<p>
</p>
<p>BB, could this be a rhetorical question from someone who has stated many times that a OOS full paying applicant should be nuts to consider the UC, including the flagships. Fwiw, if you did not use those exact words, I just did! </p>
<p>For me a better question would to ask if the UC knows what it wants to be!</p>
<p>Does Blue & Gold also only apply to CA residents?</p>
<p>If you are Pell qualifed, what’s that $5-6k max? You’re not then going to pay the other $30k OOS tuition.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think this is exactly right. There’s nothing new here. If you look at the 2011 US News data on FA for OOS students (reflecting Fall 2009 admits), UC Berkeley reported that 22% of OOS students got “need-based self-help aid,” which would include work-study (federal money) and subsidized Stafford loans (also federal money). In a sense this doesn’t cost California taxpayers anything, except I suppose insofar as there’s an opportunity cost to giving those federal dollars to an OOS kid instead of a Californian. Also, some OOS kids might be eligible for Pell grants—again, federal money available on an entitlement basis if the federal income guidelines are met.</p>
<p>As for internationals, UC Berkeley, and I assume the other UC campuses, just flatly says, “College-administered financial aid is not available.” So it appears all the internationals are full-pays, unless they’re supported by their home government—but that’s their business.</p>
<p>What’s less clear is whether Berkeley is giving any grants or scholarships out of institutional funds to OOS (but not international) students. The US News data are a bit murky on this. They don’t have a line for “need-based scholarship or grant awards for OOS students.” But they do have a line for “non-need-based scholarship or grant awards for OOS students,” and there Berkeley reports (for 2009) that 20% of OOS students got such awards, with an average scholarship or grant of $19,942. That’s a pretty handsome sum. But it’s not clear how much, if any, of that is coming out institutional funds as opposed to 3rd-party sources. Berkeley’s 2009 common data set shows it dispensed a total of $13.9 million in non-need-based grants or scholarships, of which $8.2 came from institutional sources—presumably including endowed scholarships. </p>
<p>Now 20% of the roughly 7% of undergrads at Berkeley who were OOS in 2009 is a small number. Still, at $19K a pop, that’s somewhere around $6.5 million. [In contrast, Berkeley dispensed about $170 million in need-based grants and scholarships, which went primarily to California residents, though that figure also includes $43 million in federal need-based grants, some portion of which could have gone to OOS students].</p>
<p>But even if some of that $6.5 million came from institutional sources, it’s a little unclear to me how much, if at all, California taxpayers are footing the bill. If you look at Berkeley’s various merit scholarship and academic award programs, a few are open only to California residents; most are open to any Cal student who qualifies academically or on some other geographically neutral basis. Again, there might be an opportunity cost to awarding such scholarships to OOS students rather than Californians; but most of those seem to be specially-endowed funds, so it’s not as if money is coming out of taxpayers’ pockets to pay for these awards. </p>
<p>In short, I think this is a little kerfluffle about nothing. As public universities like Michigan and Virginia realized years ago, state funding has not nearly kept pace with the rising costs of undergraduate education. This has consequences. There’s only so far a university can, or wants to, raise in-state tuition. It can seek to trim costs, but that often translates into bigger/fewer classes, termination or shrinkage of programs, and reductions in the quality of education. It can look for other sources of funding, putting even more pressure on faculty to bring in outside research grants, and working to increase both annual giving and major gifts to endowment, thus making itself more like a private university—and Michigan and Virginia are much further down that road than the UCs at this point. And ultimately, like Michigan and Virginia, it may need to change the mix of in-state and OOS students—an awfully tempting solution when, before discounting, each OOS student brings in a little over 3 times the tuition revenue of each in-state student, as is currently the case at Berkeley. But even if it needs to do a little tuition discounting (i.e., FA) to get the OOS students it wants, there’s still a net revenue benefit as long as (OOS tuition - FA) > in-state tuition. So FA for OOS students up to that point should not be seen as a California taxpayer subsidy of OOS students, exactly; it’s a revenue-enhancing move that indirectly operates to make the university cheaper for in-state students who would otherwise need to make up the difference. </p>
<p>In other words, you can’t get something for nothing.</p>
<p>What does the UC want to be–easy–solvent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Certainly.</p>
<p>[University</a> of California - Blue + Gold Opportunity Plan](<a href=“http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/paying-for-uc/financial-aid/grants/blue-gold/index.html]University”>http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/admissions/paying-for-uc/financial-aid/grants/blue-gold/index.html)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
Probably most OSS get workstudy and loans and not a lot of Pell grant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And shutdown California industries, outsource business to India and China, and import everything from China.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>bluebayou, color me skeptical. That might be what those student posters are claiming, but I only buy it if there are exceptional circumstances, such as an OOS family moving to California. My suspicion is that the posters are selectively reading or listening to the rules. </p>
<p>I do know of one unusual case where an undergrad who attended an OOS high school pays in-state UC rates. The parents are married, but only one lives and works in California. Odd situations and exceptions are certainly possible, but my money is on the cc student posters getting a rude financial shock in about a year.</p>
<p>negative xiggi. And yes, I have posted many times that folks would be foolish (not “nuts”) to pay OOS rates to attend a UC for most UC programs. (There are a few programs, such as Cal Engineering or College of Chemistry or Davis Enology that are worth the price of admission, imo.) </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps a lot is, but certainly not “all” (if posters on cc are to be believed – several have posted about receiving grant $$). And the “all” part is paid by the tax payers of California, which would be fine if the state wasn’t broke and purposely? exporting jobs to Texas.</p>
<p>My son’s close friend was accepted to UCLA with a $5K merit award. It was a surprise that he was accepted. He is not going as he cleared the wait list for one of his top choices, but this was where he was all set to go.</p>
<p>That $5K is an incentive for your son to stay in CA to work and pay back later.
I was classified as CA resident, received Pell and Cal grants after living in CA for just one year. I had not paid much CA taxes at the time I received grants. But I work and pay CA taxes in the last 27 years after my graduation. Your son’s situation is not much different from mine.</p>
<p>I have posted some data that might be relevant to this thread in
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1175195-oos-percentages-some-tech-y-us.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1175195-oos-percentages-some-tech-y-us.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Gotcha. I’ll quote foolish in the future. Fwiw, I thought it was appropriate to use nuts since we talked about California, the land of fruits and nuts! :)</p>
<p>Just to be clear, xiggi, I’m not disparaging UC. To me, it’s all about the value prop (as an economist or biz major would understand). For $220k, a private college offers better value to me than paying OOS for the UC state bureaucracy. Heck, many of those with the numbers to be admitted to Cal/UCLA from OOS, could receive a full ride at their own instate public. Thus, $220k for a piece of parchment paper from the #1 public or free at say, Arizona State. Sure, the parchment paper may not be as impressive, but that would still leave $220k in the bank. What is a better value? For those with unlimited funds, perhaps Cal still is a better value. But for the non-rich, ASU or [fill-in-your-own state public] can be mighty attractive.</p>
<p>(And yes, the UC’s got rid of parchment paper back in the dark ages.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, from the available data it looks like about 40% of the newly enrolled OOS freshmen at UC Berkeley are internationals, so the “instate public” statement doesn’t apply to them, at least not in quite the same way. As for the rest, most instate publics don’t offer “full rides” to anyone, though certainly in-state tuition would be a lot less than OOS tuition at Berkeley.</p>
<p>We also don’t know how many of the OOS freshmen are enrolled in engineering, business, or other high-value Berkeley programs that might in fact be a better “value proposition” than the programs at the University of Montana or somewhere, even with the latter at a much lower cost.</p>
<p>^^Small nit, but OOS is not the same as out-of-country, i.e., international, where there is a huge value prop to attend Cal. And I can guarantee you that zero Frosh are enrolled in undergrad biz at Cal. (They can’t apply to Haas until end of Soph year.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>BB, I do understand your position, and agree with it. Actually, my views about the value proposal of the UC system is probably a lot more negative than yours.</p>
<p>The UC Blue and Gold program, applies only to in-state residents.</p>
<p>However, the UC offers financial aid other than that associated with the Blue and Gold Program (the B&G program is simply a tuition guarantee for those under a certain income level. The UC offers cost of living grants which go beyond tuition exemptions).</p>
<p>This aid is location blind and is offered to all US students, regardless of in-state/out-of-state status.</p>
<p>International students are SoL.</p>
<p>However, the need-blind aid offered to OOS students applies only to the in state costs of the out of state student.</p>
<p>The supplemental tuition charged to OOS students, which is on the order of 22k/yr, is not covered at all by the UC.</p>
<p>Of course, it should also be noted that the UC’s guarantee of aid is not entirely sourced by UC funds.</p>
<p>Pell Grants, CalGrants, subsidized loans, private scholarships, and so on, are externally sourced. They don’t cost the UC anything. For example, under the blue and gold program, the UC itself pays aid only for what is not already met by Pell Grants and CalGrants.</p>
<p>Because NRSF (Non-Resident Student Fees) are not at all covered by aid, this makes the need based inducements offered for the normal in-state costs of attending the UC (normal tuition and cost of living expenses) largely irrelevant, because attending the UC from OOS is incredibly prohibitive for those who would qualify for any significant amount of UC funded aid. This is likely why OOS acceptances are strikingly lower than OOS admissions.</p>