Haslerig, SiduriBeam, Colbi2022-05-092022-05-092022-05-13https://hdl.handle.net/11244/335641Promise programs are a growing trend across the US that offer college assistance to low-income students. Many of these programs develop under the premise of supporting low-income students, but without policy language addressing the unique needs of low-income students in relation to race, gender, and class barriers. This study examined Oklahoma’s Promise, a statewide tuition-free program for low-income students, through a critical quantitative method and intersectional framework. It used the entire Oklahoma’s Promise population over a ten year span to ask the questions: who is being served by Promise?; when do students exit the program and what variables predict the time of that exit?; and what factors relate to the likelihood of degree completion? To answer these questions participants’ demographic data, hometown, and high school characteristics were disaggregated and analyzed to evaluate equity in the program. Additionally, statistical tests such as Cox’s Proportional Hazards model and multinomial logistic regressions were used to evaluate the validity of political narratives surrounding participant retention and completion. Findings discern Oklahoma’s Promise currently does not equitably serve students across racial, ethnic, gender, and high school characteristics but does serve equitably across hometowns. The findings in this study depart from common trends in literature showing students from underserved populations were more likely than their counterparts to persist towards a degree. However, they were less likely to attain a degree in the program. The findings validate Crenshaw’s (1989) intersectional theory relating to policy frameworks and the need for policy language and practice to consider individuals’ multiple intersecting identities to holistically and equitably serve the gamut of individuals who fall under a specific marginalized status.Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 InternationalHigher Education PolicyCritical Quantitative InquiryLow-Income Student Access