' Wrote:In my humble opinion, school (as an adult) is an "in addition to" work, but that's just me.
I'm trying to see this in the spirit it was given and not get my panties in a bunch, as there seem to be some judgements on taking out loans and assumptions about our maturity and responsibility by doing so. Perhaps 2am after out-of-left-field information when I can't call the school isn't the best time for me to post on the internet? So maybe a little all around clarification might be in order. :-)
My husband and I are 38 and 40 years old, respectively. Until September of last year both of us were professionals; I owned my business and he had been with the same company for over 10 years. My husband's department was moved to a different state a week after his father passed away suddenly and we made a choice to return to our home state to be closer to our families. My husband is on the dislocated worker program through unemployment. I chose to close my business for the move and was unable to collect unemployment. We have a young child who is not in school yet. We are using this opportunity given to us by The Shiny Red Reset Button to do several things: complete the degrees we have been monkeying around with for years (that directly equate to significant pay increases in our fields), take the time to be with our daughter full time before she starts school herself, and negate paying for childcare.
We have coordinated our finances accordingly and are quite comfortable, provided that we are still receiving an influx of funds in one way or another that are in addition to our existing savings and investments, but also in excess of my husband's UI. I have been attending school part time for three years working toward my BA and my husband has 90+ accumulated credits. Both of us will be entering as Seniors for our final year for our BAs. While it may seem counterintuitive, the loans are intentional, as we are relying on them for only one academic year (I accepted tuition-only loans for my previous years) and both of our professions participate in loan forgiveness programs. We have avenues to not accept loans, but the loans incur interest at a significantly lower rate than our investments yield. We pay down our interest accrued to zero every quarter and will leave with a principle balance only when we graduate. We also have zero consumer debt outside of one car loan and a secured credit card for coffee and parking that we have through our credit union to maintain a credit score for when we are ready to buy another house here.
So...
I am too deep down the rabbit hole with TESC to stop and find another school before we both need to start the next quarter. I was casually doing my quarterly budget when I stumbled across the 45 day disbursement and then got broadsided with no residual funding for what amounts to 4.5 months for either myself or my husband. The 45 day disbursement period is quite excessive compared to anything that we have dealt with before. After a glass of wine and some sleep we have resigned to accept whatever system we need to in order to just be done (especially since I'm going on to a Masters and I'm already feeling like I'm in the movie
Groundhog Day). We will move whatever finances we need to in order bridge the gap. With TESC my issues are the lack of transparency about that program
specifically about how it works for Financial Aid students, because as a cash student it is very straightforward.
I called to speak with the regional office of the Department of Education that handles New Jersey and the compliance officer that I spoke with agreed that the payment schedule for the CTP are outside of the intended purpose of Financial Aid. Furthermore there are possible compliance issues if you have enough Financial Aid to cover all of your tuition obligation by the 2nd quarter, because you would be receiving Pell grant funds as a 100% cash transaction if you owed no tuition for the 3rd quarter. She opened an investigation into the policy at TESC. She also felt that the 45 day disbursement was excessive.
There is a difference between being financially liable for any balance on the $8,111 tuition package if you don't maintain your Financial Aid to ensure funding to TESC from DoE for the full amount within a 12 month period, versus forcing a student to pay for credits that they haven't enrolled for yet which results in a grant monies being filtered through the school directly to the student. It is possible that they are saying that tuition for students on this plan are higher for the first quarter and lower for subsequent quarters, but that creates a preferential tuition scale for cash students that is explicitly prohibited in order to comply with any entitlement program. I'm not saying that questions weren't asked and TESC isn't following a plan that they feel is sound, but I'm having a hard time seeing how this logic passed a committee at DoE given the strict guidelines I am painfully aware of thanks to my last four years as an undergrad. It is possible to see how this would be sort of feasible if you were only receiving student loans and there was a very free and loose exemption for TESC with credit reporting to DoE, but if you have a full Financial Aid package as a senior it gets weird - if the payments are broken down over three quarters the 3rd quarter has no tuition due for a Pell grant to fund, but if it breaks it down into four payments you aren't enrolled at all for the fourth quarter and will leave 25% of the whole package on the table, even though you would be eligible for the full 100% over three quarters at another institution on a by-credit system.
Here is an excerpt from the email the DoE asked me to compile:
Quote:
- The CTP at TESC is requiring that I fund credits I am not enrolled for by withholding aid refunds for the first (and possibly second) quarters.
- This means that for my 3rd quarter I would receive a 100% refund in Pell Grant monies issued on my behalf for the intention of paying tuition.
- The CTP is outside of the sprit if the Financial Aid program if it restricts funds that are permissible for students to use for living expenses when it doesn't treat each quarter as a separate contract.
- I am not being given an option to accept the Financial Aid package as only three quarters, instead of four, even though I am only needing 36 credits to graduate. By doing so this is reducing both my entitlement to Pell grant funds and my options for funding my loans.
- My verbal conversations with TESC Admissions and Financial Aid were vague and contradictory.
- No person I spoke with during the admissions process was familiar with how this program works with Financial Aid students, and thus gave me misleading or false information.
- The specifics about the funding for the CTP and the required four quarter disbursements were key to me making an informed choice.
- The only place I have found documentation of this complex policy is the one sentence in the Financial Aid Handbook.
TESC does offer a by-credit program for almost double the cost of tuition included in the CTP. While not explicit, I feel this differentiation of costs is prohibitive to Financial Aid students. I feel that funding the full CTP program before distribution of quarterly award refunds is outside of the scope and intent of the Financial Aid process. I am wanting to commit to the full 36 credits over three quarters and have access to the same financial incentives available as a Financial Aid that students paying with their own funds do. I feel the costs should be spread evenly over each prospective quarter for Financial Aid students, only incurring financial obligation above a reasonable quarter tuition and fees if the student lacks sufficient aid for that quarter, lacks sufficient academic progress, or fails to complete classes that would lead to TESC not receiving tuition from Financial Aid on behalf of the student for the full 36 contracted credits.
![[-]](https://www.degreeforum.net/mybb/images/collapse.png)
