<p>Actually, less than 20% of H admits go elsewhere, and although it’s a carefully guarded secret where they go, most of the evidence suggests that all but a handful go to Yale, Princeton, Stanford, or MIT. Over the years, I have seen a few cases on CC of kids who turn down a real, live Harvard acceptance for a branded full-ride scholarship at another world-class university (i.e., Michigan, Duke, UNC). There was also one kid who went to Vanderbilt, and the ever-famous curmudgeon’s daughter who went to Rhodes over Yale.</p>
<p>In real life, I have known two kids who turned down Harvard to go someplace we would all recognize as not a clear equivalent, and money had nothing to do with it either time. One went to the University of Indiana’s dance conservatory for a year before joining a national dance company. After a successful professional dance career, he went back to college at . . . Harvard. He’s now in a PhD program. The other went to Northwestern to study film making, and later said she had made a really dumb decision.</p>
<p>Out of curiosity, I did a very cursory google search about turning down H, and came up with (most are from CC): UVA, Boston College, Rice/Baylor med combo, Pomona, Baylor and Davidson. Don’t know if money was the issue, but it was quite likely part of the enticement.</p>
<p>P.S.</p>
<p>Just because a family can afford (or qualify for loans) to pay for H, doesn’t mean the cost is not an issue for them.</p>
<p>I think that’s much too hasty a conclusion. First, nearly 40% of charitable giving is to religious institutions. That’s why the states with the highest rates of charitable giving per household and as a percentage of total income are in the Bible Belt and in states with large Mormon populations like Utah and Idaho. I doubt there’s much of a shift in that type of giving; Mormons in Utah and Christian fundamentalists in Alabama are probably not likely to give much to Harvard in the first place, much less to cut back on their tithing to their religious institutions when Harvard is in a capital campaign.</p>
<p>But giving to a Harvard capital campaign takes a bigger slice out of secular giving, especially secular giving in the Northeast, where I’d venture upwards of 50% of Harvard’s donations come from. The Northeast also happens to be the region of the country with the lowest rates of charitable giving. Total charitable giving in the 6 New England states is only between $6 and $7 billion annually. It’s higher in New York ($11 billion) and New Jersey ($4 billion) but they’ve got their own charities to support, and the farther away from Cambridge, the lower the density of Harvard alums and Harvard loyalists in the population. There absolutely is competition–fierce competition–for those scarce philanthropic dollars, and anyone who has ever raised money for a non-profit knows it. In Massachusetts, especially, Harvard is the 800-pound gorilla in the room; when it demands to be fed, there’s less for everyone else.</p>
<p>I’m a small donor, not a philanthropist, but every university I’ve ever attended–and for that matter every one I’ve ever worked for–asks me for money. I don’t support all of them, and I have my priorities as to which I support the most. But when one makes a bigger ask in connection with a capital campaign, I’ll often respond, not by giving them everything they ask for, perhaps, but by upping my contribution. And when that happens, I’ll often cut back on what I’m giving the others, and what I’m giving my non-educational charities. I don’t think it’s any different for Thurston Howell III when he’s giving away his $1 million a year. It’s hard to describe this as anything other than “crowding out.”</p>
<p>Will it be felt in Atlanta, Chicago, or Los Angeles? Not likely. In Boston? I have no doubt of it.</p>
<p>^ I agree with post 45. it is a hard decision whether to accept some major scholarships or spend the money. It is not just for Harvard but any of the top schools which only provide financial aid and nothing else.</p>
<p>I think it is a safe assumption that the handful of merit-based full rides handed out at real competitors to HYP, like Duke and Chicago, are there to pull upper-middle-class students away from HYP. It probably works. (For obvious reasons, most of the awardees I know are those who turned the scholarship down and came to Harvard, but somebody said yes in each case.)</p>
<p>I have no basis for guessing how a Harvard capital campaign impacts donors’ other charitable donations. It’s not obvious to me that it comes out of other groups’ budgets dollar for dollar, but I have no evidence either way.</p>
<p>Close friends of mine turned down Yale for UNC (Morehead Scholarship) and HS for the University of Texas at Dallas (McDermott Scholarship.) You can read posts about the Yale<UNC right here, as his dad posted as EaDad. The UTD math prodigy ended up graduating from Stanford Law School. Eadad’s son is on his way to become a doctor with a diploma from one of the top medical schools in the country. The detour worked out quite well for them. Just as it did for the tuba playing princess from Waco! Another friend turned down H to accept an athletic scholarship at Virginia. </p>
<p>For non-monetary reasons, a different friend turned down H for the obscure University of Dallas. But it makes sense when you know he hesitated between becoming a priest or a doctor. UD has a stellar reputation in both subjects. Finally, a younger friend turned down H, Stanford, and MIT and attended the University of Texas at Austin because of its neuroscience program. </p>
<p>And, of course, if you accept the CC stories at face value and take with a huge grain of salt, there have been plenty of stories of students turning down HYPS for the Berkeley and Michigan of this world. Probably as many as HYPS accepts every year! Fwiw, the financial aid often works much better at HYPS than it does at Berkeley and other uber publics. Some (real) stories on CC can attest how that works. On this issue, it is good to remember than from the large number of cross-admits between Stanford and Berkeley, the number of students who ultimately enroll across the bay is a single digit one! ;)</p>
<p>You are all assuming that a charitable donation to a capital campaign gets sucked out of the economy. You build a lab- that provides jobs; in the near term to build, in the long term to operate. </p>
<p>The question is- who is a better steward of a dollar- Harvard, the government, or another non-profit institution. I can’t tell you that. But to assume that the donations are taking money out of Boston’s economy is just bad math. The donations go to fund other things- which have a multiplier effect. And if Harvard hires more people, there are more people paying taxes-- which theoretically, compensates for the tax favored status of donations to Harvard.</p>
<p>And I won’t touch the urban legends of who turns down Harvard and how many of them there are. People should go where they want to go; the cross-admit statistics from Harvard suggest that other than looking over their shoulder at MIT, Stanford, Princeton and Yale, the number of kids who opt for a different college is a pretty small number overall. So no, Harvard isn’t setting up a task force to figure out how to compete with University of Dallas any time soon.</p>
<p>Unless its an award like the Robertson at UNC and Duke, or a handful of others, nationally. I would advise a kid to go to HYPS, even with debt I would consider unreasonable elsewhere. </p>
<p>Just the professors alone will be worth it. </p>
<p>I know this isn’t popular to say, but it’s true.</p>
<p>The real question is how who were competitive for HYPS cut their losses to begin with and do not apply. There are many intelligent and accomplished people who simply do not want to apply even if they might be admitted.</p>
<p>No one suggested that the money is taken out of Boston’s economy. The question posed was whether there is more social value in advancing Harvard’s mission with these funds or in advancing the mission of other non-profits in the Boston area that arguably would lose donations because of Harvard’s capital campaign. </p>
<p>With regard to employment and tax collections in the Boston area: not so fast. Donations generate employment and taxes at Harvard AND and at other non-profits. There is no obvious reason to think that donations to Harvard have an edge in that respect. </p>
<p>To evaluate the effect of donations on overall economic activity, one would also have to consider which sectors have experienced reduced employment and tax collections over the years as a result of resources being diverted to non-profits such as Harvard. Therefore, it is not at all obvious that donations to Harvard have the effect of expanding overall economic activity. What is obvious is that they expand Harvard’s overall activity.</p>
<p>Nope. Harvard didn’t crowd out any of those charities. Thurston Howell III did. It was his priority, his money, his donation, and entirely his choice. Not Harvard’s. </p>
<p>Harvard is a college, not the mafia. The school is not capable of forcing someone to donate against their will.</p>
<p>Just out of curiosity, I calculated that Harvard’s $6.5 billion capital campaign works out to an average of $20,000 per living alumnus. I doubt this is the only capital campaign most alums will see in their lifetime. Hopefully those who received financial aid will “give back”.</p>
<p>^^Because force would be the only way a college can make someone donate against their intention or will. </p>
<p>People donating to Harvard does not imply that Harvard is getting money that rightfully belongs to charities. Where does this ridiculous misconception come from?</p>
<p>Based on Almapater’s number, $20000/alum, there are about 325,000 living H alumni. How could that be possible? I thought on average, each alum would have to donate a lot more to make that 6.5B.</p>
<p>It’s also possible that Thurston Howell III won’t listen to his accountant and he’ll just give more money out this year. That’s what we do at much more modest sums. I ignored the e-mail, but if I get a call, which I expect I will eventually, I’ll probably give them a few hundred. I won’t give less to other charities because I did.</p>