Advocacy

Advocacy Update – August 8, 2025

By Sean Robins, NACAC’s director of advocacy

Welcome to the first edition of our Policy & Legislative Update series. These regular posts are meant to keep NACAC members informed about key policy developments, NACAC’s advocacy priorities, and opportunities to take action in support of students and the college admission counseling profession. 

My name is Sean Robins, and I serve as NACAC’s director of advocacy. With experience across education policy, program leadership, and nonprofit strategy, I am honored to bring these updates to our members at such a critical moment for college access and admission. I will regularly share highlights from Capitol Hill, federal agencies, and the broader policy landscape — always with an eye toward what it means for your work and our shared mission. 

This inaugural update comes amid growing national attention to race-conscious practices, new federal directives on admission data reporting, and ongoing debates over higher education funding.  

Policy & Legislative Updates 

The Trump administration has issued a Presidential Memorandum directing the Department of Education to overhaul the IPEDS system beginning in the 2025–2026 academic year. Historically, IPEDS has only captured the racial composition of enrolled students — not applicants or those admitted. Under this new directive, institutions will be required to disaggregate data by race and sex at three stages of the admission process: applicants, admitted students, and enrolled students. The new requirements will apply at the undergraduate level and in select graduate and professional programs. 

While efforts to improve transparency in admission data can offer value to students and families, we are viewing this directive in the broader context of ongoing scrutiny around race-conscious policies. NACAC remains committed to defending holistic review and the importance of personal lived experience in admission. 

With Congress in its August recess, key developments in federal education policy continue to unfold with major implications for funding, access, and institutional accountability. The Senate Appropriations Committee passed a bipartisan FY 2026 Labor-HHS-Education bill (26-3) just before the recess, rejecting the Trump administration’s proposed $12.4 billion cut and maintaining most core education programs at current levels. The bill preserves funding for TRIO, GEAR UP, Pell Grants ($7,395 max), FSEOG, Federal Work Study, CCAMPIS, and Title IV-A. It also ensures timely disbursement of K-12, CTE, and adult education grants and blocks efforts to shift Title I and IDEA programs out of the Education Department. The House will take up its version after the recess. 

The Common App opened the 2025-2026 application season with new equity-driven features, including a required question on student responsibilities outside school, expanded direct admission, and improved scholarship notifications for first-generation and low-income students. 

Access challenges remain front and center. A new NCAN analysis reveals that nearly half of students who did not file the FAFSA believe they are ineligible — including many receiving public assistance or who lack access to $500 in an emergency. Despite system fixes, misperceptions about eligibility remain a major barrier. 

Rural students continue to face persistent obstacles to enrollment, even with dual enrollment options for targeted outreach. Factors like cost, geographic isolation, and skepticism about higher education’s value shape decision-making. Still, local partnerships and district investments are helping to move the needle in some communities.  

Alabama has launched a statewide direct admissions initiative, automatically admitting students to nearly 40 institutions — including HBCUs — based solely on transcript data. The goal is to expand access, eliminate application barriers, and support the state’s workforce and economic development priorities. Separately, institutions participating in the Great Admissions Redesign are piloting structural innovations to streamline admission, integrate advising and financial aid, and improve student engagement. 

Federal scrutiny of higher education institutions continues to intensify. Columbia and Brown have reached agreements with the Trump administration following grant freezes tied to allegations of antisemitism. While funding has not yet been restored, both institutions expect payments to resume within 30 days. Over $6 billion in research funding remains frozen across several institutions, including Harvard and Princeton. At the same time, UCLA has become the first major public university to face similar sanctions, with hundreds of millions in grants suspended amid DOJ allegations. 

Continued visa delays also pose significant threats to international student enrollment this fall, with projections showing a potential 15 percent drop — or 150,000 fewer students — and a $7 billion economic loss.  

At the same time, a new Gallup and Lumina Foundation survey finds that most parents still view postsecondary education as essential for their children’s success. Three in four parents — across political affiliations — say they want their kids to pursue education after high school, with four-year colleges remaining the top preference. However, interest in shorter-term, career-aligned alternatives like two-year colleges, job training, and certificate programs is growing. While skepticism around cost and outcomes persists, the belief in education as a path to upward mobility remains strong. 

Recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) rulings reaffirm that the executive branch cannot delay or cancel congressionally approved education and research funds. These findings reject tactics like “pocket rescissions” and uphold Congress’s power of the purse. These decisions signal stronger safeguards against the misuse of federal authority to defund institutions or programs — particularly those tied to research, student aid, or equity initiatives. However, with litigation still pending and administrative workarounds under scrutiny, continued vigilance and advocacy remain critical. 

NACAC Advocacy 

This week, NACAC continued to advocate for policies that support access, equity, and opportunity for all students — both in response to urgent federal developments and as part of our ongoing commitment to fair and inclusive education. 

In the wake of a new memorandum from the Department of Justice declaring that many diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices may violate federal law, NACAC issued a firm statement reaffirming its commitment to expanding opportunity for all students. While the DOJ memo lacks the force of law, it has created confusion and concern across the field. NACAC is urging institutions not to overcorrect in ways that could limit equitable outcomes and is working with partners to monitor developments and provide guidance to members. 

This week, NACAC applauded the Senate Appropriations Committee’s bipartisan passage of the FY 2026 Labor-HHS-Education bill. The legislation protects critical investments in TRIO, GEAR UP, Federal Work Study, FSEOG, CCAMPIS, and Basic Needs for Postsecondary Students, and maintains the Pell Grant maximum at $7,395. These wins reflect sustained advocacy by NACAC, our members, and coalition partners. 

Ways You Can Take Action 

We are continuously updating our Take Action page with opportunities to make your voice — and the voices of our members — heard. If you have not already, I encourage you to advocate on the urgent issues below. You can also view all active advocacy campaigns in the yellow column of the Take Action page. 

Amid ongoing challenges and shifting political winds, our commitment to advancing equitable access and opportunity remains unwavering. We understand that progress often unfolds behind the scenes — quiet but persistent — and that patience and perseverance are essential. 

Though the path ahead may be clouded, we hold fast to the truth that brighter days are coming. As Khalil Gibran wisely said, “No matter how long the storm lasts, the sun always shines behind the clouds.” 

This hope fuels our work and reminds us that every effort we make today brings us closer to our vision — that the transformative power of postsecondary education is accessible to all.  

Test Optional

Test-optional admission during the pandemic and implications for college selectivity and enrollment

By Kelly Rosinger and Dominique J. Baker 

Colleges and universities nationwide turned to test-optional admission policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, our research team at the College Admissions Futures Co-Laborative set out to examine test-optional implementation during the pandemic, how colleges varied in test-optional policy implementation, and the implications of test-optional admission for college selectivity and enrollment at selective colleges and universities.

We defined selective colleges and universities as those that admitted fewer than half of applicants over three consecutive years, on average. For these 186 public and private, not-for-profit four-year institutions, we spent two and a half years collecting detailed data on how colleges implemented test-optional admission during the 2021-22 admission cycle (the first selective college admission cycle after the pandemic began) using archived historical websites.

History of Test-Optional 

At selective institutions that receive more applications from academically qualified students than they will admit, college admission test scores frequently have been used as one of many admission considerations. Prior to the pandemic, a movement had begun among selective institutions to reconsider the role of college entrance exam scores in the admission process. The movement started with some private liberal arts colleges implementing test-optional admission and then expanded in the early 2000s to include some private research universities, highly ranked institutions, and a few public universities. Motivations for this movement included inequitable patterns in test taking, test preparation, and test scores that systematically disadvantaged racially minoritized and low-income students in the admission process.

Prior research on test-optional admission offers some evidence that test-optional policies, at least in some contexts, can expand access among underserved students, but some evidence also indicates that they may benefit institutions by potentially expanding the numbers of applications these institutions receive and the average test scores colleges then report to rankings agencies.

With the pandemic disrupting high school students’ opportunities to safely take the SAT or ACT, virtually all selective colleges and universities turned to test-optional admission to remove a major barrier students faced in applying to college.

Key Takeaways 

Our study contributes important national evidence regarding the scale and scope of test-optional admission. We found that 90 percent of selective colleges and universities implemented some type of test-optional policy during the pandemic and, by contrast, just 20 percent of these institutions had implemented test-optional admission prior to the pandemic. Even though a large share of institutions made tests optional, the implementation of these policies varied substantially from college to college. Just over three-quarters of selective colleges went test-optional by making test scores optional for applicants, 4 percent went test-flexible by requiring applicants to submit an alternate exam or materials in place of the SAT or ACT, 10 percent went test-free by not considering the SAT or ACT in admission, and 10 percent continued to require test scores.

We also found that even at colleges with test-optional admission, 14 percent continued to require test scores from some applicants, such as international applicants, homeschooled applicants, applicants to some academic programs, or applicants below some GPA threshold. Even if colleges were test-optional for all applicants, we sometimes found language on college websites indicating that test scores were strongly encouraged or recommended. Fifteen percent of the selective colleges we studied continued to require the SAT or ACT for scholarship consideration even though they were test-optional for admission, and 10 colleges with some type of test-optional policy required matriculating students to submit a test score.

Merging our test-optional dataset with publicly available data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, we were able to explore how test-optional admission related to difference in selectivity and enrollment outcomes. These preliminary findings, available in our working paper, suggest that the implementation of any type of test-optional admission policy was associated with an increase in enrollment among Black students, and the increase in access was concentrated in moderately selective colleges admitting between half and 30 percent of applicants. At the most selective colleges we studied — those that admitted fewer than 30 percent of applicants — we found that implementing any type of test-optional policy correlated to an increase in the number of applications colleges received, on average. At these highly selective colleges, we did not find consistent evidence of gains in college access.

We found that differences in how colleges implement test-optional policies likely relates to outcomes. In particular, gains in enrollment among Black students tended to be largest at colleges that extended test-optional policies to all applicants and that were test-optional for scholarships.

Implications for Test-Optional Practice and Policy 

Our large-scale, national study of test-optional policy implementation during the pandemic highlights the widespread implementation of these policies and reveals that test-optional policies in practice differs substantially from institution to institution. Colleges vary in the type of test-optional policy they implement (test-optional, test-flexible, test-free), whether the policies extend to all applicants versus being required for some applicants, and whether the policies extend to scholarship consideration or matriculation.

Even at institutions with test-optional admission, messages about taking and submitting test scores were confusing, often strongly encouraging students to take and submit test scores.

The differences in how colleges implement test-optional admission and the lack of clear messaging around policies likely add confusion to an already complex and stressful time for students and their families.

The host of ways colleges can implement test-optional admission have implications for the outcome of these policies. Our early results suggests that test-optional policies relate to increased access among Black students, especially at moderately selective colleges and when the policies apply to all students and to scholarship consideration. We interpret this as evidence that test-optional policies, in some contexts, can be one strategy selective colleges can use to promote racial equity. As colleges navigate an environment in which the use of race-conscious admission is more constrained, admission policies that can remediate past racial injustices are increasingly important. Yet, we caution that test-optional policies on their own are not a silver bullet when it comes to addressing racial inequities that stem from centuries of unequal opportunity. We urge institutions to simultaneously consider how recruitment, admission, financial aid, and student services can better support racially minoritized students.

Kelly Ochs Rosinger is an associate professor of education and public policy at Penn State, where she examines the barriers students face going to and through college and how postsecondary policies and practices shape educational outcomes. She was a partner, along with NACAC, in the Equity Implications of Test-Optional Admission Policies initiative, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Dominique J. Baker is an associate professor of education and public policy at the University of Delaware, where she studies the way that education policy affects and shapes the access and success of minoritized students in higher education. She was a partner, along with NACAC, in the Equity Implications of Test-Optional Admission Policies initiative, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

College Admission Resources

Index measures campus efforts to create welcoming environments for religious and non-religious diversity 

 By Renee L. Bowling, Laura Dahl, and Matthew J. Mayhew 

The topic of diversity in education elicits strong feelings across the political spectrum, yet religious, secular, and spiritual (RSS) diversity is often left out of the conversation despite its importance to students’ lives. Reactions seen on university campuses in response to the Israel-Hamas war have underscored the importance for educators, administrators, and counselors to engage with this underrepresented form of diversity and its intersections with history, culture, and politics to understand how to support diverse worldview communities on campus. 

The Interfaith Spiritual, Religious, and Secular Index, or INSPIRES Campus Climate Index, measures an institution’s efforts to establish a welcoming climate for students of diverse RSS identities. Built by researchers at The Ohio State University and North Carolina State University, INSPIRES is grounded in data gathered through the Interfaith Diversity Experiences and Attitudes Longitudinal Survey (IDEALS). The project first began in 2020 and is now in its third intake. It is funded by the Arthur Vining Davis Foundations, an organization committed to courageous multi-faith efforts.  

Continue reading Index measures campus efforts to create welcoming environments for religious and non-religious diversity  →

Access, Cost of College

Unequal Distribution

By Don Heller, Gigi Jones, and Abby Miller

The recent dismantling of affirmative action and the COVID pandemic highlighted the barriers preventing underserved, underrepresented students – students of color and those who are low-income and first-generation – from enrolling in college. A college degree is the pathway to social mobility for families trapped in the cycle of poverty. However, the rising costs of college are increasingly out of reach for many students.

Financial aid discussions have centered on simplifying FAFSA and increasing federal Pell Grants – all important – but federal student aid policies are only one funding source for families trying to determine how to pay for college. Further, Pell Grants cover just under one-third of tuition and fees at the average four-year, public college in the nation, leaving families to cover the remaining two-thirds of tuition, along with living expenses, books, and other costs. This leaves, on average, over $15,000 a year for students and families to fund, many of whom lack savings and may be living paycheck to paycheck. Institutions can also do their share to make college more affordable. Continue reading Unequal Distribution →

Access, Advocacy, College Admission, NACAC News, Test Optional

Research Underway by Gates Foundation Partners to Better Understand Test-Optional Admission

iStock

NACAC, in collaboration with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and several other organizations, is carefully exploring admission policies and practices in an increasingly test-optional or test-free environment. In a previous post, we provided an overview of the project, which is grounded in the work that the Task Force on Standardized Admission Testing for International and US Students completed in 2021.

“The task force observed that if standardized testing perpetuates or worsens inequities, and if it is to remain a part of the undergraduate admission process at all, it must receive the most stringent of reviews,” according to the task force’s report on standardized testing.

As an extension of this thinking, the committee recommended that colleges’ decisions about their test policies should “include a plan for frequent reviews.” The 2021 task force also noted that simply going test-optional or test-free will not in and of itself universally improve equity. As colleges navigate the immediate future of test-optional and test-free admission, in addition to the broader equity considerations related to college admission, they must ensure that historically marginalized perspectives are front-and-center as admission offices craft policies to adapt to a new legal and political landscape.

NACAC’s role in facilitating conversation about equitable admission practices in the current admission context is to ensure careful examination of admission policies and practices, particularly as it applies to improving equity outcomes for college access.

Continue reading Research Underway by Gates Foundation Partners to Better Understand Test-Optional Admission →

Access, College Admission, NACAC News, Standardized Testing

NACAC’s Facilitative Role in the Ongoing Discussion of Test-Optional Admission

iStock

One of the most significant effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in the college admission ecosystem was the relatively rapid and nearly wholesale adoption of test-optional (or test-free, in some cases) admission policies by colleges and universities.

Prior to the pandemic, the biggest challenge to an institution considering moving to a test-optional admission policy was the institutional decision-making thicket that could prove difficult to navigate, in part due to the inertia that can define systems and structures and inhibit movement away from the status quo. COVID-19 short-circuited the process, as colleges moved away from test requirements out of necessity: The admission testing infrastructure—high schools, for the most part—was locked down. The decision was, in many ways, made for colleges and universities as much as by colleges and universities. Now that the pandemic is receding in the distance, colleges and other stakeholders must begin the hard work of assessing whether the switch to test-optional admission will produce hoped-for improvements to equity, a process that will require careful examination.

Continue reading NACAC’s Facilitative Role in the Ongoing Discussion of Test-Optional Admission →

Uncategorized

Addressing Community College Enrollment Concerns

It is getting closer to the fall semester and your application numbers are below last year’s count.

Numerous campus administrators and staff members are concerned and offer plenty of potential ideas to reach more students.

Extending admission office hours beyond 5 p.m., adding in some weekend hours, increasing marketing, and scheduling more in-person and virtual open houses are some of the usual approaches. And crucial conversations about the numerous steps to start college or reenroll—and the importance of a “one-stop” approach to student services—are also taking place.

It’s tempting to jump right into action, implementing several strategies all at once. But by doing a bit of internal research first, you’re more likely to hit upon a solution that proves successful for your unique institution and student body.

Continue reading Addressing Community College Enrollment Concerns →

Financial Aid

‘It Depends’: Responding to Common Financial Aid Questions

iStock

Students, parents, and guardians regularly ask questions about the financial aid process. Those questions begin as families work to complete the FAFSA for the first time and continue for the entire time a student is enrolled in college. Then, after graduation, students routinely seek advice as they check on upcoming student loan payments and may have new questions about graduate or professional school funding.

Although each student’s situation is unique, knowing how to respond to common financial aid questions can help you effectively advise the students you serve. Questions involving application status and refund status are very common, and the answers are rarely cut-and-dry. But even if you can’t offer students a firm “yes” or “no” — providing information specific to their situation can help ease confusion, as illustrated in the examples below.  

Continue reading ‘It Depends’: Responding to Common Financial Aid Questions →
Uncategorized

4 Questions to Ask on College Tours this Summer

iStock

Editor’s note: A version of this column was first published on the Minerva Project blog.

In the United States, summer is time for a much-deserved school break, family vacations, and for many students — college campus tours.

In fact, some students visit so many colleges over the summer it’s dizzying. When I was an admission counselor at a university that saw more than 50,000 visitors per year, I often asked groups of students and families at our information sessions how many schools they had already visited. Usually it was a handful or two at most. But one time a girl raised her hand and had a jaw-dropping list of 35.

This is not a knock on the college tour. It can be a valuable tool in helping students decide which school is a good fit for them. But herein lies the challenge: The more schools you visit, the more they tend to sound — and look — the same. This makes it even more important to ask the right questions when you visit.

Continue reading 4 Questions to Ask on College Tours this Summer →
Uncategorized

What’s the (hold) back?

iStock

Students who go through the enrollment pipeline process, financial aid, and other related procedures will sometimes be faced with “holds,” specifically, administrative process holds.

Administrators typically place holds on a student’s online account to urge them to act on a variety of specific tasks (much of which is guided by a federal or an institutional policy). For example, students may need to complete their financial aid documents to pay for their courses on time, pay an outstanding balance, register for classes, or finalize their admission process.

Continue reading What’s the (hold) back? →

Regular updates on NACAC and the world of college admission counseling. For more information about NACAC, visit nacacnet.org.