What If We Cut Federal Aid to the Worst Programs?

Sweeping Title IV eligibility thresholds to see the tradeoff between protecting students and preserving access

Threshold Sweep

The Tradeoff Curve

What happens if we revoke Title IV eligibility for programs below a given ROI threshold? We swept from −$500K to +$100K and tracked the impact on programs, students, and institutional viability.

Policy Threshold Sweep: Programs Cut vs. Impact
Scenario Table

Eight Scenarios Compared

Each row shows what happens at a specific ROI cutoff. The tension is between catching bad programs and keeping institutions viable.

Threshold Programs Cut % of All Students Affected Institutions Unviable % Unviable Avg Alternatives

Scenario arithmetic on Q1 outputs. "Unviable" = institution loses >50% of programs. "Alternatives" = average number of programs within 50 miles in same field.

By Credential Level

Which Credentials Are Most Exposed?

Certificates and associate's degrees dominate the negative-ROI landscape. Graduate and professional degrees are nearly immune.

Negative ROI Rate by Credential Level
By Field

Top 10 Worst Fields

These fields have the highest count of negative-ROI programs nationally. The list includes both fields that are universally bad (cosmetology) and large fields where a minority of programs fail (health, business).

Top 10 Fields by Number of Negative-ROI Programs
Key Findings

What the Simulation Reveals

Finding
Cutting all negative-ROI programs would affect 2 million students and make 56% of affected institutions unviable.
Finding
A more targeted cut at −$100K ROI threshold catches 13,925 programs (60% of negative) while affecting fewer institutions.

The tradeoff is real: aggressive thresholds protect more students from bad investments but eliminate access for students who have no nearby alternative. There is no threshold that cleanly separates "protect" from "harm."