<p>Regardless of who made which policies at what school, the numbers based on so-called need are HUGELY different school to school.</p>
<p>As to someone with a $179k income being “middle class”, well you’d have to be living in a different universe. </p>
<p>"Our income is in the $120,000 - $180,000 range, that is before taxes, and I can tell you that contributing 10% of that amount towards out daughter’s tuition is about what we can afford to do. I should know, I pay our bills.</p>
<p>I have an income significantly lower than that, and I can afford almost double that. But it hardly matters. The point (and it is really a point you are making as well), is that whether one’s income is $60k or $179k, top 25 “100% of need” schools are going to evaluate your need, and award need-based aid very substantially different, one to the other.</p>
<p>mini, you are misreading/misrepresenting the policy. There is an asset-based component, too. So a family with income of $60K but significant assets (other than home equity, which Harvard doesn’t count) would still be required to make payments out of those assets, as would a family with $179K of income. And several thousand dollars of student contribution does not get eliminated because family income is low. </p>
<p>So Harvard does take into account the same kind of “need” factors all of its relevant competitors do. The difference is that Harvard – no doubt because it can afford it – has much lower expectations than almost anyone else of how much money families should have to come up with.</p>
<p>In my (vicarious, limited) experience, Harvard is not always the very best financial aid/scholarship offer, but I don’t know of anyone who has been admitted to Harvard who found its financial aid offer so inadequate that it required going elsewhere. Harvard, of course, does not have an ED program, so it’s relevant here only to the extent that a kid who might think about applying ED to Cornell or Penn might want to hold out to see if he got into Harvard or Princeton RD, with their (likely) better aid offers. That’s a perfectly good decision – but it sure ain’t a high-probability bet.</p>
<p>Yes, we certainly agree on plenty. How schools evaluate need varies greatly between schools and the ultimate determination about what a family can afford can only be made by the family. I think that is why colleges don’t give you too much trouble if you opt out of an early decision contract based on finances. Who are they to say what you can afford?</p>
<p>"So Harvard does take into account the same kind of “need” factors all of its relevant competitors do.'</p>
<p>I don’t think I misrepresented it one bit. It is quite clear that while they take into account the same kind of “need” factors as their competitors, because of preset policies they will often come to different conclusions. And that’s the whole point.</p>
<p>(And one part of that is pretty easily obvious - virtually everyone with an income of $60k can pay SOMETHING for a college education. And, for me, living out here in the hinterlands, there is something equally obvious - someone with a $179k income, with no assets and also no debt, living in an apartment, could in fact pay full freight. They’d find it nice if they didn’t have to, but it certainly wouldn’t be a “need”.)</p>
<p>If I’m rich then someone forgot to tell me. Full price at a private school pencils out to something like $5,000 - $6,000 per month and unless this is an only child then this is not the only education that the family will need to finance. Living in an apartment is not the best idea over the long term. If you spend your money on a mortgage then you eventually own the house.</p>
<p>I work for the federal government so I am surrounded by people like myself, who are solidly in the middle class but not rich. I’ve had this conversation with my coworkers who have college aged children. They have made the decision before the application process begins not to let their kids apply to private schools. They don’t think they will qualify for need based assistance and they are responsible for their own retirement. For them state school tuition is responsible, full tuition at a private school is not. I’ve seen the cars they drive, I know how they live, these are not irresponsible people. They’ve run the numbers and they are being realistic.</p>
<p>When I say “need”, I don’t mean need like what a person really needs to live. I mean it like what you “need” to send your kid to a private school.</p>
<p>Just the opposite of mini’s experience: comparing offers from six schools this year yielded bubkus. Each one of them calculated an efc within a few hundred bucks of the other - almost as if they were collaborating, or due to rounding. The only differences were in the amount of student loan, all of which are clearly spelled out on their web page, as in 'we cap loans at xx." There was no negotiation, no changes, no reconsideration without new information. Take it or leave it. </p>
<p>“I work for the federal government so I am surrounded by people like myself, who are solidly in the middle class but not rich.”</p>
<p>I work for the state government.</p>
<p>The median household income in the U.S. is roughly $55k (and declining). For every doubling in income, assets (on average) multiply by 4X. Someone with a $180k income will have between 8 and 12X the assets of someone at the middle income median. At that rate, someone with a $179k income who can only afford $17.9/year for college - or even double that - based on past savings, current income, and future earnings (in the form of loans, discounted for inflation), has really significant problems budgeting. (Without huge extenuating circumstances, of course.)</p>
<p>“Each one of them calculated an efc within a few hundred bucks of the other - almost as if they were collaborating, or due to rounding.”</p>
<p>Ironically, we found this was the case with our younger d., in all NON-100% of need schools.</p>
<p>I never said that I could only afford $17.9 per year from past savings, current income and future earnings. I said that I could afford $17.9 per year from my income. I wasn’t including savings or loans, only income. That’s what Harvard bases its 10% expectation on, percentage of income.</p>
<p>Again, just the opposite of mini’s experience. Five of the six were 100% need-met schools and the need and met portion did not differ more than a few lattes worth…</p>
<p>I’ll admit that I haven’t read this thread all the way through, so I’m not taking sides, only reporting our experience with FA at various 100% need-met selective schools (ie. by most definitions, top 20 universities and top 3 LAC; all schools had similar COAs of about 50k/yr; merit aid schools not included):</p>
<p>Freshman year (before new policies to increase FA for $100-200k/yr income families): 3 schools gave grants and WS (15k, 15 & 10k/yr); 3 offered zero FA.</p>
<p>Sophomore year transfer (after FA policy changes, all schools meet 100% of need for transfers): 1 school gave grants and WS of 25k/yr, 2 offered zero FA.</p>
<p>In our case, I saw a direct correlation between size of endowment and FA offer, once we dropped off the very top tier, FA went to zero. I’d classify our income as upper-middle, but assets are higher than typical due to a depression era mentality (not “smart” for FA, but helps me sleep at night ;)).</p>
<p>The take home message here is, each family’s situation is different. It varies with the structure of your finances (eg. income vs. assets), the college, and even how much the school wants your kid (preferred packaging).</p>