For those of us who work in the enrollment management area of higher education, I can likely be called Captain Obvious with this assertion – spring was really bumpy. Having been in this line of work for about thirty years, this year was one of those – just when you think you have seen it all moments – suddenly you experience a new phenomenon. The primary cause for the bumpy spring was the federal delay in the release and administrative execution of the new FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid). As one my colleagues quoted to me, it was not “simplification” but “complification”.
The delays in the release and administrative execution of the new FAFSA caused a delay in an institution’s ability to appropriately assess a student’s potential financial need. Hence the accurate and timely delivery of a financial aid package – a meaningful piece of information that influences a student’s college selection – was subsequently also delayed. Some institutions that employ Institutional Methodology versus Federal Methodology in financial aid could still deliver a financial aid package, albeit with federal and state aid estimates. (Sidenote: Institutional Methodology in financial aid uses a different document to assess financial need than Federal Methodology that allowed for an institution’s ability to deliver a financial aid package to admitted students). However, even for those institutions that could execute financial aid decisions, if their competitor institutions practiced Federal Methodology, solely relying on FAFSA information, students (and families) did not have all the financial information needed to make a college selection.
Because of this, some institutions, moved back the traditional May 1 deposit deadline, the time when an admitted student makes a college selection, to a later date. This allowed for additional time for a financial aid package to be delivered and reviewed by the student and family before making a college selection. That said, some institutions did not move back the traditional May 1 deposit deadline.
Deciding to move the May 1 deposit deadline involved a great deal of deliberation for an institution that involved a variety of factors. Some of the deliberations go back to one of my prior posts on whether the admission process is about the student or the institution. From a student perspective, moving the May 1 deposit deadline seemed obvious – to allow admitted students more time to receive a financial aid package before making their college selection.
However, some of the decision-making process also involved the institution. For a meaningful number of institutions, particularly those that are tuition revenue dependent, their overall financial budget and fiscal health often depends on the number of traditional new fall students who enroll. For those institutions, extending the May 1 deposit deadline, while delaying some understanding of what projected fall enrollment could be, provided students with more time to make an informed enrollment decision. This would presumably reduce summer melt, where students submit an enrollment deposit, subsequently withdraw, and do not attend the institution. For those institutions that did not extend the May 1 deposit deadline, they may have captured more precise enrollment deposit numbers, however, forcing students to make a college selection without important financial aid information may result in higher projected summer melt.
Tied to this, some of the institutional decision to extend the May 1 deposit deadline likely also involved their respective market position via student demand. The stronger an institution’s market position, via higher student demand, allowed some institutions to not extend the May 1 deposit deadline given higher student affinity. This likely forced a population of students to make college selections prematurely, without all the financial aid information needed. At these institutions, it will be interesting to see whether their summer melt increases once deposited students receive their final financial aid package or from competitor institutions.
I am hopeful that the Fall 2024 admission and financial aid cycle is not one to be repeated. The student impacting decisions made relative to extending the May 1 deposit deadline caused many hand-wringing sleepless night experiences.
Comments