<p>St. Andrew’s this year omits the “need-blind” clause but promises “full need”. </p>
<p>Not sure where Neato is getting the information to support the “norm” that applicants are 50/50 FP to FA. If are all applicants, assume the foreign are pretty much aligned on the FP side. Those on FA range broadly 25-45% at any school. Simply put, the higher the percentage of foreign students matriculated at a school, especially over 15%, the more competitive the scramble for the reduced percentage of FA spots, given Neato’s ratio. If there are actually more than 50% FA applicants, then the competition gets real fierce. I agree with the proposition a few days/weeks ago that the total number of FP applicants (as opposed to applications, via common app multiplier) is probably steady over time; the foreign and FA applicants are the ones whose numbers have soared, along with the number of applications. One of the consultants, in 2011, reported 30% of total BS population as international, with China and Korea leading by a long shot, in an era of skyrocketing tuitions. Schools that can are propping up the $80-200k families with FA, otherwise they’d disappear from campuses. (This demographic might constitute roughly 15-30% on most campuses? In a pre-crisis analysis, Exeter found that from c. 1984-2004, number of American families who could afford to be FP dropped from 40% to 6%; that was beginning of Exeter’s FA policy changes, encouraged by Michael Gary.) Largest grants to <80k families have to be balanced with need for many smaller grants to the “middle class” group. </p>
<p>In the end, many families who are denied or waitlisted may assign cause to FA need, but that can not be known for sure unless a letter, like Choate’s, specifically says so. Very often, the cause for an admissible candidate, either FP or FA, to be denied/WL is geographical diversity need, building the class, or something else. You might think being FP was a huge help, or lock, but at most selective schools there are multiple FP applicants of comparable credentials for each seat (due to multiple applications?). Hence, apply to less selective schools, or apply to eight and “play odds” (which took the 26% admit rate of seven years ago to 13% today and created this virtuous cycle, from the schools’ POV).</p>