Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s 

College Access Program 

Submitted to:

AmeriCorps 

250 E St., SW

Washington, DC 20024

Submitted by:

ICF Incorporated, LLC

9300 Lee Highway

Fairfax, VA 22031

https://www.icf.com

December 18, 2020

This report was commissioned by AmeriCorps’ Office of Research and Evaluation 

under Blanket Purchase Agreement # CNSHQ14A0006 and Contract # 

95332A19F‐0062. Information in this report is in the public domain. Please, direct 

communications related to this report to Lily Zandniapour at 

lzandniapour@cns.gov and Sarah Yue at syue@cns.gov. Cite this report as follows: 

Munaretto, C., Casey, B., Miller, B., Modicamore, D., Naugler, A., & Pershing, J. 

(2020). Return on Investment Study: College Possible College Access Program. ICF.
i 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

CONTENTS

Executive Summary ................................................................................................... ES-1

College Possible.................................................................................................... ES-1

Return on Investment Study Methods.................................................................... ES-2

Benefits and Costs................................................................................................. ES-5

ROI Results............................................................................................................. ES-6

Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1

Study Overview .......................................................................................................... 1

Program Description........................................................................................................ 1

College Possible Evaluation History ............................................................................ 2

Selection of College Possible’s College Access Program in Minnesota for the 

AmeriCorps ROI Project.............................................................................................. 6

ROI Methodology ............................................................................................................ 7

Monetizing Benefits and Costs.................................................................................... 9

ROI Study Limitations ................................................................................................ 17

Benefits, Costs, and ROI Results ..................................................................................... 18

Benefits..................................................................................................................... 18

Costs ........................................................................................................................ 19

ROI Results................................................................................................................ 20

Recommendations for Further Research........................................................................ 22

Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix A: Benefits and Costs Included in Return on Investment Calculations ........... 23

Appendix B: Additional Information on the Methodology ............................................. 32

Methodology Overview ........................................................................................... 32

Measuring Benefits................................................................................................... 33

Benefits to Government ........................................................................................... 40

Measuring Costs....................................................................................................... 50

ROI Calculation........................................................................................................ 50

References .................................................................................................................... 53
ii

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

AUTHORS

This study was conducted by researchers from ICF: 

• Claire Munaretto, Senior Economics Analyst

• Brendan Casey, Senior Economics Analyst

• Benjamin Miller, Senior Director

• Dominic Modicamore, Lead Economist

• Alix Naugler, Research Scientist

• Janet Pershing, Vice President
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-1 

Executive Summary 

College Possible

AmeriCorps contracted with ICF Incorporated, 

LLC (hereafter ICF) to explore and quantify the 

return on investment (ROI) of several programs 

that rely on national service—AmeriCorps and 

AmeriCorps Seniors—as a major resource to 

sustain operations. ROI analyses have the 

potential to help AmeriCorps measure the 

performance of programs and to help build 

the base of evidence for future resource 

allocation decisions. In addition, ROI study 

results will help AmeriCorps communicate the 

value of its programs to relevant stakeholders. 

This ROI study measures the benefits of College 

Possible’s College Access program against its 

costs.

College Possible is a college readiness, access, 

and success organization that supports and 

coaches low-income students through ACT 

and SAT test preparation, college application 

assistance, financial aid consulting, guidance during the transition from high school to 

college, and ongoing support toward degree completion (Ingram et al., 2018).

Students apply to receive College Possible support during their sophomore year. To 

qualify, students must a) be from low-income families, b) have grade point averages of 

2.0 or higher, and c) express interest in attending a four-year college. For students that 

are accepted, College Possible organizes its services into two programs: 

• College Access Program. The College Access program serves students during their 

junior and senior years of high school. Students attend after-school sessions led by 

AmeriCorps member coaches for two hours twice a week throughout those two 

school years in a supportive group of college-bound peers. Coaches implement an 

interactive curriculum designed to guide students through the key aspects of 

preparing for college. Topics include finding a best-fit college, academic 

preparation, financial planning, and personal development. Summer Bridge is a 

component of the college access program that uses in-person and text-based 

coaching to help student stay on the college track over summer break.

• College Success Program. After high school, college students receive coaching 

through the transition to college and are supported all the way through college 

graduation. Depending on the college they attend, students will receive in-person 

coaching on campus or technology-based coaching. Coaches connect students 

to resources on campus, help them tackle barriers, and help them identify future 

opportunities.

Key Results

This study estimates College 

Possible’s ROI to be between

$1.50 and $6.41 per funder dollar, 

depending on how long program 

participants and AmeriCorps 

members experience increased 

earnings as a result of College 

Possible’s College Access 

program. The return on each dollar 

of federal support for the program 

is even higher. The magnitude of 

the results is driven by strong 

employment and earnings 

outcomes for participants and 

benefits to AmeriCorps members of 

national service that increase their 

earnings.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-2 

College Possible, a nonprofit organization, 

comprises a national office in St. Paul, 

MN, and six other offices that provide services 

in the metropolitan areas: Portland, OR; 

Philadelphia, PA; Chicago, IL; Milwaukee, WI; 

Omaha, NE; and Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN. 

Return on Investment Study Methods

The methodology for the ROI study of 

College Possible’s College Access program 

in Minnesota consists of the following 

components: 

1. Measuring and monetizing program 

benefits. This includes using data from 

previous evaluations and other third-party sources to determine benefits. Benefits 

are realized across three stakeholder groups: College Access participants, College 

Possible AmeriCorps members, and the government. Specifically, the benefits 

realized include future increased earnings for College Access participants, derived 

from increased educational attainment, and future increased earnings for 

AmeriCorps members, derived from increased employment and educational 

attainment. AmeriCorps members also earn education awards after their service 

and receive living allowances during their service, which are both member benefits. 

Government benefits include tax revenue generation from increased economic 

activity and future earnings as well as reduced spending on corrections, public 

assistance, and social insurance. This analysis monetized program benefits using 

various proxies and summed those amounts to quantify the impact of the College 

Access program in 2019 dollars.

2. Assessing program costs. College Possible’s total program costs were analyzed for

the 2017–2018 academic year in 2019 dollars and then prorated to College Access 

participants.

3. Calculating the ROI. Minnesota’s College Access program participation for students 

have found improvements in high school graduation, college applications, 

enrollment, and graduation. This analysis focuses on the impacts of College Possible 

for Minnesota’s College Access students alone. Total College Possible costs and 

benefits are scaled to Minnesota’s College Access students to develop the figures 

used in the ROI calculations. The ROI analysis includes three ROI calculations, which 

are each assessed under three scenarios representing different assumptions about 

the persistence of program outcomes: 

College Possible’s 

College Access Program Impact: 

Selected Evaluation Results

This ROI study measures the 

benefits of College Possible’s 

College Access program against 

its costs. A randomized controlled 

trial (RCT) study found that the 

College Access program 

increased initial enrollment at 

four-year colleges by more than 

15 percentage points for program 

participants (Avery, 2013).
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-3 

• Total benefits per federal dollar 

• Total benefits per funder dollar1

• Federal government benefits per federal dollar

The analysis calculated the value of these ROI calculations under three scenarios 

representing different assumptions about the persistence of program outcomes. 

The analytical framework includes only those benefits that could be reasonably 

monetized given the available data, and that likely would not have occurred 

without the AmeriCorps program. Figure ES-1 shows how College Access program

activities can result in benefits to College Access participants, AmeriCorps members, 

and the government. 

Figure ES-1. Benefits among College Access Participants, AmeriCorps Members, and 

Government Derived from College Possible

1 College Possible funding derives from government grants, contributions and grants, other contributions, 

and program fees (College Possible, 2019). 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-4 

Figure ES-2 shows the benefits and costs that are included in each type of ROI 

calculation. 

Figure ES-2. Benefits and Costs Included in the ROI Calculations

ROI Calculation Benefits (numerator) Costs (denominator)

Total Benefits per Federal 

Dollar 

All participant, AmeriCorps 

member, and government 

benefits derived from the 

College Possible program 

• Federal AmeriCorps 

funding

Total Benefits per Funder 

Dollar 

All participant, AmeriCorps 

member, and government 

benefits derived from the 

College Possible program 

• Federal AmeriCorps 

funding

• Budgeted match funding

• All other funding

Federal Government Benefits 

per Federal Dollar 

Additional tax revenue 

generation and reduced 

spending attributable to the 

College Possible program 

• Federal AmeriCorps 

funding

Available data established that both College Access participants and AmeriCorps 

members experience increased educational attainment leading to positive future

employment impacts and increased earnings as a result of the program. However, the 

data do not establish the duration of the increased earnings benefits. To address a 

range of possible durations for those benefits, the analysis includes three scenarios:2 

• Short-Term. This scenario assumes short-term earnings impacts. The assumption is that 

earnings impacts are limited to a single year.

• Medium-Term. This scenario assumes a longer duration of earnings impacts. The 

assumption is that earnings impacts last 15 years. A 3 percent discount rate is 

applied each year to represent net present value in 2019 dollars.3

• Long-Term. This scenario assumes sustained earnings impacts throughout College 

Access program participants’ and College Access program AmeriCorps members’ 

working years. The assumption is that earnings impacts last 30 years. A discount rate 

of 3 percent is applied to the earnings each year, to represent the net present value 

in 2019 dollars. 

2 These three scenarios consider varying durations of how long increased employment and earnings 

benefits last for both College Access participants and AmeriCorps members. Certain additional benefits 

are included equally across these scenarios. Specifically, lifetime benefits with regard to decreased public 

assistance, social insurance, and corrections costs as a result of AmeriCorps members’ higher educational 

attainment post-service are represented in each scenario equally. Thus, whether members’ employment 

and earnings impacts are sustained for one year (i.e., short-term scenario) or 30 years (i.e., long-term

scenario), the same amount of these cost savings is realized. 

3 The Office of Management and Budget defines a discount rate as “the interest rate used in calculating 

the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs.” Regarding the 3 percent discount rate, see 

Office of Management and Budget, 2003. 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-5 

The only difference among the three scenarios is the length of time that increased 

employment and earnings are sustained; all other benefits are held constant. 

Note, future employment and earnings impacts for all College Access participants will 

only be captured in the medium-term and long-term scenarios. The short-term scenario 

only captures the increased earnings resulting from the increase in high school 

graduates due to the College Access program who do not enroll in a higher education 

program. 

Benefits and Costs

Figure ES-3 shows the estimates of monetized benefits of the College Access program 

by stakeholder group for each of the three scenarios. Under the short-term scenario, 

total benefits amount to over $5.2 million, in which roughly 14, 27, and 59 percent are 

attributed to College Possible participants, AmeriCorps members, and the federal 

government, respectively. Under the medium-term scenario, the total benefits equal 

roughly $26.9 million, of which about 50 percent are attributed to College Possible 

participants, 14 percent are attributed to AmeriCorps members, and 36 percent are 

attributed to the federal government. Lastly, under the long-term scenario, the total 

benefits equal $38 million, of which 56 percent are attributed to College Possible 

participants, 11 percent are attributed to AmeriCorps members, and 33 percent are 

attributed to the federal government.

Figure ES-3: Benefits by Recipient

Recipient 

Benefits by Scenario (2019$)

Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

College Access Program Participants

(percent of total)

$1,225,798 

(14%) 

$13,408,348 

(50%) 

$21,301,363 

(56%) 

AmeriCorps Members

(percent of total)

$2,432,318 

(27%) 

$3,737,298 

(14%) 

$4,149,075 

(11%) 

Federal Government 

(percent of total)

$5,251,720 

(59%) 

$9,787,121 

(36%) 

$12,542,792 

(33%) 

Total (total percent) $8,909,835

(100%)

$26,932,767

(100%)

$37,993,229

(100%)

Notes: All benefits are proportional to the number of College Access participants in Minnesota in the 

program. AmeriCorps member and College Possible participant categories are inclusive of state and local 

tax benefits.

Additionally, Figure ES-4 shows the cost of the College Possible and College Access 

program by funding source. The total cost of the College Access program in Minnesota 

for 2018 was $5.5 million. Twenty percent of the College Access program in Minnesota 

costs ($1.1 million) are funded by government grants (i.e., AmeriCorps), while the 

remainder (80 percent or $4.4 million) consists of other contributions, grants, and 

program fees.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-6 

Figure ES-4. Cost by Funding Source, 2018 

Funder

Funding 

Provided for the 

Program Year 

(2019$)

Proportional 

Funding, MN & 

College Access 

(2019$)

Percent of Total 

(%)

Percent of 

AmeriCorps Funds 

(%)

Government 

Grants $4,449,785 $1,131,498 20% 

Contributions and 

Grants $15,033,888 $3,822,841 69% 

Other 388% 

Contributions $1,754,411 $446,114 8% 

Program Fees $492,090 $125,130 2% 

Total $21,730,174 $5,525,583 100% 

Note: Assumes that government grants encompass AmeriCorps funds.

Source: College Possible, Inc. (2019). Financial Statements, Page 6.

ROI Results

For each ROI calculation, three ROI estimates using the three scenarios (short-term, 

medium-term, and long-term) were developed. Figure ES-5 shows the ROI results for the 

College Possible program. Since two of the calculations include benefits to society (i.e., 

College Access program participants and AmeriCorps members), the results are 

expressed as benefit-cost ratios, while maintaining the ROI terminology. Specifically, 

these ratios take the form of the sum of monetized benefits over the sum of costs. The 

ROIs expressed as benefit-cost ratios in this study can be interpreted as the number of 

dollars returned for every dollar of investment (or cost). 4 

Figure ES-5: ROI Results for College Access Program

ROI Calculation

ROI Scenario

Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

Total Benefits per Federal Dollar $7.87 $23.80 $33.58 

Total Benefits per Funder Dollar $1.50 $4.55 $6.41 

Federal Government Benefits per Federal Dollar $4.64 $8.65 $11.09 

Note: This assumes that all government funding to College Possible is federal.

4 ROIs are often expressed as percentages when measuring the financial return to a single entity from that 

entity’s investment. Although this is consistent with one of the three ROI metrics reported (e.g., ROI to 

federal government), since the other ROIs lend themselves to a benefit-cost ratio, that ratio is consistently 

used for all three metrics. Although not shown as a ratio, the results should be interpreted as the return for 

every dollar of investment. 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-7 

Given the assumptions under the short-term scenario, the total benefits equal 

$7.87 times the federal government’s investment of a single dollar, meaning that 

College Access participants, AmeriCorps members, and the government realize a 

combined return of $7.87 on every dollar invested by the federal government 

(AmeriCorps). The total benefits per total funder5 dollar equal $1.50 times said dollar. 

Lastly, under the short-term scenario, the federal government alone receives 

$4.55 dollars back in federal benefits for every tax dollar invested. 

Under the medium-term scenario, the ROI for total benefits per federal dollar, total 

benefits per funder dollar, and federal government benefits per federal dollar are 

$23.80, $4.55, and $8.65, respectively. 

Under the long-term scenario, the ROI to the federal government is $33.58 per federal 

dollar invested. The total benefits per funder dollar combined (under the long-term

scenario), when all benefits are considered, is $6.41. In addition, under the long-term

scenario, for every dollar invested by the federal government, the federal government

alone realizes $11.09 in return from additional tax revenue and savings. 

Given the different assumptions of the three scenarios, the respective benefits across all 

three ROI calculations are larger than their associated costs. At a minimum—when 

considering solely the federal government investment provided by AmeriCorps and the 

benefits that would be realized for one years’ time by the federal government alone—

College Possible’s College Access program in Minnesota generates a very strong return

(as shown under the short-term scenario with an ROI of $4.55 per funder dollar). This 

indicates that given the most conservative assumptions and ROI calculation, the 

federal government still receives a monetary return greater than the taxes allocated to 

pay for the College Possible program’s annual operation. When all benefits are 

considered (i.e., that of College Access participants, AmeriCorps members, and the 

various levels of government), they are $7.87 times that of AmeriCorps’s initial 

investment into College Possible for the most short-term scenario. Thus, when all 

stakeholder benefits are realized (and the benefit of increased earnings is only 

sustained for one year), they are $4.64 times the initial investment made by the federal 

government.

The magnitude of the positive ROI calculations is driven by several factors, including:

• The expected increased earnings resulting from increased educational attainment 

for College Access students. Avery’s (2013) evaluation of an RCT of College Access 

found that participation in College Access is estimated to increase enrollment at 

four-year colleges by 15 percentage points (Avery, 2013).6 Applying the increase of 

15 percentage points, an estimated additional 195 College Access students from 

Minnesota’s 2017–2018 academic year are expected to enroll in a four-year 

5 The different funder groups whose investment is in this calculation include the federal government (i.e., 

AmeriCorps), state and local governments, and other non-government entities. 

6 This coefficient is statistically significant at the 5 percent level whether high school fixed effects are 

included or not.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

ES-8

college. To estimate the percentage of those additional college students who are 

expected to attain a bachelor’s degree, the Pell Institute’s estimated national 

percentage of low-income, first-generation college students who complete a 

bachelor’s degree or higher within 6 years (41 percent) is applied. The remaining 

59 percent of students are assumed to achieve some college (Pell Institute, 2019). 

The U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS) for 2018 by race and 

education provide median annual earnings (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018). The CPS 

data can be used to calculate the value of additional educational attainment

while controlling for demographic variables such as race. For example, according 

to CPS data, an Asian male with a bachelor’s degree earns $30,000 more than an 

Asian male with some college. A white female with some college earns $5,000 more 

than a white female with a high school degree. Applying the difference in earnings 

by educational attainment to the expected additional education attainments of 

the College Access students yields an estimated $1.7 million in additional annual 

earnings, on an undiscounted basis. 

• The employment outcomes of AmeriCorps members. According to the national 

AmeriCorps Alumni Survey Outcomes Study, the percentage of members 

unemployed was 5 percent lower six months after serving in AmeriCorps versus 

six months before (Friedman et al., 2016). 

• The educational benefits to AmeriCorps members. With the receipt of education 

awards, AmeriCorps alumni can use these funds to help pay for postsecondary 

degrees after exiting the program. Additionally, the vast majority (roughly 

92 percent) of student loans are administered by the federal government, so these 

educational benefits are also an asset to the federal government (Nyekil, 2019).7

7 For the portion of the education awards used to pay off federal student loans, these are treated as 

transfer payments and, thus, do not impact the ROI. The educational award used to pay off private student 

loans (7.8) was also not included in the ROI because benefits in this study include only those to College 

Possible participants, AmeriCorps members, and the government.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

1

Introduction 

AmeriCorps contracted with ICF Incorporated, LLC (hereafter ICF) to explore and 

quantify the return on investment (ROI) of several programs that rely on national service

as a major resource to sustain operations. ROI analyses measure the performance of 

programs and build the base of evidence for future resource allocation decisions. These 

ROI study results will demonstrate the value of AmeriCorps programming to relevant 

stakeholders. 

This project began with a comprehensive literature review process to assess the 

feasibility of ROI analyses of several national service programs. These feasibility studies 

included thorough reviews of these programs’ recent evaluations, detailed logic 

models, proposed ROI analysis methodologies for each program, and a scorecard 

mechanism that determined the viability of conducting an ROI for each selected 

program. 

Upon completion of five feasibility studies, AmeriCorps selected four programs to be the 

subject of ROI studies: College Possible, the Community Technology Empowerment 

Project, Minnesota Reading Corps, and AmeriCorps Seniors’ Foster Grandparent and 

Senior Companions Programs. This ROI study measures the benefits of College Possible

against its costs based on the analytical approach and data sources specified in its 

respective feasibility study. 

Study Overview

This study is organized into five sections:

• Program Description describes the program’s design, activities, and objectives, 

along with the role that national service (specifically AmeriCorps) plays in its 

operation. The section also provides a brief history of past evaluations and outlines 

the factors that made this program a strong selection for an ROI study. 

• ROI Methodology outlines how this analysis used various data sources to monetize 

benefits derived from the College Possible program and describes its program costs. 

• Benefits, Costs, and ROI Results provides a detailed description of the benefits and 

costs that are inputs into the ROI analyses and presents the results of the three ROI 

calculations.

• Recommendations for Further Research explores ways in which AmeriCorps and 

others could further build the evidence base for this program and similar programs, 

including how to address limitations of this study.

• Conclusion summarizes key points from the ROI study overall. 

Program Description 

College Possible is a college readiness, access, and success organization that supports 

and coaches low-income students through ACT and SAT test preparation, college 

application assistance, financial aid consulting, guidance during the transition from 

high school to college, and ongoing support toward degree completion (Ingram et al., 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

2

2018). Students apply to receive College Possible support during their sophomore year

in high school. To qualify, students must a) be from low-income families, b) have grade 

point averages of 2.0 or higher, and c) express interest in attending a four-year college. 

For students that are accepted, College Possible organizes its services into two 

programs: 

• College Access Program. The College Access program serves students during their 

junior and senior years of high school. Students attend after-school sessions led by 

AmeriCorps member coaches for two hours twice a week throughout those two 

school years in a supportive group of college-bound peers. Coaches implement an 

interactive curriculum designed to guide students through the key aspects of 

preparing for college. Topics include finding a best-fit college, academic 

preparation, financial planning, and personal development. Summer Bridge is a

component of the College Access program that uses in-person and text-based 

coaching to help student stay on the college track over summer break.

• College Success Program. After high school, college students receive coaching 

through the transition to college and are supported all the way through college 

graduation. Students who participate in College Possible during high school 

automatically become participants in the College Success program after 

graduating from high school, regardless of whether they enroll in college right after 

high school graduation. Depending on the college they attend, students will receive 

in-person coaching on campus or technology-based coaching. AmeriCorps 

member coaches connect students to resources on campus, help them tackle 

barriers, and help them identify future opportunities (Ingram et al., 2018). 

College Possible, a nonprofit organization, comprises a national office in St. Paul, MN, 

and six other offices that provide services in the metropolitan areas: Portland, OR; 

Philadelphia, PA; Chicago, IL; Milwaukee, WI; Omaha, NE; and Minneapolis-St. Paul, 

MN. 

College Possible Evaluation History

Three evaluations—completed in 2012, 2013, and 2018—analyze the impacts of the 

College Possible programs in Minnesota (Avery, 2013; Howley & Uekawa, 2013; Ingram 

et al., 2018). These evaluations were conducted by objective, third-party research 

organizations: The University of Minnesota’s Center for Applied Research and 

Educational Improvement, ICF, and the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). 

Two reports evaluated the College Access program and one evaluated the College 

Success program. 

The Implications for ROI Analysis of the College Possible program section discusses the

decision to focus this ROI study on the College Access program in light of the 

evaluation histories and available data on the College Access and College Success 

programs.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

3

Evaluations of the College Access Program

In Howley and Uekawa (2013), ICF evaluated the College Access program and 

analyzed the outcomes of six College Access high school graduation cohorts (3,812 

students). The study:

• Quantified outcomes for students in the program

• Analyzed how outcomes varied by the type of institution that College Access 

students attended or by the coaching services they received

• Identified how other factors may influence student success

The evaluation was non-experimental and did not include data collection from a 

control group. However, the evaluators did compare college enrollment rates of 

College Access students to a national average from the National Center for Education 

Statistics. The study found that College Access students enroll in college at a higher 

rate. The immediate college enrollment rate for high school graduates from low-income 

families is 52 percent, compared to 82 to 88 percent for College Access students

(Howley & Uekawa, 2013). 

NBER’s paper reports the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of qualified juniors 

participating in College Possible at eight high schools in Minneapolis and St. Paul, 

Minnesota, that followed them through their senior year and the subsequent spring. The 

trial involved 238 students, including 134 who were randomly selected for admission to 

the program in May 2010. Treatment Group 1 comprised 101 students who were 

admitted to the program on a randomized group-by-group basis and matched the 

control better. Treatment Group 2 comprised 33 students who were admitted from the 

waitlist. The results indicate that the College Access program significantly increased 

both applications and enrollment to four-year colleges, including selective four-year 

colleges. Yet, at the same time, Treatment Group students were statistically less likely to 

apply to popular two-year colleges. The report estimates that initial enrollment at 

four-year colleges increased by more than 15 percentage points for program 

participants. The estimated effect of the program on fall semester enrollment at any 

college (two- and four-year colleges) is smaller and not significant. For the spring 

semester, enrollment at competitive four-year colleges was significantly greater for 

Treatment Group students by 12 percentage points. While not statistically significant,

Control Group students were more likely to be enrolled overall than were Treatment 

Group students. The only significant negative effect in these specifications is that 

admission to the program reduced enrollment overall for the Treatment Group 2 

students (Avery, 2013).

Additionally, the NBER study finds little evidence of any effect of the program on ACT8

performance. This finding could imply that some Control Group students got help from 

other sources after learning that they were not admitted to the College Possible 

program.Thus, Avery (2013) goes on to conclude, the RCT should probably be viewed 

8 The ACT is a standardized test used for college admissions that covers English, mathematics, reading, and 

science reasoning.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

4

as assessing the effectiveness of the College Possible program relative to the 

effectiveness of potential alternative programs (Avery, 2013). 

Evaluation of the College Success Program

The University of Minnesota’s Center for Applied Research and Educational 

Improvement examined the College Success program in Minneapolis and St. Paul, 

Minnesota. The four-year study compared college graduation rates for the 2013 cohort 

(i.e., starting the first year of college in fall 2013) and other college outcomes for the 

2013–2015 cohorts of College Success program participants to the outcomes of a 

comparison group. The study included 160 College Success students and 

160 comparison group students9 at six post-secondary educational institutions in the 

Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. The researchers used propensity score 

matching to select the students in the comparison group. For the 2013 cohort, the study 

found that College Success students graduated within four years at a significantly 

higher rate than the comparison group. The results of the analysis imply that a student in 

College Possible is on average 1.74 times more likely to graduate after four years than a 

student in the comparison group. College Success students graduated with associate 

and bachelor’s degrees at a higher rate (46.4 percent) than the group of comparison 

students (27.2 percent). In the College Success group, 15.5 percent of the students 

received a degree from a two-year college and 30.9 percent received a degree from 

a four-year college, for a total of 46.4 percent. In the comparison group, 4.9 percent of 

the students received a degree from a two-year college and 22.3 percent received a 

degree from a four-year college, for a total 27.2 percent. Neither cumulative GPA, 

cumulative credits, nor continuous enrollment through spring 2017 yielded significant 

results from the College Success “treatment.” These findings are concerning and require 

future studies to examine credits earned by treatment group. The results of three 

cohorts combined (2013, 2014, and 2015) showed no statistically significant effect of 

College Success on any of the variables (i.e., GPA, credits, and retention for the first 

and second years of college) (Ingram et al., 2018). 

College Possible maintains internal program data as well. In its 2014 grant application to 

the U.S. Department of Education’s Investing in Innovation fund, College Possible 

revealed that its participants have a high school graduation rate of 98 percent, far 

exceeding the national average of 72 percent of economically disadvantaged

students. College Possible also reported that its participants have a college enrollment 

rate of 85 percent following high school graduation, far exceeding the national 

average of 52 percent of low-income students. Regarding college completion, College 

Possible reported that 57 percent of its participants graduated from a four-year school 

in six years or less, far exceeding the national average of 8 percent of low-income 

students who earn a college degree by age 24 (College Possible, 2014). 

9 The comparison group is made up of students from the same colleges who did not participate in College

Possible during high school and also are not participating in the program during college. The comparison

students are also graduates of Minneapolis and St. Paul high schools who enrolled in college in fall 2013.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

5 

Implications for ROI Analysis of the College Possible Program

The trend is evident that College Possible’s College Access program significantly 

increases both applications and enrollment to four-year colleges, including selective 

four-year colleges. While an RCT has not been administered on College Success yet, 

descriptive statistics imply that College Success students graduated with associate and 

bachelor’s degrees at higher rates than the comparison group. By only matching on 

observable characteristics, the results of the College Success study miss out on 

important unobservable characteristics, such as grit or personal goals, and is potentially 

subject to self-selection bias. There has not yet been an RCT that follows students in the

College Access program and into the subsequent College Success program. 

Additionally, there is not a thorough understanding of how students in College Success 

that did participate in College Access compare to those who did not participate in

College Access. For these reasons, the combined impact of the two programs has not 

been evaluated. However, College Possible retains internal data of historical student 

outcomes. Figure 1 depicts longitudinal data from 2008 to 2012. 10

Figure 1. College Possible Historic Average Outcomes, Using Longitudinal Data from 

Class Cohorts of 2008–2012

1Note that these rates are averaged across graduating class cohorts 2008–2012 to provide a consistent 

universe of students for each outcome category; the rates do not vary significantly by class year. Access 

outcomes and year 1 persistence for graduating cohorts 2013–-2017 were very similar to those listed above, 

give or take 1–5 percentage points, depending on the category.

2From class years 2002–2017, College Possible has no record of any students leaving the program during 

junior year. Less than one-tenth of a percent of students in the class of 2018 and 3 percent from the class of 

2019 are documented as having left the program before senior year. The class of 2020 was the first to be 

subject to a new student drop policy by which students who are not coming to sessions or responding to 

their coach could be removed from the program. 

10 Unless otherwise cited, all information provided directly by College Possible for this report was received 

through ICF’s personal communication with College Possible in 2020.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

6

Due to the lack of an RCT following students in College Access through the College 

Success program, this ROI analysis evaluates the costs and benefits of the College 

Access program only. This ROI, aiming to only use conservative and defensible findings,

applies the findings of the RCT for College Access, that initial enrollment at four-year 

colleges increased by more than 15 percentage points for program participants. Thus, 

out of the 1,302 Minnesota College Access high school seniors in the 2017–2018 

academic year, 15 percent (195 students) are estimated to enroll at four-year colleges

that otherwise would have not enrolled. The analysis then assumes the College Access 

students will follow the Pell Institute’s estimates that 41 percent of national low-income, 

first-generation college students complete a bachelor’s degree or higher within six

years (Pell Institute, 2019). For the purposes of our analysis, we assume that students who 

complete four-year degrees would have completed two-year degrees in the absence 

of the program. This is a reflection of the RCT results that reveal that a larger 

percentage of students in the control group attend two-year colleges. Thus, the 

increased earnings estimated for those who complete a four-year degree are net of 

the additional earnings earned by those who complete a two-year degree compared 

to graduating high school. This results in a conservative estimate of program benefits.

The ROI study applied additional results from the literature as well as College Possible

participant demographics to estimate increased earnings from increased educational

outcomes among College Access program participants (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018). 

Selection of College Possible’s College Access Program in Minnesota for 

the AmeriCorps ROI Project

ICF recommended making the College Access program in Minnesota the subject of an 

ROI analysis based on a comprehensive feasibility study. The feasibility study reviewed 

studies conducted on the program and explored how to use available data to 

monetize relevant benefits and costs (Avery, 2013; Howley & Uekawa, 2013; Ingram et 

al., 2018). Based on ICF’s review, we concluded that the College Access program in 

Minnesota is feasible as the subject of an ROI analysis. ICF reached this conclusion 

based on a review of the existing literature on the College Possible program in 

Minnesota and connecting enrollment to high school, college enrollment, and college 

graduation outcomes. As discussed in the methodology below, estimating educational

impacts allows the ROI analysis to include monetary estimates of outcomes related to 

earnings and public expenditures on health, criminal justice, and welfare.

The feasibility study also identified research that could be used to quantify the benefits 

to AmeriCorps members due to their involvement in College Possible via national 

service. In particular, a 2016 study by Freidman et al. documented the post-national 

service employment outcomes associated with serving in AmeriCorps. Additionally, 

Zeidenberg et al. (2016) estimated the extent to which national service increases

members’ educational attainment. Including these additional data allowed an 

expanded array of benefits of the College Possible program to be captured in the ROI 

analysis.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

7 

ROI Methodology 

The methodology for the ROI study of the College Access program in Minnesota

consists of the following components: 

1. Measuring and monetizing program benefits. This includes using data from previous 

evaluations and other third-party sources to determine the benefits to College 

Possible’s program participants, College Possible’s AmeriCorps members, and the 

government. This ROI analysis monetized College Possible program benefits in 2019 

dollars. The benefits realized across these three stakeholder groups include: 

• College Access Program participants. Increased education leading to increased

earnings.

• AmeriCorps members. AmeriCorps member benefits in the form of living 

allowances members receive during their service, education awards they 

receive following their service, and increased earnings post-service. 

• Government. Income, Social Security, and Medicare tax revenue from College 

Access program participants’ and members’ increased earnings and sales tax 

revenue from the increased economic activity that result from those increased 

earnings. Government benefits also include reduced spending on corrections, 

public assistance, and social insurance associated with the increased 

educational attainment of College Access program participants and 

AmeriCorps members. 

2. Assessing program costs. College Access program costs are based on the College 

Possible program budget and consist of federal and other funding for the 2017–2018 

fiscal year in 2019 dollars. 

3. Calculating the ROI. Previous studies of the benefits of Minnesota’s College Access 

program participation for students have found improvements in high school 

graduation, college applications, enrollment, and graduation. This analysis focuses 

on the impacts of College Possible for Minnesota’s College Access students alone.

Total College Possible costs and benefits are scaled to Minnesota’s College Access 

students to develop the figures used in the ROI calculations. The ROI analysis 

includes three ROI calculations, which are each assessed under three scenarios 

representing different assumptions about the persistence of program outcomes: 

• Total benefits per federal dollar 

• Total benefits per funder dollar

• Federal government benefits per federal dollar

This analytical framework includes only those benefits that could be reasonably 

monetized given the available data and that likely would not have occurred without 

the AmeriCorps program. Figure 2 shows how College Possible program activities can 

result in College Possible participant, AmeriCorps member, and government benefits. 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

8 

Figure 2. Benefits among College Access participants, AmeriCorps Members, and 

Government Derived from College Possible

Available data establish that both College Access program participants and 

AmeriCorps members enjoy positive future earnings impacts because of the College 

Access program. However, the data do not establish the duration of these benefits. To 

address a range of possible durations for these benefits, the analysis developed three 

scenarios:11 

• Short-Term. This scenario assumes short-term earnings impacts. The assumption is that 

earnings impacts are limited to a single year.

• Medium-Term. This scenario assumes a longer duration of earnings impacts. The 

assumption is that earnings impacts last 15 years. A 3 percent discount rate is 

applied each year to represent net present value in 2019 dollars.12

11 These three scenarios consider varying durations of how long increased employment and earnings 

benefits last for both College Access participants and AmeriCorps members. Certain additional benefits 

are included equally across these scenarios. Specifically, lifetime benefits with regard to decreased public 

assistance, social insurance, and corrections costs as a result of participants’ and members’ higher 

educational attainment post-program and post-service, respectively, are represented in each of these 

three scenarios equally. Thus, whether participants’ or members’ employment and earnings impacts are 

sustained for one year (i.e., the short-term scenario) or 30 years (i.e., the long-term scenario), the same cost 

savings are realized.

12 The Office of Management and Budget (1992, October 29, p. 18) defines a discount rate as “the interest 

rate used in calculating the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs.” Regarding the 3 percent

discount rate, see Office of Management and Budget, 2003, September 13. 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

9 

• Long-Term. This scenario assumes sustained earnings impacts throughout College 

Access program participants’ and College Access program AmeriCorps members’ 

working years. The assumption is that earnings impacts last 30 years. A discount rate 

of 3 percent is applied to the earnings each year, to represent net present value in 

2019 dollars. 

The only difference among the three scenarios is the length of time that increased 

employment and earnings are sustained; all other benefits are held constant. 

The short-term scenario assumes benefits for only the year after program service, while 

the long-term scenario (30 years of sustained employment and earnings benefits) 

represents roughly a lifetime of working years. The medium-term scenario (15 years of 

sustained employment and earnings benefits) represents the midpoint between the 

short-term and long-term scenarios. Note, future employment and earnings impacts for 

College Access participants will only be captured in the medium-term and long-term 

scenarios because the 2017–2018 College Access cohort is not expected to graduate 

high school until 2019, achieve some college until 2021, and achieve a college degree 

until 2025. 13 As a result, the short-term scenario (or 1 year of expected benefits) does not 

capture College Access participant benefits. The medium-term scenario captures the 

years after assumed educational attainment (i.e., 2018 + 15 years is 2033, less 7 years of 

education for those pursing a B.A. would encompass 2025–2033, discounted at 

3 percent to 2018). The long-term scenario captures the years after assumed 

educational attainment (i.e., 2018 + 30 years is 2048, less 7 years of education for those 

pursing a B.A. would encompass 2025–2048, discounted at 3 percent to 2018).

Monetizing Benefits and Costs

This analysis monetized an array of benefits and included College Access program

costs all in 2019 dollars to assess the ROI of College Access. Additional details on the 

methodology employed and the calculations used for this analysis are in Appendix B.

Benefits

College Access results in monetizable benefits to College Access participants, 

AmeriCorps members, and the government. Figure 3 summarizes these benefits and 

data sources by stakeholder group.

13 This methodology assumes that all College Access students destined to achieve a bachelor’s degree will 

do so within six years of high school graduation.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

10 

Figure 3. Benefits Realized from the College Possible Program by Stakeholder Group

Stakeholder Group Benefits Data Sources*

College Access

Participants

• Additional earnings from 

increased education14

• College Possible (2020)

• Howley and Uekawa (2013)

• Avery (2013) 

• Ingram et al. (2018) 

• Trostel (2015) 

• Current Population Survey 

(CPS) earnings (U.S. Census 

Bureau, 2018)

• Consumer Price Index (BLS, 

n.d.)

• Pell Institute (2019)

AmeriCorps 

Members

• Education awards 

• Additional earnings from

increased education due to 

education award

• Living allowances 

• Additional earnings from 

increased employment15

• Friedman, et al. (2016) 

• Zeidenberg, et al. (2016) 

• College Possible. (2020) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. Census 

Bureau, 2018)

• Trostel (2015) 

• Consumer Price Index (BLS, 

n.d.)

• AmeriCorps (2020)16

14 Because College Access participants are juniors in high school during the 2018 program year, additional 

earnings from increased education are only estimated in the medium-term and long-term scenarios for the 

years that occur after participants are expected to graduate from high school, complete some college 

coursework, and receive bachelor’s degree, as predicted. 

15 Freidman, et al. (2016, p. 56) found that AmeriCorps service led to a 5 percent decrease in 

unemployment between six months prior to service and six months after service. This is leveraged to 

monetize the additional earnings of AmeriCorps members who serve in the College Possible program.

16 Unless otherwise cited, all information provided directly by AmeriCorps for this report was received 

through ICF’s personal communication with AmeriCorps in 2020.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

11 

Stakeholder Group Benefits Data Sources*

Government • Tax revenue from increased 

College Access participant 

earnings post-program and 

sales tax revenue from the 

induced increased economic 

activity

• Public economic benefits 

(e.g., tax payments, health 

savings, reduced crime, 

welfare savings) from 

increased College Access 

participant education

• Tax revenue from increased 

AmeriCorps member earnings 

post-national service and sales 

tax revenue from the induced 

increased economic activity

• Reduced spending on 

corrections, public assistance, 

and social insurance 

associated with increased 

educational attainment of 

AmeriCorps members postnational service

• Consumer Expenditure Survey 

(BLS, 2019) 

• Federal and state income tax 

rates (IRS, 2019; Tax 

Foundation, 2019) 

• Social Security tax rate (SSA, 

2019) 

• Medicare tax rate (SSA, 2019) 

• Combined state and average 

local sales tax rates (Tax 

Foundation, 2019) 

• Trostel (2015) 

*The use of these data sources is discussed in more detail in the subsequent paragraphs. Minnesota-specific 

state income and combined state and average local sales tax rates are used for College Access 

participants’ increased earnings and on AmeriCorps members’ living allowances. National average tax 

rates are used for AmeriCorps members’ increased earnings, and education awards are national 

averages.

Additional Earnings from Increased Education (Benefit to College Access 

Participants)

As discussed in the “Implications for ROI Analysis of the College Possible Program”

section, College Access students’ initial enrollment at four-year colleges increased by 

more than 15 percentage points for program participants (Avery, 2013). Thus for the 

College Access program’s 1,302 high school seniors, 15 percent (195 students) are 

expected to enroll in a four-year college who would not have without the program. The 

Pell Institute estimates that 41 percent of national low-income, first-generation college 

students complete a bachelor’s degree or higher within six years (Pell Institute, 2019). 

Applying that percentage to College Access participants yields 80 high school students 

who would earn a bachelor’s degree who otherwise would not. Those who enroll in a 

four-year college but do not graduate (115 students) are expected to achieve some 

college education.

For the purposes of our analysis, we assume that students who complete four-year 

degrees would have completed two-year degrees in the absence of the program. This 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

12

is a reflection of the RCT results that reveal that a larger percentage of students in the 

control group attend two-year colleges. Thus, the increased earnings estimated for 

those who complete a four-year degree are net of the additional earnings earned by 

those who complete a two-year degree compared to graduating high school. This 

results in a conservative estimate of the program benefits.To estimate additional 

earnings, the study uses College Possible’s 2017–2018 academic year demographic

data and Current Population Survey (CPS) data on the difference in annual median 

earnings for individuals with a high school degree versus those without a high school 

degree, those with some college versus those with a high school degree, and those 

with a B.A. versus those with a high school degree, by race and gender 

(U.S. Census Bureau, 2018). The analysis used the Consumer Price Index (CPI) to express 

the resulting dollar estimate in 2019 dollars (Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.). As the 

College Access participants are high school juniors and seniors at the time of the 

intervention, the short-term scenario only captures additional earnings of seniors who 

graduate from high school because of the program but do not pursue additional 

education. The medium-term and long-term scenarios (which extend 15 and 30 years, 

respectively, from the 2017–2018 academic year) capture the benefit of increased 

earnings after the College Access participants achieve their expected terminal 

educational attainment. 

Additional Earnings from Increased Employment (Benefit to AmeriCorps 

Members)

Evaluations have shown that serving in AmeriCorps fosters higher skill acquisition, 

increased educational attainment, and higher income from increased employment 

post-national service (Friedman et al., 2016; Zeidenberg et al., 2016). Freidman et al.

(2016) found that unemployment among AmeriCorps members six months after their 

period of national service was 5 percentage points lower compared to six months 

before.P39F To monetize this decrease in unemployment, the analysis first applied the 

5 percent reduction in unemployment to the number of AmeriCorps members for the 

College Access program’s 2017–2018 academic year and then applied the product to 

the median annual earnings by demographic in terms of their race, gender, age, and 

educational attainment (AmeriCorps, 2018).17,18

The analysis proceeded to:

• Estimate the additional AmeriCorps members employed attributable to national 

service

• Estimate the annual median earnings of the AmeriCorps members by demographic

• Calculate the total earnings for AmeriCorps members attributable to the increased 

employment

17 College Possible could not provide demographic data on AmeriCorps members, so the analysis applied 

the demographics of the American State and National AmeriCorps members.

18 College Possible’s AmeriCorps members must have a bachelor’s degree before serving in the program.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

13

The earnings metrics for AmeriCorps members were applied and discounted based on 

the short-term, medium-term, and long-term scenarios in net present 2019 dollars. The 

post-tax AmeriCorps members’ projected earnings represents the additional income 

earned by AmeriCorps members attributable to their participation in national service.

Education Awards and Living Allowances (Benefits to AmeriCorps Members)

AmeriCorps members receive living allowances during their national service term and 

education awards after program exit. Both living allowances and education awards 

are taxable, so post-tax amounts were used to calculate benefits to members. 

Living Allowances. AmeriCorps members use living allowances to pay for expenses 

during their service terms. This post-tax amount represents a direct benefit to 

AmeriCorps members. 

Education Awards. AmeriCorps members can use education awards to a) pay for

additional educational attainment and b) repay student loans. Friedman et al. (2016) 

studied how AmeriCorps members allocate their education awards between these 

eligible uses. 

• Education award used to pay for additional educational attainment. AmeriCorps 

members receive an education award after serving in the AmeriCorps program, 

which is used by a portion of members to help pay for postsecondary degrees 

post-service. The additional educational attainment resulting from the use of the 

education award generates additional earnings for AmeriCorps members. 

AmeriCorps members are required to have a bachelor’s degree to serve in the 

College Possible program. This study, therefore, assumes, based on Friedman et al. 

(2016), that a percentage of AmeriCorps members will use the education award to 

earn graduate degrees. The analysis estimated the value of the additional 

educational attainment attributable to the education awards (based on the 

proportion of graduate school tuition paid with the education award) in terms of 

lifetime earnings. These estimated additional earnings were included as a benefit to 

AmeriCorps members. 

• Education award used to repay student loans. The amount of post-tax education 

awards used to repay student loans, as identified by Friedman et al. (2016), was 

included in the ROI analysis as a direct one-time benefit to AmeriCorps members. 

The analysis assumes that AmeriCorps members would have made regular 

payments on student loans. Thus, the education award serves as a personal cost 

savings for those who do not continue their education by pursuing a graduate 

degree.

Tax Revenue Generation and Reduced Spending (Benefits to Government)

The benefits of College Access to program participants and AmeriCorps members also 

result in benefits to the various levels of government.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

14

Benefits to the Government from Increased Educational Attainment by College 

Access Participants 

Similar to the timeframe of College Access participants’ increase in educational 

attainment and median annual earnings, benefits to governments are also captured. 

Achievement of a high school degree, some college, or a bachelor’s degree increases 

employment opportunities and thus expected median annual earnings. Government 

benefits from increased educational attainment by College Access participants in the 

form of:

• Income tax revenue from increased College Access participant earnings postprogram. The analysis estimated federal income tax, state income tax, Medicare, 

and Social Security tax for the additional earnings of College Access participants

based on 2019 rates. For both the federal and state income tax rates, the analysis

used the appropriate rate based on the estimated median annual earnings of 

participants post-program participation. For the state income tax, the analysis used 

a rate for Minnesota, assuming that College Access participants continue to reside 

in that state over the course of their working years.

• Sales tax revenue from the increased economic activity that results from increased 

College Access participant earnings post-program. To estimate the additional sales 

tax revenue generated due to the additional net earnings, the analysis multiplied 

the combined state and average local sales tax rate for Minnesota by the 

estimated taxable expenditures to income ratio for consumers whose income falls in 

the expected annual earnings bracket for the College Access participants who are 

expected to achieve an increase in education, and thus earnings (using the 

Consumer Expenditure Survey). The resulting product was then applied to the 

additional earnings of College Access participants to calculate the increase in sales 

tax to state and local governments. 

• Reduced spending on public assistance from increased educational attainment of 

College Access participants. As a result of increased education, those with a high 

school degree, some college, and a bachelor’s degree are expected to receive 

less public assistance with each educational step. The analysis estimated savings to 

the federal government with regard to public assistance, including lifetime reduced

criminal activity, lifetime welfare cost-savings, lifetime public health savings, and 

lifetime public health costs (Medicaid/Medicare), using data provided by Trostel 

(2015). 

Benefits to the Government from Increased Earnings and Educational Attainment 

by AmeriCorps Members 

Government benefits from increased earnings and educational attainment by 

AmeriCorps members in the form of:

• Income tax revenue from increased AmeriCorps member earnings post-national 

service. The analysis estimated federal income tax, state income tax, Medicare, and 

Social Security tax for the additional earnings of AmeriCorps members based on 

2019 tax rates. The analysis estimated tax rates based on the annual median 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

15

earnings of the AmeriCorps members’ education level and demographics. The 

analysis used average state income tax rates for the United States, given that 

AmeriCorps members may disperse to various locations nationwide following their 

service terms and continue to migrate during their working years.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

16 

• Sales tax revenue from the increased economic activity that results from increased 

AmeriCorps member earnings post-service. To estimate the additional sales tax 

revenue generated due to the additional net earnings, the analysis multiplied the 

average combined state and local sales tax for the United States by the estimated 

taxable expenditures to income ratio for consumers whose income is similar to that 

of the AmeriCorps member earnings post-service (using the Consumer Expenditure 

Survey). The resulting product was then applied to the additional earnings of the 

AmeriCorps members to calculate the increase in sales tax to state and local 

governments.

• Tax revenue from living allowances and education awards. The living allowance 

provided to AmeriCorps members during their service term is taxed. This analysis 

applies all the aforementioned tax rates to estimate this additional government 

revenue. The analysis uses Minnesota state income and state sales taxes. 

Education awards are also taxed, resulting in additional government revenue. Sales 

taxes are not calculated for education awards since this award amount cannot be 

used for consumer purchases. The education award is, however, subject to federal 

and state taxes,19 such as income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes. These taxes 

are accounted for in the ROI analysis (AmeriCorps, 2020a). 

• Reduced spending on corrections, public assistance, and social insurance 

associated with increased educational attainment of AmeriCorps members postservice. The last benefit related to College Possible AmeriCorps members captured 

by this ROI study is the lifetime reduction in public assistance, social insurance, and 

corrections/incarceration spending due to the higher educational attainment of 

members (Trostel, 2015). Higher-educational attainment is associated with less 

dependence on government assistance programs and lower incarceration rates

(Blagg & Blom, 2018; Harlow, 2003). Because College Possible AmeriCorps 

participation increases educational attainment, the government spends less. 

For the monetization of these benefits, the analysis paired the expected increase in 

educational attainment for College Possible AmeriCorps members with the 

expected difference in per-person lifetime government cost savings from Medicaid, 

SNAP, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation, and incarceration for 

individuals with different levels of educational attainment. This method 

conservatively calculates the savings realized by government for College Possible 

AmeriCorps members. 

Costs

The costs for the College Access program used for this ROI analysis include federal and 

other funding used to support program operations. The costs are specific to the 

program participant cohort for which the outcomes are measured. Figure 4 shows the 

19 An average rate for the state income taxes is used due to the unknown location of AmeriCorps members 

at the time of redemption.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

17 

segmentation of all of the College Possible program’s revenue sources by funder, for 

the 2018 fiscal year (College Possible, 2019). The proportionally scaled costs to the 

Minnesota College Access program are also displayed. While College Possible is not 

explicit regarding the government grants, it is assumed that AmeriCorps federal funds 

comprise the category. 

College Possible’s match spending was 388 percent of government funds for the 2018 

fiscal year. This match rate suggests that federal funding catalyzes other funding 

sources for the College Possible program, allowing it to serve more individuals and 

provide more services than would be otherwise available only under the federal funds, 

which translates into increased benefits across stakeholder groups. 

Figure 4. College Possible Program Funding Sources, 2018

Funder

Funding 

Provided for the 

Program Year

(2019$) 

Proportional 

Funding, MN & 

College Access 

(2019$)

Percent of Total

(%)

Percent of 

AmeriCorps Funds 

(%)

Government 

Grants $4,449,785 $1,131,498 20% 

Contributions and 

Grants $15,033,888 $3,822,841 69% 

Other 388% 

Contributions $1,754,411 $446,114 8% 

Program Fees $492,090 $125,130 2% 

Total $21,730,174 $5,525,583 100% 

Note: Assumes that government grants encompass AmeriCorps funds.

Source: College Possible, 2019.

ROI Study Limitations

There are some limitations to consider that will help to contextualize the findings of the 

analysis. Some of the data sources used, specifically Friedman et al. (2016), that

describes program impacts for AmeriCorps members, include data that are selfreported using surveys. Specific outcomes for the College Possible AmeriCorps 

members were not available. Similarly, the educational outcomes of how College 

Possible participation helps participants obtain additional education and employment

are also unavailable. The analysis instead relies on several assumptions to create a 

counterfactual for the College Access participants. 

Since this ROI analysis only evaluates the benefits of College Access participants in 

Minnesota, AmeriCorps member benefits and College Possible program costs are

proportional to the percentage of College Access participants in Minnesota. 

Lastly, it is likely that not all possible benefits from the College Possible program are 

included in this analysis, since the College Possible evaluation is focused on just 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

18 

increased educational outcomes experienced by College Access participants in 

Minnesota. College Possible also serves other locations, including Portland, OR; 

Philadelphia, PA; Chicago, IL; Milwaukee, WI; and Omaha, NE. Additionally, the 

evaluation does not capture any possible improvements in College Access 

participants’ and or their families’ well-being, socioeconomic status, or health because 

of improved educational attainment. These benefits would also lead to a higher ROI 

than reported here. 

Benefits, Costs, and ROI Results

The ROI for the College Possible program measures the benefits of the program 

compared to its costs to determine the return to different stakeholders. This section 

provides estimates of benefits, costs, and the resulting ROI.

Benefits

Figure 5 shows estimates of monetized benefits of the College Possible program by 

recipient, including College Access participants, AmeriCorps members, and the federal

government, for each scenario. 20 As described above, both College Access

participants and AmeriCorps members enjoy positive future earnings impacts as a result 

of the College Possible program. However, the data do not establish the duration of 

those benefits. To address a range of possible durations for those benefits, the analysis 

developed three scenarios: 1) short-term, assuming earnings impacts are limited to a 

single year; 2) medium-term, assuming earnings impacts last 15 years and diminish at a 

discount rate of 3 percent; and 3) long-term, assuming earnings impacts last 30 years 

and diminish at a discount rate of 3 percent. Lifetime cost savings to the various levels 

of governments as well as other benefits not associated with participants’ or members’ 

increased earnings (such as living allowances and education awards) remain constant 

in all three scenarios.

20 Benefits to College Access participants and AmeriCorps members are inclusive of their respective state 

and local government benefits.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

19 

Figure 5. Benefits by Recipient

Recipient

Benefits by Scenario (2019$)

Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

College Access Program Participants

(percent of total)

$1,225,798 

(14%) 

$13,408,348 

(50%) 

$21,301,363 

(56%) 

AmeriCorps Members

(percent of total)

$2,432,318 

(27%) 

$3,737,298 

(14%) 

$4,149,075 

(11%) 

Federal Government

(percent of total)

$5,251,720 

(59%) 

$9,787,121 

(36%) 

$12,542,792 

(33%) 

Total (total percent)

$8,909,835

(100%)

$26,932,767

(100%)

$37,993,229

(100%)

Notes: All benefits are proportional to the number of College Access participants in Minnesota in the 

program. AmeriCorps member and College Possible participant categories are inclusive of state and local 

tax benefits.

Under the short-term scenario, the total benefits equal $9 million, of which 14 percent

are attributed to College Access participants, 27 percent are attributed to AmeriCorps 

members, and 59 percent are attributed to the federal government. Under the 

medium-term scenario, the total benefits equal roughly $27 million, of which 50 percent 

are attributed to College Access participants, 14 percent are attributed to AmeriCorps 

members, and 36 percent are attributed to the federal government. Under the longterm scenario, the total benefits equal roughly $38 million, with 14, 27, and 59 percent

attributed to College Access participants, AmeriCorps members, and the federal

government, respectively. 

Costs

Figure 6 shows the cost of College Possible’s College Access program in Minnesota by 

category. The estimated total cost for the 2017–2018 academic year was $5,923,305. 

Nineteen percent (19%) of College Possible program costs ($1,131,498) are funded by 

government grants. The remainder derives from other contributions and grants as well 

as a small portion from program revenue. 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

20 

Figure 6. Total College Possible Costs by Category, Proportional to College Access 

Participants in Minnesota

Category Cost (2019$)

Total AmeriCorps Member Stipend $841,710 

Total Operating Costs, Less AmeriCorps Stipend $4,753,694 

Total Expected Education Grant Value Redeemed $327,901 

Total Costs, 2017–2018 Academic Year $5,923,305

Total Federal Costs, 2017–2018 Academic Year $1,131,498

ROI Results

Figure 7 shows the benefits and costs that are included in each ROI calculation. 

Figure 7. Benefits and Costs Included in the ROI Calculations 

ROI Calculation Benefits (numerator) Costs (denominator)

Total Benefits per Federal 

Dollar

All participant, AmeriCorps 

member, and government 

benefits derived from the 

program 

• Federal AmeriCorps 

funding

Total Benefits per Funder 

Dollar 

All participant, AmeriCorps 

member, and government 

benefits derived from the 

program 

• Federal AmeriCorps 

funding

• Budgeted match funding

• All other funding

Federal Government Benefits 

per Federal Dollar 

Additional tax revenue 

generation and reduced 

spending attributable to the 

program 

• Federal AmeriCorps 

funding

Figure 8 summarizes ROI results for College Access across the short-term, medium-term, 

and long-term scenarios. Three different ROI results are calculated for each scenario. 

Since two of the scenarios include benefits to society (College Access participants and 

AmeriCorps members), the results are expressed as cost-benefit ratios, while 

maintaining the ROI terminology. The ratio takes the form of the sum of monetized 

benefits over the sum of monetized costs. The ROI expressed as a benefit-cost ratio in 

this study can be interpreted as the number of dollars returned for every dollar of 

investment (or cost). See Appendix B for the formulas used to calculate each ROI.
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

21 

Figure 8. ROI Results for College Access Program

ROI Calculation

ROI Scenario

Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

Total Benefits per Federal Dollar $7.87 $23.80 $33.58 

Total Benefits per Funder Dollar $1.50 $4.55 $6.41 

Federal Government Benefits per Federal Dollar $4.64 $8.65 $11.09 

Note: This assumes that all government funding to College Possible is federal.

Given the assumptions under the short-term scenario, the total benefits equal 

$7.87 times the federal government’s investment, meaning that College Access 

participants, AmeriCorps members, and the government realize a combined return of 

$7.87 on every dollar invested by the federal government (AmeriCorps). The total 

benefits per total funder21 dollar equal $1.50 times the total investment made by all 

funders. Lastly, under the short-term scenario, the federal government alone receives 

$4.64 dollars back in federal benefits for every tax dollar invested. 

Under the medium-term scenario, the ROI for total benefits per federal dollar, total 

benefits per funder dollar, and federal government benefits per federal dollar are 

$23.80, $4.55, and $8.65, respectively. 

Under the long-term scenario, the ROI to the federal government is $33.58 per federal 

dollar. The total benefits per funder dollar combined (under the long-term scenario), 

when all benefits are considered, is $6.41. In addition, under the long-term scenario, for 

every dollar invested by the federal government, the federal government alone realizes 

$11.09 in return from additional tax revenue and savings. 

Given the different assumptions of the three scenarios, the respective benefits across all 

three ROI calculations are larger than their associated costs. At a minimum—when 

considering solely the federal government investment provided by AmeriCorps and the 

benefits that would be realized for one years’ time by the federal government alone—

College Possible’s College Access program in Minnesota generates a very strong return 

(as shown under the short-term scenario with an ROI of $4.64). This indicates that given 

the most conservative assumptions and ROI calculation, the federal government still 

receives a monetary return greater than the taxes allocated to pay for the College 

Possible program’s annual operation. When all benefits are considered (i.e., that of 

College Access participants, AmeriCorps members, and of the various levels of 

government), they are $7.87 times that of AmeriCorps’s initial investment into College 

Possible for the most short-term scenario. Thus, when all stakeholder benefits are realized 

(and the benefit of increased earnings is only sustained for one year), they are 

$4.64 times the initial investment made by the federal government.

21 The different funder groups whose investment is in this calculation include the federal government (i.e., 

AmeriCorps), state and local governments, and other non-government entities. 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

22

The magnitude of the positive ROI calculations is driven by several factors, including:

• The expected benefits/cost savings of increased education attainment for College 

Access participants. Large benefits and cost savings per person can be expected 

from increased educational attainment. For example, Trostel (2015) estimated that 

the present value of federal costs savings in Medicaid, SNAP, and similar programs, 

expected from a high school degree over no high school degree, is more than 

$40,000 per person. The College Access program is estimated to help yield an 

additional 115 individuals attain some college and 80 bachelor’s degrees from the 

original 1,302 high school seniors in the 2017–2018 academic year.

• The employment outcomes of AmeriCorps members. According to the national 

AmeriCorps Alumni Survey Outcomes Study, the percentage of members 

unemployed was 5 percent lower six months after serving in AmeriCorps versus 

six months before (Friedman et al., 2016). 

• The educational benefits to AmeriCorps members. With the receipt of education 

awards, AmeriCorps alumni can use these funds to help pay for postsecondary 

degrees after exiting the program. 

Recommendations for Further Research 

Future ROI studies for national and community service programs such as College 

Possible can be strengthened in several ways. 

Recommendation 1: Ensure sample sizes for program evaluations are adequate and 

random. AmeriCorps grantees are required to conduct evaluations for their programs. 

To ensure findings are statistically representative of the population served, grantees 

should identify what the appropriate sample size should be, which would differ by 

program based on the number served. Appropriate sample sizes that are randomly 

selected will make the findings more reliable and provide greater confidence that the 

outcomes can be attributed to the intervention itself versus other confounding factors. 

Overall, larger sample sizes in these studies can provide a smaller margin of error, 

identify outliers in the data, and otherwise measure program impacts more accurately. 

Recommendation 2: Document outcomes using third-party data. Using third-party data, 

along with or in place of self-reported data, can also improve the accuracy of program 

outcome measurements. While self-reported data is easier to obtain, especially via 

survey, it has several disadvantages. Some answers may be exaggerated, respondents 

may not answer honestly, and response biases could affect results. AmeriCorps 

programs should—where possible—leverage data from third-party sources either to 

provide data for their program evaluation or to corroborate findings from self-reported 

data. For example, if employment and earnings outcomes are of interest, 

unemployment insurance (UI) data could be used to verify participants’ wages or 

employment status. 

Recommendation 3: Determine the persistence of impacts for both program 

participants and AmeriCorps members. Future studies of the College Possible program 

should conduct repeated data collection and measurement over time for College 
Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

23 

Possible participants. This examination can help understand how and why the benefits 

of College Possible’s College Access and College Success interventions vary and persist

across demographics and time. This could allow for the estimation of more benefits 

from impacts that are currently not captured. The persistence of impacts, such as 

increased earnings, is often not measured in evaluations because they require tracking

over a long period of time. Rigorous research on the persistence of impacts will enable 

AmeriCorps to determine a single value for ROI calculations and avoid relying on the 

scenario-based approach. 

Recommendation 4: Quantify ripple effects. Earnings impacts on program participants 

and AmeriCorps members likely have positive benefits for those individuals’ families and 

communities. Rigorous research on those potential ripple effects would enable 

AmeriCorps to capture a broader array of benefits of this and other programs, which 

would increase the resulting ROI. 

Recommendation 5: Evaluate the combined College Access and College Success 

programs. As noted in the “College Possible Evaluation History” section, an RCT

evaluating the participants of the College Access program who subsequently use the 

College Success program, as opposed to those that do not, has not yet been 

completed. More rigorous evaluation of the College Success program and College 

Access’s interaction with the College Success program is recommended. Further

analysis would offer additional insights in better understanding the attrition rate with 

and without College Success as well as the value added by each program individually 

and combined.

Conclusion 

The results suggest that investment in College Access yields favorable impacts across a 

variety of stakeholder groups. Specifically, impacts are realized by College Access

participants, AmeriCorps members, and the government. College Access participants 

benefit from increased educational attainment, which can lead to improved 

employment and earning outcomes. As College Possible near-peer coaches, 

AmeriCorps members gain valuable work experience, preparing them for future 

employment or educational pursuits. The government benefits from the improved 

employment and earnings outcomes of both the College Access participants and the 

AmeriCorps members in terms of additional tax revenue and reduced spending on 

public assistance and other forms of government spending such as corrections. 

The results of the ROI indicate that the benefits realized by College Access participants, 

AmeriCorps members, and the government strongly outweigh the investment made by 

funders (e.g., federal, state, and local governments, as well as other community-based 

organizations who provide program funding). Although the exact ROI results vary based 

on the types of benefits and the source of funding, they are all significantly positive. The 

use of short-term, medium-term, and long-term scenarios allowed for a range of 

estimates. The short-term scenario results suggest that even using the most conservative 

estimate, the College Access program delivers a large and significant ROI. 
23 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Appendix A: Benefits and Costs Included in Return on Investment Calculations 

Benefits

In Figure A-1, the rightmost three columns indicate whether a benefit is included in the numerator of a return on 

investment (ROI) calculation.

Figure A-1. Benefits Included in ROI Calculations

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased earnings 

due to increased 

educational 

attainment of 

program 

participants

Program 

participant

• Howley & Uekawa 

(2013) 

• Avery (2013) 

• Ingram et al. 

(2018) 

• College Possible 

(2020) 

• Pell Institute (2019)

• Current Population 

Survey (CPS) 

earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• Consumer Price 

Index (CPI) for all 

urban consumers,

Midwest region

(BLS, n.d.) 

X X 
24 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased income 

tax revenue due to 

increased earnings 

of program 

participants

Federal and state 

governments 

• College Possible 

(2020) 

• Pell Institute (2019)

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers, 

Midwest region

(BLS, n.d.)

• Tax rate data (Tax

Foundation, 2019) 

X X X 

Increased Social 

Security and 

Medicare tax 

revenue due to 

increased earnings 

of program 

participants

Federal

government • College Possible 

(2020) 

• Pell Institute (2019)

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region

(BLS, n.d.) 

• Social Security 

Administration

(2019) 

X X X 
25 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased sales tax 

revenue due to 

increased earnings

of program 

participants

State and local 

governments • College Possible 

(2020) 

• Pell Institute (2019)

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers, 

Midwest region

(BLS, n.d.) 

• Tax rate data (Tax

Foundation, 2019) 

• Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS) 

Consumer 

Expenditure 

Surveys (2019) 

X X 

Lifetime reduced 

spending in public 

health, criminal 

activity, and 

welfare due to 

increased 

educational 

attainment of 

program 

participants

Federal

government • College Possible 

(2020) 

• Pell Institute (2019)

• Trostel (2015) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region

(BLS, n.d.) 

X X X 
26 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased earnings 

of national service 

members due to 

reduced 

unemployment of 

national service 

members

National service 

member • Friedman et al.

(2016) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers. 

Midwest region

(BLS, n.d.) 

X X 

Increased income 

tax revenue due to

reduced 

unemployment of 

national service 

members

Federal and state 

governments • Friedman et al. 

(2016) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region 

(BLS, n.d.) 

• Tax rate data (Tax 

Foundation, 2019); 

(SSA, 2019) 

X X X 
27 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased Social 

Security and 

Medicare tax 

revenue due to 

increased earnings 

of national service 

members

Federal

government • Friedman et al. 

(2016) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region 

(BLS, n.d.) 

• Social Security 

Administration

X X X 

Increased sales tax 

revenue due to 

reduced 

unemployment of 

national service 

members

State and local 

governments • Friedman et al. 

(2016) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region 

(BLS, n.d.) 

• Tax rate data (Tax

Foundation, 2019) 

• BLS Consumer 

Expenditure 

Surveys (2019). 

X X 
28 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased earnings 

of national service 

members due to 

educational 

attainment partially 

funded by 

AmeriCorps 

National Service 

Member • AmeriCorps 

Education Award

(AmeriCorps, 

2020b) 

• National Center 

for Education 

Statistics (NCES, 

2018) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region

(BLS, n.d.) 

• Trostel (2015) 

X X 
29 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased income 

tax revenue due to

educational 

attainment partially 

funded by 

AmeriCorps of 

national service 

members

Federal and state 

governments 

• AmeriCorps 

Education Award

(AmeriCorps, 

2020b) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region 

(BLS, n.d.) 

• NCES (2018) 

• Tax rate data (SSA, 

2019); (Tax

Foundation, 2019) 

X X X 
30 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased Social 

Security and 

Medicare tax 

revenue due to 

educational 

attainment partially 

funded by 

AmeriCorps of 

national service 

members

Federal

government • AmeriCorps 

Education Award

(AmeriCorps, 

2020b) P59F

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region 

(BLS, n.d.) 

• NCES (2018) 

• Social Security 

Administration

(2019) 

X X X 
31 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Increased sales tax 

revenue due to

educational 

attainment partially 

funded by 

AmeriCorps of 

national service 

members

State and local 

governments • AmeriCorps 

Education Award

(AmeriCorps, 

2020b) P60F

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region 

(BLS, n.d.) 

• NCES (2018) 

• Tax rate data (Tax

Foundation, 2019); 

(BLS Consumer 

Expenditure 

Surveys, 2019) 

X X 

AmeriCorps 

member living 

allowances and 

education awards

National service 

member • AmeriCorps 

Education Award

(AmeriCorps, 

2020b) P62F

• College Possible 

(2020) 

X X 
32 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Stakeholder Group Data Sources

Total Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar

Federal 

Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Reduced spending 

on lifetime public 

assistance, 

corrections, and 

social insurance 

due to increased 

educational 

attainment of 

national service 

members

Federal, state, and 

local governments • Trostel (2015) 

• CPS earnings (U.S. 

Census Bureau, 

2018) 

• CPI for all urban 

consumers,

Midwest region 

(BLS, n.d.) 

X X X 
33 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Costs

In Figure A-2, the rightmost three columns indicate whether a cost is included in the denominator of a return on 

investment (ROI) calculation.

Figure A-2. Costs Included in ROI Calculations

Cost

Stakeholder 

Group Data Sources

Total 

Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

Total 

Benefits 

per Funder 

Dollar

Federal 

Governmen

t Benefits 

per Federal 

Dollar

AmeriCorps costs for 

education awards, living 

allowances, and other 

College Possible program 

grant funding

Federal

government 

(AmeriCorps) 

• AmeriCorps Education Award

(AmeriCorps, 2020) P63F

• College Possible (2020)

X X X 

Other funding Nongovernment 

funders

• College Possible (2019) X 
32 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Appendix B: Additional Information on the Methodology 

This appendix provides additional details on the methodology used for this study, as a 

supplement to the methodology section in the main report. It describes the steps used 

to calculate the return on investment (ROI), the results of interim calculations that 

contribute to the ROI calculations, and assumptions that underlie the analyses. 

Methodology Overview 

Calculating the ROI for College Possible’s College Access program included the 

following steps:

• Measuring and monetizing program benefits to College Access participants, 

AmeriCorps members, and the different levels of government 

• Assessing program costs 

• Calculating the ROI 

This ROI analysis included only those benefits that could be reasonably monetized given 

the available data and that likely would not have occurred without the AmeriCorps 

program. 

Although both College Access participants and AmeriCorps members experience 

positive benefits from the College Access program (described below), available data 

do not establish how long these impacts are sustained over time. To address a range of 

possible durations for those benefits, three scenarios were developed for this ROI study: 

• Short-Term. This scenario assumes short-term earnings impacts. The assumption is that 

earnings impacts are limited to a single year.

• Medium-Term. This scenario assumes a longer duration of earnings impacts. The 

assumption is that earnings impacts last 15 years. A 3 percent discount rate is 

applied each year to represent net present value in 2019 dollars.22

• Long-Term. This scenario assumes sustained earnings impacts throughout College 

Access program participants’ and College Access program AmeriCorps members’ 

working years. The assumption is that earnings impacts last 30 years. A discount rate 

of 3 percent is applied to the earnings each year, to represent net present value in 

2019 dollars. 

22 The Office of Management and Budget defines a discount rate as, “The interest rate used in calculating 

the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs.” Regarding the 3 percent discount rate, see 

Office of Management and Budget 2003, September 13.
33

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

The only difference among the three scenarios is the length of time that increased 

employment and earnings are sustained; all other benefits are held constant. 23 Note, 

employment and earnings impacts for College Access program participants who 

continue with their education following high school will only be captured in the 

medium-term and long-term scenarios because it is assumed that participants won’t 

finish a bachelor’s degree for six years. 24 The employment and earnings impacts for 

College Access participants who do not continue their education following high school 

are included in all scenarios. For each ROI calculation, three ROI estimates using the 

three scenarios were developed, which is explained in the “Calculating ROI” section. 

Measuring Benefits

The first step in calculating the ROI for the College Access program was to measure the 

program benefits. As a result of the College Access program, College Access program

participants, AmeriCorps members serving in the College Possible program, and various 

levels of the government benefit. These benefits were identified through an extensive 

literature review and data collection process. The methods used to measure benefits for 

each of these stakeholders are described below. 

Benefits to College Access Participants

Figures B-1 and B-2 show the additional earnings of the College Access participants 

broken down by expected educational attainment for the three scenarios, discounted 

at a 3 percent rate. 25 Along with the earnings, Figure B-3 also shows the lifetime 

reduction in public assistance payments received due to the additional educational 

attainment of College Access participants (Trostel, 2015). In other words, it shows the 

reduced spending on welfare, health care costs and criminal justice costs for College 

Access participants due to their increased educational attainment (i.e., high school 

completion, some college, or a bachelor’s degree). This is a lifetime benefit and 

remains constant across the three scenarios. 

This analysis also calculated the federal and state income, Medicare, and Social 

Security taxes on the additional income (Internal Revenue Service, 2019; Social Security 

23 These three scenarios consider varying durations of how long increased employment and earnings 

benefits last for both College Access participants and AmeriCorps members. Certain additional benefits 

are included equally across these three scenarios. Specifically, lifetime benefits related to decreased 

public assistance, social insurance, and corrections costs as a result of participants’ and members’ higher 

educational attainment post-program and post-service, respectively, are represented in each of these 

three scenarios equally. Thus, whether participants’ or members’ earnings impacts are sustained for one 

year (i.e., short-term scenario) or 30 years (i.e., long-term scenario), the same amount of these cost savings 

are realized.

24 For the purpose of this analysis, a conservative estimate of 6 years required to attain a bachelor’s degree 

and 3 years required to attain “some college.”

25 The Office of Management and Budget defines a discount rate as, “The interest rate used in calculating 

the present value of expected yearly benefits and costs.” Regarding the 3 percent discount rate, see 

Office of Management and Budget. (2003, September 13).
34 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Administration, 2019a, 2019b; Tax Foundation, 2019). 26 The summation of these taxes for 

each of the three scenarios is shown in Figure B-3. Subtracting those taxes from the gross 

additional income resulting from the increased educational attainment for College 

Access participants yields post-tax income. From the post-tax income, additional sales 

tax revenue to the state of Minnesota (as well as local governments within the state) is 

estimated, assuming College Access participants remain in Minnesota. 27 These 

estimates are presented across the three scenarios.

Figure B-1: Additional Students with Some College and Expected Median Annual 

Additional Earnings (2019$)

College Access

Participants

Additional Students 

with Some College

Annual Additional 

Earnings per Individual 

($)

Total Annual Additional 

Earnings ($)

Race/Ethnicity Male Female Male Female Male Female

White 1 2 $5,556 $5,091 $7,8585 $11,258 

Black 11 17 $6,456 $5,478 $70,666 $93,785 

Hispanic 5 5 $7,058 $8,194 $38,949 $70,726 

Other 27 43 $9,743 $10,832 $270,165 $469,797 

Total 45 67 NA NA $1,033,201

Sources: Pell Institute (2019), College Possible, U.S. Census Bureau, 2018 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

Earnings represent additional income due to some college attainment over a high school diploma.

26 For the additional high school graduates, the analysis assumes a federal marginal income tax rate of 12 

percent, the state income tax for Minnesota (7.85 percent), Medicare (1.45 percent), and Social Security 

(6.20 percent).

27 The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey reflects that for the income bracket 

College Access participants who would benefit from additional annual earnings, their expected taxable 

expenditures would be 53 percent.
35 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figure B-2: Additional Students with a Bachelor's Degree and Expected Median Annual 

Additional Earnings (2019$)

College Access

Participants

Additional 

Students with 

Bachelor's Degree

Annual Additional 

Earnings per Individual ($)

Total Annual Additional 

Earnings ($)

Race/Ethnicity Male Female Male Female Male Female

White 1 2 $23,805 $16,956 $23,388 $26,056 

Black 7 12 $6,786 $15,427 $51,617 $183,537 

Hispanic 4 6 $9,320 $11,289 $35,741 $610,623 

Other 19 30 $31,146 $20,260 $600,165 $67,713 

Total 31 49 NA NA $1,598,840

Sources: College Possible, 2020; Pell Institute, 2019; U.S. Census Bureau, 2018

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

Earnings represent additional income due to a college degree over some college attainment. 

Figure B-3: Additional Earnings for College Access Participants and Resulting Public 

Benefits by Scenario (2019$)

Scenario

Gross Additional 

Earnings of 

College Access

Participants

Reduced Public 

Assistance

Payroll Tax 

Payments*

Estimated 

Additional Sales 

Tax Revenue

Short-Term** $0 $5,839,113 $0 $0 

Medium-Term $16,167,949 $5,839,113 $5,125,240 $319,304 

Long-Term $26,643,085 $5,839,113 $8,445,858 $520,036 

*Note: Summed federal and state income, Medicare, and Social Security taxes based on gross earnings of 

College Access participants. 

** The short-term scenario does not include the increased earnings of those that go on to pursue higher 

education.

Benefits to AmeriCorps Members

The AmeriCorps members who provide services to the College Access participants also 

experience benefits due to their service. This analysis estimates these benefits: 

• Living allowance and education award

• Increased earnings due to increased education derived from the education award
36 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

• A 5-percentage point reduction in unemployment due to AmeriCorps service

(Friedman, et al., 2016).28

Note, the benefits to AmeriCorps members are presented here for the members serving College Possible’s

College Access program in Minnesota. 

Living Allowance and Education Award 

Living allowances are given to AmeriCorps members during their one-year service term 

to pay for various living expenses, such as housing and groceries. Regarding education 

awards, according to Friedman et al. (2016), a significant portion of AmeriCorps State & 

National alumni use them to pay for additional education at colleges, graduate 

schools, and technical schools while others use them to pay off outstanding student 

loans. 

Both the living allowances and education awards (considered one-time benefits that 

are not discounted or spread over time) are taxable. This analysis included their post-tax 

value of living allowances for the 71 AmeriCorps members in the ROI analysis as 

AmeriCorps member benefits (Figure B-4). The benefits derived from education awards 

are described in detail, below. When calculating the ROI, these benefits are scaled 

using the number of College Access participants in Minnesota. 

Figure B-4: Additional AmeriCorps Member Benefits

Benefit

Post-Tax 

Value (2019$) Notes

Living Allowance (net) $599,962 Post-tax living allowances members receive 

during service 

Education Award (net) 

Used for Schooling $252,484 

Post-tax education award amount, assumed

used to pay for schooling (graduate school, 

loans, etc.)

Total $852,446

Sources: College Possible, 2020; tax rates (Internal Revenue Service, 2019; Social Security Administration, 

2019a, 2019b; Tax Foundation, 2019); AmeriCorps, 2020b 

Increased Earnings Due to Increased Education Derived from the Education 

Award 

The AmeriCorps education award pays for some portion of member educational 

attainment, and the future earnings derived from the educational attainment is treated 

as a direct benefit to AmeriCorps members. To calculate the portion of member 

educational attainment that is attributable to College Possible’s College Access 

program, tuition cost data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) were

used. Figure B-5 details the average total cost of tuition for each degree type data from 

28 According to the national AmeriCorps Alumni Survey Outcomes Study, the percentage of members 

unemployed was 5 percent lower six months after serving in AmeriCorps than six months before.
37 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

NCES and the portion of that cost that the $6,195 education award ($4,574 after taxes) 

amount represents. These percentages were used to estimate the lifetime benefits of 

educational attainment that can be attributed to the education award. For example, 

according to NCES, the average cost of a graduate degree during the 2017–2018 

academic year was $24,672 in 2019 dollars. The $4,574 post-tax education award 

represents roughly 19 percent of the cost of that degree so, accordingly, AmeriCorps is 

only credited that percentage of the lifetime benefits of an AmeriCorps member’s 

graduate degree. Note, AmeriCorps members serving in the College Possible program

are required to hold a bachelor’s degree prior to service. Thus, only those AmeriCorps 

members expected to enroll in a graduate degree program post-service (based on 

survey results from Friedman et al. [2016]) are included in this portion of the analysis.

Figure B-5: Average Total Cost of Education by Degree 

Degree Type Cost (2019$)

Percent of Degree 

Tuition Covered by 

Education Award (%)

Graduate Degree29 $24,672 19% 

Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 2018

The survey of AmeriCorps alumni in Friedman et. al (2016) provided the percentage of 

members planning to use the education award to attend graduate school (23 percent) 

post-service, attend college (21 percent) post-service, attend a technical or vocational 

school (2 percent) post-service, and repay student loans (33 percent), for a total of 79

percent planning to use the education award. This survey was conducted across many 

AmeriCorps programs, many of which do not require a college degree pre-service.

Because College Possible’s AmeriCorps members must have obtained a bachelor’s 

degree prior to service, the percentage of survey respondents that did not plan on 

using the education award at all (21 percent) was removed. Next, the distribution of 

planned uses for the education award was scaled up to account for this. This 

reallocation resulted in an estimate of 29 percent of College Possible’s AmeriCorps 

members (up from the initial 23 percent) who would use the education award to pursue 

a graduate degree post-service.30 The remaining 71 percent of College Access 

AmeriCorps members are assumed to use the education award to repay student loans.

To determine the future lifetime earnings realized due to the use of the education 

award post-service, the College Access AmeriCorps members that served during the 

most recent program year are determined by whether they are assumed to attain a 

graduate degree post-service, as shown in Figure B-6. Then, the difference in the 

29 Assumes a two-year program.

30 For example, the 23 percent of AmeriCorps members planning to use the education award to attend 

graduate school was scaled up by the ratio of the full distribution (100 percent) to the reduced sample of 

those planning to use the education award (23% * 100%/79% = 29%) to account for the fact that College 

Access AmeriCorps members have already attended college, differentiating them from the Friedman et al. 

(2016) sample of all AmeriCorps members.
38 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

additional lifetime earnings from a bachelor’s degree to a graduate degree is 

estimated using data provided by Trostel (2015), which is shown in the third column of 

Figure B-6 and expressed in 2019 dollars. For example, Trostel (2015) calculated that the 

lifetime earnings in 2019 dollars of someone with a graduate degree is about $455,000 

higher than someone with a bachelor’s degree. This represents the additional lifetime 

earnings realized as a result of gaining a graduate degree if a bachelor’s degree was 

already completed. This increase in income is then scaled by the percent of the degree 

tuition that can be paid using education award such that College Possible is only 

credited for the percentage of the benefits equal to the percentage of tuition that the 

education award pays for. 

Then, this amount is applied to the estimated number of AmeriCorps members seeking 

a graduate degree post-service. As noted in Figure B-6, this lifetime earnings amount is 

roughly $1.3 million across all College Access AmeriCorps members who served in the 

most recent program year. 

Figure B-6: Additional Earnings from AmeriCorps Members’ Use of the Education Award 

Degree Type

Number of 

College Possible

AmeriCorps 

Members

Percent of 

Degree Tuition 

Covered by 

Education 

Award (%)

2019 Additional 

Lifetime Earnings 

over Previous 

Educational Step 

($)*

Additional 

Lifetime Earnings 

from Education 

Award ($)

Graduate 

Degree 15.41 19% $455,221 $1,300,458 

Sources: College Possible, Trostel (2015)

* Note: This value is the difference of lifetime earnings over the prior degree type (e.g., one with a graduate

degree can expect to earn roughly $455,000 more over their lifetime than with a bachelor’s degree). 

The improved educational outcomes realized by College Access participants and their

AmeriCorps members also generate benefits to the various levels of government in the 

form of tax revenue generation and costs savings in public assistance, corrections, and 

other forms of government support. A variety of taxes and their associated rates are 

applied to College Access participants’ and AmeriCorps members’ earnings as well as 

to their estimated spending to determine tax revenue generation. Of note, only the 

difference in cumulative median net earnings for College Access participants and 

AmeriCorps are used to calculate government benefits in increased tax revenue. 

Again, this difference in cumulative median net earnings for each of these two groups 

represents the increased earnings solely attributable to College Access. Thus, the 

government taxes derived from these earnings amounts would also be solely 

attributable to the College Access program. Government benefits are also derived 

from College Access participants’ increased earnings in the form of a reduction in 

public assistance payments and from AmeriCorps members’ increased educational 

attainment in the form of decreased public assistance, social insurance, and 

corrections costs. Details concerning these different fiscal benefits are described in 

more detail below. Note, these benefits are only estimated for the estimated 
39

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

29 percent of members who use the education award for additional education 

post-service. 

Additionally, the survey of AmeriCorps members in Friedman et al. (2016) found that 

33 percent of members planned to use their education award to pay back student 

loans. Due to the requirement that AmeriCorps members serving College Access hold a 

bachelor’s degree, this analysis assumes that those who planned to obtain an 

associate degree (2 percent) or bachelor’s degree (21 percent) will also use the 

education award to pay back student loans used to finance the degree they have 

already obtained. The analysis therefore assumes that 71 percent (scaled from 

56 percent following the redistribution described above) of AmeriCorps members will 

use the education award to repay student loans. Assuming members planned to make 

payments on their student loans, the education award represents an increase in 

income via a reduction in out-of-pocket student loan payments. The number of full-time 

members (where two half-time members is equal to one full-time member) in the most 

recent College Access service year was calculated and then multiplied by 79 percent

to identify the estimated number of members using the education award in this fashion. 

Next, this value was multiplied by the value of the post-tax education award to 

calculate the total savings to AmeriCorps members. Again, the state and local and 

federal taxes paid due to the receipt of the education award are included as benefits 

to the respective levels of government. However, cost savings in the form of public 

assistance, corrections, and other forms of government support are not included for the 

subset of AmeriCorps members using the education award to pay back student loans.

Reduction in Unemployment Due to AmeriCorps Service 

According to Friedman et al. (2016) (i.e., the national AmeriCorps Alumni Survey 

Outcomes Study), the percentage of AmeriCorps members unemployed was 

5 percentage points lower six months after serving in AmeriCorps compared to 

six months before. Friedman et al. (2016) did not provide actual employment rates for 

AmeriCorps members pre- and post-service, but rather provided the change in 

unemployment rates, a 5 percentage point decrease. Thus, to estimate the additional 

number of AmeriCorps members employed post-service attributable to the College 

Possible program, this analysis multiplied the 5 percentage point increase in 

employment by the number of College Access AmeriCorps members who served 

during the most recent program year, as shown in Figure B-7. The analysis applied the 

5-percentage point reduction in unemployment weighted by race, gender, and 

educational attainment of the College Access AmeriCorps member. The analysis 

estimated the earnings of AmeriCorps members post-service using data from 

Zeidenberg et al. (2016).
40 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figure B-7: Additional Number Employed and Annual Median Earnings for AmeriCorps 

Members

AmeriCorps 

Members

Number of 

College 

Access 

AmeriCorps 

Members* 

Percentage 

Point Increase 

in AmeriCorps 

Members 

Employment 

(%)

Number 

Employed

Attributable to 

AmeriCorps

Weighted 

Median 

Gross 

Annual 

Earnings 

(2019 $)

Weighted 

Median Net 

Annual 

Earnings 

(2019 $)** 

AmeriCorps 

Members 71 5% 3.6 $60,167 $213,592 

Sources: Zeidenberg et al. (2016), Friedman et al. (2016), U.S. Census Bureau (2018)

* Note: 71 AmeriCorps members includes 63 full-time members and 8 part-time members.

**Note: Median net annual earnings exclude payroll taxes paid on earnings (i.e., federal and state income, 

Social Security, and Medicare taxes).

Figure B-8 shows the cumulative median net earnings for the additional AmeriCorps 

members employed for the three different scenarios. These post-tax (or net) monetary 

amounts represent the additional earnings realized due to the AmeriCorps members 

serving College Access whose employment is solely attributed to the program. 

Figure B-8: Cumulative Median Net Earnings for AmeriCorps Members by Scenario

Scenario

Cumulative Median Net Earnings 

for AmeriCorps Members (2019$)

Short-Term $208,033 

Medium-Term $2,063,015 

Long-Term $2,648,342 

Sources: Zeidenberg et al. (2016), College Possible, U.S. Census Bureau (2018)

Benefits to Government

State and Local Government

State and local government benefits from College Access are realized through the 

generation of additional state income tax revenue, state and local sales tax revenue, 

and reduced spending on social insurance and corrections due to the increased 

educational attainment of AmeriCorps post-service. Additionally, state government 

revenue is derived from the taxable portion of the living allowances and education 

award received by AmeriCorps members. 

State Income Tax Revenue: To measure income tax revenue generation for state 

government (any local income taxes are not included), the additional gross median 

earnings of College Access participants and AmeriCorps members that are solely 

attributed to the College Access program are taxed by a state income tax rate. For 

College Access participants’ additional gross median earnings, the 2019 Minnesota 

state income tax rate is used (7.05 percent) while for AmeriCorps members’ gross 
41 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

median earnings, the average 2019 state income tax rate across all U.S. states is used 

(4.80 percent). Additionally, the living allowance given to AmeriCorps members during 

their service term is taxed using the state income, as this analysis was done exclusively 

for Minnesota’s College Access program. AmeriCorps members’ education awards are 

also taxed, but at an average rate for the state income taxes. This is used due to the 

unknown location of AmeriCorps members at the time of education award

redemption. Figure B-9 is the potential annual additional state income tax revenue 

under the medium-term and long-term scenarios after all College Access students have 

achieved their educational outcomes.

Figure B-9: Potential Annual Additional State Income Tax Revenue

Stakeholder Group

Total Annual 

Additional Earnings

(2019$)

State Income Tax

Rate* (%)

Annual Additional 

State Income Tax 

Revenue (2019$)

College Access

Participants $2,632,042 7.05% $185,559 

AmeriCorps Members $214,274 4.80% $10,275 

*Minnesota tax rate for College Access participants; average U.S. state income tax rate for AmeriCorps 

Members. 

State and Local Sales Tax Revenue: To measure sales tax revenue generation for state 

and local governments, the amount of College Access participants’ and AmeriCorps 

members’ additional median net earnings that are spent on taxable goods is taxed by 

a sales tax rate. For College Access program participants, the summation of the 2019 

Minnesota state sales tax rate (6.9 percent) and Minnesota’s average local sales tax 

rate (0.5 percent) is used, amounting to 7.4 percent. For AmeriCorps members, the 

average 2019 combined state and local average sales tax rate across all U.S. states is 

used (6.5 percent). 

To estimate the amount of College Access participants’ and AmeriCorps members’ 

median earnings that are spent on taxable goods, data from the Consumer 

Expenditure Survey are used. These data show the amount of spending on a number of 

different goods and services by national consumers across several different income 

brackets. The proportion of earnings that are spent on taxable goods (such as alcoholic 

beverages, housekeeping supplies, apparel, etc.) was then calculated for consumers 

with incomes that matched the earnings of the College Access participants and 

AmeriCorps members and vary as a result of the different income brackets College 

Access participants and AmeriCorps members fall into. These proportions are then 

applied to College Access participants’ and AmeriCorps members’ median net 

earnings to calculate the post-tax monetary amount they spend on taxable goods, 

and sales tax rates are applied accordingly to estimate the resulting sales tax revenues.

For AmeriCorps members’ gross living allowance amount, the portion for AmeriCorps 

members’ estimated spending rate multiplied by the 6.5 percent sales tax rate is 

applied to calculate additional tax revenue to state and local governments.
42 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figures B-10 and B-11 detail this process for College Access participants. In order to 

calculate the additional state and local sales tax revenue generated by additional 

earnings and likelihood of employment for AmeriCorps members, the same process was 

used. However, the annual additional earnings and taxable spending rate are allowed 

to vary by the estimated educational attainment levels of AmeriCorps members. In the 

case of College Access participants, the benefits are derived only from obtaining some 

college education or attaining a bachelor’s degree. Figures B-10 and B-11 are the 

potential annual additional state and local sales tax revenue under the medium-term

and long-term scenarios after all of the College Access students have achieved their 

educational outcomes.

Figure B-10: Additional State and Local Sales Tax Revenue, College Access Participants

(Some College)

College Access 

Participants

Total Annual Additional 

Earnings (2019$)

Taxable Spending 

Rate (%)

Total Annual Taxable 

Spending (2019$)

Race/Ethnicity Male Female Male Female Male Female

White $7,855 $11,258 37% 43% $2,880 $4,841 

Black $70,666 $93,785 43% 53% $30,386 $49,706 

Hispanic $38,949 $70,726 43% 53% $16,748 $37,485 

Other $270,165 $469,797 37% 43% $99,961 $202,013 

Total Taxable Income Spending $444,020 

Total Taxable Income Less Income Taxes31 $116,495 

Total Annual State and Local Taxes32 $22,393 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

31 Income taxes include an estimate 12 percent federal income tax, a 7.65 percent tax for Social Security 

and Medicare, and a 7.05 percent state and local income tax.

32 Assumes 6.9 percent state sales tax rate and 0.5 percent local sales tax rate.
43 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figure B-11: Additional State and Local Sales Tax Revenue, College Access Participants

(Bachelor’s Degree) 

College Access 

Participants

Total Annual Additional 

Earnings (2019$)

Taxable Spending 

Rate (%)

Total Annual Taxable 

Spending (2019$)

Race/Ethnicity Male Female Male Female Male Female

White $23,388 $26,056 32% 37% $7,569 $9,641 

Black $51,617 $183,537 37% 37% $19,098 $67,909 

Hispanic $35,741 $67,713 37% 43% $13,224 $29,117 

Other $600,165 $610,623 32% 37% $192,053 $225,931 

Total Taxable Income Spending $564,540 

Total Taxable Income Less Income Taxes33 $57,708 

Total Annual State and Local Taxes34 $28,594 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

State and Local Government Cost Savings: State and local governments also benefit 

from College Access through lifetime savings in social insurance and corrections—as 

reported in Trostel (2015)—due to the increase in AmeriCorps members’ educational 

attainment after program exit. Of note, social insurance includes unemployment 

insurance compensation and workers’ compensation. To conservatively calculate 

these lifetime non-federal government savings, the pre-national service education 

levels of AmeriCorps members is first compared to their post-national service education 

levels. This determines the change in lifetime costs (and thus savings) in corrections and 

social insurance based on the differences in education levels among College Access 

participants and College Access AmeriCorps members (see Figure B-12 and Figure B-13, 

respectively). To determine what portion of this differential represents lifetime savings to 

state or local governments versus the federal government, a different method is 

employed for each of these cost savings areas. For social insurance, 

50 percent of lifetime unemployment insurance costs savings and all the lifetime costs 

savings for workers’ compensation are apportioned to state and local governments

(Oswald, 2018). Regarding reductions in lifetime corrections spending, the portion 

between the federal and state or local governments is determined based on the 

U.S. incarcerated population in 2019. Specifically, the number of individuals housed in 

federal government institutions (9.7 percent) versus state and local facilities 

(90.3 percent) was used to divide up these savings (Sawyer & Wagner, 2019). Therefore, 

over 90 percent of the lifetime cost savings in corrections due to AmeriCorps members 

experiencing an increase in educational attainment pre- to post-national service are 

allocated to state and local governments.

33 Income taxes include an estimate 12 percent federal income tax, a 7.65 percent tax for Social Security 

and Medicare, and a 7.05 percent state and local income tax.

34 Assumes 6.9 percent state sales tax rate and 0.5 percent local sales tax rate.
44 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figure B-12: 2018 State and Local Government Cost Savings (College Access 

Participants) 

Educational 

Attainment 

Attained

Number 

of College 

Access 

Participants

Lifetime UI 

Savings

(2019$)

Lifetime 

Worker’s 

Comp. 

Savings

(2019$)

Lifetime

Incarceration 

Savings

(2019$)

Total State 

and Local 

Government 

Savings

(2019$)

Some 

College 115 $36,008 $7,144 $461,350 $504,503 

Bachelor's

Degree 80 $104,455 $89,041 $527,799 $721,295 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

Figure B-13: 2018 State and Local Government Cost Savings (AmeriCorps Members)

Educational 

Attainment 

Attained

AmeriCorps 

Members 

Using 

Education 

Award

Lifetime UI 

Savings 

(2019$)

Lifetime 

Worker’s 

Comp. 

Savings 

(2019$)

Lifetime

Incarceration 

Savings 

(2019$)

Total State 

and Local 

Government 

Savings 

(2019$)

Graduate 

Degree 15.41 $1,628 -$26 $1,200 $2,802 

Notes: Values may not match due to rounding. The negative value for lifetime worker’s compensation

savings reflects that spending is higher for people with graduate degrees, compared to people with 

bachelor’s degrees. 

Federal Government 

The federal government benefits from the College Access program in terms of 

increased tax revenue (e.g., federal income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes) from 

College Access participants’ and AmeriCorps members’ increased additional earnings. 

It also realizes benefits in the form of cost savings in public assistance, social insurance, 

and corrections expenditures due to College Access participants’ improved 

employment and AmeriCorps members’ increased educational attainment postservice. Lastly, repayment of federal student loans using the education allowance is 

included in this analysis as a benefit to government (and not as a benefit to AmeriCorps 

members to avoid double counting).

Federal Income Tax Revenue: To measure federal income tax revenue, the additional 

median gross earnings of College Access participants and AmeriCorps members that 

are solely attributed to the College Access program are taxed by a federal income tax 

rate, based on the estimated median gross annual earnings of College Access 

participants and AmeriCorps members. For College Access participants, the 2019 

federal income tax rate is 17 percent while for AmeriCorps members the rate used is 

22 percent. The tax rate used for the AmeriCorps members’ living allowances and 

education awards is assumed to be taxed at the 10 percent tax bracket due to the
45 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

assumptions that the living allowance is their only income source during service and 

that if they are redeeming the education award that they are in a similar tax bracket. 

The difference in the federal income tax rates stems from their earnings amounts after 

participating or serving in the College Access program, which are associated with 

different federal income tax brackets. Figure B-14 is the potential annual additional 

state income tax revenue under the medium-term and long-term scenarios after all 

College Access students have achieved their educational outcomes.

Figure B-14: 2018 Annual Additional Federal Income Tax Revenue

Total Annual 

Additional Earnings 

(2019$)

Marginal Federal

Income Tax Rate

Annual Additional 

Federal Income Tax 

Revenue (2019$)

College Access 

Participants

$2,632,042 17% $447,447 

AmeriCorps 

Members* $214,274 22% $47,140 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

*Note: AmeriCorps additional annual earnings stems from the 5% reduction in unemployment due to 

service (Friedman et al. 2016). Lifetime earnings and state taxes to those that go on to pursue a graduate 

degree are presented as a present value in Figures B-6 and B-13.

Social Security and Medicare Tax Revenue: Social Security and Medicare tax revenue 

are measured in the same way as the federal income tax but using tax rates specific to 

each revenue source. Social Security and Medicare use flat tax rates, 6.2 percent and 

1.45 percent, respectively; thus, these rates are applied to the additional median gross 

earnings for both College Access participants and AmeriCorps members to calculate 

the amount of revenue the federal government receives. Figure B-15 is the potential 

annual additional state income tax revenue under the medium-term and long-term

scenarios after all College Access students have achieved their educational outcomes.

Figure B-15: 2018 Annual Additional Social Security and Medicare Tax Revenue

Total Annual 

Additional Earnings 

(2019$)

Social Security and 

Medicare Tax Rate

Annual Additional 

Social Security and 

Medicare Tax 

Revenue (2019$)

College Access 

Participants

$2,632,042 7.65% $201,351 

AmeriCorps 

Members* $214,274 7.65% $16,392 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

*Note: AmeriCorps additional annual earnings stem from the 5% reduction in unemployment due to service 

(Friedman et al. 2016). Lifetime earnings and taxes to those that go on to pursue a graduate degree are 

presented as a present value in Figures B-6, B-13, and B-14. 
46 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Federal Government Cost Savings: The federal government realizes cost savings in 

public assistance, social insurance, and corrections due to the improved educational 

attainment of College Access participants and AmeriCorps members after program

exit. Using the findings of Trostel (2015), which were referenced earlier in this section, the 

increased educational attainment that College Access participants and AmeriCorps 

members achieve after national service was used to estimate the federal government 

portion of lifetime cost savings on social insurance (which comprises worker’s 

compensation and unemployment insurance compensation as noted earlier), public 

assistance (e.g., SNAP, Medicaid, TANF), and corrections. Figure B-16 shows the lifetime 

cost savings to the federal versus to the state and local government for each of these 

areas—where applicable—by education level. 

Figure B-16: Marginal Benefits to Government of Increased Educational Attainment 

Level per Individual’s Lifetime

Source of 

Government 

Saving

High School 

Diploma ($)

Associate 

Degree ($)

Bachelor’s 

Degree ($)

Graduate 

Degree ($)

Public 

Assistance

$54,155 $31,803 $14,480 $9,394

Social Insurance $9,584 $8,209 $5,863 $4,732

Federal $3,964 $3,570 $2,660 $2,090 

State/Local $5,620 $4,639 $3,204 $2,643 

Corrections $8,488 $4,055 $1,190 $725

Federal $822 $393 $115 $70 

State/Local $7,666 $3,662 $1,075 $655 

Total $72,227 $44,067 $21,533 $14,851

Sources: Trostel (2015), Sawyer et al. (2019)

Note: The values represent marginal benefits over the previous level of education (e.g., a high school 

diploma over no high school diploma). 

To conservatively calculate the federal government’s lifetime savings (Figures B-17 and 

B-18), the pre-national service education levels of College Access participants and 

AmeriCorps members are first compared to their post-national service education levels. 

The differences between the public assistance, federal social insurance, and federal 

corrections costs for the pre- versus post-service education levels represent the cost 

savings realized by the federal government due to the increased educational 

attainment levels of College Access participants and AmeriCorps members. As 

previously mentioned when discussing the state and local governments’ allocation of 

the reduction in lifetime social insurance and corrections expenditures, the federal 

government receives 50 percent of the lifetime cost savings in unemployment 

insurance compensation (part of social insurance) and almost 10 percent of the lifetime 

cost savings in corrections (Oswald, 2018; Sawyer & Wagner, 2019). 
47 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figure B-17: 2018 Federal Government Cost Savings (College Access Participants) 

Educational 

Attainment 

Attained

Number 

of College 

Access 

Participants

Lifetime UI 

Savings 

(2019$)

Lifetime

Incarceration 

Savings 

(2019$)

Lifetime 

Public 

Assistance 

Savings 

(2019$)

Total Federal

Government 

Savings 

(2019$)

Some 

College 115 $36,008 $49,451 $1,029,784 $1,115,243 

Bachelor's

Degree 80 $104,455 $56,574 $3,337,042 $3,498,071 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

* These negative values reflect that unemployment insurance and workers compensation spending is 

higher for people with high school diplomas, compared to people without high school diplomas. High 

school graduates are more likely to work, producing this effect.

Figure B-18: 2018 Federal Government Cost Savings (AmeriCorps Members)

Educational 

Attainment 

Attained

AmeriCorps 

Members 

Using 

Education 

Award

Lifetime UI 

Savings 

(2019$)

Lifetime

Incarceration 

Savings 

(2019$)

Lifetime 

Public 

Assistance 

Savings 

(2019$)

Total Federal

Government 

Savings 

(2019$)

Graduate 

Degree 15.41 $1,628 -$201 $8,816 $10,244 

Note: Values may not match due to rounding.

Federal government cost savings result from additional educational attainment. The total values are 

proportional to the percentage of tuition that the AmeriCorps education award contributes to the 

estimated cost of a bachelor’s degree. 

Additional Government Benefits 

Increased federal income and state and local tax receipts due to a 5 percent 

reduction in unemployment associated with AmeriCorps service 

The analysis estimates AmeriCorps members net earnings due to the 5 percent

decrease in unemployment associated with the College Possible AmeriCorps member

demographics (in terms of gender, age, race/ethnicity, and educational attainment 

level) that served during the most recent program year. Based on the segmentation of 

these population characteristics, the analysis estimated the number of AmeriCorps 

members who would gain employment due to the reduced unemployment program 

benefit. The annual median earnings for the demographic multiplied by the estimated 

number of additionally employed individuals yield an estimated annual increase in 

earnings resulting from the reduction in unemployment due to the AmeriCorps service. 
48 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figure B-19 shows the additional earnings of AmeriCorps members, the federal and 

state income, Medicare, and Social Security taxes on the additional income,35 and 

additional sales tax revenue, 36 similar to the estimation of the additional College Access 

participants’ income. The undiscounted annual values are reflected above in Figures B14 and B-15.

Figure B-19: Additional Earnings for College Possible AmeriCorps Members and 

Resulting Public Benefits by Scenario (2019$)

Scenario

Gross Additional 

Earnings of College 

Access AmeriCorps 

Members (2019$)

Income Tax 

Payments (2019$)*

Estimated Additional 

Sales Tax Revenue

(2019$)

Short-Term $208,033 $71,657 $3,221 

Medium-Term $2,063,015 $710,606 $31,940 

Long-Term $2,648,342 $912,222 $41,002 

* Note: Summed federal and state income, Medicare, and Social Security taxes

Summary of Benefits to Government

Figure B-20 shows the amount of tax revenue generated and savings in expenditures for 

state and local versus the federal government that are solely credited to the College 

Access program in Minnesota and calculated using the methods described above. The 

data are broken out by College Access participant and AmeriCorps members, for 

each of the three scenarios. These government revenues and savings amounts are 

benefits that are included in the three ROI calculations. 

Figure B-20: State/Local and Federal Government Benefits by Stakeholder Group and by 

Scenario

Benefit Type Benefit (2019$)

Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

College Access Participant-Derived Benefits

State/Local Government Benefits $1,225,798 $2,684,942 $3,624,171

State Income Tax Revenues from 

Employment

(Assumed Minnesota State Tax Rate Bracket: 

7.05%) 

$0 $1,139,840 $1,878,337 

State and Local Sales Tax Revenue from 

Employment

(Minnesota State and Local Tax Rate: 7.4%)

$0 $319,304 $520,036 

35 For the increase in employment of AmeriCorps members, the analysis assumes a federal marginal 

income tax rate of 22 percent, an average of all 50 states’ income taxes (4.8 percent), Medicare 

(1.45 percent), and Social Security (6.20 percent).

36 The average state and local sales tax rate across the U.S. is estimated to be 6.52 percent.
49 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Type Benefit (2019$)

Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

Non-federal Savings in Reduced Social 

Insurance and Corrections Spending from 

Educational Attainment (Lifetime)

$1,225,798 $1,225,798 $1,225,798 

Federal Government Benefits $4,613,314 $8,598,714 $11,180,835

Federal Income Tax Revenue from 

Employment

(Assume the marginal earnings are federally $0 $2,748,551 $4,529,324 

taxed at an average rate of 12.0% and 22% 

brackets)

Social Security & Medicare Tax Revenue 

from Employment $0 $1,236,848 $2,038,196 (Federal Social Security Tax Rate: 6.2%)

(Federal Medicare Tax Rate: 1.5%)

Federal Savings in Reduced Social Insurance 

and Corrections Spending from Educational 

Attainment (Lifetime)

$4,613,314 $4,613,314 $4,613,314 

AmeriCorps Members-Derived Benefits

State/Local Government Benefits $202,224 $319,890 $357,019

State Income Tax revenue from Living 

Allowances and Education Awards* $45,031 $45,031 $45,031 (Assumed Minnesota State Tax Bracket: 

5.35%) 

State and Local Sales Tax Revenue from 

Living Allowances* $48,155 $48,155 $48,155 (Average Minnesota State and Local Tax 

Rate: 7.43%) 

State Income Tax Revenue from Reduced 

Unemployment $9,975 $98,922 $126,989 (Average State tax rate for assumed 

marginal incomes: 4.8%) 

State and Local Sales Tax Revenue from 

Reduced Unemployment $3,221 $31,940 $41,002 

(Average State and Local Tax Rate: 6.5%)

State Income, Sales, and Property Taxes from 

Educational Attainment (Lifetime)** $93,039 $93,039 $93,039 

Savings in Reduced Social Insurance and 

Corrections Spending from Educational 

Attainment (Lifetime)**

$2,802 $2,802 $2,802 

Federal Government Benefits $638,405 $1,188,408 $1,361,957

Federal Income Tax Revenue from Living 

Allowances and Education Awards* $116,961 $116,961 $116,961 

(Assumed Federal Income Tax Rate: 10.0%) 

Social Security and Medicare Tax Revenue 

from Living Allowances and Education 

Awards* $89,475 $89,475 $89,475 

(Federal Social Security Tax Rate: 6.2%); 

(Federal Medicare Tax Rate: 1.5%)
50 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Benefit Type Benefit (2019$)

Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

Federal Income Tax Revenue from Reduced 

Unemployment $45,767 $453,863 $582,635 

(Federal Income Tax Rate: 22.0%) 

Social Security and Medicare Tax Revenue 

from Reduced Unemployment $15,915 $157,821 $202,598 (Federal Social Security Tax Rate: 6.2%) 

(Federal Medicare Tax Rate: 1.5%)

Federal Income Tax Revenue from 

Educational Attainment (Lifetime)** $236,571 $236,571 $236,571 

Social Security Tax Revenue from 

Educational Attainment (Lifetime)** $123,472 $123,472 $123,472 

Savings in Reduced Social Insurance, 

Corrections, and Public Assistance Spending 

from Employment (Lifetime)**

$10,244 $10,244 $10,244 

Total $6,679,742 $12,791,954 $16,523,982

* Living allowances and education awards are one-time taxable payments. The resulting tax revenue does 

not vary by scenario.

** Applies only to those AmeriCorps members expected to pursue a graduate degree post-service

Of note, the federal and non-federal government estimates of reduced lifetime social 

insurance, corrections, and public assistance spending as well increased lifetime taxes 

due to increased education do not vary across the three scenarios (i.e., short-term, 

medium-term, and long-term) because they are not dependent on how long the 

increased employment and associated earnings are sustained. Rather, they are 

derived from increased educational attainment and that is a lifetime present value. 

Measuring Costs

The analysis’s treatment of costs is discussed in the “Costs” section of the main report.

ROI Calculation

The analysis calculated three different ROI results for each scenario. Since two of the 

ROI calculations include benefits to society (program participants and AmeriCorps 

members), the results are expressed as a cost-benefit ratio, while maintaining ROI 

terminology. 37 The ROI (or cost-benefit ratio) in this study can be interpreted as the 

amount of dollars returned for every $1 of investment (or cost). 

37 ROIs are often expressed as percentages when measuring the financial return to a single entity from that 

entity’s investment. Although this is consistent with one of the three ROI metrics reported (Government 

Revenue/Savings per Federal Dollar), since the other ROIs lend themselves to a benefit-cost ratio, that ratio 

is used for all three metrics.
51 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

The formulas used to calculate each of the three ROIs are the following:

= Benefits to Particpants + Benefits to AmeriCorps Members + Benefits to the Goverment

Federal (AmeriCorps)Funding

= Benefits to Particpants + Benefits to AmeriCorps Members + Benefits to the Goverment

Federal (AmeriCorps)Funding + Required Match Funding + Other Funding

= Benefits to the Federal Goverment

Federal (AmeriCorps)Funding

Figures B-21, B-22, and B-23 show the total benefits, costs, and ROI results for each 

scenario. 

Figure B-21: ROI Calculations for Short-Term Scenario

Benefits / Costs

Total Benefits 

per AmeriCorps

Dollar ($)

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar ($)

Federal Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar ($)

Total Benefits $8,909,835 $8,909,835 $5,251,720 

Total Costs $1,131,498 $5,923,305 $1,131,498 

Result $7.87 $1.50 $4.64

Figure B-22: ROI Calculations for Medium-Term Scenario

Benefits / Costs

Total Benefits 

per AmeriCorps

Dollar ($)

Total Benefits 

per Funder Dollar ($)

Federal Government 

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar ($)

Total Benefits $26,932,767 $26,932,767 $9,787,121 

Total Costs $1,131,498 $5,923,305 $1,131,498 

Result $23.80 $4.55 $8.65

Federal 

Government

Benefits per 

Federal Dollar

Total 

Benefits per 

AmeriCorps

Dollar

Total 

Benefits per 

Funder 

Dollar
52 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Figure B-23: ROI Calculations for Long-Term Scenario

Benefits / Costs Total Benefits per 

AmeriCorps Dollar ($)

Total Benefits per 

Funder Dollar ($)

Federal Government

Benefits per Federal

Dollar ($)

Total Benefits $37,993,229 $37,993,229 $12,542,792 

Total Costs $1,131,498 $5,923,305 $1,131,498 

Result $33.58 $6.41 $11.09
53 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

References 

AmeriCorps (formerly Corporation for National & Community Service). (2020a). Tax 

implications. https://www.nationalservice.gov/programs/americorps/segalamericorps-education-award/tax-implications

AmeriCorps (formerly Corporation for National & Community Service). (2020b). 

Amount, eligibility, and limitations. 

https://www.nationalservice.gov/programs/americorps/segal-americorpseducation-award/amount-eligibility-and

AmeriCorps (formerly Corporation for National & Community Service). (2018). 

AmeriCorps members demographic. 

https://data.nationalservice.gov/National-Service/AmeriCorps-MembersDemographic/2ca3-89j5

Avery, C. (2013). Evaluation of the College Possible Program: Results from a 

randomized controlled trial. NBER Working Paper 19562, JEL No. I23,I24. 

https://www.nber.org/papers/w19562.pdf

Blagg, K., & Blom, E. (2018, September). Evaluating the return on investment in higher 

education: An assessment of individual- and state-level returns. 

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/99078/evaluating_the_r

eturn_on_investment_in_higher_education.pdf

College Possible, Inc. (2019). Financial statements. (p. 6). 

College Possible. (2014). College Possible: Closing the achievement gap for lowincome students. Investing in innovation. 

https://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/2014/college.pdf 

Friedman, E., Freeman, B., Phillips, B., Rosenthal, L., Robinson, D., Miller, H., & Porowski, 

A. (2016). AmeriCorps alumni outcomes: Final survey technical report (p. 56). 

https://www.nationalservice.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_A

meriCorpsAlumniOutcomesFinalTechReport.pdf

Harlow, C. (2003, April). Bureau of Justice Statistics special report: Education and 

correctional populations. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ecp.pdf

Howley, C. & Uekawa, K. (2013). Evaluation of College Possible postsecondary 

outcomes 2007–2012.

https://www.nationalservice.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_C

ollege%20Possible%20Postsecondary%20Outcomes_2012.pdf
54

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Ingram, D., Dupuis, D., Johnson, J. & Madrid, R. (2018). College Possible College 

Program social innovation fund year 4 (final) impact and implementation 

evaluation report 2016–2017. University of Minnesota, College of Education 

and Human Development, Center for Applied Research and Educational 

Improvement. 

https://www.nationalservice.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/COLL

EGE_POSSIBLE_COLLEGE_PROGRAM_SOCIA_INNOVATION_FUND_v2_508.pdf

Internal Revenue Service (IRS). (2019). IRS provides tax inflation adjustments for tax 

year 2019. https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-provides-tax-inflationadjustments-for-tax-year-2019

National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Digest of education statistics. Table 

330.20. Average undergraduate tuition and fees and room and board rates 

charged for full-time students in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, 

by control and level of institution and state or jurisdiction: 2016–17 and 2017–

18. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_330.20.asp

Nyekil, T. (2019). 2019 Student loan debt statistics. 

https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/loans/student-loans/student-loan-debt 

Office of Management and Budget. (1992, October 29). Circular A-94, Transmittal 

Memo No. 64. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/circulars/A94/a

094.pdf 

Office of Management and Budget. (2003, September 13). Circular A-4. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/circulars/A4/a4.pdf

Oswald, J. (2018, March 29). What does an unemployment claim cost an employer? 

Unemployment Insurance Services. https://www.unemploymentservices.com/unemployment-claim-cost-employer

Pell Institute. (2019). Indicators of higher education equity in the United States. (p. 

129.) http://pellinstitute.org/downloads/publicationsIndicators_of_Higher_Education_Equity_in_the_US_2019_Historical_Trend_Repo

rt.pdf

Sawyer, W., & Wagner, P. (2019, March 19). Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie 2019.

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2019.html 

Social Security Administration (SSA). (2019a, October). OASDI and SSI Program rates 

& limits, Medicare. 

https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/quickfacts/prog_highlights/RatesLimits2019.

html 
55 

Return on Investment Study: 

College Possible’s College Access Program

Social Security Administration (SSA). (2019b, October). OASDI and SSI Program rates 

& limits, Social Security. 

https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/quickfacts/prog_highlights/RatesLimits2019.

html 

Tax Foundation. (2019). State and local sales tax rates, 2019. 

https://taxfoundation.org/sales-tax-rates-2019/

Trostel, P. (2015). It’s not just the money: The benefits of college education to 

individuals and to society. 

https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/its-not-just-the-money.pdf

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2019). Consumer Expenditure Surveys (CES). 

Annual calendar year. https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables.htm#annual

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (n.d.). Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all urban 

consumers. Midwest region, all items. https://data.bls.gov/cgibin/surveymost?cu

U.S. Census Bureau. (2018) Current Population Survey (CPS). PINC-03. Educational 

attainment-people 25 years old and over, by total money earnings, work 

experience, age, race, Hispanic origin, and sex.

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cpspinc/pinc-03.htmlt

Zeidenberg, M., Freeman, B., Friedman, E., & Porowski, A. (2016, April 27). Results from 

the National Student Clearinghouse Data Match: New methods for assessing 

AmeriCorps alumni outcomes (p. 9, 25). 

https://www.nationalservice.gov/sites/default/files/evidenceexchange/FR_N

atlStudent_ClearinghouseMatch_AlumniOutcomes_2016.pdf