<p>I think I know the answer to this question but not sure.</p>
<p>UA seems to be offering more merit-based money than most schools around us, at least within a 1000 mile radius. I see so many people post on here about their child receiving the presidential scholarship, as did mine. Where does all of this money come from? Why do schools in Illinois, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, California, etc not offer comparable packages?</p>
<p>Answers/Thoughts?</p>
<p>The money comes from donors and Crimson Tide Athletics (which is EXTREMELY profitable).</p>
<p>Other schools either don’t have those sources or spend their money elsewhere.</p>
<p>That was a rhetorical question. I know where the momey comes from. Practically none comes from Alabama Athletics. Just about all of the profits from footbal goes to pay for all the other sports.</p>
<p>Can’t speak for other states, but the University of Illinois is able, based on reputation, to attract more than a sufficient number of top students from within the state without having to offer huge merit based scholarships in the quantity that they are offered at Alabama. In part, this is because of Illinois has about 4 times the population as Alabama and many very good public and private high schools.</p>
<p>Seems to me that the University of Alabama as well as the state of Alabama are actively trying to recruit smart people. Universities in more affluent areas do not have to spend as much to get top talent.</p>
<p>It’s a good question. </p>
<p>UA athletics is putting some $$ into it, though thats only a small (but not insignificant) portion. When we say UA athletics is profitable, thats after paying for all of the sports and cost. It’s one of a dozen or two programs that makes a profit on athletics. </p>
<p>Scholarship $$ for 2000-2001 to 2009-2010
7,325,421
7,763,718
10,851,041
12,617,675
14,273,485
18,858,410
24,194,017
31,104,060
36,218,232
47,589,975
Includes only funds distributed by the Office of Student Financial Aid. Does not include athletic scholarships; also includes external scholarships reported to Financial Aid.</p>
<p><a href=“http://oira.ua.edu/d/sites/all/files/reports10/10_trend_data.pdf[/url]”>http://oira.ua.edu/d/sites/all/files/reports10/10_trend_data.pdf</a>
(Page 54, table E1)</p>
<p>(take into account the overall enrollment has also been increasing…)</p>
<p>According to its most recent filing with the Department of Education, UA athletics earned about $124 million in 2011-12. But it spent $112 million, if you factor in debt service costs.</p>
<p>Some years back (10 or more?) UA very smartly looked at the writing on the wall and saw the state funding drying up even more, and they realised they would need to rely on outside donorship for funds, especially if they wanted to influence a higher-stat populace to the campus. They had a huge concerted effort, targeting alumni specifically for its scholarship and capital projects fundraising drive. Upwards of $60 million were raised? Someone else can post the specifics/facts. I don’t know what the purpose/implication is behind OP’s question.</p>
<p>Seems pretty simple. In order to raise its reputation, UA decided it needed to attract smart, talented OOS kids. The only way to do this was to offer generous merit awards. You see post after post saying that UA wasn’t even on their radar until they got wind of the automatic scholarships. This was certainly the case for us.</p>
<p>I think what the OP is getting at is that, historically, the state’s political and business power structures have been dominated by alumni of the UA Greek system. One of the reasons in-state kids work so hard to get into these organizations is because it’s an early marker for later social status and professional success. Given that history, it’s quite likely that many of UA’s heaviest hitting donors are precisely the same folks who are products of that Greek system and, perhaps, reluctant to see it change. </p>
<p>Since I’m less polite than the OP, I will put on the table that UA’s administration has been moving very cautiously (if at all) on reforming its Greek system because it doesn’t want to risk offend big-money donors and cut off the flow of funds it has been using to buy in higher-stat kids and improve the school’s academic reputation.</p>
<p>+1 to Bigdaddy.</p>
<p>According to its most recent filing with the Department of Education, UA athletics earned about $124 million in 2011-12. But it spent $112 million, if you factor in debt service costs.</p>
<p>Crimson Tide Athletics has been reporting $30M+ profits for the past few years. Since the CT is far more successful than most athletic depts I doubt that CTA only nets $12M after paying all athletic needs and any of its athletic facility improvement debts. </p>
<p>Maybe it counts the amount that it spends give UA academic scholarship money in that “spent” number. If so, then that would sound more accurate. </p>
<p>After all, after it “gives money away”, it would need to keep XX in reserve. Would have to see the line items.</p>
<p>You can go plumb the numbers yourself at the link below. UA gets to the $30 million number by excluding the cost of debt service on all the athletic facilities improvements it has constructed over the past few years. The DOE’s reporting mechanism allows them to report that way (see total expenses) but then requires a footnote including the debt service. </p>
<p>[Department</a> of Education reporting website](<a href=“http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/InstList.aspx]Department”>http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/InstList.aspx)</p>
<p>To add to oldguys post. It would benefit both UA and the Greek organizations if this so-called power and influence reached beyond the Alabama state lines. All the more reason for the Greeks to be more open to OOS kids. Wouldn’t it be nice if some day in the future that UA have the same reputation as UNC-CH, UVA or Michigan? A top tier public that attracts the best OOS kids NOT because of merit $ but because of the amazing opportunities afforded to grads of the school.</p>
<p>There is a term my S uses quite frequently now when discussing AL and UA politics: “Feeding the meter.” I believe this concept would have been completely foreign to him, had he gone to our instate flagship. And, that’s saying something, because IL politicians are real back-scratchers…but living in it, you don’t always see it. Very ironic that he had to travel so far to such a traditionally conservative region to see this concept in action. I’m glad he is getting an eye-opening experience at UA. One’s university experience definitely shapes what you will do with your life. </p>
<p>Winston Churchill: “We make a living by what we get; we make a life by what we give.” I still believe that UA has its head (and heart) in the right place. It’s up to alumni to give back appropriately and ethically.</p>
<p>Recent details on the athletic budget (the average profit over the last six years has been more than $13 million):</p>
<p>[Alabama</a> athletic budget, revenues on the rise | TuscaloosaNews.com](<a href=“http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20130727/news/130729819?p=1&tc=pg&tc=ar]Alabama”>http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20130727/news/130729819?p=1&tc=pg&tc=ar)</p>
<p>It does cover athletic scholarships (a significant cost; 400 student-athletes at a cost of $20,511 for in-state students and $33,811 for those coming from other states), as well as debt service and maintenance on athletic facilities which topped $21.5 million for last year.</p>
<p>Still, most of the funding for merit Scholarships does not come from athletics, it’s coming from donations, and the endowment (earnings, about 40% of which is targeted to scholarships).</p>
<p>Wouldn’t it be nice if some day in the future that UA have the same reputation as UNC-CH, UVA or Michigan? A top tier public that attracts the best OOS kids NOT because of merit $ but because of the amazing opportunities afforded to grads of the school.</p>
<p>Actually, I don’t know how many OOS students UVA, UNC and Umich would be attracting to pay their high OOS costs if they didn’t provide need based aid - which for the OOS students they’re accepting, is really merit-based.</p>
<p>Plenty of students are willing to pay OOS tuition at UCLA, Berkeley, and Michigan. I’m not sure about UNC or UVA. Don’t underestimate the power of a good brand name in attracting full paying students.</p>
<p>Also, Penn State, U Washington, and Wisconsin routinely reject full paying OOS students.</p>
<p>^^^that’s what I’m saying. If Bama continues to offer high stat kids lots of merit $ AND if they are forward-thinking enough to not only attract these kids but make them an important part of the Greek machine…the sky’s the limit. </p>
<p>In the future, they will be turning away the very kids they are actively courting now. </p>
<p>All the schools I mentioned earlier turn away tons of OOS kids willing to pay the full OOS sticker price.</p>
<p>Check this story out:</p>
<p>[Playing</a> the Merit Aid Game at Public Universities | NewAmerica.net](<a href=“http://higheredwatch.newamerica.net/blogposts/2013/playing_the_merit_aid_game_at_public_universities-83896]Playing”>http://higheredwatch.newamerica.net/blogposts/2013/playing_the_merit_aid_game_at_public_universities-83896)</p>
<p>It provides a good history of Bama’s decision to go after top academic talent from other states.</p>