OT: Pitt launching another major financial aid initiative: Pell grant matching
- Thread starter CrazyPaco
- Start date
Is cool but doesn't address students who don't qualify for Pell Grants and have FAFSA results determine ridiculously large expected parental contributions.
Indeed, that's a double squeeze for some. I'm happy for anyone who benefits and, I guess, nice that Pitt addressed this for them specifically. But in the big picture, it's the kind of thing that doesn't solve, indeed contributes to relentless tuition increases, that crush those who can't get these things.
It is true that $25 million per year to fund this has to come from somewhere. This is, by Pitt's count, the 7th financial aid initiative they've launched in the last couple of years, so they're trying to do something, which I think is admirable considering demand for Pitt education, at least at main, is near an all-time high.
Fundraising for scholarship endowments needs to be a major emphasis going forward.
I so agree with you. Kids today have way more career opportunities other than college. The internet has also made it easier for kids to identify these opportunities.
I believe Pitt is realizing this and trying to ease the financial burden in order to draw in more kids.
Seriously doubt I would have gone to college if I was coming out of high school now. Probably would've gone to trade or tech school. Today's kids can make 50K within a year or two out of high school with little to no debt.
They should use that money to lower tuition for all. PA in state tuition is laughable.
Pitt already does that for citizens of the Commonwealth. For over a decade, Pitt has provided more discounts on in-state tuition than it receives in annual state subsidies. In-state tuition in Pennsylvania is so high, at all three of the public research universities, because financial support from the Commonwealth is the lowest in the nation after Vermont. Pitt has no further obligation to the state because it is not the one that has de facto reneged on the 1966 arrangement.
Last edited:
That doesn't mean that they couldn't use the money to lower tuition for all students, not just the ones receiving Pell Grants.
Pitt has no shortage of students waiting to get in, but you are right, the debt burden is unsustainable, and Pitt is trying to do something about that. For many positions, there is no need for a college degree, and 50 years ago, many positions that now require a college degree never required one. The push for everyone to go to college has devalued the meaning of a college degree to the point that it means little more than what a high school diploma meant 50 years ago. An graduate degree is now the new bachelor's. College was never supposed to be just vocational training and that is what it has turned into for many.
Last edited:
Pitt is attempting to address the needs of some of the students who have a greater need. Why would you want to dilute the benefit by offering it to students who can afford the current tuition? That makes no sense.
"The federal Pell Grant helps students and families with the greatest financial need pay for college. The Pitt Success Pell Match Program will maximize the power of this federal program by matching it dollar for dollar. This University-wide program will be available to eligible undergraduate students at each of our five campuses (Pittsburgh, Bradford, Greensburg, Johnstown, Titusville)."
https://oafa.pitt.edu/pitt-success-pell-match/
The ROI is the key.
It cannot be emphasized enough to high schoolers that SOME post secondary education is vital to long term financial success.
But, business and trade/vocational schools should be a serious consideration.
Unless a student has some kind of benefits in place to mitigate the cost of tuition, like a parent working at the University, they had better darn well 1) know for sure what they are going to major in 2) know what that degree can do for them after they graduate 3) be pd sure that is what they want to do for their career 4) know that that they will make the kind of $$$ to justify the investment.
The ROI for a two year degree is almost always pretty good, and you can always go back to school and get a four year degree once you get into the work force. It isn't easy, but for those with limited financial resources often is the best route to go.
Because kids who don't qualify for Pell Grants are still going deep into debt to pay for college. The expected parental contributions determined by FAFSA are unrealistic at best.
Pitt has budgeted about $25 million to launch this program. It has roughly 5K total students that receive Pell grants, each receiving an average of $4,500 from their federal grant, out of 24,242 full time equivalent undergrads. With the average cost of attendance being $32,912, you are talking about helping the most financially distressed students with 14% of their cost (or 28% if you add the actual Pell, and many of these student will have additional help), vs 4% per student if you spread it among everyone, regardless of their need (and they might have zero need).
Administrators have to decide how to spend money and where it will have the most impact is typically a major factor in such a decision. They've clearly determined for this latest financial aid program that the budgeted money will have the greatest impact by aiding the poorest students, obviously aimed at keeping Pitt open as an educational option to this demographic.
But I agree, a major fundraising objective for Pitt with any forthcoming capital campaign should be increasing university-provided increases for merit- and need-based financial aid. But the money needed to reduce every student's cost of attendance by 25% would require a $189 million per year increase in the institutional budget which has to come from somewhere, or adding a $4.2 billion addition to the endowment pool which would be equivalent to doubling the current endowment that took 230 years to build.
Last edited:
This is a great initiative, and Gallagher mentioned in his address that Pitt is also increasing their total financial aid budget (for Pell recipients and other students) over the next several years, largely in response to losing qualified students to other universities that offer better financial aid packages. Pitt should get a lot of positive attention for this program nationally, and for good reason.
On that note, this week is Pitt Day of Giving (https://www.pittdayofgiving.com/pages/home-59), which gives alumni and supporters a dedicated day to donate towards any program at the university (including athletics). If you believe that the university should be putting more effort towards scholarship fundraising, this is a chance to take part. Strange as it is, the academic rankings actually take into account the percentage of alumni who have made a donation in the past year, no matter how small, so this is an opportunity to actually contribute to Pitt’s academic reputation. I’m planning on giving what I am able to give to my graduate school alma mater this week, and I’d encourage all who are able to donate to the academic program of their choice.
On that note, this week is Pitt Day of Giving (https://www.pittdayofgiving.com/pages/home-59), which gives alumni and supporters a dedicated day to donate towards any program at the university (including athletics). If you believe that the university should be putting more effort towards scholarship fundraising, this is a chance to take part. Strange as it is, the academic rankings actually take into account the percentage of alumni who have made a donation in the past year, no matter how small, so this is an opportunity to actually contribute to Pitt’s academic reputation. I’m planning on giving what I am able to give to my graduate school alma mater this week, and I’d encourage all who are able to donate to the academic program of their choice.
It appears that fewer and fewer boys are enrolling in college each year. I don’t know if that is because of the job market or if boys just aren’t succeeding in school
And the most influential ranking is the one that factors in alumni donor percentages, and they don't care if someone gives $10 or $10 million. It's hard to excuse anyone that is interested enough about their Alma mater to be reading this message board for not voting for Pitt in these rankings by giving a minimal, token amount each year.
Pertinent to this thread, there are two major financial aid initiatives that can be given to for the Day of Giving, the General Scholarship Fund and the Panther Forward Program.
https://www.pittdayofgiving.com/
Last edited:
One of many reasons people are leaving PA in droves. You go down with the ship if you want, no skin off my back.
The funding would have been better used for merit-based aid to attract top students regardless of their economic background. Likely will mean more tuition increases in the near future hurting enrollment possibilities for middle class families and individuals who will be saddled with loans for the most expensive public school in the country (considering middle class students will not receive the already generous Pell Grant money provide by taxpayers).
If not based on merit towards improving the academic status of the university and value of the degree, then use it to reduce tuition for all and spread the savings to Pitt students fairly and equitably.
If not based on merit towards improving the academic status of the university and value of the degree, then use it to reduce tuition for all and spread the savings to Pitt students fairly and equitably.
Last edited:
Ding. Ding. You can bet they crunched the numbers to figure out how this helps Pitt.
Each year, more and more of USNews’ ranking formula is dedicated to financial aid metrics, particularly related to retention and graduation rates (which often follow financial aid, as finances are the most common reason for students dropping out or not graduating).
In 2019, 5% of USNews’ ranking formula is based solely on the retention rates for Pell Grant recipients and the disparity in retention rates for Pell recipients compared to the general student population. 22% of the rankings are based on graduation rates, of which Pell recipients are more likely to graduate late or not at all based solely on finances. Compare that to overall admissions numbers, which is 10% of the ranking. FWIW, percentage of alumni giving, which I talked about in an earlier post, also makes up 5% of the ranking.
The strategy to focus on Pell Grant recipients is surely both motivated by it being the right thing to do for the Pitt students with the greatest financial need, but also because it presents the greatest bang for your buck opportunity to make improvements in Pitt’s USNews ranking versus its peers and, as a result, help its overall academic reputation.
Last edited:
Doesnt that speak to more of the flaws in the US News ranking? Also that Pitt will undoubtedly increase tuition further to afford this and squeeze out middle class families in the process.
This initiative would have been better to have been 100% self-funded by donors who directed it there rather than putting this squarely on the backs of middle class families who will not get a dime in taxpayer grants such as Pell (which they too are the ones paying $30 billion annually into) let alone this addition and take out student loans to pay for both themselves AND this additional payout.
Like everything else, middle class always gets screwed. Typically just used to the government putting the screws to them, but now Pitt has decided to hurt them as well beyond having the highest public tuition in the country as is.
Merit scholarships to attract the best and brightest regardless of their economic status would have been far a greater benefit to the Pitt community, value to the Pitt diploma for alumni, and a higher potentially for great accomplishments that in the long run may yield greater donations. If not that, lower tuition for all students across the board making it more affordable for all (considering the vast majority are taking out student loans they will be paying off for a decade by themselves).
Last edited:
Well, I must say the critiques in this thread surprised me ... but likely not as much as the Pitt partyliners (which my phone spell check helpfully changed to pantyliners... which I was sorely tempted not to correct).
I feel many are being a little too critical here. I think Pitt was trying to do something laudable for a needy contingent of student that probably are most likely to have to drop out due to finances. That's not ideal for anyone.
Remember, when someone gets accepted, somebody else doesn't. If the accepted student doesn't finish, that's twice an opportunity lost for Pitt... the original student who dropped out, and the one who was not accepted at the time.
Rather than take the safe route and simply take more students with coin, they went this route, and that, taken in a vacuum is laudable.
As far as other suggestions/ criticism made, on helping the most accomplished, or to spread out the money to lower costs for every student... I think even those posters are aware of the realities of what universities are prioritizing in this day and age.
Many in higher ed would see "most accomplished" as a code for something that is toxic, elitist, possibly even racist. I'd disagree with that, but university thinking definitely doesn't match my own at my current age. Thirty five years ago, maybe it would have. But 35 years ago I also had a Walter Mondale sign in my room and probably would have gone to an AOC event (Bernie would have repulsed me even then, though).
As for spreading the savings to all students, likely the amounts would just be a drop in the bucket, when divided by the full number ... barely noticed by most ... yet not enough to help the neediest.
Given a bunch of mostly bad choices (in the university's view) they likely went the best direction they could.
Anyway, something to actually help the affordability, to even a portion of students is refreshing, since the trend in higher ed is almost always the opposite.
I feel many are being a little too critical here. I think Pitt was trying to do something laudable for a needy contingent of student that probably are most likely to have to drop out due to finances. That's not ideal for anyone.
Remember, when someone gets accepted, somebody else doesn't. If the accepted student doesn't finish, that's twice an opportunity lost for Pitt... the original student who dropped out, and the one who was not accepted at the time.
Rather than take the safe route and simply take more students with coin, they went this route, and that, taken in a vacuum is laudable.
As far as other suggestions/ criticism made, on helping the most accomplished, or to spread out the money to lower costs for every student... I think even those posters are aware of the realities of what universities are prioritizing in this day and age.
Many in higher ed would see "most accomplished" as a code for something that is toxic, elitist, possibly even racist. I'd disagree with that, but university thinking definitely doesn't match my own at my current age. Thirty five years ago, maybe it would have. But 35 years ago I also had a Walter Mondale sign in my room and probably would have gone to an AOC event (Bernie would have repulsed me even then, though).
As for spreading the savings to all students, likely the amounts would just be a drop in the bucket, when divided by the full number ... barely noticed by most ... yet not enough to help the neediest.
Given a bunch of mostly bad choices (in the university's view) they likely went the best direction they could.
Anyway, something to actually help the affordability, to even a portion of students is refreshing, since the trend in higher ed is almost always the opposite.
What is one of the many reasons people are leaving the Commonwealth? Because Pitt gives out more in-state tuition discounts than the state provides funding for? People leaving the Commonwealth is on Pitt 0%. Pitt produces and attracts more economic activity and talent and provides much more return for the city and state than it has ever received, and more than any other school in the Commonwealth. Pitt is one of the only reasons, perhaps the primary reason, Pittsburgh isn't Detroit east, and considering it created UPMC, it is absolutely the primary reason.
Last edited:
The funds though will come from some where and given since it wasnt directly allocated from a source of new donated funds means it will result in higher increases in tuition for all other students (of which that population will not receive a dime in Federal aid in terms of Pell Grants either). Just deciding to punish one group and pushing them into hardship in student loans is something I cannot get behind when there it is not merit-based on earned academic capacity to improve the Pitt community or added requirements (beyond the laughable 2.0 GPA "criteria") to accepting the funds.
As mentioned prior, Pitt just pushed more and more middle class families to the breaking point or further into debt in student loans (in which Pitt is already the most expensive public school) with this decision....getting to the point where Pitt doesnt look like good option for many academically-talented students coming from middle class families who are looking for value on their education and minimizing post-college student debt. This decision will also likely mean accepting less PA residents to force more out-of-state tuition fees.
To be clear, Penn State is actually the most expensive "public" school in the country. They tier their tuition rates for upperclassmen so costs increases as students progress through school, thus hiding the real cost of an education there for publications that publish such stats. Fits their well-established m.o. of transparency perfectly. But Penn State faces the same issue as Pitt...the nation's worst public support for higher education.
That said, we don't really know where this $25 million Pitt budgeted for this program is coming from. It may come from tuition increases, but not necessarily. But I agree, there should be a concerted effort to fundraise to increase merit aid as well.
The reality is that it doesn't matter one bit if US News is completely flawed, it is the ranking most prospective undergrads are looking at.
As I mentioned above, we don't know where the $25 million is coming from. We don't know if part of it will be fundraised. But the other reality is, Pitt is constantly fundraising for the General Scholarship Fund, and has been for decades, so it can hardly be accused of neglecting middle class students just because it has introduced a new program to target help to the neediest.
Last edited:
And with the kind of people we elect to office, the whole purpose of college is primarily to create lifelong debt for their donors and big banks to collect. People are dumb, they look at this and accept it and don't fight it. How about WE CUT THE MILITARY 50% and institute free public college, get something that matters. And quit spending on things (like the Military) THAT WE DON'T NEED AND IS A WASTE OR MONEY.
Similar threads
