<p>Hey, so I tried searching for this but didn't find answers.
Does anyone know how much the regents scholarship covers?
e.g. if one's efc is 0, then can he/she attend ucla and live on campus free???</p>
<p>Thanks for help in advance.</p>
<p>The projected COA for next year is about $30,500. If you get the Regents Scholarship, you will get $30,500 minus your EFC in grants/scholarship. If $30,500 minus your EFC is less than 0, you get $2000.</p>
<p>Note that tuition, room and board will come to $21-25k, so if your other expenses are less than projected and you have an EFC of 0 (or only a couple thousand dollars), you will actually be able to pocket some (taxable) money.</p>
<p>If your EFC is 0, you pay nothing. Actually, I have EFC of 0 and I stand to make around $3,000 (maybe more) this year because they overestimate the cost of attendance. I would be making even more if I had a cheaper meal plan and had a triple instead of a double.</p>
<p>Wow that does not seem right. Some of us are searching for money and you are making money because your EFC is 0. Actually it is not…now your EFC is $3000</p>
<p>Nope, it’s still $0. I only got paid for one quarter in 2010 and also I lent some money to my parents so I only have about $1000 in my bank which wasn’t enough to put me over the 0 EFC level. It’s not just equal to how much money you make…
As for it being unfair, I disagree. Had I gone to Brown (the other school I was deciding on) I would have also gotten a full ride based on my EFC. So basically they had to match it to keep up. I’m sure a lot of Regent’s scholars are in similar situations, and UCLA must essentially keep up financially so they aren’t at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>“UCLA must essentially keep up financially so they aren’t at a disadvantage”</p>
<p>Are you kidding me?</p>
<p>Umm no…
If UCLA wants to draw “top” applicants, at the very least they must match the financial aid the applicant would get elsewhere. If you could go to a school (any of the Ivies) that guarantees full financial aid, it would make no sense to pick UCLA instead if you had to pay to go there. To make UCLA at all competitive in that regard, they must match financial aid. If I would have had to take out a loan, even a small one, or do work study if I wanted to go here, I would have gone with my more financially viable option which was Brown, especially considering that Brown is as “prestigious”, if not more so, than UCLA.</p>
<p>You are getting more than a full ride at UCLA…you are pocketing $3000 that is not yours. Let me guess you are majoring in narcissism</p>
<p>…and so I am not confused you gave up a full ride to Brown to go to UCLA</p>
<p>Umm it is mine. If I wanted to I could buy new books and live in a suite and meet their cost of attendance. But instead I save money by living in the halls, buying used books, etc. Would you still be as upset if I spent it on spending more money on books and housing in order to meet their estimated cost of attendance and not pocket anything?
And yes. I turned down a full ride at Brown to come here.</p>
<p>@ kwwboarder,</p>
<p>Thanks, that is sooo cool. Congratulations and thanks for taking the time to respond to my question.</p>
<p>@ 33dmjjm</p>
<p>not the point of the post and besides consider the fact that regents is also a MERIT scholarship.</p>
<p>Thanks all. : )</p>
<p>That is 100% correct…the $3000 should go to someone that needs if for educational purposes</p>
<p>glad we agree</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The money supports education and cost of living. The school gives out what it thinks is enough for that. If you can’t stay in that limit, you have to take out loans. If you can live well under that, you keep the money.</p>
<p>I’m not sure what you think is a better system, because it would be silly to suggest not covering COL.</p>