<p>Yes, all the issues you mention (issues that might keep a low-income family from applying) are considered by Harvard's admissions and financial aid staff. (William Fitzsimmons is dean of the combined admissions and financial aid staffs at Harvard.) There used to be some really detailed articles linked to from the Harvard Financial Aid Initiative site that I no longer see on the Web. In some cases I have traveled over to my alma mater's huge academic library to look up the monographs cited in those articles. </p>
<p>I beg everyone's pardon for assuming that that background is well known--perhaps it is not widely reported in mass media, but it is familiar to scholars of higher education. There are a lot of different studies, some based on the longitudinal data sets set up years ago by the federal government, that consistently show that low-ability, high-income students fare better at getting into college and completing college than high-ability, low-income students. A lot of economists, sociologists, and psychologists think that is an appalling waste of human talent. </p>
<p>The focus of this thread is starting to shift to low-income families, and that is not who the recent H initiative is targeting. It is intended to reach families like many I know, professional and well-educated, not at all ignorant about their chances at receiving financial aid from non-merit schools. I suspect H is more familiar with the mind-set of large parts of the country than some of the posters on cc. I personally know quite a few families in the current target income group who have worked long and hard to establish a comfortable level of income, and who simply do not believe the difference in experience and preparation (for grad, professional school, etc) between top Ivy schools and top merit schools is worth giving up such a large chunk of current and future income. The students from these families attend schools like Rice, Wash U and Vanderbilt on significant merit scholarships. </p>
<p>Will families of this sort be more inclined to encourage applications to H now? I believe so. Unlike the low-income families nmd refers to in post 161, these are not families unable to afford application fees and concerned about being out of their depth socially. They simply do not want to destroy their retirement budgets and tell the extended family members who rely on them that junior's college expenses have eaten up every extra penny.</p>
<p>I agree with midmo, and my family is an example. My H and I both have graduate degrees, work fulltime, and our combined AGI is about $90,000. We live in an economically depressed area and have little job security. With a child being offered a full ride at in-state colleges as a NMF, it's hard to justify spending $20,000+ a year for Harvard or another elite college, knowing you have other kids coming up who will need college assistance and your first child will probably want to pursue a grad or professional degree. The choice for a family like ours has been $0 at a state school versus $80,000+ over four years at a Harvard or other elite college. For a family like ours, this new initiative makes applying to Harvard a possibility at least.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The focus of this thread is starting to shift to low-income families, and that is not who the recent H initiative is targeting.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with this statement. But I think the recent Harvard announcement still has an effect on families who are near the median United States income (that is, near the boundary of the previously announced Harvard Financial Aid Initiative income levels and the low end of the income levels mentioned in the December 2007 announcement). Some families know that they can apply, and then see what offer they get. But there are still a lot of families that assume that their offer of financial aid will be so inadequate that it is not even worth applying. The more Harvard talks up having a BROAD range of incomes subject to rather low out-of-pocket payments by families, the more the lower end families can believe that they might as well apply.</p>
<p>Interesting:
At my first school, some fellow students and I were talking about where we had applied. The two said they hadn't applied to any Ivy Leagues, because those schools didn't give out ANY merit scholarships! And being of very low income, they needed the money. My response: "yo, dummies" (okay I didn't say that) Ivy leagues meet your full NEED, had you have gone, you would have a FULL scholarship, instead of the partial merit scholarships all three of us are on here." </p>
<p>So maybe ^^^ is right, and this will get the word out. </p>
<p>And just to make my life easier, does anyone know, or have a link, as to what EXACTLY Harvard is doing in its financial aid??</p>
<p>whatever4...
The $120,000 to $180,000 10% percent range has provoked the "wow" factor in the press, but people like you and me are potentially affected by this in a big way.
A $90,000 AGI (halfway between 60K and 120K) would generate an expected annual contribution of $4500. That's less than your kid or mine would cost living at home. The Harvard education is thrown in for free.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That's less than your kid or mine would cost living at home. The Harvard education is thrown in for free.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's an important point. Harvard's cost of attendance includes room and board. Already my son has been to one summer program where our net cost was less than it would have cost to buy him groceries for the same number of weeks. Nice.</p>
<p>curious: "I can't say about the numbers. We along with Harvard will have to wait for the data to show up but logically if any new students are enticed to apply to Harvard and some of those are admitted (and go there) they will displace someone else who would have been admitted under the old system. That does not require data to support it's just logical, unless they expand the size of the entering class."</p>
<p>Even when the data come in you still can't isolate which factor cause the change in data distribution more. Dropping EA/ED or Change of this FA policy?</p>
<p>I agree with someone who has said earlier, it probably just mean to attract more applicants to bring down the acceptance rate.....Some talented kids who already got accepted by one of their first choice college in EA rounds might consider dropping Harvard from their RD list. However with FA package like this, they might as well send an application to Harvard to leave options open. Not to mention the big brand name in their parents' mind.</p>
<p>Tufts eliminates loans for low-income students</p>
<p>MEDFORD, Mass. (AP) — Tufts University is making it easier to afford attending the school by replacing loans with grants for undergraduate students whose families make less than $40,000 a year.</p>
<p>Dean of Undergraduate Admissions Lee Coffin says the program will enable some of the neediest families to send their children to Tufts.</p>
<p>The current freshman class already is benefiting from the program, which will now be extended to future freshman classes. The university granted $42 million in financial aid this year.</p>
<p>Tufts has about 5,000 undergraduates, 40 percent of whom receive some sort of financial aid. Tufts tuition is about $49,000 per year.</p>
<hr>
<p>Hmm. Only 40% receive aid. And tuition isn't $49,000 -- but tuition, room and board add up to that.</p>
<p>It is going to be based on a Harvard formula which considers assets. They will look at a family's "entire picture" as they have in the past. Home equity will no longer be a factor.</p>
<p>A lot of my friends family in this target income group or above. We are all profesional families with double income. In area we live, a double profesional income family easiely exceed this $180k level. However the cost to live here and make money is also very high. Each of us has to spend $35 (commute + lunch) a day just going to work to make money. Typically, About $60k goes to federal and state taxes. A typical mid size single family house in a decent school district cost around $800k, with property tax $12k. A mortgate payment around $40k. And on top of this since the money earned is not captal gain, about $20k goes to social security and medicaid tax for a double earning family....even with AGI $180k will leave family about $50k. This is even before utility, grocery, gas, etc. ... now compare a full ride with merit scholarship and $45k you do have to think it twice..... Most of us (first generation of imigrants) reasoning like this: without ivie education we are able to go this far, no reason our kids, with more advantages than us, wouldn't go this far w/o ivie education.....but still some think ivy is still ivy, if we can get some finantial break, it would be nice. </p>
<p>I'm suprised though, in this capitalist country, so many ppl's view on this board are so much more socialism than a socialized country. If you can't afford Rolex, buy an Omega, if you can't afford Omega, buy a Seiko. They all can tell you the correct time.....guess my point is if your parents can't afford to pay ivy education for you now, make sure you work hard and earned (merit scholarship, future salary) more to pay for your kids in future. </p>
<p>I really hope some day college admission is totally race/gender/need blind!</p>
<p>ETA, twinmom, "Home equity will no longer be a factor" is not necessary a good thing. If you still have home mortgage and some liquadity in your saving. In a case like this better empty your saving acount pay off the mortgage. According to the info session provided by Princeton finantial officer. Since they take out your primary resident house out of picture, any loan mortgate payment along with it also gone out of picture.</p>
<p>I would expect that Harvard, as before, would not only include assets (excepting primary homes) but also liabilities. This would include mortgage. In the past, it has also included private school fees which surely must count as discretionary spending.</p>
<p>anotherNJmom -- you describe what sounds like our life but we live in the southeast. Homes not qute as expensive here but salaries not so high. I've received a number of gentle reprimands on here to the effect that I'm rich and just don't know it. This is beginning to remind me of the mortgage loan crisis. I'm being told that we "qualify" to pay full freight but my common sense tells me differently. I think it's very easy for those at lower incomes to imagine that just a bit higher on the ladder the living is easy. Just not true. Moreover, job security can be less. My H and I have been discussing this issue almost nonstop since Friday when D was accepted at her EA school. If she visits and loves it above all others on her list who accept her -- then we will pay the full freight and cross our fingers that layoffs and health crises don't strike. I wish these schools would take into account how LONG a family has been at a given income. This is very significant. Those at a high income for a significant period have had a much bigger opportunity to accrue savings. In our case our income is very recent. Oh well. Whining gets you no where, I guess. One impact of the cost however will be that we will probably insist that D major in something "practical" vs evolutionary biology or anthropology. I hate to do that but I'm not sure we can stand to have her "find herself" at a cost of $50K per year.</p>
<p>my family makes what many consider a lot. but when you factor in the ups and downs and how that comes and goes based on job changes or the market, if one year is bad, another is used to catch up. so when they use last years as a guide, it is far from accurate. then you factor the costs of paying for multiple kids in college (3) AND the house and the transportation and the food, etc. the well off are not as well off as you would think. for everyone that makes less that looks at others and thinks we are rich, remember we get no breaks. rich is being able to pay 50,000 for one year of college and it not changing your bank account much. try doing that for my s and b and me and you can believe few can do that unless the income in followed by at least 6 zeros. one family we know sold their house so that the equity would not hurt them. </p>
<p>I completely agree with the lady that said it should be:</p>
<p>need blind, race blind, sex blind, where nothing counts except for how well you can do at the school in question. the rich get in, the low income get in but the middle (at least what i call middle which is 200,000-500,000) are stuck.</p>
<p>"I think it's very easy for those at lower incomes to imagine that just a bit higher on the ladder the living is easy. Just not true. Moreover, job security can be less." </p>
<p>Exactly. To think, most of us (me and my friends's family) are still shopping at discounted department store; cutting cupons for groceries; working in NYC but never went to Broadway show; etc. ... while all the same time see those a little bit lower on the ladder spend tons shopping cart loaded clothes; luxiouse vacations; etc. Make you wonder if the system is build to 'punish' those hard working, saving up, self made families....</p>
<p>I'm kind relieved when our kid got EA to one of his first choice schools, not only because it is a great honor that he got accepted via EA. But also this is one of the only two top schools in the nation that provided some kind merit scholarships......Having seen/heard enough of our friend family's 'delimmas' between parents (who prefer kid took the full 'free ride' honor program at State Flagship or other non ivies but still good school and provide full ride 'merit' scholarship) and kids (who wants to go the 'need based' ivies like elite school); he is 'smart' enough not to put any of those schools mailed to offer 'full ride' programs in his list. So leave us no choice when the time to decide.....On the other hand we felt like we 'owe' him at least that much to pay for the college where ever he chose to go. During his 3.5 year high school, never once we met with HS GC or get involved in his school work remotely like 'helicopter parents' (disscussed here in another thread), the only thing we did is to driving him around to the activities he chose to go. He took the initiatives take care all his course select, ECs, etc. I don't know if I should feel ashamed of myself. But I definitely feel proud of him....Besides at very young age, we told him we will take the resposible to make the money and prepare for his college education (and even prepared to sell the house or take second mortgage off). He should do his best to make it into whatever the top college he chose not to worry about the cost. He did just that. And consider he contribute to the money we saved for his education as well, since he has been denied a lot chances of McDonald meals, toys, nice clothes, etc. as he grown up. I just felt I own him this much to pay. .... but still when time comes, seeing almost everyone else get some kind of 'aid' or 'break'. You know the feeling.</p>
<p>But, mammall, if your daughter's top EA school is 'need based' you don't have to worry about 'lay off' though. My H half joke with me the other day, 'now you don't have to worry about lay off. The college will pay for you.'....at least this is some kind of comfort for me.</p>
<p>"can't see anything that supports your statement about H losing apps based on price."</p>
<p>Harvard loses as many admitted students to full rides as it does to YPSMC combined, and merit aid is gaining ground as a competitor to Harvard. When I guided my first Harvard tour (97-98), about 25% of the ~400 kids who said no to Harvard each year took a full ride. Last I heard, it's now about half.</p>
<p>"Each of us has to spend $35 (commute + lunch) a day just going to work to make money."</p>
<p>"at least what i call middle which is 200,000-500,000"</p>
<p>I think these two comments reflect two sides of the same fallacy. Sure, $450k is a "middle" salary if you view all kinds of luxuries as necessities. Lunch is a fixed cost, and you can't work without it? Don't they make peanut butter in New Jersey? I brought a dollar-fifty bag lunch to my six-figure corporate skyscraper job every day and lived to tell the tale (and bank the balance). The same goes for other luxuries some families feel entitled to, like having a house with a yard in metro New York, a single bedroom for each kid, etc. If luxuries are important to you and you think they're worth the money, of course you should buy them. But those are choices you make, not externalities imposed on you.</p>
<p>The United States middle quintile of income is a much lower level of income. I don't think there is any state in the country, certainly none outside the northeast, where the top end of the middle quintile even reaches $100,000 in annual income.</p>