<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not sure exactly why UCLA is considered private by some, but i’ve heard this by at least a few people. I obviously know it isn’t a private university, but i can sort of understand why some might think so. I get the same sort of feeling from UVa. </p>
<p>I think UCLA has to work especially hard to promote that its a public university (much harder than berkekey.) It goes out of its way to admit Los Angeles students which have typically had low admit numbers at the university, and to promote ‘diversity.’ It also has the highest number of pell grant recipients.</p>
<p>At the same time, they were the first UC to have a privatize a part of itself (Anderson) and probably have the lowest California admit rate of any public school in the state (17%). It also probably doesn’t help that the university is located in one of the most affluent areas of Los Angeles.</p>
<p>UCLA’s like private universities with regard to its prestige, donations and fundraising; but it’s like a public in its mission to promote the public good. It’s sort of like a person who works at a non-profit during the day, and spends his nights networking with LA’s elite.</p>
<p>As far as USC is concerned, it being regarded as a public university probably has to do with the other USC</p>
<p>[University</a> of South Carolina](<a href=“404 page not found | University of South Carolina”>http://sc.edu/)</p>