FINANCIAL AID

Institutional Funding (1.7/3)

Student Concerns: Students asked that institutional funding be increased.

Response: With a fund raising goal of $18 million, medical school scholarship support is the second highest priority in the medical school’s ongoing capital campaign. Thus, the medical school shares students’ concerns about the priority for increased institutional funding. Realization of this goal has the twofold purpose of minimizing the educational debt levels of our current students while improving the medical school’s ability to enroll a more socioeconomically diverse student body.

The Medical Student Senate report recommended that the assignment of institutional funding be independent of the amount that students are awarded by outside scholarships. Federal regulations (and most private foundations) unfortunately do not permit a student to retain financial aid funds that are in excess of the annual cost of attendance unless such funds are for educationally related expenses. Our financial aid policy has always required private funding to be utilized in a manner that is most beneficial for the student. In the overwhelming majority of situations, the receipt of such funding reduces the student’s least favorable loan, usually the unsubsidized federal Stafford loan or replaces part of an unrealized parental contribution. While no change in this policy is planned, the Admissions and Financial Aid Office will emphasize in its annual award notifications that students with unusual expenses should contact the office to inquire as to whether such expenses may be covered by additional private funding.

Another recommendation was to provide more low-interest loans. Beginning with the 2000–2001 academic year, the medical school received a $1,000,000 grant to offer need-based loans to medical students. Income generated from this grant (about $35,000) was awarded to the first group of borrowers this year. These loans have no application fees, are interest-free during the in-school period, qualify for up to three years of deferment during residency training, and are repayable at a fixed rate of 5%. Preference was given to fourth-year students this year in order to accelerate the availability of funds to subsequent borrowers.

The director of admissions and financial aid is exploring ways to improve the terms of institutional loans. One proposal seeks to reduce the interest rate from 9% to 6%, extend the residency deferment period from one to three years, allow for a fellowship deferment, and provide a cancellation clause for death or disability. We are hopeful that these improvements will be approved and will go into effect for the 2001–2002 year.

We are also working to increase the medical school’s allocation of Perkins loan funds from the university. Perkins loans are low-interest federal loans that offer many desirable deferments and cancellation provisions that are not presently available in our institutional loan programs.

The report recommended that the medical school provide additional support for "extra costs" such as medical equipment, board review classes, and travel for residency interviews. The first-year student budget has always included an allowance for the purchase of a diagnostic kit at the end of the year. The allowance increased from $580 to $600 in the 2000–2001 year. The financial aid assistant director consults with the medical equipment vendor annually to determine the cost of a midrange kit.

In the December 2000 issue of The Pulse, the Office of Admissions and Financial Aid announced the availability of institutional loans to cover the cost of board review classes for a limited number of students. While preference is given to recipients of institutional aid, all financial aid recipients may request financial support. Students who believe that they would benefit from a board review course or from practice exams or other types of preparation are encouraged to contact learning specialist Phil Tetreault for more information.

Unfortunately, since residency interviews are not a requirement for graduation, federal regulations do not permit medical schools to include the expenses associated with them to be supported with financial aid. However, there are several market-rate private loans that allow credit-worthy students to borrow up to $10,000 per year for interviewing and relocation expenses. Although the interest rates tend to be higher than in other loan programs, borrowers are able to defer payments for up to four years during residency and choose flexible repayment plans thereafter.

Often, the medical school can help students absorb these expenses if they arrange an away elective to coincide with the residency interview season. In those instances, the financial aid office can increase a student’s budget and thus the student’s loan eligibility to cover the cost of the away elective (most importantly, airfare and housing) and thus help the student pay for most, if not all, of the interviewing expenses.
The report recommended that the financial aid office send students their summary sheet each year at the time that they must complete the financial aid forms for the following year to make the paperwork easier. The financial aid staff sincerely appreciated this suggestion. Last month, the office enclosed with each financial aid application booklet a personalized, cumulative summary of the student’s educational debt divided by the academic year and by loan program. To the extent possible, data regarding debt incurred prior to enrolling in the medical school was included. This information was cross-referenced with data from the National Student Loan Database System and other sources.

Explaining tuition increases (2.0/3)

Student Concerns: Students requested that the use of tuition dollars and annual increases should be explained to them.

Response: As a result of this suggestion, the customary letter from the dean to the students announcing the change in tuition was modified to be more informative. Additionally, the full text of the medical school’s report to the Budget & Finance Committee of the Brown Corporation was put on the medical school’s web site. The letter to the students and the report to the Budget and Finance committee can be found at http://biomed.brown.edu/deansreport/index.html.

Socioeconomic Diversity (2.3/3)

Student Concerns: Students were mildly concerned that there needs to be a greater commitment to increasing the socioeconomic diversity of the student body. Students recognized the value of socio-economic diversity as an ideal and noted the advantages of having classmates from a variety of socioeconomic backgrounds.

Response: The medical school administration enthusiastically concurs. Two years ago, in anticipation of new income from the capital campaign, we began to admit a PLME entering class in which over 50% of the matriculants qualified for financial aid, compared to 35% to 38% in previous years. Last year, approximately 53% of the entering class of PLME students received financial aid. While we are pleased with these results, our ability to sustain these percentages with future classes will depend upon the success of the capital campaign in raising additional scholarship funds. If all goes according to plan, the medical school should be need blind within the next several years.

Effective for the 2000–2001 year, the Financial Aid Policy Committee approved a change that reduced the base loan requirements for institutionally aided students from $23,700 to $22,000. (The base loan is the amount that a student must borrow before he or she is eligible for scholarship support.) This policy change resulted in over 90% of financial aid recipients receiving an increase in their scholarship over the previous year’s amount. The lower loan requirement coupled with the inevitable increase in student budgets resulted in students receiving an average scholarship increase of $3,000.

Although we were not able to further reduce the base loan for the 2001–2002 year, the majority of students nonetheless will continue to receive increases in their scholarships next year because budget increases will be absorbed by commensurate increases in scholarship funds.

The report also recommended that the medical school make a strong commitment to increasing the socioeconomic diversity of the student body and allow that principle to dictate changes in admissions and financial aid policy. We endorse this principle and have planned for an expansion in the Early Identification Program. We will include an additional linkage with an undergraduate institution that enrolls significant numbers of underrepresented minority and disadvantaged students, perhaps an historically black college or university or a school that is a member of the Leadership Alliance. The director of admissions and the associate deans for minority affairs will explore this recommendation in depth in the spring of 2001 with a target of establishing the linkage effective for the 2001–2002 year.

We are working to ensure that the composition of the admissions committee reflects faculty, students, and others who themselves fulfill the spirit of the mission statement and who represent the socioeconomic and ethnic diversity both currently represented and sought in our student body. Some progress has been made in this area for the 2000–2001 year, but more work needs to be done in the 2001–2002 year. With the assistance of the associate dean for faculty affairs, the director of admissions will identify potential faculty whose backgrounds and work experience demonstrate a predisposition for promoting socioeconomic diversity.