<p>I’ve been doing some research and so far what I found is universities accept students who parents can afford the tuition and buy their way in. Is this true?</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>well, to the extent that all colleges will have to fill some of their seats with students who require no financial aid, yes. There is an advantage that full pay students will have at many schools over students who need money. When there’s no money left in the FA fund, there are still seats open at any college.</p>
<p>Well I don’t qualify for financial aid in my community college so I guess I’ll have to buy my way in as a sophomore</p>
<p>No, not true. </p>
<p>Some schools are need-aware, as opposed to need-blind; that is, they do take into account ability to pay as part of the admission decision. In contrast, need blind schools separate the ability to pay from the decision to be admitted. </p>
<p>Few tip-top universities are need-aware, it tends to be the smaller LACs which acknowledge that, as they get to the bottom of the pool of applicants, when all available financial aid has been offered, they are need-aware, admitting the full pay student as opposed to the equally well qualified but high financial need students. Some argue this is more fair – why admit someone and then fail to give them the financial aid they need, when they cannot attend without the aid. Schools do identify if they are need-blind or need aware, so they are not hiding it. </p>
<p>But schools are not admitting unqualified applicants who can pay over well-qualified applicants who cannot. Merely being full pay is not the admissions winning lottery ticket. </p>
<p>No one said they are, @Midwestmomofboys, admitting unqualified candidates. But all but a handful of the thousands of colleges in the US have to take into consideration ability to pay.</p>
<p>The schools where ability to pay seems to be weighted most heavily are, in fact, not the most selective in academic terms…</p>
<p>I would like to think not. Sure there is an advantage for students who can pay, but there is a lot of need-based aid for students who cannot. There are plenty of merit-based scholarships as well. </p>
<p>I hear they buy their way in to houses and cars too!</p>
<p>Yeah, that’s different… Sorry. Couldn’t resist. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you mean by “buy your way in”? If you don’t qualify for financial aid, of course, you’ll have to find another way to pay the tuition and fees. It’s not like you have to pay extra to bribe the admissions committee or anything to let you in. If you can’t afford to pay (with aid, savings, scholarships, loans, etc), then you can’t go.</p>
<p>Just finished reading a book by a former admissions person and the short answer is that there is some deference given to students of wealthy donors, but it isn’t hundreds of them by any means and even those students have to be in the ballpark for admissions. It is along the lines of the deference often given to siblings of current students…Not a gimme, but given at least a second look.</p>
<p>Are you implying that people not qualified for college are getting into college because they can pay their way 100%?</p>
<p>That may be true, but people not qualified for college are getting into college if they get full financial aid too. Basically, a lot of unqualified people are getting into all but the top (100 or 200) colleges, and a handful of unqualified people are getting into those top colleges.</p>
<p>Being poor helps a lot more at the top schools than being rich, unless your family also has connections.</p>
<p>@rhandco:</p>
<p>Being poor and having the advantages that most upper-middle-class families have, maybe you mean. Most poor kids are too culturally disconnected and have too deficient an education thanks to their K-12 system to be attractive to the top schools.</p>
<p>Also, I won’t say that you can’t buy your way in at all schools. At the elite schools, you can’t unless your family is donating 7-8 figures maybe, but as you go down the totem pole in selectivity, the more it is that being full-pay is helpful.</p>
<p>All I can say is your research is not good.</p>
<p>It is very uncommon for someone to buy their way into college. </p>
<p>At a top 10 school, that would probably take $20 million or more, and that rarely happens.</p>
<p>Simply being fullpay is small, small potatoes. I know 1st hand of one kid at DS’s private high school who got off an Ivy WL by donating a new academic bldg. I have a personal friend who got into one of the Claremont schools when parents donated a new wing to a bldg. Another kid at DS’s selective high school got into the high school when parents underwrote the major renovation of a bldg. These were all 8-figure “donations”, not just 7-figure chump change.</p>
<p>Then there’s Margaret Bass, whose circumstance of admission into Stanford made the Wall Street Journal:
<a href=“WSJ.com - For Groton Grads, Academics Aren't Only Keys to Ivy Schools”>http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/golden1.htm</a>
</p>
<p>When it’s an IRS-approved, tax-deductible charitable-contribution $30 million quid pro quo, it’s no longer called a bribe. It’s respectably called a “development case”. Pretty much all schools nowadays have an Office of Development. </p>
<p>I would think that the biggest advantage wealthy people have is that cost is no longer a barrier. Most people, even upper middle class families, see cost as an issue and will have that as a consideration when applying. I doubt that many people have the money to assure admission. As someone earlier said the donation would have to be pretty spectacular to make that happen.</p>
<p>@GAMERFORLIFE40: I don’t know how my advice to you in your question about transferring to USC or UCLA morphed into your sudden research that indicated to you that money buys entrance into colleges. <a href=“What do private universities look for in a student - Applying to College - College Confidential Forums”>What do private universities look for in a student - Applying to College - College Confidential Forums;
<p>Perhaps it was just a burning question on your mind. For your particular situation, NO, money won’t get you a transfer admit into USC if you’re otherwise not qualified or can otherwise entice them to admit you. YES money is a barrier for many people to attending USC. They are two separate discussions and I advised you to make sure that cost wouldn’t de-rail your exploration into target transfer colleges.</p>
<p>People focus on the top of the totem pole so much.</p>
<p>I think that being full-pay would help at those LACs that generally only have a regional reputation, as they really need them for their finances to work.</p>
<p>BTW, being full-pay <em>may</em> help as a transfer to USC. It won’t get you in if you’re too unqualified, though.</p>
<p>Buy a building and you get in. (#15)</p>