Needs-Based Aid from Common Data Sets

Parents Forum
1

<p>Need-Based Aid from Common Data Sets</p>

<p>As promised, selected data taken from some prestigious colleges/universities that guarantee to meet 100% of need. Usually, data is taken from the 2006-2007 CDS; in a few cases where that isn?t posted yet, the 2005-2006 CDS is used. It should be noted that there are schools that do not seem to post the CDS, among them Harvard, Tufts, Wellesley, Johns Hopkins, WUSTL, Columbia, Chicago, and Penn.</p>

<p>The first number is the amount given in institutional aid in the form of needs-based grants. When merit aid is used to meet need, the general rule is that it is counted as needs-based in all the data, except the total amount of needs-based aid. The second and third numbers are enrollment/number receiving needs-based grant aid; the fourth number is percentage receiving needs-based grant aid; the fifth number is average size of needs-based grant; the sixth number is average needs-based grant per student attending (i.e. the needs-based budget/enrollment).</p>

<p>Interpret as you like:</p>

<p>Amherst - $23,568,803, 1654/768, 46.4%, $31,393, $14,250
Barnard - $19,171,414, 2296/917, 39.9%, $24,611, $8,350
Bowdoin - $16, 285,150, 1660/734, 44.2%, $24,785, $9,810
Brown - $46,330,000, 5864/2337, 39.7%, $22,224, $7,901
Carleton - $21,435,032, 1959/1070, 54.6%, $23,279, $10,974
Claremont-McK - $11,693,280, 1151/524, 45.5%, $23,674, $10,159
Cornell - $102,833,211, 13462/5864. 43.2%, $21,184, $7,639
Dartmouth - $45,630,575, 3991/2000, 50.2%, $25,303, $11,433
Davidson - $9,981,805, 1683/540, 32.1%, $16,383, $5,931
Emory - $43,631,673, 6486/2414, 37.2%, $27,011, $6,727
Grinnell - $15,060,078, 1556/850, 54.6%, $19,317, $9,679
Hamilton - $19,618,055, 1799/881, 49.0%, $22,565, $10,905
Haverford - $10,501,626, 1168/479, 41.0%, $24,073, $8,991
Middlebury - $25,888,000, 2365/1011, 42.7%, $24,468, $10,946
Mt. Holyoke - $28,032,732, 2252/1273, 56.5%, $23,948, $12,448
Northwestern - $59,303,584, 7826/3268, 41.8%, $21,489, $7,578
Pomona - $18,237,526, 1532/808, 52.7% $25,484, $11,904
Princeton - $53,597,900, 4678/2340, 50.0%, $25,303, $11,457
Reed - $15,781,454, 1365/625, 45.8%, $27,018, $11,562
Scripps - $7,776,366, 857/351, 41.0%, $25,057, $9,074
Smith - $39,500,462, 2717/1609, 59.2%, $26,372, $14,538
Swarthmore - $17,451,430, 1472/719, 48.8%, $26,411, $11,855
Wash/Lee - $7,854,734, 1754/426, 24.3%, $18,370, $4,478
Williams - $22,978,912, 1965/842, 42.8%, $29,713, $11,694
Yale - $55,900,852, 5340/2232, 41.8%, $27,932, $10,468</p>

<p>A cursory look at the data compared with similar runs I did two years ago does not indicate significant changes, with the exceptions of Amherst and Princeton (as new, more generous policies now cover students in all four years), and to a lesser extent, Williams (where the size of grants has risen, though not the percentage of students receiving them). On the whole, given COA increases in the past two years, I think the schools are slightly less generous (or students are wealthier) than they were then, but I?m not sure about the statistical significance.</p>

2

<p>My conclusion is there are a lot of students that come from families in the top 3% of the income scale at these schools. ;)</p>

<p>Wash Lee, Davidson and Emory don't look too economically diverse. The real truth is none of these schools are economically diverse.</p>

<p>You must get a very scewed look at life when kids from these schools sit around a table and discuss economics, literature, and sociology.</p>

<p>Unless you live in upper middle class areas. ;)</p>

3

<p>Some info from the Harvard website:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.fao.fas.harvard.edu/fact_sheet.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.fao.fas.harvard.edu/fact_sheet.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

4

<p>I don't use anything from college websites other than CDS. In several cases (which shall remain unnamed) the differences between what the colleges claimed or advertised and what they actually reported were quite, shall we say, "remarkable". </p>

<p>(though I expect H.'s profile wouldn't look very different form P's or D's.)</p>

5

<p>Trying to get more of a handle on Harvard's financial aid stats, I came across the Harvard Fact Book for 2005-2006. The stats do not seem consistent with what is reported on the Admissions website.
Total number of undergrads: 6,613.
College grants (institutional/federal/other) in thousands:
$76,118/6,177/11,250 Total: $93,545 millions (vs. $86 millions reported on the website)</p>

6

<p>That's why I only use the CDS.</p>

<p>"College grants (institutional/federal/other) in thousands:
$76,118/6,177/11,250 Total: $93,545 millions (vs. $86 millions reported on the website)"</p>

<p>In my data, I only used institutional needs-based grant aid. </p>

<p>I loved the "bon-bon" from the FAQ:</p>

<p>"One fifth of the families receiving need-based scholarship assistance from Harvard have incomes above $130,000."</p>

<p>That's about double the percentage that earn $45k or below. It probably parallels the Princeton data where one half have incomes above $100k. At any rate, it was "interesting" that they would choose to post this on their website - gives you an idea of whom they wish to attract. (can't blame 'em.)</p>

<p>At my alma mater, the admissions director keeps crowing about the 50% receiving aid, despite the fact that, according to their own data, it has never broken 43% (the difference is a lot of people, and the difference it makes for the median income among entering students is huge.)</p>

<p>Were you at all surprised that, after all that rigamorole about no-loans and etc at P, after 5 years, they finally got up to the aid level of Dartmouth? (It's a good thing, in my book, that they are doing it, it just isn't a very big good thing, though again, the changes ARE signficant.)</p>

7

<p>
[quote]
admissions director keeps crowing about the 50% receiving aid

[/quote]
I'm wondering of some of those colleges are boasting about the percentage of admitted students offered aid, vs. the number of enrolled students receiving it. There's a big difference, especially since it's rather easy for a college to structure a package that the student isn't going to accept.</p>

8

<p>"At my alma mater, the admissions director keeps crowing about the 50% receiving aid"</p>

<p>It's the difference between those granted institutional aid and those (parents, usually) who take out educational loans on their own -- apart from those offered by the college as part of the financial aid "package." The college has determined that those (middle class) families making up the difference themselves did not qualify for need-based aid.</p>

9

<p>The absence of CDS for Harvard is bugging me, so I've been doing a bit of detection:
From the Harvard Gazette, for class of 2009:</p>

<p>Close to 360 admitted students are likely to be eligible for the new HFAI program, which requires no parental contribution from families with incomes under $40,000 and a greatly reduced contribution from families with incomes from $40,000 to $60,000. The number of first-year students who will benefit from HFAI increased by 22 percent compared with last year.
<a href="http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/04.07/03-admission.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/04.07/03-admission.html&lt;/a>
The acceptance rate for HFAI admits is said to be close to 84%, or about 282 students for the class of 2009.</p>

<p>From the Harvard Gazette, for the class of 2011:</p>

<p>In addition, the Class of 2011 entering this coming September will be the most economically diverse to date, with an estimated 26 percent eligible for Harvard's new Financial Aid Initiative (HFAI) for low- and middle-income families, which requires no contributions from those with annual incomes under $60,000 and a reduced contribution for those from $60,000 to $80,000. Since the inception of the program three years ago, there has been a 34 percent increase in aid for students from families with incomes under $60,000.
<a href="http://www.huliq.com/17182/a-record-number-of-applicant-applied-to-harvard-university%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.huliq.com/17182/a-record-number-of-applicant-applied-to-harvard-university&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>If the 84% yield figure holds, 420 entering freshmen will be receiving full or nearly full rides (out of an entering class of 1,660).</p>

<p>
[quote]
"One fifth of the families receiving need-based scholarship assistance from Harvard have incomes above $130,000."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm not bothered by this. We don't know how many children these families have, what kinds of expenses (including medical) expenses they may be incurring and how much finaid they're getting. My guess would be not much.</p>

<p>In my data about Harvard, I did not include loans figures, since as onemoremom suggests, it often means loans taken by parents. The figures, however (institutional/federal/other) are, in thousands:
($2,777/13,829/5,775) or a total of $22,380 millions on top of the $93 millions in grants</p>

10

<p>"It's the difference between those granted institutional aid and those (parents, usually) who take out educational loans on their own -- apart from those offered by the college as part of the financial aid "package." The college has determined that those (middle class) families making up the difference themselves did not qualify for need-based aid."</p>

<p>Actually Calmom is closer to the truth. I did not use institutional loans in ANY of the numbers (had I done so, the numbers at my alma mater would have looked much worse, but they wouldn't really have been, because in wealthier families, the parents tend to take on the loans instead of the students. High reported indebtedness at a 100%-of-need school can be a sign of the school's generosity toward low-income students.) </p>

<p>"My guess would be not much. (aid offered to $130k+ families)</p>

<p>I'm sure it isn't much. It is akin to the Princeton "no loan" strategy to replace small loans with small grants, paid for with COA increases in subsequent years. That's why it is interesting that they chose to highlight it! ;)</p>

11

<p>"Actually Calmom is closer to the truth"</p>

<p>You are wrong in saying that what I said is not truthful. It is most assuredly the case for my family -- it is my truth. And we are not alone. Your conjecture is off the mark.</p>

<p>And the percentage mentioned is for enrolled, not prospective, students.</p>

12

<p>1) mini you left off Pell Grantees? :)</p>

<p>2) The data are somewhat skewed for those well-endowed colleges that are need-blind to internationals. For example, Princeton's CDS shows that internationals receive higher grant awards than US citizens. While it's their money to use as they see fit, its worth knowing that a some (many?) of thier full rides are international students. Thus, the average package for US residents is lower than the total average.</p>

13

<p>
[quote]
For example, Princeton's CDS shows that internationals receive higher grant awards than US citizens.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Swarthmore's average international grant is higher than for domestic students, too. Plus, the percentage of intl's receiving need-based aid is slightly higher. However, the small percentages of internationals relative to the student body (4% to 8% at elite colleges) means that these dollars probably don't have a major impact.</p>

<p>On Pell Grants, I appreciate the work mini put into this list. If I had one suggestion, I would probably include the state, federal, and third-party need-based aid grants. Although, these are pass-thrus from the college's perspective, the college still has to enroll students that qualify for these dollars. I don't think it would change the order of list much, but the dollars are significant on a per-aided student (or even a per total student) basis.</p>

<p>BTW, an interesting note on Princeton. I understand that their financial aid is dispersed from an separate endowment, earmarked solely for financial aid. They can't spend the return on investment of these funds for anything but financial aid. Thus, their recent "largesse" wasn't really a discretionary policy change. They couldn't spend the money otherwise. That's a different kettle of fish than a choice between financial aid and some other institutional priority.</p>

14

<p>
[quote]
If the 84% yield figure holds, 420 entering freshmen will be receiving full or nearly full rides (out of an entering class of 1,660).

[/quote]
Its hard to extrapolite yield when you add in the factor of considerable need. I know that to an affluent family, accepting a full ride to Harvard seems like a foregone conclusion -- but to many on the low end of the financial spectrum, factors like distance from home, travel costs, and family needs can create additional barriers to attendance. The poorer the family, the more likely the kid is needed at home.</p>

15

<p>"On Pell Grants, I appreciate the work mini put into this list. If I had one suggestion, I would probably include the state, federal, and third-party need-based aid grants. Although, these are pass-thrus from the college's perspective, the college still has to enroll students that qualify for these dollars. I don't think it would change the order of list much, but the dollars are significant on a per-aided student (or even a per total student) basis."</p>

<p>I considered that (and examined it), but thought the better of it, as the question I was attempting to address was the degree to which 100%-of-need colleges differed in their institutional commitments both to enrolling students with financial need, and in supporting them. All Pell Grant students receive very, very signfiicant aid from their institutions, with the Pell itself usually only about a 10th of the total. What it would likely do (as I found in a small sampling) is make those schools particularly generous with very low income students (Smith, Amherst, and to a lesser extent, Williams) look even more generous. The size of the need-based average grant often reflects the fact that of those who receive financial assistance at all, a sizeable number are receiving a lot of it. (In the case of Amherst, and to a lesser extent, Williams, it means that there are very, very small numbers of middle-income students, and a "barbelling effect" in family income distribution.)</p>

16

<p>calmom:</p>

<p>I agree with your reasoning. But the 84% yield was for last year and there is no reason to believe that, with the higher threshold for receiving a full ride ($60k vs. $40k), the yield would be lower.</p>

17

<p>I expect that, from a financial perspective, H. gets whatever mix of students they choose. For every low-income student who is admitted but doesn't attend, there are two waiting in the wings.</p>

18

<p>
[quote]
The acceptance rate for HFAI admits is said to be close to 84%

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's surprisingly low given overall yield near 80 percent. It appears that either there is a very mild across the board increase in Harvard's desirability to low-income admits, or the yield improvement comes primarily from making Harvard able to offer de facto scholarships to those recruited athletes and minorities with HFAI-eligible family incomes. Harvard's yield numbers are somewhat lower (70-75 percent) for groups with more options: recruited athletes, minorities, top students with multiple admissions to Harvard's competitors.</p>