<p>^^ Right, good catch. I did mean *100% of the difference between COA and EFC<a href=“not%20100%%20of%20the%20EFC”>/i</a> :)</p>
<p>As for eastcoastcrazy’s case, I’m not sure how much to make of the fact that Vanderbilt would have been $14,000 a year more than UNC. For families with a high enough EFC, it’s to be expected that Vanderbilt would be more expensive.</p>
<p>Tk, my point is that all three of those schools claim to meet full need, all three are CSS schools, all three offered some amount of financial aid, and yet the result was a difference of $14,000 per year in tuition, room and board. </p>
<p>I’m not sure what difference it makes to compare other private schools, since none of the other private schools that accepted him claimed to “meet full need”. The two public schools I listed do make that claim, which is why I listed them.</p>
<p>In our case, and in spite of often touted beliefs on CC that privates can often be cheaper than OOS publics, the OOS public university costs were substantially less than any of the private universities he applied to.</p>
<p>Of the other private universities where he was accepted, all were CSS schools. Those schools look at what they want to look at in terms of family finances, and CSS schools have their own ideas of “need”.</p>
<p>^
If your EFC was greater than the UNC COA, then of course UNC’s net cost would have been lower than Vanderbilt’s net cost (assuming both schools were fully meeting only the need, without also offsetting any of your EFC). The spread would have been all the greater if UNC tossed in “self help” aid to offset an EFC that already was higher than their full COA.</p>
<p>From the information you’ve provided, it’s impossible to tell if that’s what really happened. Was your EFC in fact higher than UNC’s COA? Vanderbilt apparently concluded that it was. The fact that you got a better deal elsewhere does not necessarily mean that Vanderbilt didn’t “meet full need”. It may simply mean UNC went above and beyond (and was less expensive to start).</p>
<p>Schools that use the CSS profile have their own methodologies to determine what the family should contribute. Therefore, even schools with the same COA might calculate a different family contribution, and therefore a different amount of “need” for the same family and the same set of financial circumstances.</p>
<p>Someone posted an interesting set of results in the Financial Aid forum a year or two ago. The student was admitted to an impressive array of selective private schools, all of which claimed to “meet full need” and the out-of-pocket costs were dramatically different across the schools. Not because of differences in COA, but because of differences in how “need” was calculated and how it was met (e.g., grants vs loans).</p>
<p>This might happen less frequently and less egregiously for people who have very straightforward financial circumstances (e.g., students from low-income families with no assets).</p>
<p>I found Vanderbilt to be very generous with their FA. our EFC was met, and we are paying less for 2 kids at Vanderbilt than we would have paid for our state flagship. They met our EFC with no student loans included in their packages. For the “reach” schools, we only let our girls apply to schools that met 100% of need. We didn’t get to see with our second the comparison between schools because she applied ED. however, we already knew what our first was given, so we were not nervous about the second. We are a middle class family with no debt besides a small 10 year mortgage left on our home. We did not save a lot for college because we assumed (incorrectly) that kids with perfect GPAs and high test scores would have full scholarships to anywhere. We learned the truth with our oldest! So when our second was ready to apply this year we were ready. For us it was a family decision. We have tightened the budget, I’ve taken on some extra work, and my girls are responsible for their books and living expenses while at VU. This allows us to pay our EFC, and our girls to attend their dream school, without too much stress.</p>
<p>Tk, DeskPotato explains our results very well.</p>