By Hugh T. Ferguson, NASFAA Managing Editor

In the past six months, 94% higher education professionals have reported using artificial intelligence (AI) tools for work, but according to a new NASFAA survey, only 54% of financial aid professionals are using this technology in their offices for financial aid work.

The survey from NASFAA’s Use of AI in the Financial Aid Office Task Force, released today, reflects the perspectives of 1,233 financial aid professionals from 834 institutions nationwide and presents findings from a NASFAA membership survey.

The lower adoption rate reflects that financial aid offices have reported a more cautious approach to the technology than other offices or staff on college campuses.

“That gap does not seem to be a measure of reluctance, but rather a matter of context,” the report explains. “Financial aid professionals operate in a highly regulatory environment defined by federal aid compliance, federal tax information (FTI) requirements, and a professional obligation to students whose access to higher education depends on the accuracy of their work.”

Some key findings include that 62% of survey respondents described their personal attitude toward financial aid-specific AI use as cautious, while 58% of non-AI users cited compliance or accuracy concerns as their primary barrier to the technology. The survey also indicated that there was near-universal recognition of data privacy and inaccurate outputs as significant risks when utilizing AI tools in financial aid administration.

The survey also found that many financial aid offices have not received institutional guidance on the use of AI within their office — only 9% of respondents were aware of any institutional policy guiding AI use in their office. Nearly half (45%) of respondents reported receiving no AI training of any kind, and among those who had, only 23% described it as specifically focused on financial aid or enrollment management. Thirty-seven percent reported that their institution provides no AI tools at all.

Financial aid professionals also cited several risks and challenges associated with using AI technologies and how the tools present unique challenges to their office’s use of data and security.

According to the survey, data privacy and accuracy dominate perceived risks, with 79% of respondents citing privacy/data security, while 67% cited FERPA compliance as the most significant risk of using AI in financial aid work.

As a part of the survey, respondents were also able to provide open-ended responses, and across 141 of those submissions, financial aid officers expressed cautious optimism toward AI. Practitioners described real value in AI tools they are already using, expressed genuine interest in learning more, along with a readiness to engage seriously, given the right support and guardrails.

The survey also surfaced a distinct constituency who hold principled reservations about AI, including ethical, relational, and environmental concerns that go beyond compliance uncertainty. As the task force develops its recommendations, those perspectives will also be taken into account.

The goal of this task force is to examine how financial aid professionals are using, or considering using, Artificial Intelligence (AI), including promising practices and challenges related to privacy, compliance, data stewardship, customer service, and equity.

Samantha Hicks, FAAC®, serves as chair of NASFAA’s Use of Artificial Intelligence in Financial Aid Offices Task Force, and recently participated in a Q&A, which detailed her priorities for evaluating the ways in which professionals effectively engage in AI.

This is the task force’s first report. Findings from a review of institutional AI policies and findings from NASFAA member listening sessions will be published later in 2026.

The task force will use the information gathered across these three reports to inform their final report, which will be submitted to the NASFAA Board of Directors.

The final report will be published after it has been reviewed and approved by the NASFAA board in the summer of 2026.

Publication Date: 4/30/2026

Comments Disclaimer: NASFAA welcomes and encourages readers to comment and engage in respectful conversation about the content posted here. We value thoughtful, polite, and concise comments that reflect a variety of views. Comments are not moderated by NASFAA but are reviewed periodically by staff. Users should not expect real-time responses from NASFAA. To learn more, please view NASFAA’s complete Comments Policy.