Some public universities disproportionately direct their recruiting efforts on out-of-state students from affluent, white communities and private schools, a new study shows, adding fuel to an increasingly fiery debate about inequity within higher education that colleges and universities have been trying to sidestep for years.

"In contrast to rhetoric from university leaders, our findings suggest strong socioeconomic and racial biases in the enrollment priorities of many public research universities," researchers wrote.

"A small number of universities exhibit recruiting patterns broadly consistent with the historical mission of social mobility for meritorious state residents," they said. "However, most universities concentrated recruiting visits in wealthy, out-of-state communities while also privileging affluent schools in in-state visits."

The report , from researchers at the University of California Los Angeles and the University of Arizona, is based on an analysis of recruiting visits to local high schools made by admissions officials at 15 public research universities.

They found that most public research universities prioritize recruiting out-of-state students rather than students from their home state: Twelve of 15 universities made more out-of-state visits than in-state visits, and seven of 15 universities made more than twice as many out-of-state visits than in-state visits.

All universities were much more likely to visit out-of-state public high schools in high-income communities than schools in low-income communities, and most universities were significantly less likely to visit out-of-state public high schools with a high percentage of students of color.

Moreover, most universities visit a disproportionate number of out-of-state private schools.

Editorial Cartoons on Education View All 76 Images

Most universities were more likely to visit in-state public high schools in high-income communities than schools in low-income communities, though the bias was not as significant as it was for out-of-state recruiting visits. And when it comes to racial bias in in-state recruiting visits to public high schools, results varied across universities, with some less likely and others more likely to visit schools with a high share of students of color.

Since most universities made many more out-of-state visits than in-state visits, the researchers point out, the overall recruiting patterns for most universities fueled a student population culled overwhelmingly from wealthy and white families.

Very simply, the researchers said, the recruiting patterns "contribute to a student composition where low-income students of color feel increasingly isolated amongst growing cohorts of affluent, predominantly white, out-of-state students."

The research mirrors the findings in a recent report by The Education Trust , which found that only about half of states enroll a representative share of black students at their community and technical colleges, despite the fact that students of color disproportionately attend such colleges. Moreover, just four out of 41 states – Tennessee, Oregon, West Virginia and Utah – enroll a representative share of black students in four-year public colleges and universities.

"We're still more comfortable blaming individuals of color for failing to get a higher education, despite knowing that there are gross inequalities in the P-12 and college systems in terms of funding, teacher experience, access to rigorous curricular options, and the like," Andrew Nichols, The Education Trust's senior director of higher education research and data analytics and co-author of the report, said in a statement.

"We've been doing things around the margins that pay lip service to equity, but we're not doing enough to break up the systems that are designed to push certain people away," he said.

Colleges and universities across the country pledged to re-examine their admissions processes following the scandal unearthed earlier this month, in which wealthy parents paid a college admissions expert a combined $25 million to help their children cheat on college entrance exams and gain them admission to elite colleges and universities as recruited athletes when in reality they were not athletes at all.

The revelation painted a damning portrait of higher education industry : that it's a rigged system accessible only to the wealthiest and most elite families in the U.S. Many colleges and universities, including those implicated in the admissions racket, were quick to say that the scandal was antithetical to their missions.

But many higher education policy experts and civil rights advocates capitalized on the moment to highlight how the entire admissions process is rigged against historically disadvantaged students and overwhelmingly favors those in the upper-income brackets of the country.

To be sure, income inequality in education has a long history, in large part because so much of K-12 budgets are dependent on local property taxes, meaning wealthier communities with higher tax bases automatically have more money to pay for things like better teachers, AP courses and college counselors – all of which provide a leg up in the college admissions process.

Combine that with families who can also afford coaching for the SAT and ACT, additional counselors who go over college essays with a fine-toothed comb and costs for recreational sports, music lessons and other extracurriculars, and admission to the most elite colleges is assumed by many lower-income families to be out of reach.

As one recent study found , 38 colleges, including five Ivy League schools, enrolled more students whose families are among the top 1 percent of income earners than from the entire bottom 60 percent.

The researchers were quick to note that the recruiting patterns are directly linked to state divestment in higher education. As it stands, 41 states spend less on higher education than they did before the Great Recession in 2008, fueling a greater appetite for students who can pay a high tuition sticker price.

Researchers found that universities with weak state funding, like the University of Alabama and the University of South Carolina, tended to make more out-of-state visits.