<p>I rec'd award info from another college today and they had a $3,000 Perkins Loan listed (in addition to my $3,500 and $2,000 Stafford Loans).</p>
<p>No award letter from any of the other schools I applied to listed Perkins.</p>
<p>It looks like it's Federal, so it can't be an in-state only thing.</p>
<p>Anyone know wjy this school would offer it, but none of the other schools so far have offered it?</p>
<p>Some schools just do not have any perkins funding. It is a federal loan but the funds are actually (in part) issued by the school. Also, some schools with perkins loans have such limited funding that theycannot issue a perkins loan to many students. I know my institution had to resort to $1500 per qualified student just to try and spread it out to as many qualified students as possible.</p>
<p>thanks nikkiil. Maybe that's what's going on.</p>
<p>One school told me that they just didn't know what level of Perkins funding they would have available for next year yet, so were offering to returning students first. They said that my D would be likely be offered one later or next year. You can ask the ones that didn't as subsidized loans are certainly preferable to unsubsidzed, especially if you're going to have to take loans every year!</p>
<p>We got a Perkins loan from 1 college (conn college) and not from any others because we were above the income level. I asked an admissions officer and he said that some colleges have so many high income/full tuition paid students, they can offer loans to some students that wouldn't normally get them. Other schools run out of money as stated above. That was certainly the certainly the case with Conn College and my son didn't end up attending. It's a constant learning process in admissions and aid.</p>
<p>My older son was also offered a small Perkins Loan at only one of the private colleges he applied to. He was not offered any grant money to that school or any money. The amount of loans that they wanted him to take out as a freshman was not something we would consider. It was a no brainer to sadly say good-bye to that school.</p>
<p>That was the same with us, a Perkins loan with stafford loans and a 5,000 grant. I didn't really think of it as an acceptance....sometimes you have to wonder with paltry offers and looking at your FA forms, why they bother, but you might have a rich uncle. : )</p>
<p>Deb, at that time they wanted my son to take out 7k in student loans as a freshman. The quick answer was just no. I don't recall whether we were gapped, I don't think I looked further than the 7k in loans. For us, that was a deal breaker, "no go"!</p>
<p>Only 7000?</p>
<p>Most of my friends and myself are discovering "financial aid" packages with significantly more in loans than 7K!</p>
<p>With an EFC of 4124, the least amount of loans offered to me was 12,000 and in one school's package the loans totaled over 25,000. I hardly think its appropriate for either myself or my parents to go into that much debt when their financial situation is shaky and my future earnings are not certain.</p>
<p>I find it odd that someone with no need can be offered 25K to entice them to attend while students with serious need are given small grants and huge loans. </p>
<p>There has to be a better way.</p>
<p>Icanplaybass, I do agree! Just 3-4 years ago, no packages, other than the one I described, asked most students to take out so many loans (although there was plenty of gapping, and more loans for a low efc). Ave. loans over the 4 years were closer to 20-25k, IMO. Now it is another story (no stats, just from what I am seeing, along with more gov loan money available and higher priced tuition)!! There has to be better way, I do agree. IMO, something must be done so that many more students have access to a college education (both public and private).</p>
<p>So I looked at my 3 aid packages again. Remember I qualify for Pell.</p>
<p>One had $1000 Perkins, the second had a $2000 Perkins and the third gave me a $3875 Perkins!</p>
<p>The subsidized Staffords ranged from $2000 to $3500 while unsubsidized were all exactly $2000.</p>
<p>The work study offers were $1500 at one and $3000 at the other two. </p>
<p>Parent/private loans were from $8700 to $18372. </p>
<p>So far, the cheapest place to go would cost me and my parents 12000 in loans. The costliest in loans, Rose Hulman, if anyone cares, would require us to take on $27,750 freshman year, not including our 4124 EFC!!!! </p>
<p>How could anyone justify or encourage a student to take out almost $30,000 in loans for one year of college? It's crazy.</p>
<p>I completely agree with you! You need to do some damage control here. Taking on 27k+ in loans for one year of college is insanity! </p>
<p>Not the main point, which are the those HUGE loans, but do not count on being able to earn the W/S that you are offered. Sometimes this works out, but on some campuses it does not.</p>
<p>I see where I work, so many variations with loans/grants/scholarships. I had an argument with someone last year who insisted my son couldn't have gotten a Perkins with our income..was adamant until I showed her. Nothing is set in stone.
I've seen all loans given to families of limited income and many doctors that got "windfalls" as they put, it with scholarships for high SAT's and sports. One joked the other day, his son's SAT prep gave him a nice bonus and he got a "free" vacation.....they offered him quite a bit at his college of choice.
They raised the stafford limits which is good in way but bad in another. They just expect the student to take more out and it is cheaper than the parent loan in interest. I had my son take what he could last year and I will help him pay what I would have needed to take out.
I don't think they really expect you to do that, iconplaybass,as I told one college FA office if I took out as much as they said, I'd go bankrupt in 2 years! (maybe then they'd lower it)</p>
<p>Deb, perhaps she confused a Perkins Loan with a Pell Grant? As far as those with higher incomes getting "windfalls", don't confuse financial aid with "pure" merit aid. I put "pure" in quotes bc some merit aid requires one to apply for financial aid, and some of that merit aid can be tied to income as well as student stats.</p>
<p>How could anyone justify or encourage a student to take out almost $30,000 in loans for one year of college? It's crazy. </p>
<hr>
<p>The financial aid office is not encouraging anyone to take out loans. They are offering them as an option should you choose to attend their school. If you do not want to take out the loans, you need to find another school. Contrary to what many believe, financial aid offices do not WANT anyone to take out big loans. However, there is only so much money to go around. If there isn't enough money to meet your need, then there isn't enough money to meet your need. YOU have to decide if you want to take the loans. If you don't, you will have to find a school you can afford --- community college, commuter school within driving distance of your home, etc.</p>
<p>Also, you should realize that often the cost of attendance is variable. Look at your "true costs." What are your actual costs? How much do you need to borrow to meet those actual costs? We have many students who have budgets that include room & board expenses - and those students actually live at home with mom & dad, rent free. Some of those students borrow their full loan eligibility, get a big refund check, and go shopping (or on spring break). They could have chosen not to borrow what they didn't actually need for school, lived frugally, and kept their debt to a minimum. Just because it's offered doesn't mean you have to take it.</p>
<p>I think she mixed that up too, re the loans, although I'm not sure. We normally wouldn't have gotten the Perkins though. As the gentleman said, I was the "poor" one at the college.
I realize although I wasn't clear, they got merit or athletic scholarships, but it was the point that although they had the money, they just didn't have to pay it, and others struggling with average to better stats still fall so short. Nothing is "fair" you just have to do the best you can.</p>
<p>Yes, I understand how frustrating that is. I do understand that schools do need to pull in certain students who have something specific to offer a school. If this young man got a merit and athletic scholarship they probably earned it. I just feel for the middle class and low income B student with 1000-1200 (or even 900) on the SATs who is in a couple of clubs, but not a leader. This student deserves an affordable college education and we want to nurture this student (not necessarily packing these students into gen ed lecture halls with 300-400 students) so that they can continue to develop and contribute to our society. Colleges pricing is making that become for difficult every year.</p>
<p>kelsmom</p>
<p>I understand your point. I don't expect a free ride and I'm clearheaded enough to know I am not taking on loans to go to college. </p>
<p>However, while I will find a way to pay for school, or go to my state school, or whatever, I still feel that the practice of offering rather large sums of money to wealthy students to bribe them to attend is somehow unfair to all students. If colleges have access to a set amount of funding, I'd like to see it used to help insure that any qualified and well-prepared student can attend.</p>
<p>I'm not saying lets pay for just anyone who wants to go; let there be some minimum agreed upon level of achievement to qualify for acceptance and funding. But to accept that only the wealthy should be awarded the privilege of attending a quality college or university is unfair to students who work hard and were unlucky to have been born to poor or dysfunctional parents.</p>
<p>But what you are saying contradicts itself. On one hand, you say that the money should help the ones who need it most ... then you say there should be some merit component attached. Everyone seems to disagree about exactly where all the cutoffs should be - it all depends on your situation what your point of view will be. Colleges do their best to try to spread their resources around to best achieve their institutional goals.</p>
<p>I work at a school that is committed to providing access to the poorest. Our goal is to try to provide enough grant money to help our Pell eligible students pay for tuition. If you are a few hundred above the Pell threshold, you would be upset that you missed out on the grants - but we only have so much money & it's the best we can do. A young woman who posts here found out that she missed a no-loan package at her state school because her mom's income was just a little over the threshold - and she ended up with $7000 in loans in her financial aid package. It stinks, I agree. But there truly is not enough money, and someone is going to get left out.</p>
<p>As always, I will offer my suggestion for fixing this: Colleges need to keep tuition costs down across the board. Easier said than done, but worth considering as the best "fix."</p>
<p>I don't believe what I wrote is a contradiction at all. I didn't say award money for merit. I said that because I recognize there is a limited amount of funding, it would not make sense to completely pay for college for anyone who merely "wanted" to attend. That would be a waste of resources to pay for college for someone who is unable to perform the work or is not committed to doing the work. Some kids would look at college as a way of avoiding having to find a job. It would be wasteful and imprudent to pay for college in that case.</p>
<p>When I say capable of performing the work or showing achievement, I don't expect every student to attain an Ivy level SAT scores, just a reasonable score, perhaps "average" or above? If you can reasonably be expected to complete college, then you should have your need met.</p>