<p>I wish. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s deliberately done this way just to be confusing. I have zero idea why, but it certainly comes across as a purposeful action. I cannot for the life of me figure out what benefit this differing terminology would give, though. Then again, we are one of those states that charges “no in-state tuition” to in-state residents, but in-state residents are charged significant fees ;). We’ve sort of set a precedent for ourselves to play with wording.</p>
<p>On the other hand, one could maybe look at it as something to be more clear about what the money is for? My UCSC Grant money overlaps into some of my housing costs after it finishes covering my fees (most of which is covered by Cal Grant) which it would not be able to do if it was Blue and Gold funds. Blue and Gold is only for UC fees so perhaps that’s why it’s deemed as such when given? To distinguish that it’s only for fees, I mean.</p>
<p>California is very generous with its state and institutional grant money for in-state residents (considering our economic climate, this is very surprising this has so far been able to be maintained), but there are so many small details about them that make them all very confusing :(</p>