In the US higher education system, students who study abroad do not reflect the diversity of the student body. Several underrepresented groups have been identified, including: students of minority races/ethnicities, male students, students with disabilities, students enrolled in associate degree programs, and students studying in the science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields. Other groups generally understood to participate less or warrant increased access to study abroad include: first-generation college students, students with limited financial means, students who identify as LGBTQ+, students with diverse religious affiliations, and undocumented students. A critical review of this research literature demonstrates that existing scholarship focuses on barriers to participation in study abroad at the individual student (micro) level. However, at the mezzo level, analysis and recommendations for institutional processes that affect access to study abroad are not discussed adequately in the research. This dissertation addresses this gap in the literature by advancing research on inclusion in study abroad at the institutional level. It specifically examines the institutional processes that determine which study abroad programs students have access to, a topic which has never before been addressed in the research and literature. I employ a two-stage, mixed-methods approach to learn about the extent to which inclusion is (or is not) considered through these processes. First, a pilot study within the State University of New York (SUNY) system is conducted. At this stage, data is collected through an electronic survey, as well as interviews, and documents. Next, data is gathered at the national level through electronic surveys and documents. The results bring forth three key findings. First, within study abroad program approval processes, consideration for inclusion is inconsistent and reactive. Second, when access is considered, it is primarily related to program costs. Third, the people involved in the process are primarily international education staff and faculty, while representatives from campus offices with a mission for diversity or inclusion are not involved. Based on the findings and existing literature, I present recommendations for advancing the research, and improving practices at the institutional level. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]