Person A in this case is myself, functioning as a funder, a quasi-counselor, and a consistent communicator. Person B is a student aspiring to higher education (in other situations, it could be an adult seeking assistance or the representative of an organization wanting help).
From an extensive conversation between Person A and Person B, the latter settles on a course of action for himself/herself. Person A thereafter is only to be involved to the extent desired by Person B. Person B unilaterally declines to proceed on the course of action he had committed to.
It has not proven fruitful for Person A to reach out continuously to push, prod, and provoke Person B into doing what the latter said he intended to do and what he was individually capable of doing (the scaffolding principle is not applicable here—there is no question about Person B’s ability (either individually or through collaboration with others readily available to him) to follow through on his previously defined course of action.
While Person A’s ultimate scorecard as a funder of aspiring students is driven by how many Persons B have accomplished their goals, because this is the basis of the initial interface between Person A and Person B, if Person B does not have the motivation to proceed on his end of the bargain, it is not productive for Person A to “chase.”