<p>I was doing efc calculations, and from what i see, it appears as though if i put my parents home equity value as liquid savings or as simple investments, the efc stays the same.</p>
<p>so, if someones home equity was 300k (and compared to liquid savings its not very liquid) but they had no liquid savings, could this lead to different a different efc than someone in the same situation but with 300k in liquid savings and no home equity instead?</p>
<p>For FAFSA it makes no difference if an asset is liquid or not. An asset is an asset. But home equity (for primary home) is not a reportable asset for FAFSA.</p>
<p>CSS schools all use home equity in different ways so it is hard to get an accurate CSS 'EFC' from the calculators. For instance some schools may not use home equity at all, others my cap it at a certain multiple of income, others may not cap it.</p>
<p>The expectation is that you can borrow against the home equity, not that you'll sell the house. Of course given the credit crunch, they might have to look at this differently until credit flow is restored.</p>
<p>be sure to note swimcatsmom's comment....you do NOT include the home equity in your primary home in EITHER liquid savings or investments. The FAFSA form clearly states that....it will be more clear when you do the actual form instead of one of the calculators. However, if you have to do the CSS Profile for any of your schools, you will have to report the home equity in the entry.</p>
<p>that sucks, cuz i looked on the project of student debt chart for the average assets for families of different income levels. and for families with like 150k income the average asset would be like 200k or something. so i guess if you own ur own home youll have way more than that i guess?</p>
<p>im only referring to schools that use IM so theyd include home equity.</p>
<p>Not necessarily. It is only the DIFFERENCE between the home value and the mortage or the NET equity that would considered. For many people, that amount may be negative under the current circumstances.</p>
<p>I can tell you that we had to delete Profile schools from our list (this was before all the tippy top schools put either limits on HE based on income or started special low income based programs. </p>
<p>The difference in FAFSA vs Profile aid for low income and high HE (owned a home on the west coast since the early 1980s we have not increased our mortgage amount since then, have actually decreased it, but the equity keeps going up) was dramatic. Now that one is through and one graduating soon I am very glad we did not sign up for those huge loan packages.</p>
<p>We still accessed an HELOC to cover EFC and cover the loan portion of aid some years.</p>
<p>If you do not get into one fo those amazing top schools and your home equity is a problem, there are still some small privates which use the FAFSA, so look for some of those to add into the mix</p>
<p>Our daughter is applying to some of the private LAC's in the pacific northwest. I was pleased to find that Willamette, Puget Sound, and Univ of Portland are all FAFSA-only schools. Lewis & Clark and Reed, her other two schools, are Profile.</p>
<p>Yes, but most of those FAFSA only schools you list above don't meet need and are not big endowment schools with lots of aid dollars. It's a double edged sword!</p>
<p>Well, Puget Sound meets on average 86% need with an average need based grant of 20k; U of P meets 89% need with an average need based grant of 14K, and Willamette meets 92% need with an average need-based grant of 20K. Those numbers are comparable to the % need met at many LAC's that take the Profile. By contrast, Lewis & Clark, which takes Profile, meets only 85% of need on average.</p>
<p>It will be interesting to see what those schools do this year with endowment issues. Take more full pays and meet higher percentage of need for those they want? Meet lower percent for more applicants? Just fill up with full pays with lower stats? Any guesses?</p>