<p>Agreed. The biggest misconception about financial aid is that so many people assume “meeting need” means that the school will meet their need as they compute their need … when in reality, it means that the school will meet need as the school computes their need. Heck, if we got to tell the school how much we need, a whole lot of folks would tell them they need pretty much the whole cost of attendance.</p>
<p>As the parent of a student who needed ALOT of financial support in order to make his college dreams a reality, I find it difficult not to come down on the side of a student. Having said that, the OP clearly didn’t understand what demonstrated need means in FA circles…and this post is just sour grapes.</p>
<p>This sentence from S. web site sounds like something written by a graduate of their top-notch creative writing program. Then people here are surprised when HS counselors tell kids - just get admitted and money will not be an issue. If your finaid is heavily skewed towards really low-income students - just say so clearly. Or put a table listing how many students at different income levels are attending your college. A year ago Yale actually had a crude table like this on their web site. Out of 5K+ undergrads they had only 500 with family income levels in the 150-200K range. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But this poster has given no indication that their parents make that kind of money, have they? Swarthmore did ask for more financial information (their own form) than any other college D2 applied to last year. And to put a number on it, their aid was $10K worse than two other comparable schools. </p>
<p>And doesn’t swat have a net price calculator just like every other college?</p>
<p>intparent, I wasn’t referring to the OP specifically. But I still think the key point is that ultimately, even with net price calculators, colleges have discretion in how they define “need”…and we have all seen people complaining about their dire circumstances who really shouldn’t be.</p>
<p>Yes, but I think we have no indication that this poster is doing that. Honestly, we found Swat to be somewhat stingy with aid, and pretty brusque when we requested a review of D2’s aid. But I also posted in my first response that colleges have a right to define “need” as they want to, and applicants have to live with that. But I do think there is something to the argument that Swat gives less aid than other top schools.</p>
<p>This is the FULL quote from the FA website: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The first part is extremely important. They base aid on what your family shows, on paper, that the university believes your family can afford. </p>
<p>The primary responsibility for paying for an education falls on a student and his/her family. The college attempts to fill gaps between that and their COA. </p>
<p>The OP ( who hasn’t returned to CC since posting his rant) makes it sound like he got NO need based aid at all, and a PLUS was what was suggested. That is far different than getting SOME need based aid, but less than other schools gave. If this student got no need based aid, then he/she has a high family income or very high assets. Otherwise, they would have seen something for need based aid.</p>
<p>And Swat doesn’t use an “arbitrary gross income”. The student would have filed a FAFSA, and linked to the IRS retrieval tool. Nothing “arbitrary” about what appears on your tax return.</p>
<p>If I were guessing, I’d say there is self employment income here…and some of,the deductions allowed by the IRS for tax purposes were added back in as income by Swat. The OP needs to know that MANY colleges do this when computing need based aid.</p>
<p>
Just to be clear, the OP did not post that his or her family income was this high. This income figure was cited by sally305 as an example of a different student’s situation.</p>
<p>I do believe posts like the OPs and particularly the one by an earlier student poster about Swarthmore (or any school’s fin aid) are important to all of us. Though I don’t know if this poster is correct because the info was limited and the post sounds more like a sound off, the earlier poster gave a lot of important info.</p>
<p>At least in one situation, we now have some indication that Carlton could be more generous, like A LOT more generous than Swarthmore in a situation where a family owns a business. That poster got very little from Swarthmore when accepted ED and lost out on appealing the decision. Yet, got a considerably larger package from Carlton with the same circumstances. </p>
<p>Because the NPC is very limited when it comes to family businesses and other situations, I do wish that the the Common Data included % of need met with the FAFSA EFC as the standard. When a school says it meets 100% of need but defines need very narrowly, I’d like to see that. Yes, by looking at a number of stats, running some NPCs one can get a general idea, but that info can be valuable for those who are looking for schools that are likely to meet FAFSA EFC, not some custom EFC.</p>
<p>I think it’s unrealistic to be able to come up with a report for the Common Data Set that would account for every situation. What might be better is for colleges to state up front that although they wish they could provide adequate need to every situation, they have limited funds and they use the information in the CSS to distribute these funds fairly according to their own formula.</p>
<p>It’s not a report, Oldmom, and it would not be much work to include that % in the Common data. The schools have the FAFSA EFC. They know what they give out in aid. They already do the calc for their own financial aid. I think it’s quite useful to see the varying % of need met as defined by EFC vs that of need met as they define it themselves. Especially since we have no idea of how varying schools define need. A little thing like the cap on home equity as multiple of AGI could make a big difference, but you have to really play around with a lot of NPCs to see this. It also might make some schools adjust their not so generous definitions of need when such info is showcased. Some schools that meet 100% or other high % of need as they define it, might be right there with schools that use FAFSA only and meet the same or similar % of need when using the same benchmarks.</p>
<p>I just wanted to be clear here, after reading some of the comments: Puffery is fine and every school does it, but not to Swarthmore’s extent. It’s not a game, or at least it shouldn’t be! Students commit themselves via “early decision” to schools, and when a school repeatedly, relentlessly assures applicants - and the media - that they will cover 100% of demonstrated need, it’s not unreasonable for an honest applicant to look at his or her financial situation and expect (hope, pray) that Swarthmore will understand how he needs help. Huge medical expenses (4 surgeries in 2 years), high housing costs because of the area (and because of elder care of grandparents!) and an underwater mortgage, a laid-off parent - but Swarthmore’s formula looks at the median mortgage (elderly grandparents can always go to a nursing home, I guess) and literally ignored all information that didn’t fit into a formula. Two other schools applied to - one with a small per-student endowment - actually read the narrative and offered more aid. If parents can’t take out loans because of financial issues and the student is unable to take out private loans either and a home equity loan is out of the question, too . . . well, if that’s not demonstrated need, then the word “demonstrated” must have assumed a new meaning lately. Schools can choose to give what they want, but not imply they’ll offer you what you demonstrably need in order to attend.</p>
<p>So what did Swarthmore’s net price calculator tell you before you applied, and how did that result compare to Swarthmore’s actual financial aid offer?</p>
<p>The things you are mentioning,medical expenses, supporting grandparents…those require a professional judgement on the part of the school. There is never a guarantee that one will receive additional aid based on this. In fact, there is no guarantee that it will be reviewed at all. </p>
<p>If one parent lost their job…when did that happen? Did the parent get a severance package? And what was the income with the other parent’s income? Many schools will only consider job loss after a period of time has passed because it IS possible that the parent will secure another job.</p>
<p>That you live in an expensive area with a high mortgage is your choice. That your house is underwater is unfortunate.</p>
<p>You KNEW these things when you applied to college. </p>
<p>If you applied binding early decision, knowing you needed significant financial aid, and committed to Swat with insufficient aid, that was not a good decision. </p>
<p>You knew you needed an affordable college given your family financial circumstances. Absolutely fine to apply to a variety of colleges, but apparently you expected the colleges to make adjustments instead of knowing that you would need to walk away from schools providing insufficient aid to meet your family situation. </p>
<p>thumper is correct, unfortunately. Your family made choices over the years that have led to your current predicament. I assume since you grew up in an expensive area, you have had the luxury of attending good schools–which in turn helped you get into competitive colleges. What about kids Swarthmore also wants to give financial aid to who have not been so fortunate…who REALLY need it, according to any measure? Picture another Swarthmore admit who comes from a low-income household (maybe there’s only one parent there in the first place) and also has issues of job loss, elder care, health insurance, etc. This kid (who also likely went to crappy schools and had other disadvantages) is also asking the college to help fund his education. Who do you think they would want to help more?</p>
<p>I do feel for you, as the decisions made by your family years ago are affecting your choices now. But from what you say, you have two other, more affordable, options on the table. I hope you take one of those and don’t look back.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think what the OP is saying is that Swarthmore really just slams the door on even a discussion of these types of items the OP is bringing up. I agree with him that at Swat the formula is the formula, and that is that. The feeling you get when you approach them for a review is almost like there is an eye-rolling and you-want-more-than-you-deserve attitude. You can tell when you ask that you are getting nothing no matter what you say. We didn’t feel that when we asked for a review at other schools, and other schools did adjust to varying degrees. Zippo adjustment at Swat. It certainly contributed to pushing them off D’s final choice list in the end (I sure wasn’t going to lobby for them!).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That figure is pretty low compared to a lot of other colleges. </p>
<p>OP, I am curious–are you going to attend one of your other choices? Are you satisfied with the offers you got from them?</p>
<p>I understand the OP’s frustration. Most of us believe what the schools say in their literature or what the high school GC’s say. “Apply. Worry about the money later. Schools are generous.” It is the building up of expectations that is the problem. We don’t have years to learn, we basically have one shot at applying to schools and figuring out how the FA works.</p>
<p>It is no different than any other marketing. “Big savings on cars. Thousands off your mortgage.” Thousands means different things to different people. Two thousand? Sixty thousand? How big is BIG?</p>
<p>I don’t think schools should promise anything. Why should Student A get a free education just because he’s unlucky enough to come from a lower income family (or one that ‘must’ live in a big house) and Student B gets nothing because his middle class family has no ‘need’ as defined by Swathmore? If Swathmore wants to attract Student A more than Student B, then it has a reason to give A money. Does it really want A more than B?</p>