Evaluation of Accelerate, Complete, Engage (ACE) at CUNY John Jay College of Criminal Justice
Zhu, J., & Strumbos, D. (2021). City University of New York (CUNY) and Metis Associates. https://www1.cuny.edu/sites/asap/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2021/06/CUNY-ACE-RCT-Year-2-Interim-Study-Report-March-2021-FINAL.pdf.
-
examining559Students, gradePS
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Accelerate, Complete, Engage (ACE))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
On track to four-year graduation |
Accelerate, Complete, Engage (ACE) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
67.90 |
50.90 |
Yes |
|
|
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 70%
Male: 30% -
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
New York
-
Race Asian 10% Black 10% Other or unknown 18% White 62% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 48% Not Hispanic or Latino 52% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at the City University of New York (CUNY) within the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
Study sample
The racial breakdown of the overall sample was 9.8% Asian, 10.2% Black, 62.1% White, and 17.9% other. By gender, the overall sample was 29.9% male and 70.1% female. Additionally, 72.1% of students in the overall sample were eligible for Pell grants while 27.9% were ineligible.
Intervention Group
The Accelerate, Complete, and Engage (ACE) program—an undergraduate adaptation of CUNY’s ASAP—offers intensive advising, career support, tuition aid, textbooks, and transit assistance. At John Jay, Year 2 was split: fall 2019 ran as designed; spring 2020 shifted fully online. Before fall, ACE hosted a Sophomore Summit highlighting campus resources and career sessions led by alumni and Career Center staff. Advising was frequent: in fall, just over half of ACE students met with their advisor six or more times and 44% met four to five times. A November networking event drew 117 sophomores. After the move to remote learning, ACE surveyed students to identify urgent needs, expanded advising via video/phone/text, offered virtual career workshops, and held online community chats to support distance learning. In spring, 90% met with an advisor six or more times and another 8% met four to five times.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition maintained business-as-usual from students enrolling in CUNY John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
Support for implementation
In Spring 2018, a study recruitment assistant was hired to assist the research team in reaching out to students, explaining the study, obtaining informed consent, and conducting randomization. After receiving approval from the CUNY IRB, the study co-Principal Investigators held a full-day training for all John Jay staff participating in recruitment and randomization, covering research procedures, the consent form, the intake survey, and the use of the randomization software developed by Metis.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).