Merit Aid Percentage from Common Data Set

Parents Forum
1

<p>(Apologies in advance: I love crunching the numbers....)</p>

<p>In addition to the average "merit aid" dollar amount that is sometimes tossed around for a school, some of us potential "full-pay" parents with non-superstat kids would like to know what fraction of those students who do not qualify for need-based aid actually get "merit" aid. </p>

<p>The USNews numbers this year give the "Average non-need-based grant/scholarship for full-time undergraduate students" but don't tell how many students get that type of aid. For example, Hopkins shows up with an average non-need scholarship amount of $27,471. Sounds good, but they don't bother to tell you that there were only 14 of those given to a Freshman class of 1206, 621 of whom did not qualify for need-based aid. So only 2% (14 out of 621) of the non-need kids got "merit money" You have to go to the real common data set numbers to figure out that fraction. </p>

<p>This can be done by dividing the number of students with non-need awards by the number of non-need students (those who don't qualify for need-based aid). This is easy if you have the line-item entries in the financial aid section (section H) of the common data set tables. First, calculate the number of students were determined not to have financial need by subtracting the number of students with need in H2c from the total number of students in H2a. Then divide the number of students awarded non-need based scholarships in H2n by this number. The percentage of non-need-qualifying students getting non-need-based scholarships is:</p>

<p>% = 100% * H2n / (H2a-H2c)</p>

<p>I did this for a few schools (freshmen only) and found some interesting results</p>

<p>Legend:
School........
non-need kids with awards %;
$average non-need award
(number of non-need awards / number of non-need freshman)</p>

<p>Bucknell............6%; $11,126 (30 / 465)
Case Western....71%; $20,329 (189 / 265)
Pitt..................18%; $13,504 (294 / 16544)
Maryand............30%; $5,441 (695 / 2298)
Delaware...........28%; $6,073 (654 / 2342)
RPI...................94%; $14,085 (436 / 464)<br>
WPI..................87%; $12,288 (158 / 181)
Rhodes..............75%; $13,060 (200 / 265)
Smith................13%; $8,973 (35 / 272)
Dartmouth.........1%; $450 (4 / 562)
Brown................0%; $0 (0 / 863)
Princeton...........0%; $0 (0/559)
JHU..................2%; $27,471 (14/621)</p>

<p>Obviously these numbers don't tell the whole story (who gets these awards, in-state vs out-of-state differences, the mix of big and smalll awards, total cost of attendance, etc.), but there are some interesting observations to be made:</p>

<p>If your EFC is greater than the COA, you gotta love Case, RPI, WPI, and Rhodes. These schools are pretty much discounting tuition for the majority of the kids.</p>

<p>If you aren't one of the lucky 14 Superstars at Hopkins, get ready for the second mortgage.</p>

<p>If your neighbor tells you they got a full-ride academic scholarship from Brown or Princeton, you know they are full of it.</p>

<p>Wish I had the Common Data Set for Rochester! Any other schools with good numbers?</p>

2

<p>Interesting stuff, and a great first cut. I trotted off to take a look at the Case website. By way of comparison of methodology, their admission guide states that 50% of students are awarded merit-based aid. They don’t specify if that’s admitted or enrolled students.</p>

3

<p>Nice post! Really good information to have. Other posters have said that in the past U.S. News did provide the percentage of kids who got non-need based merit aid, but for some reason that is no longer listed in the premium edition. So you do have to dig.
Some schools don’t post their Common Data Sets, which is a bummer – I think I tried to find Miami of Ohio’s once and couldn’t find it anywhere.</p>

4

<p>Yeah, I remember from a couple of years back that Case is a little inconsistent with their numbers. I’m reaping the benefits, though, for two more years or as long as my kid keeps his 3.0. When you try to figure out merit money within the need-based population, you don’t know how they work the numbers. That’s why I separated out the non-need population. </p>

<p>USNews has a list of the schools with the most merit $ percentages [Best</a> Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/most-merit-aid]Best”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/most-merit-aid), but I don’t see RPI, WPI, or Case, so have to wonder how they pulled it together… They had Rhodes at 43%, which is close to my 42% number, though.</p>

5

<p>@SlitheyTove, the published data from Case are consistent with Dad’o’2’s calculation, because he’s pulled out the students who qualified for need-based aid. Case had 1045 first-year students according to the Common Data set for 2008. Of them, 265 did not qualify for need-based aid, so 780 did. If 50% of the students received merit aid, that’s 523 (give or take) receiving merit aid. Of those, 189 were the non-need, merit-aid students, leaving 334 students who received merit-aid and qualified for need-based aid. The % of non-need students receiving merit aid is 71%, the % of students qualified for need-based aid who receive merit-based aid is 43%. The overall % is 50%.</p>

6

<p>The USN&WR 2009 Ultimate College Guide says 22% at Case received merit awards, averaging $18,140. 62% received need based gift aid averaging $20,998.
In spite of throwing such discounts around, 59% graduated in 2007 owing student loans averaging $32,195.
I would hate to run Case’s admissions and financial aid office. All this for a 20.8% yield.</p>

7

<p>Maybe I’m missing something but couldn’t some of the kids that received need based awards also get the merit awards?</p>

8

<p>Hmm, interesting. I relied on SlitheyTove’s figure of 50% receiving merit-aid overall. If it’s only 22%, then the non-need, merit-aid students already account for 82% of all students receiving merit aid, and far fewer of the students who also qualified for need-based aid got merit aid. (??) Maybe part of the discrepancy can be explained by considering the fraction of upperclassmen who received some merit-based aid vs. the fraction of first-year students?
Also, lol, danas, agreed about running their offices.</p>

9

<p>One problem with the data is that some of the kids getting non need merit awards are also need students. I was one of them as was my H, and many others I know. It’s often not clear if merit money doesn’t take some need into consideration. I know some awards are given to kids who are clearly non need and such superstars that the school plain flat out wants to buy them, but when you get down to a group of kids who are pretty much equal in “points” , would financial need factor into the equation? </p>

<p>Now in this area, it is pretty clear to me that a number of Catholic schools, both high schools and colleges, do give purely merit awards. Too many well heeled kids getting hefty awards for that not to be the case, or at least the need part of the profile is not heavily emphasized.</p>

<p>A private school (not college) near where we lived gives out a full scholarship to one student that is supposed to be merit based. The entire merit program is supposed to be that way. However, in the 12 years I lived there, I, nor anyone I know, can come up with a single name of anyone who got more than the token lower amounts who was not high need. Someone I know who worked at the school said that the criteria did included challenges and adversities overcome, and that is where, yes, family financials came into the picture. So really, unless your family or child had some heavy duty material in that area, despite how well the testing, grades, ecs, interviews, etc go, it is highly unlikely that a substantial award is forthcoming.</p>

10

<p>danas–</p>

<p>Where did you get the 22% number? I can’t find in in my USNWR 2009 data</p>

<p>Financial Aid Statistics : Case Western Reserve University </p>

<p>First-year Students<br>
Percent of first-year students applying for financial aid: 84 %
Percent of first-year students determined to have financial need: 70 %
Percent of first-year students whose financial need was fully met: 86 %
Average financial aid package for full-time, first-year students: $33,900<br>
Percent of first-time, full-time students who received need-based financial aid: 70 %
Average need-based scholarships or grants for first-year, full-time students: $23,972<br>
Percent of first-time, full-time students who received need-based grants: 69 %
Average self-help aid, such as work study or loans awarded to first-year students: $7,905<br>
Percent of first-time, full-time students who received self-help aid: 56 %
Average need-based loan (excluding PLUS or other private loans) for first-year students: $5,995<br>
Average percent of need met for first-year, full-time students: 90 %
Average non-need-based grant/scholarship for full-time first-year students: $19,409<br>
Average athletic scholarship for first-year students: N/A<br>
Full-time Undergraduates<br>
Percent of undergraduate students applying for financial aid: 70 %
Percent of undergraduate students determined to have financial need: 63 %
Percent of undergraduate students whose financial need was fully met: 89 %
Average financial aid package for full-time undergraduate students: $33,565<br>
Percent of full-time students who received need-based financial aid: 63 %
Average need-based scholarships or grants for full-time undergraduates: $20,998<br>
Percent of full-time students who received need-based grants: 62 %
Average self-help aid, such as work study or loans awarded to full-time students: $8,016<br>
Percent of full-time students who received self-help aid: 53 %
Average need-based loan (excluding PLUS or other private loans) for full-time students: $6,135<br>
Average percent of need met for full-time students: 90 %
Average non-need-based grant/scholarship for full-time undergraduate students: $18,140<br>
Average athletic scholarship awarded to full-time students: N/A<br>
Indebtedness<br>
Average total indebtedness of 2007 graduating class: $32,195<br>
Percent of 2007 graduating class who have borrowed 59 %
2007-2008 Aid Awarded to In- and Out-of-State Students (Public Schools Only)<br>
Average non-need-based gift aid awarded to in-state students: N/A<br>
Average non-need-based gift aid awarded to out-of-state students: N/A</p>

11

<p>"Maybe I’m missing something but couldn’t some of the kids that received need based awards also get the merit awards? "
that is what happens at USC- a top student may qualify for USC’s NMF 1/2 tuition scholarship, but also qualifies for additional need based aid.</p>

12

<p>@twomules, yes. If SliveyTove’s figure of 50% receiving merit aid applies to the first-year students, then 334 students who qualified for need-based aid received merit aid. If the correct figure is only 22%, as supplied by danas, then there were only 41 students who qualified for need-based aid and received merit aid. So, somewhere between 41 and 334! </p>

<p>Someone with more time might be able to disentangle the differences in the precise definitions that lead to the different figures (50% vs 22%), which are causing the variation. Or maybe someone from Case will weigh in. </p>

<p>Many universities might well have a different fraction of merit aid support for first-year students vs. upperclassmen (limited-duration recruiting scholarships, scholarships only for students already there, etc.).</p>

13

<p>Oh, um, nevermind. :wink: I thought Dad’o’2 had the non-need awards to non-need students, but then saw that the figure was all non-need awards. But now I don’t quite see how they get up to the 22% figure, even.</p>

14

<p>OK, here is how I interpreted Case Western’s Common Data Set numbers (2008-09) </p>

<p>Freshman numbers:</p>

<p>(H2a) Total Freshmen: 1026
(H2c) # with financial need: 761
(H2d) # awarded any financial aid (need) 730
(H2g) # awarded need-based aid who got non-need based aid: 593</p>

<p>So 593 out of 730 or 81% of the kids who qualified for need-based aid got “merit” aid as part or all of their financial aid package</p>

<p>(H2n) # with no financial need awarded “merit” aid: 189</p>

<p>So 189 out of (1026-761)=265 or 71% of non-need kids got “merit” aid</p>

<p>So overall, (593+189)=782 of the 1026 freshman or 76% got “merit” aid.<br>
So I have idea where danas’s 22% or Case’s 50% numbers came from!</p>

<p>By the way, when I use all students instead of freshmen, the number drops from 71% to 58%, still not too bad.</p>

15

<p>Over in the “Admissions Gap” thread, I tossed out some of this information for the University of Chicago.</p>

<p>Chicago apparently does not even publish its Common Data Sets, so you have to piece it together from their web site. The picture is not complete because it is not clear how many merit awards go to kids also judged to have need. </p>

<p>The key information as far as I can determine is this:
they offer 30 full-tuition merit scholarships, and an additional 100 scholarships at ~$10K each. This is for an entering class of ~1300. However, one poster has suggested that if an admitted student turns an offer down, they do not re-allocate it.</p>

<p>Let’s assume a high percentage of admitted students who are offered these scholarships do accept them; also assume that other merit awards such as institutionally-sponsored NM grants compensate for the ones turned down. In that case, a number approaching 10% of Chicago’s entering class is getting merit aid. That would be pretty high, I think, compared to other highly selective private universities (many of which don’t grant merit aid at all).</p>

16

<p>More from the Case admission guide file (data as of Sept. 2008): 93% of enrolled students (they specify enrolled for this statistic) receive aid. Total Case gift aid awarded is $17 million, with an average award of $33,900 and 93% of enrolled students receiving aid. These numbers aren’t fitting together in the way I’d expect. 93% of enrolled students is around 3800 undergrads, and $17 million divided by 3800 is about $4500. There must be loan and maybe federal grant money included in that average award number.</p>

17

<p><em>Sheepishly offers to resolve one discrepancy, anyway</em> I added in the 19 “Other first-year, degree seeking students” to the “Degree-seeking first-time freshmen,” which converts Dad’o’2’s figure of 1026 to mine of 1045. Also, retracting my earlier retraction, line H2g does (or should, anyway) make it possible to do exactly as Dad’o’2 claimed: it gives the number of need-qualified students receiving non-need aid, thus making it possible to separate out non-need, merit-aid students. <em>Will now stop, before needing an erratum to the erratum to the erratum</em></p>

18

<p>We get just enough information to totally confuse us.</p>

19

<p>I just noticed that in section H1 of the CDS, they list “Institutional Non-need-based $” which notes “(Exclude non-need-based aid used to meet need)”</p>

<p>That is probably a really-good number to use.</p>

<p>For Case Western, this number is $17,533,772
For Bucknell, it is $1,588,542.<br>
Bucknell also provides $8,500,000 in non-need parent loans and $2,945,634 in “tuition waivers.” </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>If you add up the need and non-need grant, self-help, and other, you get about $129million. Divide that by 3800 and you get $34,947.</p>

<p>Wish I hadn’t even started this thread–I’m so confused!</p>

20

<p>Just wanted to acknowledge that the analysis originally posted by Dad’o’2 is correct, based on the Common Data Set, and its definitions. It is also extremely useful. Thanks, Dad’o’2! </p>

<p>I hadn’t yet read H2n) of the Common Data Set when I posted before. H2A n) is the “number of students with no financial need, awarded institutional non-need-based scholarship or grant aid (exclude athletic awards and tuition benefits)” Figures are listed separately for first-time, full-time freshmen and all full-time undergrads. So when you determine how many students there are with no financial need (as Dad’o’2 did) and then calculate the %, you have a really good idea of the raw odds that a student with no need will receive a scholarship or grant.</p>

<p>Students with financial need also do receive non-need based scholarships and grants, of course. However, the Common Data Set specifies that “non-need based aid used to meet need should be reported in the need-based aid column.” (Slightly odd, I admit.) But the identification of non-need based aid that goes to students without financial need is then reasonably clear cut. One issue might be the interpretation of “tuition benefits” in H2A n). I think this means that institutions do not count in this category any reduction or waiver of tuition for employees, their spouses, or children, if the institution has tuition benefits. The institutions would count scholarship awards that cover tuition in H2A n), when they are not employee benefits.</p>

<p>Also, in H2 g), there is a separate number for those with aid who received any non-need based scholarship or grant aid from any source. Without digging further into the Common Data set instructions, it would appear to me that a student with need who received a $500 Kiwanis scholarship would count in this data cell. </p>

<p>Sorry if my earlier flip-flopping contributed to the confusion! In my opinion, the Common Data Set is the most reliable source for cross-institutional comparisons, because items are defined the same way for all universities.</p>