Meeting People Where They Are: Experimental Evidence on Embedded Supports, Service Use, and Educational Outcomes

• In Event: Expanding Opportunity at Community Colleges: Credentials, Transfers, and Supports

Abstract

Many public services suffer from persistently low take-up despite high potential returns. A growing body of evidence suggests that information alone does little to close this gap; instead, hassle costs and default access points may be the binding constraints on utilization. We test whether reallocating existing services to where people already are — rather than requiring them to seek out centralized offices — can improve utilization and outcomes.

We study this question in community colleges, which enroll 40% of U.S. undergraduates and disproportionately serve low-income, first-generation, and working students — a population facing severe time constraints that make even modest frictions a barrier to engaging with available support services. We conducted a multi-semester randomized controlled trial at Piedmont Virginia Community College, randomly assigning gateway course sections in math, English, and biology to treatment or control across three semesters (Fall 2023–Fall 2024). In treatment sections, tutoring and advising staff were embedded directly in the classroom, attended class regularly, and proactively reached out to students showing early signs of academic difficulty. Control sections followed standard instructional practices. Critically, both treatment and control students had access to the same on-demand tutoring and advising through centralized campus offices.

Embedding supports generated large increases in utilization: treated students were 192% more likely to meet with a tutor, 577% more likely to meet with an advisor, and 309% more likely to meet with an instructor. Treatment students were 5 percentage points more likely to pass their courses and 4.6 percentage points less likely to withdraw, with especially large effects for new and first-generation students. Impacts spilled over beyond the focal course: treated students engaged more with support staff in other courses and showed gains in overall semester GPA and persistence into subsequent terms. Our findings demonstrate that resource reallocation — rather than resource expansion — can meaningfully improve outcomes for underserved students.

Author

• Benjamin L. Castleman, University of Virginia
  Presenting Author