After reading through the various comments by posters, it’s clear there are so many leaps of conclusion and assumptions based upon the very limited information in the article.
What we know: We have a little idea what the household income is annually (other than "solidly middle class, which if taken literally, in Mass, is 77k/year).The family in the article has an EFC of $14K. The school sticker price is $47k. The school gifted the family $10,200. The true cost for this student to attend, ( which is before loan and work study) is $36,800/year in after tax dollars. If the above assumption is correct, that is almost half of the family’s take home income annually. The student is going to contribute her $5k in savings. The school in the article has an endowment of over $17 million. Those are the facts.
We have no idea if there are other siblings and if any are in college at the time the student in the family will attend college.
We have no idea what this family has in savings.
We have no idea what the mothers disability income is per month nor how long she has been on disability.
We have no idea if the family provides or cares for other family members in some way, shape or form.
We have no idea what the home equity situation, if a home is even owned, nor if other property is owned
We have no idea what the family’s uncovered medical costs are the past few years.
We have no idea if the family ran the NPC for the school, and if they did, how many times over the past how many years.
Yes, many family’s rely on the EFC to produce a number that corresponds with it’s name sake. I agree with some that the title of that calculator needs to change, or just get rid of it all together. It’s at least misleading as it stands today. I mean, expecting a family of 4 to live on just under 30K/year( the amount shielded from the EFC formula) is laughable. It seems we know which side of the student/education industry equation has the better lobbyists.
Some posters assumed that the family was doing it’s best and that there was financial hardship.
The rest seem to assume that there was financial hardship and that, in spite of the EFC number being less than half of the true cost to attend the school, that the family could have done something in prior years to prepare better. I think we can all agree that hindsight is 20/20 and if the family had any idea this school would be this expensive, they could have prepared better. And yes, other options for post high school education in the chosen field are maybe available. That wasn’t in the article.
My assumption, and perhaps incorrect, is that the school can afford to gift this family more than the $10,200 listed in the article. Further, my experience has been, broadly (and there are many exceptions) that schools seem to have the ability to give more to a student’s education, and less to the facilities arms race that is taking place in the post high school education industry. The school in the article has a lengthy mission statement that says nothing about getting the most $ out of a family, as seems to be in this case. : file:///C:/Users/ASUS%20Family%20Computer/Downloads/Mission%20Statement.pdf
My main point was that, given the little we know from the article, a little less preaching and “holier than tho” would be the order of the day. I often wonder reading some posts, how many are quietly shills or have a conflict of interest, or if the main goal is good old fashioned shadenfruede. If you expect others to come to you for your expertise and advise, assuming we are all doing our level best is probably a good starting position to take.