Students randomly assigned to Treatment 2 will receive a minimum of 8 messages designed to support students to complet e their first semester and persist into the second semester. These messages will be focused on key tasks students must complete such as paying tuition and registering for the next semester as well as common challenges faced in the first semester such as ac ademic unpreparedness and lack of knowledge about campus supports. All messages will be grounded in both social psychological and behavioral economic research suggesting that the messages be aligned to key time points such as housing deadlines, registratio n deadlines, tuition payment due dates, the add/drop period, and mid

- term exams and that the messages be action oriented such as submit your housing form and go to this webpage to register for classes. To the extent possible, messages will be customized for each student based on the information they provide on the baseline survey about college intentions. For example, deadlines for submitting particular forms and links to find more information will be sp ecific to the college a student indicated as the planned college of enrollment on the baseline survey.**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **3** Exhibit A

- 1 contains a preliminary outline of key prompts that are timed to key milestones or pressure points in enrolling and persisting in college. **Exhibit A**  **- 1. Draft Outline of Student Messages**  **Topic Personalization**  Enrollment Messages (Treatment 1) Log into college's web portal to access important paperwork and deadlines Link to specific website Register for orientation and plac ement tests Institution

- specific registration deadlines Complete housing forms Link to specific forms, include deadlines Sign up or waive health insurance (if relevant) Link to specific forms, include deadlines Submit deposit for fall enrollment Institution

- specific deposit deadlines Register for fall classes Institution

- specific registration deadlines Reminder of orientation and/or welcome activities dates Inst itution

- specific dates/activities Persistence Messages (Treatment 2) Provide links to campus resources for student support Links to specific resources Reminder about upcoming midterms Link to campus specific academic support center Mindset booster on overcoming challenges in college Link to campus counseling center Check financial aid eligibility for second year Link to requirements Register for spring classes Institution

- specific registration deadlines **Overview of the Evaluation** The study will use a rigorous random assignment design to test the effectiveness of sending customized messag es to GEAR UP students

. GEAR UP projects that were awarded awards in Federal Fiscal Year 2011 will be invited to volunteer for the demonstration (see Appendix A for invitation) , because they are the first to have funds to support a 7 th year of servic es . To test the effectiv eness of the customized messaging , the study will assign students within participating high schools s elected by volunteer GEAR UP projects to either a control condition (eligible for all GEAR UP services), or a treatment condition ( eligible for all GEAR UP services, plus receiving the customized messages). Students will be randomly assigned to conditions at two points in time (1) in the spring of th eir senior year of high school and (2) the end of summer after senior of high school. This two

- phase design maximizes our ability to investigate both the effects of messaging during the summer before college and the effects of messaging during freshman year of college.

 At the first phase of random assignment ( end of 2016

- 2017 school year), students in high schools served by GEAR UP projects who declare their intention to enroll in college will be randomly assign ed to receive messages in the summer after high school (Treatment 1) or not (Control 1). The comparison of Treatment 1 to Control 1 will test the impacts of messaging on college enrollment

– i.e., to see if it reduces summer melt among GEAR U P students

.  At the second phase of random assignment ( end of summer 201 7 ), students will be randomly assigned to receive messages (Treatment 2) or not (Control 2) in what would be their first year of college if they go to college right after high school

. Random assignment in this second phase will occur within both the Treatment 1 and Control 1 conditions, so that within**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **4** the Treatment 1 and Control 1 groups, half of the students will be assigned to Treatment 2 and half assigned to Control 2

. Exhibit A

- 2 displays the phases of random assignment and their relationship to each other. Comparison of Treatment 2 to Control 2 will test the im pacts o f different messaging on college persistence. **Exhibit A -**  **2: Two -**  **Phase Randomization Process and Treatment**  **Received**


### Phase 1 **Timing of**

**Randomization College Intending Seniors**  (summer messaging) End of 2016

- 17

school y ear T 1 C1 (summer messaging) (no summer messaging)

Phase 2 End of summer

2017 T2 C2 T2 C2 (frosh messaging) ( summer and frosh messaging ) (only

summer messaging ) (only

frosh messaging ) ( n o

messaging )

Baseline data will be collected from all students via a survey , and college

- related outcome data will be extracted from national datasets (National Student Clearinghouse Data (NSC) and the Federal Student Aid (FSA) database). The study will address the three research questions: 1. To what extent do the messages

— above and beyond the services GEAR UP may already provide

—improve student college

- related outcomes? 2. What types of college advising are typically received by GEAR UP students ? 3. Is there variation in the impact of the messages, and to what extent is the variation associated with student characteristics or features of the GEAR UP project or school? To answer these questions we will conduct both impact and descriptive analyses. The first report, which will address each research question with a focus on college enrollment

- related outcomes , will be published in 2018 . The final report, which will also include college persistence, will be available in 2020

. Exhibit A

- 3 presents the research questions along with the data sources for each question, the analytic approach and outcomes of interest

.**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **5 Exhibit A**  **- 3** 
**. Evaluation Questions, Data Sources, A**  **naly tic A**  **pproach, and Outcomes of Interest**
**Research Question Data Sources**  **Anal yt**  **ic Approach**  **Outcomes of Interest**  1) To what extent do the messages — above and beyond the services GEAR UP may already provide

— improve student college
- related outcomes?  Student rosters
 Student baseline survey data
 National Student Clearinghouse Data
 Federal Student Aid (FSA) database  Impact analysis of RCT (HLM)
 Baseline survey sample: 16 ,000 students in 80 schools.
 Analytic s ample size: approximately 5,600 students in 80 high schools that intend to enroll in college in Phase 1 ; approximately 4,000 students across a larg e number of colleges in Phase 2 , equally divided between treatment and control groups.  College enrollment ( P hase I)
 College persistence into sophomore year ( P hase II)
 FAFSA completion

2) Wh at types of college advising are typically received by GEAR UP students ?  Student baseline survey data  Descriptive analysis
 Survey sample : 16 ,000 students in 80 schools.  Description of GEAR UP program components provided and received 3) Is there variation in the impact of the messages, and to what extent is the variation associated with student characteristics or features of the GEAR UP project or school?  Student baseline survey data
 National Student Clearinghouse Data
 Federal Student Aid (FSA) database  Descriptive (subgroup) analysis
 S ample size : 5,600 students in 80 high schools that intend to enroll in college in Phase 1 ; approximately 4,000 students across a larg e number of colleges in Phase 2

.  College enrollment (Phase I)
 College persistence into sophomore year (Phase II)
 FAFSA completion
Altogether, we expect that 80 GEAR UP high schools will participate in the first phase of the research project, with an estimated total of 16 ,000 seniors

. 1 All seniors will be surveyed, with the consent process giving them (or the parents) an option to o pt of completing the baseline survey or other data collection activities. The survey will gather information from students for participation in the student messaging intervention (see Appendix C for the consent letter).

1 An estimate of the number of seniors in each school is 200, given that the average secondary school enrollment in 2011

- 2012 w as 788 students (NCES, 2013).**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **6** Itis expected that 70 percent of s eniors will express intent to attend college 2 and 50 percent of the se seniors would provide assent and information for texting, resulting in 2,800 students in the T reatment 1 group, and 2,800 students in the C ontrol 1 group . Assuming a matriculation rate for seniors of 50 percent 3 the phase 2 sample will include 4,000 students entering college, 2,000 students in Treatment 2 group and 2,000 students in the Control 2 group

. 

### A. **1 Circumstances Making the Collection of Information Nece**  **ssary** The study’s data collection and design will allow for a rigorous assessment of a promising practice within GEAR UP that focuses on program improvement targeting college

- related outcomes for participating disadvantaged youth

. Nationally, children from disadvantaged families hold lower educational expectations ( Goyette, 2008; Kao & Tienda , 1998) and are less likely to attend, persist, and complete college than their more economically advantaged peers (e.g. Haskins, 2008; Bailey & Dynarski, 2011). For those who do enroll, the transition to and first year in college can bring particular challenges ( Liu, Sharkness, & Pryor, 2008; Darling & Smith (2008) ). While factors such as students’ academic preparation and financial circumstances are cause for concern, a substantial number of low

- income students fall off track in the complex processes of obtaining financial aid, and applying to, enrolling in and stayin g in college (Bowen, Chingos, & McPherson, 2009; Roderick, Nagaoka, Coca, & Moeller, 2008). Experimental evidence suggests that relatively low

- cost interventions may help low

- income students remain on track. For example, an intervention that involved ten text messages with customized messages to college

- intending high school graduates increased college enrollment among students with less access to college

- planning supports and who were not as far along with their college planning at the completion of high school (Castleman & Page 2013). Also, two to three hours of transition counseling during the summer after high school slightly increased college enrollment among students in some sites and improved persistence into the sophomore year even more (Castleman, Page, & Schooley, 2014). Finally, messaging during students’ freshman year providing information about financial aid deadlines and FAFA completion improved c ollege persistence into the sophomore year among community college students (Castelman & Page, 2014 )

. Th ese emerging practices can be tested in the context of GEAR UP, and fill a need to identify effective (or ineffective) strategies for providing 7 th year program services in low

- cost ways. The first cohort of GEAR UP students eligible for those servi ces will be high school seniors in school year 2016

- 2017. The demonstration is being introduced at a key time, before grantees have solidified their plans for the 7 th year and when they are most open to implementing strategies that will be assessed using random assignment.

2 Among 2010 seniors, 82 percent of graduating students planned to attend a postsecondary institution and the percent among parents with no college education was 71 percent (Aud et al. 2012). 3 This is the immediate college enrollment rate in the first fall after high school graduation for students graduating from low income sch ools according to the national student clearinghouse research center (National Student Clearinghou se 2014a).**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **7** 

### A. **2 Purposes and Use of the Information Collection**  This ICR requests approval for data collection that involves burden to the public , which will occur primarily during the first phase of the study when study participants are seniors in high school. Much of the data collection will draw upon administrative data , so the study’s burden on projects and students will mainly be limited to the student roster collection and baseline survey collection. All i nformation will be collected by the Abt stu dy team. Exhibit A

- 4 outlines the combination of administrative and survey data that will be collected to examine the implementation and impacts of the customized messaging intervention. **Exhibit A**  **- 4** 
**. Data Collection Plan**  **Schedule Data**  **Collection Activity**  **Respondent Mode**  **Phase I –**  **College Matriculation Study** Wi nter 2015
- 2016 List of participating

schools GEAR UP grantees will identify schools that serve seniors and are willing to participate in the study GEAR UP project directors/ site coordinators E
- mail

Fall 2016 List of GEAR UP

seniors Gather student rosters of high

school seniors with access to GEAR UP services from participating schools GEAR UP project directors/ site coordinators Electronic
Spring 2017 Administer baseline

survey Administer a brief baseline

survey to capture student assent, intention to enroll in college, and a small number of covariates for the analysis (e.g., demographics) Students (high school) Paper/ Electro

nic

Fall 2017 Obtain data from

National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) and Federal Student Aid Center (FSA) NSC will provide matriculation

and persistence outcome data ; FSA data will indicate whether student completed the FAFSA for the first and second years of college None (administrative record) Electronic

**Phase II –**  **College Persistence Study** Fall 2018 Obtain data from

National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) and Federal Student Aid Center (FSA) NSC will provide matriculation

and persistence outcome data ; FSA data will indicate whether student renewed the FAFSA None (administrative record) Electronic

**A. 2.1**  **Data to Be Collected**  This ICR requests clearance for all collection activities of the demonstration. **Student Rosters.** The study team will collect rosters of high school seniors who have access to GEAR UP services in the high school s in the demonstration . In order to obtain this information, the study team will request student rosters from the GEAR UP site coordin ator from participating schools (see Appendix B for roster request)

. In requesting student rosters, the study team will request only directory information as designated under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and its implementing regulations (20 U. S.C 1232g and 34 CFR Part 99) such as the student’s name, email, date of birth, telephone number, zip code, p arent contact information, and district or school**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **8** identification numbers. 4 These data will help in locating students and parents for the study’s co nsent processes and baseline data collection effort. The study team will reach out to each site coordinator via a telephone call during the middle of the 2016

- 2017 academic year to request st udent rosters of 12 th grade GEAR UP students . Site coordinators w ill be asked to submit student rosters through a password protected secure file transfer portal (SFTP). **Baseline Student Survey** . The baseline student survey will be administered in the spring of the 2016/2017 school year to high school seniors who have n ot opted

- out or whose parents have not opted out (see Appendix C for consent letter) . The survey is voluntary and student assent will be collected at the beginning of the baseline student survey. The baseline survey will collect data that will: be used to determine eligibility for the intervention (students must be intending to enroll in college); be used as covariates to improve the precision of impact estimates; and allow for checks on the equivalence of the treatment and control group individuals that ar e included in the final analytic sample (see Appendix D for student survey) . The baseline survey will gather information about student demographics and other characteristics that are likely correlated with college

- going outcomes. These characteristics will include college

- going expectations and plans, 5 such as the number of colleges to which a student plans to apply; the type of degree the student plans to pursue first after high school graduation (Associate’s or Bachelor’s); knowledge of the college applic ation process; and understanding of financial aid options and college costs. As such the student survey does not contain any questions of a sensitive nature. In developing the survey we will consider scales with established validity and reliability wheneve r possible. The baseline student surveys will be administered in paper or electronic format during . To facilitate data collection, the site liaison will work with each GEAR UP school to: facilitate the logistics for the baseline student survey administration ; track response rates and communicate with project directors /site coordinators , as needed; remind absent students about the survey (see Appendix E for survey reminder) ; and distribute individualized thank you or reminder letters to students near the end of the survey field ing period. **Postsecondary Enrollment and Financial Aid Data .**  In November 2017, postsecondary enrollment data will be extracted from the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) for students who were seniors in 2016

- 17 . The NSC data cover all 50 states and both public and private institutions. The NSC provides student

- level data on college enrollment and completion for 9,800 member institutions; together, these institutions represent 91 percent of enrolment in higher education in the U.S. Although the NSC has lower coverage of two

- year than four

- ye ar institutions, fewer private than public

4 Only districts and schools that have directory information policies in place prior to July 1, 201 6 that allow for student information designat ed as “ directory information” to be shared in compliance with Federal law w ith the evaluator will be included in the participating GEAR UP high schools. In accordance with FERPA, if any parents or guardians of a s tudent opt out of the disclosure of “direct ory information,” the school or district will not provide the “directory information” for that student to the evaluator unless the parent or guardian of that student provides consent under 34 CFR 99.30.
5 Students who indicate some intent to attend college will be eligible for the intervention and w ill comprise the pool of students who are randomly assigned to the treatment and control conditions.**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **9** institutions, and gaps in data in some states, no other national

- level datasets contain individual student

- level data on postsecondary enrollment, full

- time versus part

- time status and completion. In November 2017, data on FAFSA completion and receipt of Federal student aid (such as Pell grants, Federal Work

- Study, etc.) will be obtained from the FSA data center. To obtain these data, we will prepare a d ata file containing identifying information for students in the study sample for submission to the FSA. N SC and FSA data will be obtained again in November 2018 to assess persistence into a second year of college for the treatment and control groups. The collection of all NSC and FSA data will be completely non

- intrusive to students since their directory information from rosters and baseline surveys will be used for all subsequent follow

- ups. 

### A. **3 Use of Information Technology**  **and Burden Reduction** The data collection plan reflects sensitivity to issues of efficiency, accuracy, and respondent bu rden. The study will use a combination of mechanical and electronic technology to collect data. For each data collection task, the study team has selected the form of technology that enables the collection of valid and reliable information in an efficient way while minimizing respondent burden. T he Abt study team will collect student rosters from site coordinators. To minimize burden, the evaluator’s electronic mail a ddress and toll

- free telephone number will be included on the request for student rosters should site coordinators have questions , and site coordinators will be provided with an SFTP link to upload rosters with minimal effort and time . Taken together, thes e procedures are all designed to minimize the burden on respondents. Additionally, we will explore with individual schools whether the student baseline survey can be administered electronically, or with a paper

- and

- pencil option if computer access on a cl assroom level scale is not feasible. Further, the study will rely on existing sources of data for much of the data, which will add no respondent burden. 

### A. **4 Efforts to Identify Duplication**  To date, there has been no rigorous study of strategies that could improve the effectiveness of enhancements to GEAR UP related to students’ matriculation and persistence in college. Our survey instruments will be designed to reflect the efforts of a consortium of state GEAR UP grantees to develop common program service definitions. T o the extent possible, the study team will use existing data for the study rather than duplicate data collection efforts. The study team will utilize all publically available data on high school characteristics and about GEAR UP programming. The information collected in the student rosters and in the student survey is not available elsewhere. 

### A. **5 Efforts to Minimize Burden in Small Businesses**  No small businesses will be involved as respondents. The primary small entities for this study are GEAR U P high schools. T he study team will minimize burden by training data collection staff to ma ke their contacts with GEAR UP site coordinators as straightforward and concise as possible. Further, the study team will administer the student survey, minimizing the burden placed on site**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **10** coordinators. All notification mailings, conversations, and presentations are designed to be clear, brief, and informative

. 

### A. **6 Consequences of Not Collecting the Information**  The consequences of not collecting specific data are descri bed below:

 Without collecting the student rosters, the study team could not identify the survey sample or define treatment and control groups, rendering it impossible to conduct the study.

 Without collecting data through the student baseline survey, the st udy team would not be able to identify which GEAR UP students intend to matriculate in college , and, consequently, which students are eligible to receive the messages. In addition, not collecting the student baseline survey data would limit the study’s abi lity to make conclusions about the intervention impact on matriculation and persistence.

 Without collecting the NSC and FSA data the study team could not measure the key outcomes and complete the impact analyses. 

### A. **7 Special Circumstances Justify**  **ing Inconsis tencies with Guidelines in 5**  **CFR 1320.6** There are no special circumstances concerning the collection of information in this study. 

### A. **8 Consultation Outside the A**  **gency A.**  **8.1 Federal Registrar**  **An nouncement**  A 60

- day notice to solicit public comments was published in the Federal Register on DATE

. XXX comments were received. **A. 8.2**  **Consultations Outside the A gency**  Over the course of the study, the study team will assemble a Technical Working Group (in consultation with ED) composed of consultants with various types of expertise in the areas relevant to this study. The Technical Working Group will convene in the spring of 2015 to discuss the study design, instrumentation, and data collection plans. **A. 8.3**  **Unresolved Issues** There are no unresolved issues. 

### A. **9 Pay**  **ments or Gifts to Respondents** T here will be no payments or gifts to respondents. 

### A. **10 As**  **surance of Confidentiality** The study team will conduct all activities in accordance with all relevant regulations and requirements. Thes e include the Education Sciences Institute Reform Act of 2002, Title I, Part E, Section 183, that requires “[all] collection, maintenance, use, and wide dissemination of data by the Institute ... to conform with the requirements of section 552 of Title 5, Un ited States Code, the confidentiality standards of subsections (c) of this section, and sections 444 and 445 of the General**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **11** Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232 g, 1232h).” These citations refer to the Privacy Act, the Family Education Rights and Priva cy Act, and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment. In addition, all data collected for the study shall remain confidential in accordance with Section 552a of Title 5, United States Code, the confidentiality standards subsection (c) and sections 444 and 445 of the General Educations Provision Act. Subsection (c) of Section 183, referenced above, requires the director of IES to “develop and enforce standards designed to protect the confidentiality of persons in the collection, reporting, and publication of data.” The study will also adhere to requirements of subsection (d) of Section 183 prohibiting disclosure of individually identifiable information as well as making the publishing or inappropriate communication of individually identifiable information by employees or staff a felony. In addition, the following verbatim language will appear on all letters, fact sheets, and other study materials: Per the policies and procedures required by the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Title I, Part E, Section 18 3, responses to this data collection will be used only for statistical purposes. The reports prepared for this study will summarize findings across the sample and will not associate responses with a specific program, district , or individual. Any willful disclosure of such information for nonstatistical purposes, except as required by law, is a class E felony. Data will be presented in aggregate statistical form only. All study staff involved in collecting, reviewing, or analyzing individual

- level data will be knowledgeable about data security procedures and will sign nondisclosure agreements (see Appendix F) . Respondents will be assured that all information identifying them or their school will be kept private to the extent allowed by law. The confidentiality procedures adopted for this study during all rounds of data collection, data processing, and analysis consist of the following:

 All paper files will be converted to an electronic format and the paper files will be shredded immediately after they have bee n converted

.
 Electronic data files with sensitive data will be removed from computers and working servers in a manner that ensures that the information cannot be recovered

.
 At end of contract with the ED, the Abt study team will prepare a restricted use data file of de

- identified data that will be submitted to ED. The Abt study team will destroy all student identifiers but will retain de

- identified student data for three years.

 All electronic copies of de

- identified student data maintained by the Abt stu dy team will be destroyed within three years of the final contract payment from ED, unless otherwise directed by ED at the request of the Abt study team or by ED’s request

. 

### A. **11 Questions of a Sensitive Nature**  There are no questions of a sensitive nature included in the information requested. 

### A. **12 Estimate of Response Burden**  The total respondent burden for the data collection effort covered by this clearance request is 4 ,160 hours, for a total estimated cost to resp ondents of $ 4,123.20

. Exhibit A

- 5 presents time estimates of**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **12** respon dent burden for the data collection activities requested for approval in this submission. The burden estimates are based on the following assumptions:

 One site coordinator is expected at ea ch of the anticipated 80 high schools. It is assumed that collecting and submitting the GEAR UP student rosters in each school will take approximately two hours.

 The total cost to site coordinators to collect student rosters is $ 4,123 .20 . The salary estimate for School and Career Counselors is based on an average hourly wage of $25.77 in 2012

. 6

.
 An average of 2 00 students in the 80 schools. It is estimated that the survey will take 15 minutes to complete. **Exhibit A -**  **5**
**. Estimate of Respondent Burden** 

**In formant/Data Collection**  **Activit y** **# o** **f R** **e s** **p o** **n d** **e n** **t s** **# o** **f R** **e s** **p o** **n s** **e s** **H o** **u r** **s /** **R e** **s p** **o n** **s e** **T o** **t a** **l B** **u r** **d e** **n H** **o u** **r s** **/ r** **e s** **p o** **n d** **e n** **t T** **o t** **a l** **B u** **r d** **e n** **H o** **u r** **s C** **o s** **t p** **e r** **R e** **s p** **o n** **d e** **n t** **( h** **o u** **r l** **y w** **a g** **e )** **T o** **t a** **l C** **o s** **t s** **p e** **r R** **e s** **p o** **n d** **e n** **t T** **o t** **a l** **C o** **s t** **s**

**GEAR UP Site Coordinators** Collect and Submit Student Rosters 80 1 2.0 2.0 160 $25. 7 7 $51. 5 4 $ 4,123.20 **Students** Student Baseline Data Collection 16 ,000 1 0.25 0.25 4 ,000 NA NA NA **Total 4**  **,160 $**  **4,123.20**


### A. **13 Estimate of Total Capital and Startup Costs/Operation and Maintenance**  **Costs to Respondents or Record**  **- Keepers**  There are no annualized capital/startup or ongoing operation and maintenance costs involved in random assignment or the collection of student rosters. 

### A. **14 Estimates of Costs to the Federal Government**  The estimated cost to the federal government of the data collection activities for the study as described above is $ 1,769,371 . The data collection activities will be carried out from fall 2015 to fall 2018. Thus, the average annual cost to the federal government is $ 442,342

. 

### A. **15 Changes in Bur**  **den** This is a request for a new collection of information.

6 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2014

- 15 Edition , School and Career Counselors, on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/ooh/community

- and

- social

service/school

- and

- career - counselors.htm ( January 8, 2015 ).**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **13** 

### A. **16 Plans for A**  **naly sis, Publication and Schedule**  **A. 16.1**  **An aly**  **sis Plans** Impact and descriptive analyses will be conducted to answer the study research questions, as described below. Part B of this Supporting S tatement provides additional methodological detail. **1. To w**  **hat extent do the messages**  **— above and beyond the services GEAR UP may already**  **provide**

**— improve**  **student outcomes ?**  Given that participating schools are volunteering to participate in the study (rather than being selected at random) and inferences will be focused on students in th e se or similar schools, the study will use a model with fixed treatment effects to assess the effect of messaging on student outcomes (Schochet, 2008)

. 7 The study team will contro l for student demographic characteristics, including gender, race/ethnicity, and first gener ation college student status. Reflecting the randomization of students within schools, the study team will include a set of dummy variables for schools and a treatment indicator to provide an estimate of the average impact of the messaging demonstration on students across all schools. The study team will conduct a test of the null hypothesis of no treatment impact for each outcome variable. The study team will interpret a positive and statistically significant impact at the 5

- percent level (using a two

- tailed test) as compelling scient ific evidence that the intervention improves the targeted outcome (e.g., college enrollment, college persistence, FAFSA completion). For continuous outcome variables, the study team will estimate multilevel linear models; for dichotomous outcomes (e.g., co llege enrollment, FAFSA completion), the study team will estimate multilevel logistic regression models. **Multilevel Logistic Regression** For dichotomous outcomes (e.g., enrollment, persistence, and FAFSA completion), a logistic regression will be used. This model is: 

### (1) [ = 1 ] = ( 

###  0 + 

###  1 ( T ij ) + 

###  2 ( Y ∗ ij ) + 

#  

 1
1 J j 

###  2 + j 

### Sch

j + 

# 

 M

m 1 

###  2 + ( J

− 1 ) + m 

### X mij )
Where is the covariate

- adjusted log

- odds of the outcome occurring (e.g., enrolled in college, completed FAFSA) versus not occurring (e.g., did not enroll in college, did not complete FAFSA) for students in school j ; is a regression coefficient indicating the difference in log

- odds of the outcome between the treatment and control group , controlling for all other variables in the model ; and through parameter estimate for the average effect (in log

- odds) of each student

- level covariate on the outcome , controlling for all other variables in the model. To convert estimates produced by logistic regression to an impact measured in percentage point increases in probability of the binary outcome, we calculate the individual level probability of the outcome given treatment implied by individual level covariates and model estimates, we repeat this calculation if the individual were assigned to control, and find the mean difference between these two probabilities.

7 If we suspect that treatment effects differ by school, we will interact schools with the treatment indicator.**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **14 Hi**  **erarchical Linear Model** The following model will be used to estimate program impacts on continuous outcome variables. Given that our core outcome measures (i.e., confirmatory contrasts) are all dichotomous (i.e., college enrollment, FAFSA completion, and p ersistence into the second year of college), this HLM describes our methodology for assessing exploratory contrasts.
Y ij = 

###  0 + 

###  1 (T ij ) + 

###  2 (Y * ij ) + 

#  

 1
1 J j 

###  2+j 

### Sch

j + 

# 

 M

m 1 

###  2+(J

- 1)+m 

### X m ij + ij

 where Y ij is the value of the outcome (e.g., amount of Federal financial aid received) for the i th student in the j th GEAR UP school; T ij is 1 if student i is randomized to the treatment condition in schools j and 0 if assigned to the control condition in school j ; Y * ij is the baseline score for the outcome of interest for student i in school j ; 

### Sch j 

### = 1 if student is in school j, =0 else; 

### X mij are 

###  additional covariates representing demographic characteristics of student i at school j ( e.g., race/ethnicity, English language learner status ); 

###  0 is the conditional mean follow

- up score for the outcome of interest for control students; 1 

###  is the treatment effect i.e. the mean difference of the outcome between intervention and control students. The overall treatment estimate ( 

###  1 ) and will be a precis ion

- weighted estimate, where the weights are inversely proportional to the variance of the treatment effect in each school. ij 

###  is the residual error term assumed to be normally distributed with mean 0 and variance 

###  2

. **2. What types of**  **college advising are typically**  **received by GEAR UP**  **students ?**  Descriptive analyses will be used to provide information on the types of college advising GEAR UP students typically receive. It is important to understand the existing college advising to which the messaging will be added. Further, this collection and analysis has the added benefit of filling a gap in program information about the intensity of and emphasis on college advising. T he study team will describe the types and intensity of college advising regularly received by GEAR UP students at the high school level as reported on the student survey. One example of the type of college advising that mi ght be received by students is one - on - one counseling or advising session s about applying to college ; the study team would describe the percent of students that attend ing such sessions. These results will provide another important source of contextual information for interpreting impact fin dings. **3. Is there variation in the impact of the**  **messages , and to what extent is the variation**  **associated with student characteristics or**  **features of the GEAR UP project or school**  **?** To examine variation in program impacts by student characteristics or features of the GEAR UP project or school, the study team will include an interaction of the treatment indicator with the subgroup variable of interest in the impact model s described above. 8 The study team will include interaction terms in the model for our core dichotomous outcomes of college enrollment, FAFSA completion, and college persistence (i.e., equation 1 above), allowing the treatment impact to vary by student characteristics, such as knowledge of the college application process, understanding of financial aid options and college costs, or amount of college advising received (e.g. one - on - one

8 This approach requires the assumption that gender is not correlated with the marginal effect of the other mo del covariates. We will eval uate whether this assumption is tenable during preliminary data exploration.**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **15** counseling or advising session s about applying to college )

– or by program characteristics su ch as whether the GEAR UP program was funded under a state grant or a partnerships grant. If significant interaction effects are found , the sample will be broken into subgroups , the treatment effect will be estimated for each subgroup, and the means and variances of the subgroup will be compared **A. 16.2**  **Timeline and Publication plans Timeline**  The study is expected to be conducted across five years. Exhibit A

- 6 (below) displays the full study timeline. The student baseline survey will be administered in the spring of 2017, the random assignment for Phase I will take place in the late spring of 2017, and the randomization for Phase II will take place at the end of the summer of 2017. NSC and FSA data will be collected in the fall of 2017 and 2018

. **Exhibit A -**  **6 Study**  **Timeline**

**Timeframe Activity** 

**Planning** Fall 2014 Refine the study design and develop data collection forms

Winter 2015 Revise data collection forms; obtain approval from Abt’s

Institutional Review Board (IRB); intervention design Spring 2015 Submit Office of Management and Budget (OMB) package (for

approval by October); refine intervention design Summer 2015 Refine intervention design; revise OMB package as needed

Recruitment

**Recruitment** Fall 2015 Develop recruitment materials; Finalize intervention design

Winter 2016 Recruit GEAR UP grantees and schools; Setup intervention

message delivery system. Spring 2016 Ensure schools and districts have necessary approval from their

review boards Summer 2016 Finalize commitments from grantees and schools **Roster and Baseline Data**  **Collection** Fall 2016 Collect 12th grade rosters from participating schools

Winter 2016 Obtain student and parent consent Spring 2017 Ad minister baseline surveys to all seniors with consent
.

Conduct first random assignment of students intending to enroll in college. **Intervention Imple**  **mentation** Summer 2017 D eliver college enrollment reminders Conduct second random assignment. Fall & Spring 2017 Send college persistence messages through students’ first year

of college **Outcom es Data**  **Collection** Fall 2017 Obtain extant data from National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) and Federal Student Aid data center (FSA) Fall 2018 Obtain extant NSC and FSA data **Reporting** Spring 2018 Draft Report #1

Summer 2018 Final Report #1 Summer 2019 Draft Persistence Report Winter 2020 Final Persistence Report **Publication plans** The evaluation plans call for two reports. The first, published in summer 2018 , will be based on data collected through 2017 that addresse s Phase I of the study (i.e., college enrollment and FAFSA completion). The s e cond report will be available in early 2020, and will cover the Phase II of the study (i.e., college persistence).**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **16** 

### A. **17 Ap**  **proval to Not Display Expiration Date**  No exemption is requeste d. The data collection instruments will display the expiration date. 

### A. **18 Exceptions to Item 19 of OMB Form 83**  **- 1**  The submission descri bing data collection requires no exemptions to the Certificate for Paperwork Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.9).**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **17** 

### References Aud, S., Hussar, W., Johnson, F., Kena, G., Roth, E., Manning, E., Wang, X., & Zhang, J. (2012). The condition of education 2012 (NCES 2012

- 045). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved June 27, 201 2 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. Bailey, M. J., & Dynarski, S. M. (2011). Inequality in postsecondary education. In G. J. Duncan and R. J. Murnane (Eds.). Whither opportunity? Rising inequality and the uncertain life chances of disadvantaged children. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Bowen, W. G., Chingos, M.M., & McPherson, M.S. 2009. Crossing the Finish Line: Completing College at America’s Public Universities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Castleman, B. L. & Page, L. C. (2013). The not
- so - lazy days of summer: Experimental interventions to increase college entry among low

- income high school students. New Directions for Youth Development, 140 , 77

- 97. Castleman, B.L., & Page, L.C. (2014). Freshman year financial aid nudges: An experiment to increase FAFSA renewal and college persistence. EdPolicy Works Working Paper. Available http://curry.virginia.edu/uploads/resourceLibrary/29_Freshman_Year_Financial_Aid_Nudges .pdf Cas tleman, B.L., Page, L.C., & Schooley, K. (2014). The forgotten summer: Mitigating summer attriti on among college

- intending low

- income high school graduates. The Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. DOI: 10.1002/pam.21743 Darlin g , R. & Smith, M. (2008 ). First

- generation college students: First

- year challenges. In M. S. Hunter, B McCalla

- Wriggins, & E. White (Eds) Academic Advising: New Insights for Teaching and Learning in the First Year . National Resource Center for the First

- Year Experience and Stude nts in Transition , Columbia SC. Goyette, K. A. (2008). College for some to college for all: Social background, occupational expectations, and educational expectations over time. Social Science Research , 37(2), 461

- 484. Haskins, R. (2008). Education and eco nomic mobility. In J. B. Isaacs, I. V. Sawhill, and R. Haskins (Eds.). Getting ahead or losing ground: Economic mobility in America. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. Retrieved June 27, 2012 from http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2008/02/e conomic

- mobility

- sawhill. Kao, G., & Tienda, M. (1998). Educational aspirations of minority youth. American Journal of Education, 106(3), 349

- 384. Liu , A., Sharkness , J., & Pryor , J. (2008). Findings from the 2007 Administration of Your First College Year (YFCY): National Aggregates

. Higher Education Research Institute , University of California, Los Angeles . Available http://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFS/YFCY_2007_Report05

- 07

- 08.pdf National Center for Education Statistics (2012). Digest of Education Statistics, 2011. Washington, DC : US Department of Education.**Revised OMB Supporting Statement Promising**  **Strategies in Federal College Access Programs**

**Abt Associates Inc. Part A: Justification**  **▌ pg.**  **A -**  **18** National Center for Education Statistics (2013). Common Core of Data (CCD), "Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey," 2011

- 12. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_216.80.asp National Student Clearinghouse (2014a). Report: High School Benchmarks 2014 , National College Progression Rates f

or high schools participating in the N ational Student Clearinghouse Student Tracker S ervice . Available http://nscresearchcenter.org/hsbenchmarks2014 National Student Clearinghouse (2014b). Snapshot Report: First

- Year Persistence an d Retention Rates by Starting Enrollment Intensity: 2009

- 2012 . Available: http://nscresearchcenter.org/snapshotreport

- persistenceretention14/ Roderick, M., Nagaoka, J., Coca, V., & Moeller, E. (2009). From High School to the Future: 

### Mak ing Hard Work Pay Off. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Schochet, P. (2008). Statistical Power for Random Assignment Evaluations of Education Programs. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics , 33 (1), 62

- 87. U.S. Department of Education. ( 201 4 ). Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Pr ograms (GEAR UP) Funding Status. Retrieved on January 13 , 201 5 from: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/funding.html