To: Dr.

Dana Mitra

From: Christopher Sosnowski

Date: 7/12/2020

Subject: Blog Entry #6 (Impact of Policy)

Question:

Provide an example of a federal, state, or local policy that affects the operations of this
organization. How is the organization responding to this policy? Not responding?

Response:

A strong example of a policy that impacts the operation of Penn State Talent Search is
the “two-thirds” policy. This policy is a federally enforced policy, and reads “In any given
project, two-thirds of the participants must be students who are low-income and potential first-
generation college students.” The language is specific, and paying attention to its precise
meaning is important. Notably, the policy states that two-thirds of the students must be low-
income AND potential first-generation college students, not either-or. This dual requirement for
two-thirds of our program’s participants can present a multitude of challenges.

First and foremost, the policy requires that any program run out of Penn State Talent
Search does research beforehand to make sure that the program will be targeting an
appropriate population. This is the very work I have been assigned to do as part of my
internship. Most of the data I find is sourced from census data and covers information such as
low-income status, educational attainment, graduation rates, and more. Using this information,
the Talent Search secretary (Stephen Holoviak) can then make judgments as to where a
program should operate, and where to request grant money. A great example is the research
I've conducted on Centre County. While pulling the numbers, it was discovered that the county,
even when divided by census tract, still does not meet certain thresholds that would make for a
successful grant. Just not enough of the population is likely both low-income and first-
generation. Because of this, likely, our program will not be requesting grant money for these
target areas.

Second, this two-thirds policy can present issues during the operation of a Talent
Search program. In fact, over this past week, I have been conducting conversations with
various members of the Talent Search team, and one of these conversations touched on this
very issue. Kelli Conage and Autumn Lusk are some of Talent Search’s school counselors, and
during our talk, they spoke about how the two-thirds policy can often lead to issues when
students and their families shift from one identifiable group to another. Take for example a
family whose child has been serviced by Talent Search for years, and suddenly finds work,
shifting their income above 150% poverty. This student is no longer both low-income and first-
generation, and by the end of the year, if the margins are tight, the program might face a
situation where at least two-thirds of participants are not both low income and first-generation.
Tackling this problem is challenging, but Autumn and Kelli also discussed ways by which the
program handles these cases.

Often a response involves direct communication with students and families. Talent
Search counselors are expected to maintain strong relationships with the students they serve,
and in doing so, if it comes to the attention that a student’s family might begin to rise above the
low-income threshold, they can respond immediately as opposed to simply figuring out at the
end of the year. A counselor could then expand recruitment efforts, and meet the two-thirds
requirement while maintaining the student. Or, for example, they could inform potential
participants that only me one of the two categories that they can no longer participate in the
current cycle, out of the respect for the student relying on the services for years, and who is
soon to graduate. Either way, these solutions are better than having to force a student to drop
out of participating in Talent Search and protect the program from a potential government
audit. Kelli and Autumn also mentioned that they keep track of students on the fence of low-
income status who are also not first-generation students more so than any other group. This is
because if they were to rise above the low-income threshold, they would qualify as neither
group and would be difficult to maintain as part of the program.

These are just some of the major ways in which the two-thirds policy impacts the
operation of Penn State Talent Search, but there are plenty more. It makes sense, seeing as a
policy such as this one forms the backbone of the entire program, as well as all other TRIO
related programs, run out of the Penn State Equity Department. It has been insightful to
question the staff about how they handle the policy, as well as to hear Stephen talk about how
he goes about grant write-ups, and I look forward to learning more as the weeks go by.