<p>FAFSA DID count home equity at one time. I am not sure when the primary residence was removed from the formula, but it was part of the EFC formula in the late 80’s. So it is possible that this was the issue 15 years ago.</p>
<p>well then it is possible I wouldn’t have gotten aid anyway.
When my father died, his life ins paid off the mortgage, but everything else was left to my mom.</p>
<p>I wonder when they changed it- did states get a lot more college funding at some point?</p>
<p>Oh, for crying out loud.</p>
<p>YES THEY ARE DIFFERENT SITUATIONS. That is the point.</p>
<p>The point is–no matter who you are, if you have savings, you will be asked to spend it.</p>
<p>No matter how many kids you have, whether you are the mom or you are the kid or what, if you have money at poverty level income, you will be asked to take out loans.</p>
<p>I am talking about disparate situations ON PURPOSE, to highlight the fact that you cannot get out of the fact that if you are working, even a little bit, you will not get grants. You have to be really poor.</p>
<p>Even if you’re the mom.</p>
<p>Even if you’re the kid.</p>
<p>Even if you have kids and you’re the kid going to college.</p>
<p>Does. Not. Matter. You. Will. Put. Your. Savings. On. The. FAFSA. And. They. Will. Expect. You. To. Pay.</p>
<p>So buy a car before you file, is the lesson here, LOL.</p>
<p>But frankly… since it is possible to do it anyway through working (and a lot more rewarding), I’m going to step out here and I’m not going to reply to further posts, though I assure you I will read to see if you have any advice for my cousin, who really does need the money. So if you have any specific tips 
by all means share them.</p>
<p>I have got to get off line so this is my last post for the following months. I am just posting to hold myself accountable, not because I want a farewell. Teehee.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that you should stop posting these proclamations because they are so untrue. One can have an AGI of $30,999 and not have to enter any asset income on FAFSA and have an EFC of 0 under the simplified EFC formula. We don’t have any idea why you or your cousin were not Pell eligible - it does sound as if there were some other issues or perhaps errors made. But that is not true for the vast majority of low income students…they can and do receive federal and state grants. Whether colleges will package them without loans or gaps is entirely dependent on the school. I know kids who have gone to CC’s that have no loans and kids at very selective schools who meet 100% of need. Maybe your cousin should consider starting at a CC.</p>
<p>EK, it was removed with the Higher Ed Amendments of 1992.</p>
<p>Thats interesting. They also increased Stafford loans at that time.
I wonder if tuition started shooting up before that, or if that was in response to fewer students being able to afford college. ( I wasn’t paying attention, I had a two year old)</p>
<p>I’m not sure. Stafford limits were increased again in 1989 … extra $2000 unsub per year.</p>
<p>Back to the OP, I happen to agree that FAFSA is a joke. Been in the FAFSA system for 3 years and will be filing my last one hopefully real soon. It is only designed for the poorest people and the middle class people are the ones on the losing end. I have been in the same profession for the past 30 years. I had to pay back my own student loans. I have been saving for college for my daughter(only child) since she was in 4th grade. I still am saving even though she is a junior in college. What I made back then is very different what I make now, but college costs have gone up exponentially higher and have outpaced what the cost of living has becme. FAFSA does not take that into consideration. If it were not for the savings we had for her college, She would not have been able to attend. It still is not enough and we have made sacrifices so that she can attend. Every family has to evaluate what is important to them. Not all schools are created equal, cheap isn’t always better. Fit is important. I do not feel it is the governments job to make college affordable. But I do feel tuition costs are part of the politics that schools play because of government policy. I am grateful for the stafford loans. Colleges should make tuition more affordable for everyone.</p>
<p>But “FAFSA” has nothing to do with any of this. FAFSA is simply the form used to collect the information required by the federal government in order to compute the EFC using the formula determined by the U.S. Congress (Higher Education Act).</p>
<p>The issues raised concern the underlying assumptions of the EFC formula, the tuition rates set by individual colleges, and the expectations of each school in terms of the individual family’s ability to pay & their aid policies.</p>
<p>Again, NONE of this has anything to do with the FAFSA itself.</p>
<p>The FAFSA formula makes assumptions. The number computed is based on past earnings, current earnings and future earnings. Is says “a family is assumed that they can pay this amount”. it is not realistic and the assumptions should be re assessed.</p>
<p>The point that is being missed is that the FAFSA and the EFC formula are not one & the same. Again, the FAFSA is a form used to collect information. The EFC formula and all its assumptions are mandated by Congress in the Higher Education Act (and all its amendments/reauthorizations).</p>
<p>It still not realistic. The formula should be more reflective of reality.</p>
<p>Then it would seem you do think it’s the government’s job to make college affordable. Government aid(read other taxpayers money) is provided to allow poorer people to afford commuting to a local CC or 4 year public university to get an education. Those fortunate enough to be middle class can generally afford to send their kids to a local CC or 4 year public if they do a little saving. The government isn’t in the business of helping people afford the ‘true college experience’ or ‘find a fit’ or attend a private or go out of state or any of that sort of thing. Those are all ‘nice to haves’.</p>
<p>Annoyingdad you obviously have not read all my posts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do completely agree with this. Taxpayer money should be for those with the most need, and should be about providing the “basics”. </p>
<p>I think there are times when whatever formula you use doesn’t identify the right people, but in general the middle-class folks (including myself) who wish we could get some money from the government for college really “shouldn’t” need it. (And we <em>do</em> get a tax credit, which is nice!) </p>
<p>It would be nice if the formula took into account where you live because the cost of “the basics” isn’t the same everywhere, and depends if there is realistically a state school you can commute to!</p>
<p>For those with true need, who cannot afford commuting to a local state school or CC, and for whom the federal (and state) formulas don’t pan out, I would suggest looking into local scholarships where you have an opportunity to “tell your story” and explain why even with what the government provides, you can’t get an appropriate education without a little more help.</p>
<p>For the rest of us… we need to be looking at sacrificing more and/or finding lower-cost options (lower COA and/or schools that offer merit scholarships or additional need-based aid). Or going back in time and saving more 
But honestly I don’t regret our (minimal) saving strategy – the priorities we chose made sense at the time and still make sense in retrospect, and we’ll find a way to make things work one way or another, without expecting the American taxpayers to foot the bill.</p>
<p>*The government isn’t in the business of helping people afford the ‘true college experience’ or ‘find a fit’ or attend a private or go out of state or any of that sort of thing. Those are all ‘nice to haves’. *</p>
<p>Exactly…</p>
<p>you can’t expect tax-payers to be funding “room and board” for other people’s kids to “go away,” when these SAME tax-payers are having a hard time paying for “food and shelter” of their own families. </p>
<p>The primary responsibility to pay for college rests with the family. </p>
<p>If the family is lowish income, then money to help pay for a local CC or local public is available. </p>
<p>If the family is not lowish income, the assumption is that the family can pay for the local CC or local public U thru savings, current income, and loans. If the family wants MORE for their child, then the family needs to fund that.</p>
<p>I totally agree that families are the primary payors for college, but colleges need to strive to make college more affordable for everyone. Tuition is astronomical and the outdated FASFA formulas do not help the situation.
[3</a> Ways the Government Overestimates Your Ability to Pay for College - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/paying-for-college/articles/2010/11/22/3-reasons-the-government-overestimates-parents-ability-to-pay-for-college]3”>http://www.usnews.com/education/paying-for-college/articles/2010/11/22/3-reasons-the-government-overestimates-parents-ability-to-pay-for-college)</p>
<p>Tuition is not astronomical in most states for CCs, directional state u’s and even at many flagships. In those states where tuition is higher than average, people need to take issue with their state, not with the taxpayers in the states that are paying enough in taxes to have reasonable options. Taxpayers in many states are also paying for state aid for poorer residents in their state.</p>
<p>*but colleges need to strive to make college more affordable for everyone. *</p>
<p>That may be * your* priority, others have different things they want their tax money spent on.</p>
<p>which is why we vote & go to the capitol on lobby day.
;)</p>