Your Thoughts: If You Could Change One Thing About The Federal Methodology, What Would It Be?

Federal Methodology (FM), used to determine a student's eligibility for all forms of federal student aid, does not take into account some types of income and eliminates certain assets from consideration. FM also has certain rules on dependency status, household size, and eligibility for the simplified needs test and auto zero expected family contribution (EFC). We want to hear from you! Share your thoughts in the comments section below on what you would want to change about the Federal Methodology calculation and scroll through to see what other NASFAA members have to say.

 

Publication Date: 10/7/2014


Amy H | 11/12/2014 4:16:54 PM

Refine the concept of Household Size and better define what "more than half the support" means.

We see students/families list lots of extraneous people in their household size and we're constantly having to make corrections when we find not all the people listed on the FAFSA meet the definition. Which brings me to the other part of my comment. The concept of "providing more than half the support" is too vague, hard to quantify and hard to verify.

Sue Y | 10/30/2014 1:30:21 PM

My vote--Foreign Income Exclusion should be counted as non-taxable income.

Susie J | 10/23/2014 4:20:44 PM

1) Make DRT mandatory; IRS could populate message if they didn't file. 2) Get rid of homeless question; should be PJ. 3) Don't allow students or parents to "skip" questions regarding income and assets; make them answer NO if they have none. 4) If they have 0 (zero) income, other questions should be asked regarding how they are living and supporting themselves and/or their families. They should be required to answer these questions even if they are living with someone else. Such as: do they receive TANF, SNAP, etc.

Christina G | 10/16/2014 9:59:57 AM

I agree with all of the above! I hate to make the FAFSA more difficult for truly needy students, but I have seen way too many non-needy students receive Pell grants.

Make it easier for self-supporting students under 24 to become independent.

Include ALL untaxed income on the FAFSA, especially foreign income.

Eliminate auto-zero EFC.

Different IPAs per zip code. But include home equity.

Fewer dependency status questions. But DO ask non-custodial parent questions (make exclusion of non-custodial parent income a PJ decision).

Include W2s as part of DRT.

Exclude student income and earnings under a certain amount for verification purposes.

Build in additional questions for unusually low income to determine how families are supporting themselves.

Susan C | 10/10/2014 3:35:33 PM

For Dependent students: don't ask for dependent student tax information. Normally it is not that much income and it would make the application shorter.
Stop asking for pre-tax retirement savings (ex. W-2, boxes 12a-12d)--the money is going into a retirement plan that is not used in determining aid eligibility so why bother asking for it since it is not readily available without tax penalty.
I also agree with some of the other folks that want to eliminate the homeless question - that is a PJ option
Have the Data Retrieval Tool pull in W-2 earnings (and line 12 or 18 of the 1040) as well based on SSN. The more information that can be automatically populated, the better estimate students will get by the end of the application
Get rid of selective service question. For foreign students who come into the US after age 26, they are selected with that error every year.

Jessica S | 10/10/2014 12:39:05 PM

1. Eliminate the auto-zero EFC for the reasons mentioned by Carol C, especially when a business loss or carryover loss is involved. Some of these families have very substantial assets, so allowing a full Pell one year and next to nothing the next just because AGI increased a bit is very hard to explain to families. They figure the school is doing something wrong to cause this to happen.

2. Count all sources of income that lie outside of the AGI as untaxed income. This includes social security, foreign income, earned income credit, etc.

3. Do not allow anyone who would qualify as an independent student to be counted in a dependent student's number in college, especially since otherwise dependent students who are attending military academies cannot be included in the number of college. In addition, don't allow otherwise independent students to be counted as someone being supported by the household unless there is a highly atypical situation, such as an older sibling with a chronic and persistent disability living at home, etc.

4. Allow a very modest asset protection allowance for students (maybe $1000? $1500?) to encourage saving and budgeting. However, since many initiatives are pushing to "finish in four", consider changing their contribution from assets to increase to 25% after the protection.

5. Make the DRT a more prominent button. I know we have figured out where to go, but families go in looking for a DRT button and instead have to go into the "Make a correction" tab, which seems counterintuitive for many of them. After they've logged in, if there is no DRT on file, maybe asking them if they'd like to complete DRT before bringing them to other sections would be more efficient for all involved.

Sandra N | 10/8/2014 5:0:39 PM

Per review of the 2014-2015 federal methodology concerning the Social Security Tax Allowance calculation (Table A2). Is it intentional for parent(s) with a 7 digit income earned from work and a six digit AGI to have a Pell eligible parent contribution (especially when both parents have a 7 digit income) due to the social security tax allowance? When compared to the 2013-2014 table A2, there are no differences made in 2015 to account for the change to a 7 digit income. I believe ED needs to look at this!

Michele D | 10/8/2014 10:56:18 AM

My one change would be to use prior prior tax year data. So for the 15/16 award year you would use 2013 tax data instead of 2014 tax data. Folks could complete the FAFSA earlier, have less problems getting IRS transcripts or completing the IRS data retrieval process, and families could potentially get an earlier estimate of aid.

Petra F | 10/8/2014 8:35:30 AM

Establish a maximum allowed for business income to be considered for the Pell Grant. In my opinion it is more important (as a taxpayer) to determine a student's eligibility on 'all' income received not just making the FAFSA easier to complete.
I agree with changing the age of 24 for independent status and go by where they are living.

Amy P | 10/7/2014 3:17:18 PM

Go back to adding back Foreign Income Tax exclusions.

Bruce D | 10/7/2014 2:39:40 PM

I would dump both the auto-zero and simple formulas and go back to a full blown analysis for all students, using all income, untaxed income, and assets. I know this sounds hardcore, but if a student can't read and follow instructions, then maybe they aren't college material. Also, I think we should require non-custodial parent income like some of the private schools do for their institutional aid. There are way too many people who are gaming the system by filing under poor divorced mom and letting rich dad skate (or vice versa).

Tammy C | 10/7/2014 2:23:18 PM

Independent applicants indicating they have $0 income, not required to file taxes and $0 government assistance; yet proving financial support for 5 in their HH? The very statement is conflicting information. These applications are never selected for verification and take a ton of administrative burden when the result is almost always a 0 EFC. It is not logical for an applicant to have an ISIR pushed to the school with this information. Stop the students in the application process and require they provide reasonable financial resources or a comment section to explain how they support their HH of 5 on the $0 amount being reported.

An easier process for a dependent student clearly demonstrating they fully support themselves financially (i.e. rent, utilities, etc…) be able to use their income to determine need.

Have the ISIR flag or prevent married applicants from selecting tax filing status as “Head of Household”. Perhaps there could be a drop down menu with all of the eligibility indicators and if after answering the questions they clearly filed their taxes incorrectly they are unable to move forward in the application – prompting them to contact their tax preparer. I have seen a substantial increase with this issue over the last few years. If the IRS is not questioning it then why is the DOE passing the burden down to financial aid administrators?

The question “dependents other than” is often completed incorrectly. Can this be clarified or eliminated altogether.

I would agree with one of the comments about mandatory DRT use and add that even if you did not file you must utilize the tool and it would populate that there is no record of filing with the IRS.

Patrick S | 10/7/2014 2:12:44 PM

Use Total Positive Income rather than AGI as a basis for the income portion. The formula may need to be tweaked, but the current state of giving zero EFCs to people with large write-offs is anathema to the spirit of the FAFSA. Let those people who honestly make less receive more assistance.

David S | 10/7/2014 1:1:38 PM

The number of dependency questions is absurd...used to be 4, now up to 13, with many of the additions identifying students who would be poor as dependent students anyway. Simplified needs test should be eliminated, it's the type of thing that can be manipulated to make someone look needier than they are. Make the need analysis formula more sensitive to the 1001 ways that the well-to-do can hide their money thanks to a friendly tax code...who knows how much Pell money goes to people who don't need it at all but can massage their 1040 and assets in such a way that they qualify. People with inch-thick tax returns and AGI's in negative numbers (you have to have lots of money to have an AGI that small) shouldn't be qualifying for need-based aid.

Karla W | 10/7/2014 1:1:04 PM

Net Operating Losses make me cry. High income families with 0 EFC's getting full Pell. True low income families do not have negative AGIs.

Denise D | 10/7/2014 12:59:57 PM

NASFAA--please either eliminate the character limit or put a counter in here to tell us where we are!

Thank you.

James U | 10/7/2014 12:51:49 PM

Good question... I don't believe the Federal Methodology has changed much since its inception. I would like to see the Income Protection Allowance set by where the student or student's parent(s) live. There's a HUGE difference in the cost of living between Hastings, NE, and San Diego, CA. Especially in the cost of housing. Or property taxes. One size does not fit all anymore in our diverse nation, and where one lives geographically has much to do with how much of their income is devoted to basic living expenses.

Sean M | 10/7/2014 12:49:56 PM

We are all trying to make a complex system/formula even more so. Similar in appearance to the Pell Grant grid, the tax return within which a student is an exemption should have columns & rows for AGI & number of exemptions resulting in a federal grant. That's it for federal aid. If you want to look at other factors (foreign income exclusion, assets, etc.) for your own institutional financial aid, knock yourself out.

Patti C | 10/7/2014 12:45:32 PM

I agree with Cathleen W. Student savings and earnings are counted too heavily. We should give them more incentive to earn and save for college.

Denise D | 10/7/2014 12:44:19 PM

Ah, the 2000 character limit got me! And the back button doesn't let me recoup the remainder!

All net assets should count, including retirement accounts and homes, but the asset allowance needs to be revised to protect money for retirement based on social security benefits not kicking in until later than 65 for most current parents and independent students, and the likelihood that those benefits will be smaller and that people will likely also have to provide much more of their own health care costs as medicare benefits are already very low and stand to be cut even more. Everyone should be on an even keel though, so people who own homes and have retirement funds should not be advantaged over those who don't--and people whose homes are still "under water" should be able to have that negative amount counted in the formula.

Independent students who have low or no income and do not file taxes or claim 0 exemptions and dependent students who claim they are living off campus need to be examined more closely. A person who claims 0 exemptions or who does not file taxes needs to report who, if anyone, claims them. A person with 0 exemptions by IRS definition
is providing less than half of his/her own support. Yet the federal processor does not even require that these people fill out the untaxed benefit section of the FAFSA. And dependent students who say they're living off campus, not with parents but are from the local area often are living with parents or relatives--or they switch houses with a friend. Some also report living off campus because they say they are paying rent to their parents--which means that the parents should be reporting the rental income on their taxes and only claiming the student if they are paying more than half the student's total expenses after rent. These items contribute to a large number of students receiving loans for off-campus room and board costs they don't actually have, or someone else is paying. For parents

Denise D | 10/7/2014 12:18:19 PM

One is not enough.

Auto zero EFC may be hard to explain, but the bigger problem with auto zero EFC for a dependent student is that the dependent student may be making more income than the parents, yet once the parental information is reported, the student's information isn't even considered.

Add back all the excluded income (welfare benefits, foreign income exclusion, VA benefits, social security benefits, co-op income, tuition credits, EIC, child tax credits, etc.) and also make it mandatory to report untaxed income and benefits (no leaving it blank) including all the tax credits and things like depreciation and paper/carryover losses. Make the living allowances for families more reasonable--so that the family can maintain a moderate standard of living that allows for them to be able to have things like health insurance, money to put away for retirement and a bit of savings to handle things like home maintenance and emergencies. Allow for a negative EFC, especially in the case of the student earning more than the parents.

Put the family's actual medical/dental/optical expenses back into the formula and subtract these from income. Now with the Affordable Care Act, many families are paying a lot more in health insurance and medical costs that they did not have to pay in the past, and I've even seen some have to take money our of IRAs or retirement accounts and pay penalties and taxes on these distributions just to pay the health care costs--especially when an employer has stopped providing these. Also take out of the income any penalties people have to pay because they can't afford the mandatory health insurance.

I know this is controversial, but I think we should also put K-12 private educational and home-schooling costs in the formula for siblings/dependent children still in school when the student is in college. These families are paying twice for their kids' education--once in taxes form which they garner no personal benefit and once

Travis S | 10/7/2014 11:53:03 AM

Many good suggestions I particularly like the suggestion of having income and asset protection tied to zip code.
Dependency status should not be determined by age but by where support is actually coming from. If a 20 year old is self-supporting they should be treated as independent and if a 27 year old is living with a family member that is supporting them that person's income should be included in the calculation. And the support should not be limited to parents but whoever is providing the support regardless of the student's age (grandparent, sibling, etc.).
Scholarship reported on a tax return is notoriously misunderstood and should be moved to a function of a PJ if a family can document the inclusion on a tax return.
Not a matter of methodology, but FotW needs to give a better explanation of what an amended tax return is. So many students do not understand what it means and select yes.

Cindy H | 10/7/2014 11:45:16 AM

There are some very good suggestions so far. So these are some other thoughts. We are a QA school and the most missed questions are the grant and scholarship aid when they file it on their taxes. We have found that the overwhelming majority of students do not file taxes on this and should answer the question as $0. Another question which has issues is where the student is fairly young and they answer the dependent question and list siblings or roommates. They should be dependent or if they are independent due to age - their EFC should actually be higher since they are not truly supporting the additional household members. I would also say they need to deal with the selection of the 30% per day for processing. Whle we don't deal with newly selected verified students if they make a change such as address on the FAFSA - it is too confusing to students with all the timing involved. And if they should be selected, then the should be selected for verification.

Sharon H | 10/7/2014 11:43:11 AM

Include all income, assets and untaxed income in the calculation for financial aid. I also agree with others about getting rid of the homeless questions for independence.

Michael D | 10/7/2014 11:22:13 AM

collect all asset information and stop auto zero. Millionaire who doesnt' work but files because of interest earned gets a zero EFC because of low taxable income and assets ignored (seen it happen). Also agree with others that the writing off of business expenses many time gives Pell to family that is actually really well off if take into consideration all assets and income.

Kimberly L | 10/7/2014 11:10:41 AM

I work at a community college in a large metropolis. Most students/families have other income and resources in addition to financial aid. I wish CPS would select FAFSAs for verification that have no income and no public benefits reported. I recognize for some colleges students live on campus and have no income whatsoever. I am not referring to those types of students. I am tired of seeing these students with "no money" at the mall in the Coach store or driving the latest cars.

Matt F | 10/7/2014 11:8:39 AM

I agree with getting rid of the homeless questions. Those situations can be handled with PJ.

Helen F | 10/7/2014 11:8:26 AM

Aren't we a spirited bunch? I agree with many of the comments already left. If there was just one thing I could change, it would be to eliminate all of the different methodologies and just have one uniform standard methodology. If someone should really have a $0 EFC, then the methodology should be revised to reflect that. Auto-zero and simplified methodology generally do not change outcomes for truly needy students and families, whereas they do seem to give unfair advantage to a select few who either select the wrong answer to the 1040 question and skirt verification, or those who possibly know enough to intentionally file a 1040A to avoid having to report assets. Truly poor families have an easy enough time answering asset questions, as they generally have few to no assets.

Linnea T | 10/7/2014 11:2:03 AM

I agree with other comments regarding the auto-zero EFC. I have seen families with gross amounts of assets, but they get excluded from the student's FAFSA entirely because the parents have their own business and write off so many questionable deductions that their AGI is lower than what, in reality, they actually took home for the year.

Amy S | 10/7/2014 10:57:48 AM

I would add an income protection allowance based on ZIP code. It seems absurd that people with much higher costs of living should get the same protection allowances as those in less expensive areas. This is one of the biggest complaints I hear from our families in the Northeast, California, and even Northern Virginia.

Sheree B | 10/7/2014 10:48:52 AM

To continue:

Untaxed social security should remain excluded. If you are on social security, you are either retired on a fixed income or disabled on a fixed income.

Someone else suggested including a pop up box during IRS DRT to indicate if an untaxed pension amount is a rollover. I think that is a great idea.

The dependency questions for homelessness should be eliminated. This is a PJ, and they are rarely answered correctly anyways.

I'm sure I can think of more...

Sheree B | 10/7/2014 10:45:12 AM

No one wants to make it harder for students to get a Pell Grant. We want students to receive the aid that they are rightfully eligible for, not give ways in which students with means get grants that should be going to students who do not have means. You can have two students/parents with the same household size, income, and assets, but because one filed a 1040A and the other filed a 1040 and is not eligible for a 1040A, one student gets an auto-zero and the other has a higher EFC. This is not an equitable way to measure the ability to pay. Why should people who are self employed and already having to pay self employment tax also be penalized for daring to work for themselves.

There should be ONE calculation, period, that counts everything, and the Pell Grant extended to higher EFC middle class families who historically have fallen into the range of not well off enough to pay out of pocket but too well off for any grant assistance. Not a huge amount but a little to help offset the costs. With everything being counted accurately, there should be enough savings to increase the award for the lowest income households and have a little bit for the middle class families.

Also, count foreign earned income as untaxed income. It is not an accurate reflection of the ability to pay when you have hundreds of thousands of dollars being excluded from the calculation that the family earned.

Include an asset protection allowance for dependent students. They should be encouraged to save for college and offset some of their expenses, not discouraged by a calculation that doesn't allow for even $5 cash in your pocket.

The primary residence should continue to be excluded from the assets. Again, we want to encourage home ownership, not penalize people for buying a house with equity. If you are living there, you are not getting cash for the equity unless you take out a loan, and more borrowing is the last thing we want to encourage. We do not want to keep people in debt.

Billy B | 10/7/2014 10:24:57 AM

I've thought about this quite a bit. Though I've never tried to limit it to one thing. I would probably completely get rid of the asset questions. It confuses students and parents and the cases where it actually matters are so few and far between compared to the times it really shouldn't matter. It also kicks in much too early for students and divorced parents. And by gosh add back the foreign income credit back (sorry couldn't resist that one)

Lauren G | 10/7/2014 10:23:38 AM

I have to somewhat agree with a previous comment: I think students should have an incentive to work; afterall, isn't that why they are in school? Pertaining to this, I believe a student should be able to earn up to a particular amount (4000? -- estimated on what they might make in a Summer job) that doesn't work against them.

Sherri S | 10/7/2014 10:19:22 AM

I would like to see the dependency questions addressed, specifically the homeless questions (56-58) and question 51 regarding children who the student provides more than 1/2 of support. It seems that we are seeing more and more students with children who are continuing to be supported by the student's parent(s). We continue to get a mix of students who answer the question incorrectly and do not have children as well as those who indicate they have children but are not actually providing the support. It becomes burdensome to confirm that the question is being answered correctly/accurately. Can there be a standard in which schools can use to determine what is considered 1/2 of support?

Mark G | 10/7/2014 10:16:20 AM

All the comments about adding in untaxed Social Security income are mean-spirited, if you ask me. Anyone who thinks these people are getting away with something ought to be required to live on a similar income and nothing else. On the other hand, Foreign Income Exclusion income should definitely be added back in.

Lauren G | 10/7/2014 10:12:42 AM

I understand the student vs spouse earnings but for a dependent student's parental info, remove Qs #88 & 89; does it really matter how much dad earned vs mom? If so, isn't this discriminating?

Lauren G | 10/7/2014 10:4:37 AM

In reference to the question #53, "Do you have dependents (other than your children or spouse) who live with you and who receive more than half . . .", I feel that no one should be able to claim these other "dependents" if these others would be considered "independent" if they were applying for the Pell grant.

Eric A | 10/7/2014 9:58:49 AM

I'm shocked by how many of you want to add things to the FAFSA or make it harder for students to get a Pell Grant. Let's help students and families as much as we can. A. Simplify the FAFSA by getting rid of untaxed income B. Don't add in things like home equity and EIC C. Allow students who have no parental income support to be independent D. Mandate data retrieval and get rid of verification altogether (or reduce the numbers selected by 50%). Data retrieval should also pick up on rollovers, but not sure how exactly to do that. Maybe a separate pop up box if there is some income showing in that line item on the tax form to ask if it is a rollover? In one word...simplify!

Tara O | 10/7/2014 9:56:01 AM

Add back untaxed income that was previously removed (SS, foreign income exclusion, EIC, etc) and require that all families report assets regardless of income. There are some that look 'low-income' until you review their assets. Besides awarding federal aid equitably, I believe it would be more aligned with how schools award their institutional aid.

Also, stop requiring grad/professional students to correct the FAFSA data when they're not even pell eligible - it's just more work than is necessary for the families and the aid officers.

Nathan B | 10/7/2014 9:41:29 AM

The question of parents married, I am finding students putting NO based on the fact that the students biological parents have divorced, but parent has remarried, so they only provide the income of the biological parent. Thus creating additional documents to update information.

Michael H | 10/7/2014 9:27:40 AM

I think it would be helpful to narrow down the bachelors degree question to one clear location.

Donna F | 10/7/2014 9:27:14 AM

To justify my previous comment of allowing Medical & Dental expenses PAID be an automated PJ/Special Circumstances on the FAFSA - when the new Health Care law begins to hit the family budget, this may affect any financial decisions the family would make of the affordability to send their child to college.

Ruth C | 10/7/2014 9:24:43 AM

Great suggestions, everyone! I vote for requiring parents to provide asset information if they must file a 1040, regardless of their AGI.

Cathleen W | 10/7/2014 9:23:40 AM

I would ignore both student AGI/income and student cash, checking and savings for students up to $25,000. There are many students in today's economy that are trying to help out with expenses both at home and college that are being penalized for having worked. It is frustrating to see a student earn $8,000 or $9,000 to finish paying their student account bill just to lose their Pell the next year because they worked.

Connie A | 10/7/2014 9:18:23 AM

I would eliminate the question Rcvd 1st Bach Deg by 7-01-2014. For some reason I have a lot of students that answer "yes" when it should be "no".

Donna F | 10/7/2014 9:14:12 AM

--Earned Income Credit and Social Security benefits should be put back into the formula as income.
--Medical and dental expenses PAID should be an automated special circumstance to determine need. Especially with the new health care law. If this could be automated via IRS data retrieval that would be great - schedule A has this data.

Dart H | 10/7/2014 9:9:58 AM

Gosh, the FAFSA is so horrible as it is I can't imagine changing only one thing. I could pick the Selective Service question, since we have not had a draft since the 1970s. I could pick the convoluted dependency questions....Wait, I have a better idea! Why not change the question to what one thing would you keep?

James C | 10/7/2014 9:5:28 AM

Eliminate the number in college question. A parent who has two kids one year apart has the EFC nearly cut in half if both are enrolled yet if you have two kids four years apart who are never concurrently enrolled you get no benefit despite the out-of-pocket expenses being the same. Number in college is also hard to verify unless you go through the laborious process of requiring sibling verification.

Michael H | 10/7/2014 9:3:50 AM

I worked with IM for years and it would burn me whenever someone we pegged as no need for IM would end up with a full Pell because of negative AGI. So I agree with Marcelle.

Leonard G | 10/7/2014 8:55:04 AM

Eliminate income and asset exclusions as they distort the true picture related to the family's ability to contribute.

Edward I | 10/7/2014 8:50:35 AM

Get rid of allowing grad school siblings as family members in college. They are already considered independent for fed aid purposes, so the family is getting a double break.

Richard H | 10/7/2014 8:49:42 AM

Add back losses and Foreign Income Exclusion

Doreen Del M | 10/7/2014 8:48:04 AM

Currently the value of a business is not reported if the family owns and controls more than 50 percent of the business and the business has 100 or fewer full-time equivalent employees. The number of full-time employees should be reduced to 30. Many times I've seen a value of a business reported on the CSS Profile that is not counted on the FAFSA; however, if it was, the student would not have qualified for Pell.

William B | 10/7/2014 8:37:08 AM

Expand NA to collect additional IRS transfer data and exclude negative incomes, or set to zero.

William B | 10/7/2014 8:35:29 AM

Elimate the confusing special independent student status questions and defer to professional judgment. Example Unaccopanied Youth, etc....

James E | 10/7/2014 8:33:10 AM

If I could change one income-related item, it would be to put the various forms of untaxed income back into the formula -- Foreign Income Exclusion (as noted above), Earned Income Credit, Untaxed Social Security Benefits. There was never a good reason to pull them out, let's put them back in.

If I could change one asset item, I would put Home Equity back into the formula. It was only removed to garner middle class votes decades ago. By removing it we created larger "assumed need" for families with significant resources.

If I could change one non-financial item, it would be to clean up the Dependency questions, getting rid of the homeless options and the guardianship options. Students do not understand the questions, respond to them incorrectly much of the time, and students who in fact meet these criteria were generally appropriately moved along via Professional Judgment overrides anyway.

jimeddy

Marcelle T | 10/7/2014 8:26:35 AM

Don't allow negative income to provide a family with full Pell, usually these losses are carryovers and it's obvious the family has resources, and in most cases, should not be Pell eligible.

Sandra T | 10/7/2014 8:19:43 AM

Anyone who files a 1120S or 1065P tax form should be ineligible for Pell Grant. I have thought this for the past 30 years of doing financial aid. Those are vehicles for hiding income and assets and anyone who files them should not be eligible for federal grants.

Caroline B | 10/7/2014 8:19:19 AM

Foreign Income Exclusion should be counted as non-taxable income.

Stephen F | 10/7/2014 8:17:53 AM

I would add a small asset protection allowance for students so they are not penalized for saving a few thousand dollars.

Carol C | 10/7/2014 8:17:42 AM

I would eliminate the auto zero EFC. It is frustrating to explain when a family has a very slight change in their circumstances but has a large change in their EFC from one year to the next because one year they qualify for auto zero and the next year they do not.

You must be logged in to comment on this page.

Comments Disclaimer: NASFAA welcomes and encourages readers to comment and engage in respectful conversation about the content posted here. We value thoughtful, polite, and concise comments that reflect a variety of views. Comments are not moderated by NASFAA but are reviewed periodically by staff. Users should not expect real-time responses from NASFAA. To learn more, please view NASFAA’s complete Comments Policy.
View Desktop Version