This report contains a correction.
Introduction and summary
Despite rising college costs, a postsecondary education remains one of the most reliable pathways to good jobs and well-paying careers in the United States. Postsecondary education carries an immense earnings premium: One recent study found that an associate degree holder earns about $423,000 more over their lifetime than someone with a high school education, and a bachelor’s degree holder earns about $964,000 more.1
However, access to higher education remains strongly divided by demographic factors such as race and socioeconomic status. College enrollment rates for Black (36 percent), Hispanic (33 percent), and American Indian/Alaska Native students (26 percent) lagged significantly behind their white peers (41 percent) in 2022.2 Students from the highest income quintile are almost 3.5 times more likely to enroll in college than those from the lowest quintile, at 78 percent and 28 percent, respectively.*3 In an era following the U.S. Supreme Court decision to end race-conscious admissions in June 2023, programs that promote postsecondary access for underrepresented groups remain more important than ever.4
One such federal grant program is Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP), which helps increase college enrollment and success for low-income students.5 Established in 1998 as an amendment to the Higher Education Act of 1965, GEAR UP offers six- to seven-year grants to prepare low-income students to enroll and succeed in college.6 The program currently serves approximately 570,000 students across 2,954 secondary schools, in which more than half of the students receive free or reduced-price lunch.7
Through locally tailored programming and community engagement, GEAR UP aims to help improve students’ high school outcomes, strengthen their postsecondary awareness, and increase their postsecondary enrollment. Because students of color are overrepresented in high-poverty, underresourced schools, supporting programs such as GEAR UP and looking to them as models for promoting college and career readiness can help ensure postsecondary education remains a pathway toward opportunity that is open to all, even with new barriers to racial diversity in higher education.8
![]()
GEAR UP program design
GEAR UP has various key features that contribute to its effectiveness and differentiate it from other types of college readiness programs. GEAR UP awards state and partnership grants.9 State grants can be implemented through a cohort, priority student, or hybrid model, while partnership grants, which are given to at least one local education agency and an institution of higher education or two more community organizations, can only be implemented through the cohort model.10 Several aspects of GEAR UP’s program design help to make these grants both equitable and effective:
- The cohort model: The cohort model offers services to an entire grade level at a school, from sixth or seventh grade through the end of their high school career or first year of postsecondary education.11 This approach, which is in contrast to programs that serve only selected groups of students, provides access to college readiness services to students who may not qualify or be selected by other types of programs. It also allows schools to promote a college-going culture.12
- The use of early intervention: Early intervention ensures that students experience college readiness activities beginning in sixth or seventh grade, based on proven research interventions that demonstrate the effectiveness of reaching students in middle school.13 College visits are an example of a college readiness activity available to GEAR UP students. Research has shown that offering college visits as early as middle school positively affects students’ college awareness and readiness rates, particularly for low-income and first-generation students.14 College visits and other GEAR UP student services contribute to program efforts to create a college-going culture, which improves students’ college awareness and readiness outcomes.
- Flexibility to fit community needs: Finally, GEAR UP is a flexible program that funds required services for all grantees and additional allowable services that are determined by local programs. This allows programs to thrive across communities; rather than prescribing a universal approach, programs leaders and partners across K-12, higher education, and the community are empowered to tailor their services to meet local student needs.15 For example, GEAR UP 4 LA partners with the Chicano-a Latino-a Educational Foundation, which offers Spanish-language college readiness programming to better serve the many Spanish-speaking students and families in their districts.16
GEAR UP services
Successfully preparing students for their futures cannot be captured by any single indicator. A wide variety of interventions can facilitate college and career readiness, including interventions that address academic progress, overall well-being, and community environments. GEAR UP allows its local programs to offer two types of services: those that target students and those that target students’ parents and families.17
In addition to these services, state grants are required to include a scholarship component to assist students with the financial barriers to higher education.18 Partnership grants are allowed, but not required, to use this component.
GEAR UP and TRIO programs
An additional set of federal programs designed to provide assistance to students from underserved backgrounds are the TRIO programs.19 Well-known TRIO programs include Educational Opportunity Centers, Talent Search, and Upward Bound. These programs provide targeted college and career support services to students from underresourced backgrounds. TRIO programs are often discussed in tandem with GEAR UP because of their common goal to support students in underresourced communities in improving their college and career outcomes. What sets GEAR UP apart from its TRIO counterparts are its cohort models and early intervention strategies that address a school’s college-going culture. By contrast, many TRIO programs serve smaller groups20 of students within a school or begin later in a student’s education journey.21 However, GEAR UP and TRIO are both essential to ensuring more students from underserved backgrounds can access and succeed in postsecondary education. Their differing service models complement one another and should be seen as working in tandem.
Evidence of GEAR UP outcomes
Research demonstrates the positive impacts of GEAR UP on a range of student outcomes. One recent meta-analysis found that participation in GEAR UP had positive effects on high school GPA, high school graduation rates, and college enrollment among participants.22 Another showed that GEAR UP students significantly outperformed other students on standardized tests: The share who reached the district’s college readiness benchmark was 12 percentage points higher in math and 10 percentage points higher in reading.23 Academic preparation activities included in GEAR UP programs have been associated with improved high school academic outcomes.24 These positive impacts were also seen in another study on SAT scores and Advanced Placement (AP) course enrollment.25 Furthermore, the effects on test scores and school attendance rates were even more pronounced for students from lower-income families. 26
GEAR UP program activities that expose students to college and help with the financial aid process also have been shown to have significant impacts on college-going. In one study, GEAR UP students who participated in college visits were 9 percentage points more likely to enroll in college within two years of high school graduation, and almost 13 percentage points more likely to persist in college, than those who did not receive these services.27 The effects of financial aid counseling were even stronger: Those who received this service were 17 percentage points more likely to enroll in college within a year or two years of high school graduation.28
There is also evidence that GEAR UP programs can help to level the playing field once a student enters college. One study found that GEAR UP participants—who came from lower-income families, and were more likely to be Black or Hispanic or Latino, to come from rural areas, and/or to be first-generation college students than their university peers—performed as well as their more affluent and advantaged peers on measures such as first-term GPA, a predictor of persistence.29
A recent multistate, longitudinal study by the National Council for Community and Education Partnerships (NCCEP) looked at the impact of specific GEAR UP services on several key outcomes.30 It found that program participants outperformed national averages of high school graduation and Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) completion by 7 and 8 percent, respectively. It also found that this program narrowed gaps in graduation rates by race and ethnicity. In terms of college attendance, the study found that the GEAR UP schools achieved postsecondary enrollment rates similar to those of high-performing schools. The study found comprehensive mentoring to be the most impactful service offering, while “financial aid counseling, counseling/advising, campus visits, job site visits, summer programs, and workshops all showed a positive significant relationship with at least one outcome.”
Program models in Washington state and Georgia
The uses and success of these services depend on the local context of the program. For example, in Washington state’s GEAR UP program, of all the allowable services, the 2017 cohort used the five following services the most: counseling, tutoring, financial aid, workshops, and mentoring.31 Though multiple services were tied to the completion of FAFSA student aid forms and increased first-year enrollment, services that had the greatest impact included: parent and family counseling, advising, and workshops.32
Alternatively, in the GEAR UP Georgia program, mentoring seemed to be the most effective service. Mentoring33 also had the largest effect on postsecondary enrollment both immediately following graduation and within one year of graduation across all GEAR UP programs nationally. This aligns with findings from the multistate longitudinal study from the NCCEP, which found that comprehensive mentoring has a positive relationship with FAFSA completion, high school graduation, and postsecondary enrollment across all samples.34 However, financial aid counseling was found to be the strongest predictor across all outcomes.35
College and career readiness
College and career readiness serves as a tool for advancing students’ long-term success. Research shows that participation in college preparation activities in particular can significantly affect education and work attainment as soon as one year after high school.36 Yet, according to 2024 National Center for Education Statistics data,37 in high-poverty neighborhoods, schools were less likely to report doing “very good” or “excellent” in college preparation compared with their more affluent counterparts.38 This discrepancy in preparedness indicates underlying structural issues.
Students from low-income backgrounds and students of color face numerous barriers to entering and succeeding in postsecondary education. Difficulty accessing information on postsecondary and workforce options is one of the challenges that students from low-income families face.39 Another challenge is that students from low-income backgrounds are often excluded from college and career readiness opportunities through a lack of access to rigorous courses.40 Meanwhile, Black and Latinx students are less likely than their white peers to be deemed college and career ready according to their state’s standards, with Black students seeing greater discrepancies.41 In addition, Black and Latinx students are less likely to enroll in a postsecondary institution than their white counterparts, with Latinx students seeing larger gaps.42 Programs such as GEAR UP work to offset these barriers to entry by preparing students for their academic and professional futures.
In one study, GEAR UP students who participated in college visits were 9 percentage points more likely to enroll in college within two years of high school graduation, and almost 13 percentage points more likely to persist in college.
Recommendations
It is important to recognize that significant disparities exist in school quality and in access to resources in K-12 schools in the United States, particularly for low-income students and students of color.43 For example, 63 percent of Black students and 65 percent of Hispanic students attended mid-high- or high-poverty schools in 2021, compared with 25 percent of white students.44 In 2018–2020, high-poverty districts received about $800 less in funding per student in state and local funding than low-poverty districts.45
Furthermore, students in high-poverty schools may experience multiple forms of disadvantage that together magnify the effects of each individual factor.46 Studies show that concentrated poverty—in which communities may simultaneously lack access to quality education, housing, health care, and employment—can contribute to lower educational outcomes beginning as early as kindergarten and persisting through high school.47
Therefore, a program such as GEAR UP must be understood and evaluated within this context, in which a single intervention, or even a set of interventions, work against a variety of systemic barriers that affect a student’s entire educational journey.
Researchers have identified three general categories of barriers to postsecondary enrollment and success that students typically encounter: financial, informational and behavioral, and academic.48 While GEAR UP programming touches upon all three categories, it is not possible for a single grant to address all the areas of need for a given cohort. A comprehensive approach to improving postsecondary access would involve a range of policy changes and significant increases in state and federal investments in public education.
Some of the following recommendations seek to maximize the impact of GEAR UP by drawing on research on the most effective practices for increasing postsecondary enrollment and success among low-income students. Others look beyond the scope of GEAR UP to advance this goal, though the proposals outlined below are meant to provide a starting point for addressing the overlapping forms of inequality that contribute to inequities in postsecondary attainment.
1. The Department of Education should advise GEAR UP grantees on the most effective college readiness practices
Evidence from the literature on college and career readiness programs provides general principles for the delivery of services, including in the following areas.
High-impact practices: Counseling and mentoring
Of the three categories of interventions—financial, informational/behavioral, and academic—GEAR UP programs may be best positioned to deliver informational and behavioral services to their students. These types of interventions include college counseling; planning and goal setting; financial aid counseling and FAFSA filing assistance; college visits; and workshops and counseling for parents.49 GEAR UP programs are likely to fill key gaps in counseling needs: while most schools across the country lag behind recommended school counselor-to-student ratios (250 to 1 or lower), this lack of access is particularly pronounced in high-poverty schools and schools that enroll higher shares of students of color.50
One of the most reliable sources of research on GEAR UP program success found that comprehensive mentoring was the intervention that most consistently and significantly improved the three outcomes studied, which included FAFSA completion, high school graduation, and postsecondary enrollment.51
Robust and comprehensive programming that combines multiple interventions
One recent meta-analysis found that the most effective programs combined active learning of academic content, the development of soft skills and engagement in college and career awareness, goal setting, and visioning.52 Comprehensive programming can also help to create the environmental factors necessary to propel a student on to college, such as family support and a college-going culture at school.53
Access to qualified professionals
A study found that another key factor in improved information and choices around postsecondary enrollment was the extent to which students had access to workers with specialized skills.54 In addition, greater frequency and intensity of interactions with these professionals improved outcomes, pointing to the value of low student-to-staff ratios in college readiness programming.
The impact of early intervention
When it comes to college readiness, it’s about not just what services schools offer, but when they offer them. Exposing middle schoolers to college readiness early on is crucial. Research from ACT indicates that less than 20 percent of eighth graders are on track to take on college-level work by the time they reach high school graduation.55 Additionally, evidence shows that the level of academic achievement attained by eighth grade has a greater impact on college and career readiness than any high school academic factor.56 GEAR UP addresses this head-on by beginning their programming as early as sixth and seventh grade. As states are looking to implement college readiness strategies in their own schools and districts, it is important to consider early intervention services that start before high school.
Flexibility to allow grantees to tailor services to students’ needs
While evidence can point program providers in the direction of successful interventions, no two cohorts of students have the same needs.57 Programs from states such as Washington,58 Georgia,59 Rhode Island,60 and Iowa61 have taken evaluation into their own hands to gauge their impact on student outcomes and, in some cases, investigate which services had the greatest impact on these student outcomes. These evaluations show GEAR UP having a positive impact on several student outcomes, but with different services contributing to their success. To leverage the success of these services, it is also important for states and local partners to conduct ongoing local analyses to ensure the enduring impact of these services.
2. Congress should increase investments in GEAR UP and other programs that close gaps in college attainment
Holistic investments in education from early childhood through postsecondary school are necessary to achieve equity in college attainment for underrepresented groups. Improving school quality in underresourced K-12 schools and funding college access programs in particular can help ensure every American who would like to pursue a postsecondary education has the opportunity to do so.
Investments in K-12 education
Title I funding under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 is a cornerstone of federal funding to support schools that serve high shares of low-income students—the populations that GEAR UP also seeks to target.62
In order to comprehensively address issues related to academic underpreparation, investments in whole-school improvement for high-poverty schools are essential. Title I is the bedrock of federal efforts to provide educational opportunity to low-income students. Increased federal and state investments in K-12 education that will support teacher quality and retention, improve facilities, reduce class sizes, deliver high-quality curricula, and provide the wraparound support services that are essential to underserved students’ success are necessary for meaningful, wide-scale changes that will close gaps in educational opportunity.
Investments in higher education
Federal funding for GEAR UP has failed to keep up with inflation, and the program serves fewer students than it did more than a decade ago.63 In 2004, Congress appropriated $298.2 million for GEAR UP, which would be about $510 million in 2025 dollars.64 In real terms, therefore, GEAR UP’s $388 million funding level in fiscal year 2024 ($398 million in 2025 dollars) represents a decrease of about 22 percent—even as the number of public middle and high school students in the United States has grown by at least 2 percent over the same time period.65
Today, GEAR UP serves about 570,000 students, or only about 1 in 50 of the 25 million middle and high school students who receive free or reduced-price lunch—the demographic this program serves.66 Federal appropriators should ensure this program continues to grow to give more students access to the types of services GEAR UP provides and, ultimately, the opportunity to pursue a higher education and a pathway toward the middle class. More aggressive annual increases are necessary to accomplish this, by contrast to far-right plans included in Project 2025 to eliminate GEAR UP entirely.67
Several programs contribute to federal efforts to improve access to and success in postsecondary education for underrepresented students. These include TRIO programs, dual enrollment programs, and Postsecondary Student Success Program grants.68 All these programs complement GEAR UP and should continue to receive robust federal investment to improve outcomes for students across the socioeconomic spectrum.
3. Congress should invest in improved data, reporting, and research into the implementation of college and career readiness programs
While the importance and effectiveness of college preparation programs for low-income students is not in question, more research on implementation would benefit GEAR UP grantees and other college access programs. Questions such as the most effective intensities of service deliveries, differing combinations of interventions, or the differing needs based on local contexts could all help ensure program funds help as many students as possible succeed. There are several mechanisms by which lawmakers can fund further research on these important questions.
Longitudinal studies
To better understand the dynamics that contribute to college readiness, it is critical to invest in longitudinal studies. While longitudinal studies are more time- and resource-intensive than short-term evaluations, they are able to follow students over time and capture a wide range of factors about a student, their family, their school, and their educational and career outcomes, for example. The High School Longitudinal Study (HSLS), a study that follows high school students through postsecondary completion, is just one example of a longitudinal study that provides researchers with a wealth of knowledge on college readiness that can be disaggregated to focus on underserved student populations.69 Continuing to invest in future iterations of the HSLS can help reveal the most significant barriers for low-income students accessing and succeeding in postsecondary education. Because it is a federal agency, the Institute of Education Sciences has access to nonpublic data, such family financial information provided in the FAFSA, which can be matched with survey responses to provide a broader picture and improve data reliability.70
Reinvested funding for innovation
Congress should reintroduce funding for the Investing in Innovation (i3) program, which was last funded in 2016.71 This would allow for new types of studies on policy innovations that aim to increase college enrollment. Similar initiatives have been undertaken by private organizations and led to innovation in school size, leadership, organization, specialization, and other new models.72
The i3 program could address challenges around college access and success by evaluating different combinations of services, different intensities of interventions, different program designs, and different methodologies, such as control groups, to contribute to existing evidence around what works for increasing postsecondary access. It could also focus on cohorts of schools with similar characteristics or the differing needs of various student populations. These initiatives could also be an avenue for exploring approaches to whole-school improvement that seek to comprehensively address gaps in college-going for underserved students. Such initiatives could help add to researchers’ knowledge of what additional resources, beyond the types of services GEAR UP provides, are necessary to substantially improve outcomes for low-income students.
Funding for grantee program evaluations
The GEAR UP statute in the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, allows the U.S. Department of Education to use up to .75 percent of its funds to “evaluate and improve” program effectiveness.73 Because the data collection and management and other logistical challenges of a nationwide evaluation are steep, the Department of Education should focus on improving state and partnership program evaluations. Evaluations of consortia of community partnership grantees may provide valuable, localized information about program outcomes.
These studies can continue to build out the evidence base compiled in the Department of Education’s What Works Clearinghouse, a publicly available database of research on education practices that peer reviewers determine meet rigorous standards of evidence.74 GEAR UP and other federal education grant programs ask applicants to cite this material to demonstrate they are proposing programs that meet evidentiary standards for effectiveness.75 Further resources and support for rigorous research, such as those described above, can continue to build this evidence base and encourage replication of the most impactful service models.
Conclusion
While GEAR UP stands out as a successful college readiness model, there are greater inequities that cannot be addressed by GEAR UP alone. As it stands, the number of students served by GEAR UP is equivalent to only about 1 in 50 students who receive free or reduced-price lunch. GEAR UP is one program that helps to improve college readiness, access, and success for students from low-income families, but more robust investments in public education from early childhood through higher education are necessary to ensure that as many students as possible have a high-quality education that allows them to achieve their goals and improve their career opportunities.
* Correction, September 3, 2024: This report originally incorrectly stated the share of students from the highest and lowest income quintiles who enroll in college. It has been updated to state the correct numbers: 78 percent and 28 percent, respectively.