"The collateral consequences of a criminal conviction have long-lasting and devasting effects on people involved in the criminal justice system. From losing the ability to find employment, to being banned from public housing, to losing access to most federal benefits, 'justice-involved' people face a life of punishment, even after their sentences are completed. One rarely discussed collateral consequence is the inability of justice-involved people to get state financial aid grants for college. It is well known that incarcerated people cannot get federal Pell Grants for college, but some states impose even more restrictive barriers on state-funded scholarships for students who were previously convicted of crimes or who are currently incarcerated. Through statutory or regulatory eligibility rules, policymakers in over half of states deny aid eligibility to one or more populations of justice-involved student, according to this study's findings. The eligibility rules of these programs, often decades old, have never been investigated, leaving researchers without an understanding of the scope of the disenfranchisement of justice-involved students from state financial aid. This two-phase dissertation explores this policy issue. Because there was no existing research on this topic to build on, this dissertation begins with a descriptive study that illustrates the financial aid policy landscape for justice-involved students (Phase I). For the first time, I identified all the state grant programs that currently deny eligibility to incarcerated students and students with criminal convictions. The descriptive analysis also identifies when the policies were adopted and explores patterns in where the policies exist across the country. This accounting of policies unveils how commonly states deny aid to justice-involved students, something that policy researchers and advocates should scrutinize. Results from Phase I raised questions about the policymaking process, chiefly: how and why did state legislators adopt these eligibility rules to deny aid to justice-involved students? This is the pursuit of the policy adoption study (Phase II). Using qualitative case study methodology and framed in a conceptual model of state policy innovation and diffusion in higher education, I interviewed state policymakers and studied historical documents to understand the rationales for denying state grant aid to justice-involved students. Findings have implications for the study of state policy adoption as well as for policymakers and advocates seeking to restore state financial aid to justice-involved students."--Pages ii-iii.
Read
