Tufts new tuition free policy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take those fancy vacations, buy the nice car and splurge on great dinners - those who are fiscally responsible and save for college are "punished."

So many of these grand proclamations are so performative. I am very supportive of a diverse student population, including socioeconomic diversity. But I feel like these schools are going overboard with these special programs.

And if the endowment tax ends up kicking in, they might want to very quietly reverse some of them.

I’m starting to feel ticked off as well as I see more & more schools do this.

If this ticks you off maybe have your kids apply to schools they can afford. They don’t need to go Tufts or schools with the same policies.

They are. Obviously! That is not the point.

It’s a philosophical question. Why should a family that earns $150k get full tuition when a similar student at $200k or $250k or even $300k does not.

And let me tell you, the difference between $150k and 250k is not very much in practical terms.

As you’re thinking about the wealth gap, with an ungodly number of millionaires and now billionaires, families that earn $150k $250k, they’re in a similar boat, and yet the $250k families are treated as if they are just as rich as the millionaires. It’s absurd.

And so I am ticked off at that. My child will not be applying to any of these schools due to the price tag. But it’s an upside down world we live in, that’s for sure.

As someone who has lived in a HCOL area on 150k and 250k hhi - it’s life changing re: stress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good for Tufts!

That said it will be very competitive and difficult for students that fit this income profile to get a coveted spot. I assume there will be lots of competition!

Is Tufts need aware or need blind now?

anyone know?

[Anonymous]

Tufts is need aware.

[Anonymous]

How are schools like Tufts, Brown, Columbia, Duke, etc. all able to afford these need blind admissions/tuition free policies? Duke and Northwestern have laid off massive numbers of staff/froze research, Brown took on $700MM of debt this year. Where are they getting the money to fund their generosity? Brown and Yale are bleeding but have a need blind and full needs met policy for even international students. What am I missing?

[Anonymous]

And tuition and costs keep rising. Cornell is now over $100K all-in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How are schools like Tufts, Brown, Columbia, Duke, etc. all able to afford these need blind admissions/tuition free policies? Duke and Northwestern have laid off massive numbers of staff/froze research, Brown took on $700MM of debt this year. Where are they getting the money to fund their generosity? Brown and Yale are bleeding but have a need blind and full needs met policy for even international students. What am I missing?

They might be getting large restricted gifts to fund some of this. Which is very short-sighted of the donors.

It is also a matter of priorities - they might think (I would say incorrectly) that this is part of their mission and they will make sacrifices elsewhere to make it happen.

As you suggested, having policies like these and truly being need blind doesn't work as things get tighter financially. If they are doing what they claim, admissions could come in and say "guess what? An extra 10% of the incoming class that we want is low income so we need to live up to our promise and give them all free rides". Not sure how that would work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are schools like Tufts, Brown, Columbia, Duke, etc. all able to afford these need blind admissions/tuition free policies? Duke and Northwestern have laid off massive numbers of staff/froze research, Brown took on $700MM of debt this year. Where are they getting the money to fund their generosity? Brown and Yale are bleeding but have a need blind and full needs met policy for even international students. What am I missing?

They might be getting large restricted gifts to fund some of this. Which is very short-sighted of the donors.

It is also a matter of priorities - they might think (I would say incorrectly) that this is part of their mission and they will make sacrifices elsewhere to make it happen.

As you suggested, having policies like these and truly being need blind doesn't work as things get tighter financially. If they are doing what they claim, admissions could come in and say "guess what? An extra 10% of the incoming class that we want is low income so we need to live up to our promise and give them all free rides". Not sure how that would work.

Not sure how that works either. If a school is truly need blind, you would think that they have the money to fulfill the need blind policy. For the high profile schools with financial issues, they probably hire consultants to make sure they manage their budgets for the short term and long term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: They might be getting large restricted gifts to fund some of this. Which is very short-sighted of the donors.

It is also a matter of priorities - they might think (I would say incorrectly) that this is part of their mission and they will make sacrifices elsewhere to make it happen.

You think donors are short-sighted in how they want their money spent and think schools are interpreting their own mission incorrectly? Impressive!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: They might be getting large restricted gifts to fund some of this. Which is very short-sighted of the donors.

It is also a matter of priorities - they might think (I would say incorrectly) that this is part of their mission and they will make sacrifices elsewhere to make it happen.

You think donors are short-sighted in how they want their money spent and think schools are interpreting their own mission incorrectly? Impressive!

Unrestricted gifts are much more useful to a university than restricted. That is finance 101. So many wealthy people fund pet projects (often with their names on them) that are of little use to universities rather than letting the universities use their discretion.

And if a university is having to make significant cuts to its operations that impact the education experience, maintaining those programs to me is more important than going from X% kids getting full rides to X+5% kids getting full rides assuming X>0, which it already was at all of these schools. Every university likely has plenty of fat to trim, but some of these numbers being tossed around indicate that they are going beyond cutting low hanging fruit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are schools like Tufts, Brown, Columbia, Duke, etc. all able to afford these need blind admissions/tuition free policies? Duke and Northwestern have laid off massive numbers of staff/froze research, Brown took on $700MM of debt this year. Where are they getting the money to fund their generosity? Brown and Yale are bleeding but have a need blind and full needs met policy for even international students. What am I missing?

They might be getting large restricted gifts to fund some of this. Which is very short-sighted of the donors.

It is also a matter of priorities - they might think (I would say incorrectly) that this is part of their mission and they will make sacrifices elsewhere to make it happen.

As you suggested, having policies like these and truly being need blind doesn't work as things get tighter financially. If they are doing what they claim, admissions could come in and say "guess what? An extra 10% of the incoming class that we want is low income so we need to live up to our promise and give them all free rides". Not sure how that would work.

It’s not that they’re sacrificing other things for financial aid. The dollars are literally tied to financial aid; they can’t just fill in the research gaps if a donor doesn’t want it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unrestricted gifts are much more useful to a university than restricted. That is finance 101. So many wealthy people fund pet projects (often with their names on them) that are of little use to universities rather than letting the universities use their discretion.

So if a university can't convince a big donor to give unrestricted gifts, they should turn down their restricted gifts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unrestricted gifts are much more useful to a university than restricted. That is finance 101. So many wealthy people fund pet projects (often with their names on them) that are of little use to universities rather than letting the universities use their discretion.

So if a university can't convince a big donor to give unrestricted gifts, they should turn down their restricted gifts?

Not what I said at all. But you can continue to move the goalposts.

This is all virtue signaling by these schools. Take a good idea and go too far with it.