Smith uses PJ and out-of-the-blue changes our FAFSA--for the better!!!

Paying for College
1

<p>OMG! I'm kind of freaking out right now! I got 2 emails today from FAFSA saying corrections were made on our FAFSA which REDUCED our EFC by $8000. I called the FAFSA info center and they explained what happened and said we should be getting a new award letter from Smith!</p>

<p>Could this be true that we could get some better aid? If so, I guess it could just be some extra loans :( They had only packaged $3500 in Fed subsidized loans in the original package.</p>

<p>Has anyone else had this kind of experience???</p>

2

<p>Given Smith’s financial aid policies, you will probably get the difference in grants. $3500 is already the max available for first year subsidized loans. </p>

<p>And yes, other schools do this sometimes. Barnard did this when my d. entered, though in our case it was a lot less than $8000. (Our FAFSA EFC was only about $5500 that year, but Barnard’s changes reduced it to around $3000 & made my d. Pell-eligible.)</p>

<p>Keep in mind that Smith’s changes are not binding on any other school – so even though the FAFSA has been changed, other schools can still base your financial aid based on the original FAFSA numbers. However, it might be worth your while to find out why Smith made the change – and then consider using that factor in negotiations or an appeal with other colleges (if your d. hasn’t yet decided on a college).</p>

3

<p>My D hasn’t decided yet whether or not to attend Smith. After I talk with them, I am going to call the other school she is considering and see if they will make any changes. I don’t hold out any hope of that though. That school is about $1500 more as is and I contacted them (without identifying myself) recently just to see if they had any flexibility in their awards. They told what I pretty much knew already–that unless I supply them with new numbers or circumstances, the award stays the same. Two days ago $1500 wasn’t a deal breaker, but if Smith awards D more money, $9500 certainly would be! [And D will probably then decide the other school is where she wants to go- not so lol!}</p>

4

<p>We received exactly the same FAFSA correction, which we believe was initiated by Smith College. Our EFC was significantly reduced by 8K. The only college listed on the SAR was Smith. Was Smith also identifed on the last page of your SAR?</p>

5

<p>courbec–ours said the EXACT same thing! Yes, Smith was the only college listed on the SAR and back page. Glad to know we weren’t the only ones who got a confusing email! Have you called Smith? If so, what did they tell you?</p>

6

<p>We haven’t called Smith as our daughter has commited to another University. However, reading though some of the posts here as well as on a few other college sites, made me realize that what Smith has done isn’t all that unusual. I may just make the call to satisfy my curiosity. If I do, I’ll post.</p>

7

<p>You also need to keep in mind that the package offered by Smith with admission may already incorporate whatever changes were made to the FAFSA EFC. </p>

<p>Actually many colleges follow the practice of making an offer to new admits based on anticipated FAFSA changes, but only enter the changes later, after the student enrolls. That is what Barnard did with my daughter - a significant change to the FAFSA, which qualified my d. for a Pell grant – but the FAFSA wasn’t corrected until June even though the offer was made in April. I personally think that’s the better practice, because there is less confusion for parents – but my point is simply that if the initial award seemed very generous, and that is followed up by a FAFSA change, you just may be seeing the tail end of paperwork needed to justify the offer you already have in hand. </p>

<p>If there was a major change made to your FAFSA, be sure that you understand what triggered it, because it could have long term impact on your financial aid. If the circumstances that led the school to exercise PJ do not recur in future years, you could expect the amount of grant to decrease in the 2nd year going forward.</p>

8

<p>“If there was a major change made to your FAFSA, be sure that you understand what triggered it, because it could have long term impact on your financial aid. If the circumstances that led the school to exercise PJ do not recur in future years, you could expect the amount of grant to decrease in the 2nd year going forward.”</p>

<p>As I said in the other thread I started, it turned out to be a “cruel joke.” I called Smith and they claim, just as you say Calmom, that the package had been determined before my D was offered admission and they didn’t know why now I was receiving this “updated” FAFSA notification. It must have been the end of their paperwork. But the difference was so great ($8000) that I am concerned that if they don’t do the same PJ next year our award may look quite different. Up until my D got into Smith, the other schools that admitted her did so with merit scholarships that are defined and spread over 4 years. Smith’s was only a grant (+ stafford sub loan and w/s). Not having any experience with grants, I called Smith to find out what will happen in years 2-4. They assured me (this was weeks before this reduced EFC wrinkle) that if our financial picture stayed about the same, we could expect about the same aid. We are going Smith’s open house tomorrow and I am going to meet with their fin aid office to find out exactly how our EFC was determined. The weird thing about this is that on the new EFC, Smith made major changes in numbers (like the amount of money my H and I made and the amount of federal taxes we paid- number which was totally not correct!) and we did not supply any new information at all. So this all really doesn’t make much sense to me!</p>

9

<p>Are either of you self-employed?</p>

<p>Keep in mind that there is no field on on a FAFSA worksheet to enter in or specify a professional judgment adjustment. So they need put the adjustment figure into another field on the form. There is a report form that they use to explain the reason for all adjustments, so if they were audited by the education dept. they could document all the math – but the point is that the numbers you see in the field may not match the description. </p>

<p>You definitely will want to know exactly what triggered the changes. It could be factors that will come up in future years as well. </p>

<p>Merit aid vs. need based is a mixed bag. The limitations of merit money are that it is possible that tuition and housing costs will go up while the merit award remains the same; and if the merit money is tied to a specific GPA or other requirements, it can be lost. Depending on major & school grading policies that could be an issue for some students.</p>

<p>Need based aid will rise as needed to meet rising tuition costs, but as you are seeing can be uncertain if there are changes from one year to the next in terms of parent finances.</p>

10

<p>It doesn’t make sense to me, either, since the numbers that should be reported are subject to federal regulations. However, I find that parents sometimes do not follow the FAFSA directions and report the wages and taxed paid incorrectly. It is possible that the updates Smith made SHOULD have been made. PJ’s are usually not done on the FAFSA without any specific request from the family for a review, so I am mystified as to why they would change something unprompted. </p>

<p>Did you have any unemployment compensation on your tax return? Or any other non-work earnings? How about business income? They could have made some adjustments on some of these items & refigured your taxes paid. But it just seems odd …</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>My daughter’s college certainly did that – and the specific reason for the PJ wouldn’t have even occurred to me to ask. I saw the issue in a different light at the time.</p>

<p>I think that the reason my daughter’s college did it was two fold. (1) For newly admitted students, there probably is a motive to give the best award possible based on the reported numbers, because that makes the college award more competitive with its peer institutions at a time when it is important to the college to enhance yield – this is at a competitive college where I think the financial aid office can act on the assumption that if the college has admitted the student, it wants the financial aid office to err on the side of giving the student enough money to attend. (2) The changes my d’s college made on the FAFSA created Pell eligibility; at the time there was also an ACG grant. So basically with those changes, some federal money could be brought in – but the college didn’t actually have to meet the FAFSA EFC it created, because it’s own grant money factored in home equity, NCP income, etc. Without the Pell factor, I’m not sure if there would have been any particular need to make changes to the FAFSA – in my case the pj factor could have been incorporated somehow within the CSS formula without also being shown on the FAFSA. </p>

<p>But I think it’s mistaken to think that 100% need colleges that rely on the CSS Profile or other material don’t routinely make PJ decisions without prompting from the parents – after all, they have specifically asked for the sort of information that impacts those decisions. It would be manifestly unfair if they took that information and then favored the students who were more savvy about aid over others, given that most parents are going to assume that if they provide info via that route that the college will be aware and take that into consideration. </p>

<p>As noted above, I think it’s a mistake for the colleges to make these adjustments to the FAFSA itself prior to the student actually enrolling, because of the confusion it causes – but my guess is that it is probably fairly common among the 100% need schools. It may actually be triggered by the CSS software itself – that is, perhaps the software red flags issues in the same way that my tax software pops up with little messages to point out possible deductions I may have overlooked.</p>

12

<p>I am sure that whatever is being done is within guidelines, but I would venture a guess that it is not at all common for schools to make PJ changes unprompted. A LOT of work is required to document PJ changes.</p>

13

<p>My h and I really have very simple taxes and financial picture–we don’t own a business; not self-employed. We have simple assets; nothing complicated. On the new Smith FAFSA the total amount of our income was not changed, but individual numbers for my h and I were changed as was the amount of income tax paid. They changed the income tax paid to read 2 1/2 times what we paid. I repeat we paid x number of dollars (it’s on our tax return) and they increased it by 2 1/2 times!!! What the heck is going on? The FAFSA customer service agent told me that Smith changed 5 entries. So I naturally thought that they artificially changed the numbers to “rig” it so they could give us more aid (why, I don’t know??) </p>

<p>My husband was unemployed for a short period of time, so yes we did report some unemployment compensation. But as I said before, nothing changed between the original FAFSA and this new one. </p>

<p>My D has been admitted into 7 schools. All of those schools were listed on the original FAFSA. Only Smith went back in and changed numbers (and without our prompting). The other schools’ awards seem to follow our original EFC number. But maybe the EFC really is meaningless. She applied to both meets-100%-need and doesn’t-meet-need schools. She got all kinds of scholarship/loan/ws, grant/loan/ws and scholarship/grant/loan/ws packages. As I said before, we will be visiting Smith tomorrow and hopefully I can get more information about what happened and how this will affect future years IF my daughter chooses to attend there.</p>

14

<p>The federal regulations do allow schools to take unemployment income out of the formula (they don’t require that - they just allow it). Smith may have removed the unemployment compensation & recalculated tax info without it. They may have adjusted your H’s income to 0 to reflect the job loss. I am not sure why taxes paid would be higher (should be line 55), but who knows. Whatever they did, I imagine they have reason for making the changes.</p>

15

<p>Thanks for everyone’s help and comments. The unemployment comp was miniscule in the scheme of things so I don’t see how that could have made much of a difference. If I get any answers at Smith I’ll post later this week. Thanks again!</p>

16

<p>I do have one other question–does anyone know how checking the “dislocated worker” box (for someone who is unemployed aka my H) affect the EFC and fin aid determination, both for the current year (11-12) and when they ask for projections for the following year? One fin aid officer told me that the determination is based mainly on income (the 47% that is bandied about) but I wonder if it doesn’t flag the app in some way.</p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>Why do you think they did it in my case (Barnard) and also upstatemom’s case then? Do you really think that we are all that unusual? In the other thread that upstatemom created (in the Smith forum), at least one other parent reported a similar change. </p>

<p>I honestly don’t think that we are all that unusual. I think what we share is simply that our kids attend (or have been accepted to) 100% need colleges that have fairly generous aid policies. Their financial aid staff probably acts in accordance with internal policies set by the office, and are encouraged to be proactive in adhering to that policy.</p>

18

<p>All the dislocated worker question is used for is to determine possible eligibility for the simplified needs test or the automatic 0 EFC. But they both have income cut offs.</p>

<p>The simplified needs test ignores all assets in calculating the EFC. It requires an AGI below $50,000 and also meeting one of several other criteria - dislocated worker is one of the criteria.</p>

<p>The automatic 0 EFC sets the EFC at 0 and ignores assets, untaxed income, student income etc. All it looks at is the AGI (must be below $31,000) and also requires that you meet one of the other criteria - dislocated worker being one.</p>

<p>If you do not meet the income cut offs then the dislocated worker question has no impact at all.</p>

19

<p>I honestly don’t think that we are all that unusual. I think what we share is simply that our kids attend (or have been accepted to) 100% need colleges that have fairly generous aid policies. </p>

<hr>

<p>Given the very small number of students that would fit into this description, I would consider this unusual … in the grand scheme of financial aid. The Smiths of the world are few and far between, and those accepted to the Smiths & eligible for aid are even fewer and far-betweener.</p>

20

<p>That may be true, but this is CC and the issue comes up among families who aspire to elite colleges that promise to meet 100% need and routinely ask for supplemental financial info via the CSS profile and their own forms. So in CC-world, it is probably not at all “unusual”. </p>

<p>I know that in my case (Barnard, not Smith), the PJ-factor was ascertained because of information that showed up on my tax return, specifically because of a schedule A deduction that reflected an unusually large expense. Barnard and many other private colleges require that all financial aid applicants provide complete copies of their tax returns – it doesn’t matter whether the student is selected for verification or not. Given that they have asked for the info, it makes sense that when staff members go through the returns that they also simultaneously follow the verification process, and apply those p.j. factors that have been set by internal policy. It’s more efficient to have staff work from a check list or enter data into a computer program that performs all functions simultaneously, than to have to repeatedly come back and review the same information for different purposes. </p>

<p>For example - and this is total speculation based on one piece of information that upstatemom has provided – suppose Smith has adopted an internal policy concerning unemployment & the exercise of p.j. They recognize that these are hard times and they are getting a lot of calls about parents who have lost their jobs, so they create some sort of policy and internal formula to apply in all cases —that way, when they get calls from parents and students in the spring bringing up that factor, they will honestly be able to tell the caller, “we already took that into consideration” in calculating the award. </p>

<p>There are probably several scenarios that are very common reasons that families request review – unemployment, high medical expenses, casualty loss, etc. – and it would make sense for the full need college to adopt very specific policies as to each. (And again, if possible, to create a worksheet and automated computer program to implement those policies). </p>

<p>Obviously the vast majority of colleges in the US do NOT promise to meet full need - so we are dealing with a small subset – and within that subset, the majority of applicants don’t have circumstances that would trigger the application of p.j. – but for that subset who does meet this criteria:</p>

<p>applying to full need school + required financial aid docs reveal facts and specific figures warranting p.j. </p>

<p>then my guess is that most of the full need schools are likely proactive and do either apply p.j. in those circumstances, or contact the family seeking further information and documentation</p>

<p>To assume that those schools are not being proactive – that they only apply p.j. if they are asked – is to assume that they are setting up a two-tiered financial aid system in which more aid dollars will be given to families who are savvy enough about the financial aid system to know (a) that they can ask for p.j. and (b) what circumstances will be considered. I think that is the opposite of the mission of most of those schools – I think they want their financial aid systems to work to benefit the types of students who are coming from less sophisticated families, such as first generation college students. </p>

<p>In other words, “the Smiths of the world” cover a very large subset of colleges that CC’ers are likely to be applying to.</p>