Full-Time Study, Part-Time Work: STEM Program Demands, SNAP Eligibility, and Basic Needs Insecurity

• In Event: Saturday Poster Luncheon

Abstract

States are investing heavily in community college STEM pathways as a workforce development strategy, reflecting broad policy consensus that these institutions are central to expanding economic mobility and meeting regional labor market demand. Yet the affordability of these pathways extends well beyond tuition. Students pursuing high-intensity STEM credentials face substantial non-tuition expenses, such as housing, food, transportation, and childcare, while navigating rigid course sequences, mandatory laboratory hours, and full-time enrollment expectations that sharply constrain their ability to work. Public benefits programs, particularly SNAP, represent a critical but chronically underutilized component of college affordability for this population. Prior research identifies awareness gaps and administrative burden as primary barriers to take-up. This study identifies an additional structural barrier: the design of STEM programs themselves. This paper addresses two related questions. First, to what extent do the time demands of community college STEM programs create structural incompatibility with SNAP's work requirements? Second, what non-tuition financial challenges do STEM students report, and how are these challenges associated with food and housing insecurity across varying levels of institutional financial support? The analysis integrates two complementary data sources. Program maps from NSF-funded S-STEM programs at community colleges in Minnesota, Texas, and Washington document scheduled class and laboratory hours, required sequencing, and structured program activities. These data are used to estimate total weekly academic time commitments and compare them against SNAP's 20-hour weekly work requirement. State-specific SNAP rules, including how work hours are calculated and whether work-study satisfies eligibility conditions, are analyzed to assess how federalism shapes student-level feasibility. These structural findings are paired with student survey data from the INTuitN STEM Research Hub's multi-institution Student Basic Needs Survey, fielded across community college partners in 2024–2025, which captures self-reported work patterns, food and housing insecurity, and benefit access among STEM students receiving varying levels of last-dollar scholarship support.The analysis reveals that full-time S-STEM students face weekly academic commitments exceeding 60 hours (combining class time, laboratory hours, study time, and required program activities), or the equivalent of more than one full-time job. Adding SNAP's 20-hour work requirement leaves students approximately 12 hours per day for all remaining responsibilities. State variation in work-hour averaging, weekly in Minnesota and Texas, monthly in Washington, generates meaningfully different eligibility conditions for students with irregular schedules. Survey findings extend this structural account, documenting the non-tuition financial pressures students report and examining whether last-dollar scholarship support moderates food and housing insecurity and shapes patterns of benefit access. Together, these findings reframe the SNAP take-up problem among community college STEM students. Access to food assistance depends not only on financial need or benefit awareness, but on whether program structure leaves sufficient time to satisfy ongoing work requirements. Students may be eligible on paper but structurally unable to comply. As states simultaneously expand STEM investment and federal benefits rules remain unchanged or tightened, the incompatibility between high-intensity credential pathways and public benefits design represents an underexamined equity issue with direct consequences for student persistence, program completion, and the real cost of pursuing high-demand credentials.

Author

• Leanne Davis, University of Washington
  Presenting Author