Colleges often approach belonging through affinity groups, social events, mentoring, and messages about inclusion. Those efforts matter greatly, but they cannot compensate for material conditions that can prevent some students from participating in campus life. Belonging begins with a more fundamental question. Has the institution created conditions in which every student can realistically remain, learn, and participate?
The Hope Center for Student Basic Needs 2023-24 survey found that 59% of respondents experienced food or housing insecurity. The study included 74,350 students at 91 institutions in 16 states, although the sample was not nationally representative. When researchers expanded their analysis to include mental health, child care, transportation, and internet access, 73% reported at least one form of basic-needs insecurity.
The consequences extend beyond physical well-being. Among respondents who had previously stopped out and returned to campus, or were considering leaving college, 79% cited a basic-needs or financial challenge. The survey also identified significant disparities. Nearly 75% of Black and Indigenous respondents experienced food or housing insecurity, compared with 55% of White respondents.
These findings point to an often-overlooked dimension of inclusion—material belonging. Students cannot feel fully connected to an institution when they are continually calculating whether they can afford to eat, get to class, pay rent, or secure care for their children.
Build Systems, Not Scattered Services
A food pantry is valuable, but hunger rarely occurs in isolation. A student seeking groceries may also face an eviction notice, unreliable transportation, or child care disruption. Sending that student to several offices, each with separate forms and eligibility requirements, can turn getting assistance into another obstacle.
A 2025 RAND report identified six features of promising community college basic-needs programs: comprehensive support, dedicated staff and partnerships, broad outreach, streamlined intake and case management, institutional commitment, and data-informed practice. The framework positions basic-needs assistance as student-success infrastructure rather than “charity.”
Amarillo College in Texas offers one model. Its Advocacy and Resource Center connects students with food, housing, utilities, transportation, child care, legal services, and emergency assistance. The college has also used financial aid data to identify those who may need help before a semester begins.
This proactive approach matters because many students never request assistance. The Hope Center found that 65% of respondents lacked awareness of available support. Among those experiencing basic-needs insecurity, 48% had not used any of the campus resources included in the survey.
Colleges should make support visible through orientation, advising, registration, and financial aid communications. A single intake process should connect students with a trained navigator who can address several needs, help with public-benefit applications, and follow up after an immediate crisis.
Oregon has implemented this approach statewide. During the 2023-25 biennium, Basic Needs Oregon served more than 30,000 students through benefits navigators embedded in public colleges and universities. They helped them access food, housing, transportation, health care, child care, and public benefits. A program evaluation found that participants reported greater basic-needs security, better academic performance, and improved persistence.
Intervene Before a Setback Becomes a Departure
Emergency aid works best when it is timely, flexible, and easy to access. A small unpaid bill can quickly turn into a dropped course, lost financial aid, or stopped-out enrollment.
Georgia State University’s Panther Retention Grant program proactively identifies students who are progressing toward graduation but face removal because of modest tuition balances. The university reports that 61% of seniors who received grants during the previous academic year graduated within two semesters. Within a year, 82% of recipients had graduated or remained enrolled.
The results are university-reported and do not, by themselves, establish that the grants caused those outcomes. Still, the program demonstrates a replicable practice: Use institutional data to identify solvable financial barriers before students disappear.
Institutions can also establish partnerships with landlords, hotels, transportation agencies, food providers, and community organizations so that students receive immediate relief and long-term support.
Redesign the Institution Around Students’ Lives
Basic-needs work cannot stop at referrals. Colleges must examine whether their own schedules and policies exclude the students they say they want to include. Required courses offered only during traditional work hours can impact working students. Unpredictable course rotations complicate child care arrangements. Evening students may arrive after advising, dining, and tutoring services have closed. Commuters might miss community events because transit schedules do not align with campus programming.
Better practices include publishing schedules earlier, offering predictable academic pathways, clustering courses on fewer days, expanding evening, weekend, and hybrid options, and providing remote access to advising and student services. Transportation strategies can include transit passes, gas cards, emergency ride funds, and shuttle schedules aligned with evening classes or events.
Student parents need equally intentional support. The University of Oregon, for example, offers eligible student parents and caregivers subsidies for children age 12 and younger, along with access to child care centers near campus. Colleges can also include backup-care assistance, family study spaces, lactation rooms, and priority registration.
Measure Access, Not Just Sentiment
College leadership should continue asking students whether they feel welcomed, valued, and connected. However, they should also be asking students if their basic financial needs are being met. The findings should be disaggregated and reviewed alongside retention and completion data.
Evaluate not only whether the necessary resources exist, but who can access it, during what hours, through how many steps, what barriers prevent its use, and with what stigma may be attached.
