With the new FAFSA not considering untaxed income, I think it is easier for some middle income families to get closer to the full Pell Grant. This whole thread is from a poster with a family income of 130K and a full pell grant.
However, the main reason why I brought this issue up is because I am curious about how traditional measures of social mobility may or may not be accurate at some colleges. Mwfan1921 and eyemgh were discussing what type of college provides the most benefit for FGLI for families. Apparently, the Dale & Krueger study suggests that the only students that really benefit from attending highly rejective colleges are those from FGLI families. However, the social mobility web site seems to contradict this idea or at least it doesn’t give high mobility scores to those rejective colleges. I am trying to understand that seeming contradiction. The highest score went to California State University-Dominguez Hills despite the generosity of some meet needs-no loan schools like Brown or Williams.
Mostly, I think perhaps https://www.socialmobilityindex.org is defining the benefits provided to low income students differently than Dale & Krueger. The social mobility index is interested in overall societal responsibility/benefit not individual personal benefit. However, I also wonder if the difference also lies in the relatively high income of pell grant recipients at those rejective colleges. No matter how high one’s post-graduating starting salary, there may not seem to be as much mobility for a graduate if they came from a pell grant family that makes 130K vs. a graduate who came pell grant family that makes 25K.