Trustee Committee Reviews Aid Policy
By Kyle Warneck
Staff Writer

This semester, as part of a periodic review of college policy, the Pomona College Board of Trustees has convened a committee to study and recommend changes to Pomona's financial aid policy. All of the members involved came away with a sense of how different Pomona's approach to financial aid is.

The committee senses that Pomona is doing something right as admissions are entirely need blind: admissions officers never see any financial aid information. At most schools, financial aid and admissions are housed in one department, but Pomona stresses how separate these issues are.

The admissions office is responsible for finding and admitting a diverse and talented student body, then the financial aid office steps in to meet 100 percent of demonstrated financial need. This policy puts Pomona in a separate class of schools which actually carries legal benefits.

Up until 1991 a group of predominantly East Coast private colleges met in what was called the Overlap Group. The Overlap Group would meet after admitting students and compare notes. Students who were admitted to multiple "Overlap Group" schools would receive the same financial aid offer from each of the schools. In 1991, the group was voluntarily disbanded after the Justice Department filed an antitrust suit against them. The Department of Justice accused these schools of colluding education prices.

A ban on information sharing was included in the 1992 Higher Education Act, with one exemption. Section 568 specified that private colleges that choose to be need blind in admissions and meet full demonstrated aid are eligible for an antitrust exemption to share information about financial aid decisions.

Under that exemption, last year the so called "568 Group" came to fruition. A group of 31 schools which includes Pomona and Claremont McKenna met to determine standardized practices for assessing student assets, cots of living variances and other details about assessing aid. This group is part of the Consortium on Financing Education, which is meeting this summer to discuss this and other policies. The financial aid review was up for its five year review and had an opportunity for national dialogue. This committee, like the student surveys that Pomona students received in their email, is about determining what Pomona's policies will be.

The 568 Group is receiving high marks from Pomona administrators. While this is the first year of fully implementing the best practices established by the 568 group, Director of Financial Aid Patricia Coye said that it is already paying dividends. "The consensus approach to needs analysis helps bring integrity to the program. If you look at the schools that participate, and the thought that's gone into this, you find consistency and make families feel more comfortable with a process that can otherwise be quite capricious."

While the committee has many important decisions facing it before reaching a consensus on its recommendations to the Board of Trustees at their April 4 meeting, students should not expect too many changes. The committee members believe Pomona's policy works. Vice President and Dean of Admissions Bruce Poch expressed that in admissions "money's just not part of the conversation." Meanwhile Coye commented on "an incredibly strong financial aid policy . . . that strives for consistency and equity amongst the Pomona population." The student representative to the committee, Maria MacHatton '06 said that "The system's frighteningly good right now . . . the system works."

Even with so much praise there are still real issues open for discussion. There is much debate nationally about what a financial aid policy should be. One trend is towards merit based or preferential aid.

These would consist of financial aid packages above demonstrated need targeted to recruit athletes, the strongest academic students or students from underrepresented ethnicities. These discussions have taken place on Pomona's committee as well, but there seems to be a real belief that these are not the right solutions for Pomona. Some committee members feel that such policies shift money away from the students who need it most. Other committee members worried about retention rates and the social climate that would stem from merit based awards. It would be awkward for two roommates with similar transcripts and backgrounds to be receiving different amounts of aid and the committee seems hesitant to setup these inequalities.

The committee is principally making fine adjustments. The last admissions policy review two years ago went through every detail of the process and finished by changing some wording and affirming the overall philosophy of the program. The same seems set to happen with financial aid. The philosophy of the college remains unchanged and many believe the current policy reflects that philosophy.

Poch, however, was quick to point out that "this is not a rubber stamp process. We have an extraordinary board that is smart and engaged and asks us the right kind of questions. They are not just there patting us on the head... They're helping us frame things and asking good, hard questions."

Others agree with the importance of this process, especially about the issue of financial aid. Machatton said "The determining factor for kids these days is the money. . . What excites me about the issue [financial aid] is that usually students don't get a say about the financial aid decisions. I get a say in the policy that will have a real impact on who comes into this school."

A report on the committee's findings will be available following the presentation of their recommendations to the Board of Trustees in April.