Just as colleges ramp up for another high-stakes election year, their go-to scoreboard for student turnout has gone dark. A federal inquiry and a key decision by a major data provider have effectively pulled the plug on the National Study of Learning, Voting and Engagement, the long-running campus-by-campus project based at Tufts University. With the NSLVE program on pause, participating schools say they no longer have the fresh reports that usually guide their local voter outreach campaigns.
On Feb. 5, the U.S. Department of Education’s Student Privacy Policy Office opened an investigation into Tufts and the National Student Clearinghouse, and it instructed colleges not to use NSLVE data until the review is finished, according to the U.S. Department of Education. The department warned that institutions relying on the contested data in 2026 could face FERPA enforcement, including potential loss of federal funding, if violations are ultimately found.
Tufts’ Tisch College and the NSLVE team maintain that the study is nonpartisan, relies on de-identified records, and is designed to help colleges close gaps in political participation. Even so, they have paused release of the 2024 national and campus reports while the department reviews the program, according to Tisch College at Tufts. Tufts says it has turned over detailed documentation to federal staff and is pushing for a quick resolution so campuses can regain access to data they have come to treat as essential.
After the inquiry began, the National Student Clearinghouse told participating institutions it would end the authorization that allowed it to provide data for NSLVE, a move that effectively cut off new reports to more than 1,000 campuses, according to Inside Higher Ed. Advocates and campus groups have warned that the shift could cool nonpartisan turnout efforts, even as student organizers and some administrators insist they will keep pressing ahead with voter education on their own.
How NSLVE Worked and What Campuses Lost
NSLVE relied on the Clearinghouse and a third-party voter-file vendor to match campus enrollment records with public voting data, strip out identifying details, and send back aggregated campus-level reports. That matching pipeline is now at the center of the department’s inquiry, according to a legal and policy overview from Debevoise & Plimpton. With the feed turned off, colleges lose the standard benchmark they used to see whether their registration drives, classroom presentations, and civic-engagement programs were actually moving the needle.
Why the Data Mattered
NSLVE’s national reports had become a staple for campus planners. Its 2022 “Democracy Counts” analysis documented measurable progress in closing participation gaps, including a noticeable narrowing of the turnout gap between community colleges and public four-year institutions by 2022. Those findings, highlighted in coverage by NPR, helped many campuses justify targeted efforts to boost turnout in specific student populations.
Campus groups say the pause is inconvenient but not a dealbreaker. They plan to continue running voter registration tables, advising students on absentee and mail-in ballots, and training poll workers, relying on their own tracking and national partners instead of NSLVE’s campus reports. Organizations such as the Campus Vote Project and the Students Learn Students Vote Coalition are still offering tools and training for colleges that want to measure and increase turnout without the Tufts-run study in the mix.
Legal Implications for Colleges
Legal experts say the fight now turns on a pair of technical questions: whether the Clearinghouse’s matching and de-identification process fits within FERPA’s research exceptions, and whether institutions secured appropriate student consent for participation. Analysts note that the Education Department’s guidance creates real compliance risk for schools that used NSLVE data this year and are considering relying on it in 2026. Many recommend that administrators carefully document consent procedures and pause use of NSLVE outputs until the federal review is complete, pointing to background and analysis from Debevoise & Plimpton for additional context.
