UCB really hit the nail on the head. When it comes to low income applicants, and in particular those with truly terrible family and community support (think, inner city vs small town/rural), LESS is MORE.
Every single new thing that is required of them (don’t call this “optional” - if it exists, its absence will be noted) is just one more barrier, one more hurdle, one more thing that will dissuade them from applying.
These kids have real world, pressing worries that consume their time in ways you can’t understand unless you have spent even a little bit of time with them. Problems that have no solutions I can think of. Putting together a portfolio that’s good enough to compete with Richie Rich’s portfolio isn’t ever going to be high on their list. Why bother? Other than a few astonishing superstars, most disadvantaged kids will not have the energy to leap yet another hurdle tossed their way.
UC’s are a shining example of how to do it right. What’s so hard about duplicating their methods? IF, of course, the goal truly is to capture more disadvantaged students (which, I continue to doubt is the real goal).