<p>Look at their web page which states my point. The family with $40-$60K in income with a EFC of $3.7K still has another $6.7K in loans and work study.</p>
<p>[Office</a> of Financial Aid: Sample Aid Packages](<a href=“http://www.finaid.umich.edu/TopNav/AboutUMFinancialAid/SampleAidPackages.aspx]Office”>http://www.finaid.umich.edu/TopNav/AboutUMFinancialAid/SampleAidPackages.aspx)</p>
<p>*Look at their web page which states my point. The family with $40-$60K in income with a EFC of $3.7K still has another $6.7K in loans and work study.</p>
<p>Office of Financial Aid: Sample Aid Packages*</p>
<p>But, the loans and w-s are not part of “family contribution.” Those are part of the aid pkg. Are you adding the loans and ws to your family contribution and then saying that the EFC is much larger than it should be? </p>
<p>Since it sounds like your older child attends a super-elite school (no loans, etc), then I can see why the comparison may be shocking. however, it may not be really fair to compare the exceptional (super-elite) to a school that does provide very good aid. It’s like comparing a 10 carat diamond to a 3 carat. ;)</p>
<p>It’s not unreasonable for a school that gives very good aid to expect the student to pay for SOME of it.</p>
<p>Yes, k, which is reasonable. A few thousand in loans and self-help is not unreasonable at all. That’s very generous IMO. That doesn’t even max out Stafford loans.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But Kdog mentioned that daughter IS maxing out Stafford loans.</p>
<p>
I don’t know what my EFC was the first year (I still had a full time job) but I don’t think it was more than around 10K (is that reasonable?). In that year we were offered a whopping $3K in grants and $8K in loans and work study with the $11K gap. We did not have a PLUS loan the last two years after I lost my job and our EFC was <$5K but she still had the maximum Stafford loans, Perkins and work study.</p>
<p>Right, lerkin which is something I don’t understand, hence why I asked if she/he ever asked for a review.</p>
<p>
I never said it was unreasonable but it is not what I define as generous. Having an EFC of less than $5K is not an enviable position (at least when it comes to paying the bills) and she HAS maxed out the loans (she is at just under $26K as of the end of junior year). I would guess that most people have a higher EFC so their packages would be even lower.</p>
<p>To the OP, Sorry to hijack this thread. You determine what you believe is generous. ;)</p>
<p>OP, to answer your question, if you have a LOW EFC then yes they meet 100% of the need but expect loans as a part of meeting the need. If you have a higher EFC (i.e over 10K) then expect there to be a gap that you have to figure out how to meet.</p>
<p>When does one fill out the CCS/PROFILE vs the FAFSA?</p>
<p>Umich may seem more generous to those who qualify for full Pell because then total grants will be much higher when compared to loans.</p>
<p>I’m guessing that the instate COA is about $26k or so? So, a Full Pell student might get about $7k in loans, $2k in work study, and about $17k in grants. </p>
<p>I do think that UMich either made an error with Kdog’s award…or…the school is expecting the family to pay more because the older child’s school is SUPER generous.</p>
<p>
But Pell is offered by the federal government and not the school so it is not them being more generous. Also, if you lose a outside scholarship, expect your loan to increase and not your grant. When our great state governor did away with the Promise scholarship 3 years ago we were forced to increase our loan to compensate. Since you mentioned my son’s school, when his Pell was reduced, they increased his scholarship to make up the difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So? Schools count on federal and state aid to help subsidize students that need more. They count on that aid. </p>
<p>You really can NOT compare Yale to U of M. </p>
<p>U of M promises to meet need for instate student with Stafford loans, self-help, grants, etc. Personally, if a school promised to meet need with reduced loans like U of M does, I would be pretty confused about why there was an 11k gap and would ask for an explanation. </p>
<p>OP, I have a lot of friends and family at U of M. I go to State so I have absolutely zero reason to lie to make U of M look better ;). I grew up just a bit outside of Ann Arbor. Kdog is honestly the only person I’ve heard INSTATE call U of M stingy. I have never heard that before. I would explore U of M’s website to see typical aid packages. I believe they have a calculator on there as well but I could be mistaken.</p>
<p>Since you mentioned my son’s school, when his Pell was reduced, they increased his scholarship to make up the difference</p>
<p>I think it can create a somewhat of a warped expectation of aid when a first child attends a HYPS school. I know someone who’s having a similar issue after first child went to Stanford. Second child is attending a UC, which gives very good aid to low income, but when compared to S, it doesn’t seem so.</p>
<p>As for…“if you lose your outside scholarship, expect loans to increase,” …I don’t see how that can happen UNLESS the student wasn’t offered full Stafford and Perkins to begin with. Adding more Plus wouldn’t be fair since Plus isn’t aid. </p>
<p>If an outside scholarship as a frosh was substituted for “self help” (loans/ws), then of course loans/WS will get added (or increased) once the outside scholarship goes away. That’s because the outside scholarship substituted for loans/ws in the beginning…it didn’t sub for grants.</p>
<p>An instate student is already getting a huge discount (almost like a grant). compare the instate vs OOS rate. </p>
<p>Yes, a full Pell student would be getting SOME money from the feds…but would still be getting over $10k in university grants. VERY few publics can give $10k in institutional grants each year.</p>
<p>University of Michigan is “generous” to its in state residents in terms of financial aid as compared to most colleges in the United States by far. Very, very few colleges meet full need EVEN WITH SELF HELP. I only know of two other state schools that guarantee to meet need and I have no idea how their definition of aid compares to that of UM, nor do I know how much self help they put into their packages. But most schools gap and gap badly. Most schools don’t even give aid–you get whatever federal and state money you would get at any school in that state, not a dime of university money. So UM is very generous as compared to the vast majority of the colleges in the US.</p>
<p>However, if you want to list those schools that are need blind in admissions AND guarantee to meet 100%$ of need, UM probably does not do so well as compared to those well endowed and generous schools. Absolutely, it is no Harvard with its aid packages nor would I expect it to be able to fund students as these top colleges can. That it can guarantee to work out some way for all instate kids to go there is remarkable enough to me.</p>
<p>There is a niche where UM is better than a number of these well endowed schools, and that is if you are a top student. You can get merit money at UM, something most schools that guarantee to meet full need and are need blind, very rarely give. An instater with good stats and profile can do very well with scholarships and/or aid, even without need.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>Agreed.</p>
<p>And when you consider how COAs are calculated, they include a few thousand for personal expenses and travel. It’s very reasonable for (most) schools to expect students to pay for those things. </p>
<p>Does UMich calculate a “student contribution”?</p>
<p>
I guess it’s all relative to what you compare it to. ;)</p>
<p>To romanigypsyeyes, I never used the word “stingy” I just don’t believe “generous” is the word. Perhaps it is because I can compare it to schools that really are.
From an instate comparison, I believe both Oakland and Wayne State provide better scholarships (at least from a merit perspective). At U-M my son was offered $1500 for his stats (35 ACT score and 4.0 UW GPA) whereas both Oakland and WSU offered full tuition.</p>
<p>I don’t see a need to belabor the point and my summation is very accurate on what one can expect from U-M in relation to a financial aid award.</p>
<p>From an instate comparison, I believe both Oakland and Wayne State provide better scholarships (at least from a merit perspective). My son was offered $1500 for his ACT score whereas both Oakland and WSU offered full tuition.</p>
<p>You’re comparing the merit from a much higher ranked school to ones that are ranked much lower. That can be found again and again. There are even lower ranked schools that might have offered your son a full ride (tuition, room, board, etc). At a school like WSU, your son’s stats were likely spectacular and very rare. </p>
<p>If the amount of merit offered is being considered, look at it from the standpoint of someone who doesn’t qualify for ANY need-based aid. That person may think that his lack of aid from Yale means that Yale isn’t generous, while X school is generous because he was given a full ride merit from there.</p>
<p>Agree, Michigan is a public university. One cannot compare a public institution with a private institution apples to apples. Cost-wise it is the most expensive university in Michigan but still meets need for in-state students…need that is determined by the Profile and FAFSA. Also the number of “no loan” schools is dwindling…and can probably be counted on one hand so the fact that your student is using federal direct loans is really not an unusual circumstance for a family with high need. PLUS loans are a choice for parents to cover the expected family contribution. </p>
<p>Kdog…everyone is telling you that if you believe there is an error in your parent contribution you should ask for a review. If there is an $11,000 gap AFTER your $5000 EFC, full federal direct loans, any grants you absolutely should sit and go through your Profile. I’m assuming you are in-state otherwise all this discussion is moot since Michigan does not meet need for out of state kids, so schedule time when you get yourself to Ann Arbor and sit down with someone. Michigan can be more expensive than sending your kids out of state…no one is saying that UofM is the most affordable/less costly school for ALL Michigan students. That statement can be made for many states but not Michigan but Michigan does claim to meet need for in-state so if your need as determined by FAFSA and profile is NOT being met then you should find out why.</p>
<p>Finally, if cost was a huge factor to you then why did you not send your student to one of the directionals where they probably WOULD have gotten automatic merit for their test scores and GPA? There is a huge difference between meeting financial need and discounting tuition to get students that will help the college achieve it’s collective GPA/test score reporting… Uof M doesn’t have a problem filling it’s slots with kids that achieve those test score/GPA goals…they don’t have to discount tuition to get those in-state kids.</p>
<p>momofthreeboys,</p>
<p>Our PLUS loan was 3 years ago so there is no point in asking for a judgment. Once our EFC dropped below $6K the awards only had maximum Stafford loans and Perkins in addition to work study. As I stated numerous times, I didn’t say U-M was the most expensive nor did I use any words like stingy. My only argument is using the word “very generous” but I guess you could find schools that would make them look that way. There are other privates schools that do define that term (outside of the Ivies) and I was able to compare them with U-M when my son was applying. I can tell you that U-M was the least generous (at least from a percentage of COA covered by scholarships/grants) of all the schools he applied to.</p>