State student-aid office: fewer graduates processed, lower test/GPA drive TOPS eligibility drop

Suwan Butte, executive director of LASFA programs for the Board of Regents, told the House Education Committee that several interacting factors explain the recent drop in Taylor Opportunity Program for Students (TOPS) eligibility.

Butte said the decline is not the result of a single cause: “Those outgoing classes are larger than the incoming classes,” she told lawmakers, meaning a big graduating cohort is moving out of the pipeline while smaller incoming cohorts reduce the pool of eligible students.

The office identified three drivers. First, demographic shifts and a large prior cohort moving through the system reduce the share of students in the pipeline. Second, fewer graduates are processed for TOPS because of privacy and consent limits on data sharing with LOSFA. Third, a smaller share of processed graduates meet the program’s GPA and ACT thresholds; LASFA reported that “the latest 1 is 46.3 percent,” meaning fewer than half of processed graduates met eligibility in the most recent year.

Butte and LASFA staff presented more detailed breakouts: average ACT and GPA for eligible and ineligible students, separate figures for the OPH (Opportunity, Performance and Honors) and TECH pathways, and acceptance and retention measures for award recipients. For the OPH award, acceptance of the award by eligible students fell from 89.4% in 2014–15 to 81.1% in 2023–24; roughly 15.6% of eligible students historically do not accept the award, and of that group about 8.7 percentage points represent students who went out of state. TOPS Tech showed a different pattern: acceptance rates dropped from about 23.8% to about 20.1%, meaning most TOPS Tech–eligible students do not take the award, and only about 5.9 percentage points of that group go out of state.

LASFA staff told the committee that the reasons students decline payments are mixed. Many TOPS Tech–eligible students enroll in programs the award does not pay for: LASFA estimated about 44.1% of non‑accepting TOPS Tech‑eligible students enrolled in in‑state two‑ or four‑year programs that are not eligible for TOPS Tech payment. Smaller shares were enrolled part time (5.4%) or enrolled after the one‑year anniversary deadline (about 3%).

Butte emphasized the program’s positive outcomes for recipients: “These students are your better prepared students, these students are retaining and graduating at a higher rate,” she said, citing LASFA figures that show higher four‑ and six‑year completion and retention rates for TOPS recipients versus nonrecipients.

Committee members asked staff for historical trends and follow‑up data. Representative Amade requested a five‑year series; LASFA supplied year‑by‑year processed‑graduate eligibility rates back to 2019 and additional TOPS Tech breakdowns. Members also raised workforce alignment questions: Representative Brass and others asked whether TOPS Tech enrollment could be driven to the credential types employers need; LASFA staff and lawmakers discussed coordination with MJ Foster and other workforce programs as a path to align program lists and encourage use of the awards for employer‑demand training.

The presentation concluded with LASFA pointing committee members to a public “TOPS Trends” report and an online, updating dashboard. LASFA said they will follow up with additional breakdowns requested by lawmakers, including suspension rates and detailed program‑by‑program acceptance behavior.

Ending

Lawmakers on the committee requested follow‑up data and signaled interest in further study of both why fewer processed graduates meet eligibility and how award design and program lists could be aligned with workforce pipelines so more eligible students both accept and use awards in ways that lead to employment.