How Each State Uses Safety Net Programs to Supports Students

The pressure associated with being a student who is older or parenting is profound. And our support structures in this country are flawed. But state policy makes a difference. In this section, we explore how each state treats older, parenting students by looking at the policies they set for their safety net programs, as described throughout this paper.

Similar to its approach to financial aid, Colorado does a good job compared to some of the other states in our sample of using public benefits-related policy and the eligibility criteria at its disposal to support students. Colorado runs its SNAP program in a way that allows for student access. It uses broad-based categorical eligibility to set its income limit at 200 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, allows eligibility for students receiving state or Federal Work-Study, and does not impose asset limits.

The state is slightly less generous in how it runs its TANF program. On the positive side, Colorado has one of the higher income limits, does not have an asset limit, and has the most generous monthly benefit of our sample states. It also has a high percentage of eligible people receiving benefits, does not require a drug test, and allows recipients to access benefits for 60 months—the federal maximum. But while it does allow attending college to count as a work activity, students can only attend a program for 12 months, a very short time to be able to achieve a credential that will help them get a job with a family-sustaining income.

Colorado has expanded Medicaid, meaning eligible residents with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level are covered, with increased eligibility for children and pregnant people; its state CHIP eligibility is also on the generous side; and it has a generous income limit for child care subsidies, although only 12 percent of eligible children receive the benefit.

Missouri makes it difficult for older students and student parents to access state financial aid and access public support as they go to college. Missouri is the least generous on SNAP eligibility of any of the four states we examined. It is the only state in our sample that does not use broad-based categorical eligibility. It also has the lowest monthly income allowed and the lowest percent of poverty cut-off, meaning that a family must have an extremely low income to qualify. It also has an asset limit of $2,750, so a family can own very little and still be ineligible.

For TANF, Missouri is also less generous than other states in our sample. The maximum monthly family income to be eligible for benefits is an extremely limited $342 for a family of four, with an asset limit of $1,000. And the monthly benefit is the lowest of our group, at $292. The state also requires drug testing and limits eligibility for TANF to only 45 months. On the positive side, Missouri allows students to be eligible for the longest of any of our states, 24 months. That means that a student could earn an associate degree while receiving support from the program.

Missouri expanded Medicaid and also has the most generous eligibility for children and pregnant people in our sample. The state also has generous CHIP eligibility for children, but the premiums are very high, reaching up to $559 a month. For child care subsidies, Missouri has the lowest income threshold for eligibility but it covers the highest percentage of the eligible population of any of the states we examined.

North Carolina has a mixed picture for older or parenting students trying to access financial aid. Its approach to public benefits is also mixed. In SNAP, the state provides a high maximum monthly income cap, at 200 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, but it also has a lower asset limit, of $2,750.

For TANF, the Tar Heel State has the highest monthly income eligibility of any of the states we looked at, $594. It also has a time limit of 60 months. While it does have an asset limit, it is high, at $3,000. The state allows education as a qualifying work activity, but only for 12 months. However, the monthly benefits are low, at only $297; the state requires a drug test for eligibility; and a mere 8 percent of eligible people receive the benefit, the worst among our sample states.

Although North Carolina is in the process of expanding Medicaid, the expansion has yet to go into effect. Eligibility is set at only 37 percent of the federal poverty level; the threshold will increase to 138 percent once the expansion takes effect. Eligibility for pregnant people and children is also not particularly generous, at 201 and 216 percent of poverty, respectively. For CHIP, eligibility is on the low end of our sample states but a high 95 percent of eligible children are covered, with a low premium of $100 a year. For child care subsidies, North Carolina has a high income threshold for families with younger children, but only 14 percent of eligible children receive grants.

Texas makes it difficult for older and parenting students, especially those with high financial need and who attend community college, to access financial aid. These populations also struggle to access public benefits in the Lone Star State. Texas is only slightly better than Missouri in terms of eligibility for SNAP benefits. The monthly income cap is about $800 higher than Missouri but below North Carolina and Colorado. The percent of poverty guideline is also lower than in North Carolina or Colorado but higher than in Missouri. The asset limit is also higher than in North Carolina and Missouri.

Texas’s TANF program is hard to access. A family of four can only make $231 a month and have an asset value of $1,000. The monthly benefit is higher than in North Carolina and Missouri, but postsecondary education does not count as a work activity. Only 11 percent of eligible people actually receive the benefit.

Texas is the only state in our group that has not expanded Medicaid. This means that adults in Texas are only eligible for Medicaid if they make at or below 16 percent of the federal poverty level and have children, by far the strictest eligibility of the group. Texas also has less generous eligibility requirements for children and pregnant people. For CHIP, the eligibility requirements are similar to those in North Carolina and the premiums are low. However, Texas also has the lowest percentage of eligible children covered in the states we looked at. Texas has generous eligibility for child care benefits, but only 8 percent of eligible children receive them, the smallest share of any of our states.