Discussions about college affordability often revolve around helping students pay their tuition and fees. But nontuition expenses, including food, housing, and other living expenses, make up a large portion of student budgets and contribute to increased student debt. These expenses can be a barrier to student enrollment and completion. Lack of information about the true full cost of attendance, stringent requirements to qualify for income support benefits, and limited grant aid make it hard for many students to access enough resources to cover their basic needs. In this report, we summarize our findings emerging from research and a convening we hosted on nontuition expenses. Currently, there is no standardized way to measure cost of attendance at institutions, making it difficult for students to compare nontuition costs across schools. Providing students personalized information about what their food, housing, and other living expenses may look like allows them to plan for the school year but is distinct from practical solutions for measuring student need for financial aid purposes. Doubling the Pell grant is a common suggestion when discussing the cost of education, and incorporating some level of basic living expenses, in addition to the costs of books and supplies, into estimates of adequate grant aid would be constructive. But increasing the Pell grant is insufficient, as using it explicitly to cover living expenses could lack political support and may lead to unintended consequences, such as tuition increases. Based on these findings, state and federal policymakers can do more to support students who cannot afford nontuition expenses through changes to federal, state, and institution-level policies. Both enabling students to have access to income support benefits and more generous grant aid are central to policy efforts for addressing financial barriers to student access and success. Increases in need-based financial aid from federal and state governments, as well as institutions, are important. But we should not view low-income students as entirely distinct from other low-income adults, and education policy alone cannot be responsible for meeting students' basic needs.