STATS IN BRIEF

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DECEMBER 2010 NCES 2011-175

What Is the Price 

of College? 

Total, Net, and

Out-of-Pocket Prices 

in 2007–08

AUTHOR

Christina Chang Wei

MPR Associates, Inc.

PROJECT OFFICER

Tracy Hunt-White

National Center for Education Statistics

This report was prepared for the National Center for 

Education Statistics under Contract No. ED-CO-0033

with MPR Associates, Inc. Mention of trade names, 

commercial products, or organizations does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Students and parents see

college attendance as a principal avenue 

to middle-class life, and, given the rising 

price of postsecondary education, they 

are apprehensive about their ability to afford it.1 In a recent survey of college 

freshmen, about two-thirds (66 percent) 

reported having concerns about being 

able to finance their education.2 Many U.S. 

policymakers and researchers share their 

concern, and are exploring ways to make 

college more affordable.3 Legislators have 

required colleges and universities to provide more extensive information about 

tuition and prices, and in the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 mandated 

a host of price-related measures, including 

institutional net price calculators on college websites, the reporting of net price 

data to the U.S. Department of Education, 

and the creation and posting of “College 

Affordability and Transparency Lists” by 

the Department. These lists highlight institutions with the highest and lowest tuition and fees, net prices, and percent 

changes in them, within their sectors.

This Statistics in Brief illustrates the kinds 

of questions that national data can answer 

4

1 A recent public opinion poll showed that increasing numbers of 

Americans view college as a necessity for success (Immerwahr et al. 

2009). The College Board (2009) reports that the totalprice of attendance has increased more rapidly than the price of other goods 

and services over the past three decades. See also Lewin (2009), 

which reported on the College Board’s findings. 2 The Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, has conducted a survey of freshmen each year 

since 1973 (Pryor et al. 2009). See also recent media attention to the 

issue (Marchand 2010). 3 Both governmental and nongovernmental study commissions have 

convened to address this. See, for example, The College Board (2008). 

4Public Law 110-315, Sec.111. August 14, 2008. Higher Education 

Opportunity Actof 2008.
2 

about the amounts U.S. undergraduates pay annually, on average, for 

postsecondary education, with and 

without financial aid. This brief draws 

upon the National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS), a nationally

representative survey of all postsecondary students enrolled in Title IV 

institutions.5

Included in this report are the average 

prices paid by undergraduates attending one of the four major types of institutions: public 2-year, public 4-year, 

private nonprofit 4-year, and for-profit 

institutions at all levels.

6 Most of the 

figures in this Brief display data only for 

5 “Title IV institutions” refers to institutions eligible to participate in federal financial aid programs under Title IV of the 

Higher Education Act.

6 For-profit institutions include less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-

year institutions.

full-time undergraduates7 who attended one institution. These students

constituted about one-third (35 percent) of all undergraduates in 2007–

08.8 Of all full-time undergraduates, 18

percent were enrolled in public 2-year

institutions, 43 percent attended public 4-year institutions, 21 percent were 

at private nonprofit 4-year institutions, 

and 8 percent were enrolled in forprofit institutions, which is a different 

distribution than among all undergraduates (table 1).9 Focusing on full-time 

students who attended only one institution10 allows for comparisons in tuition, price of attendance, and financial 

aid across institution types, since stu7 “Full-time” status is defined as having been enrolled full time 

in one postsecondary institution for 9 months or more during 

the academic year. 

8 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08) Data 

Analysis System.

9 The remaining students (11 percent) were enrolled in other 

types of institutions or in more than one institution during the 

academic year.

10 Tuition, total price of attendance, and all net price estimates 

are available in NPSAS only for students attending one institution during the academic year.

dents at different institutions enroll full 

time at different rates. Those attending 

full time generally have higher overall 

expenses than do all students, regardless of attendance status (table 1). They

also qualify for federal aid and other 

assistance not available to many parttime students, and hence larger proportions of full-time students receive 

financial aid when compared with all 

undergraduates (table 2). 

All comparisons of estimates in this 

Brief were tested for statistical significance using the Student’s t-statistic, and 

all differences cited are statistically significant at the p < .05 level.

11

11 No adjustments for multiple comparisons were made. The 

standard errors for the estimates can be found at http://

nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

What are the average prices 

paid by full-time undergraduate students and how do 

these prices vary by the type 

of institution attended?

1 

STUDY QUESTIONS

2How do the average total 

price of attendance and 

net prices vary by institution type? 

3How do the net 

prices paid by undergraduates vary by 

family income?
3 

KEY FINDINGS

• There is a wide range of prices for 

postsecondary education. This Brief 

shows the total price of attendance

(tuition and living expenses), the net 

price after grants (total price of attendance minus all grants), and the 

out-of-pocket net price (total price of 

attendance minus all financial aid)12

for the four major types of postsecondary institutions.

• Full-time students enrolled at public 

2-year institutions had the lowest average total price of attendance

($12,600). Those at public 4-year institutions had an average total price 

of $18,900, those at for-profit institutions had an average total price of 

$28,600, and those at private nonprofit 4-year institutions had the 

highest average total price ($35,500). 

• After all financial aid is received (including grants, loans, and workstudy), the average out-of-pocket 

net price ranged from $9,100 at 

public 2-year institutions to $10,300 

at public 4-year institutions, $16,000 

at for-profit institutions, and 

$

• Along with income, a student’s total 

price of attendance is also a factor in 

determining eligibility for financial 

aid. Students at a lower priced institution will have less eligibility for aid 

than if they had attended a higher 

priced institution. Those attending 

private institutions had the highest

tuition but they also received the 

most financial aid. Undergraduates 

at private nonprofit 4-year institutions received the greatest amount 

16,600 at private nonprofit 4-year 

institutions. 

of institutional grant aid while those 

at for-profit institutions had the 

largest proportion of borrowers.

• Low-income undergraduates 

enrolled full time at for-profit institutions had the highest average net 

price after grants as well as the 

highest average out-of-pocket net 

price when compared with lowincome students enrolled at other 

institutions. The average net price 

after grants was $21,300 for lowincome students at for-profit institutions but ranged from $7,800 to 

$17,900 at other institutions. Similarly, the average out-of-pocket net 

price was $11,700 among lowincome students at for-profit institutions but the average for those 

enrolled elsewhere ranged from 

$6,000 to $9,800. 

12 The “net price after grants” subtracts any form of gift aid, or 

aid that does not need to be repaid, from the total price of attendance. This can be need- or merit-based grant or scholarship aid. NPSAS does not have measures for net price that 

distinguish between need- and merit-based aid.The “out-ofpocket net price” subtracts all financial aid from the total price 

of attendance. All financial aid includes grants, student loans, 

Parent PLUS loans, work-study, employer aid, job training benefits, veterans benefits, and any other financial aid received.
4 

TABLE 1.

UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENT, TUITION, AND TOTAL PRICE

for all undergraduates and full-time undergraduates, by type of 

institution attended: 2007–08

All undergraduates Full-time

Percentage

distribution

Average

tuition1

Average

total

price1

Percentage

distribution

Average

tuition1

Average

total

price1

 

Total 100.0 $5,800 $14,000 100.0 $10,300 $22,400

 

Type of institution 

Public 2-year 40.0 1,200 7,000 17.8 2,400 12,600

Public 4-year 29.2 5,500 15,200 42.7 7,100 18,900

Private nonprofit 4-year 13.0 17,800 28,200 20.6 23,400 35,500

For-profit 9.0 10,200 20,600 8.5 11,900 28,600

Other, or more than 

one institution 8.8 4,800 12,300 10.5 7,000 18,000

1 Average tuition and average totalprice estimates are shown for 

those attending one institution only. 

NOTE: “All undergraduates” include both full- and part-time students. “Full-time” is defined as having been enrolled in a postsecondary institution for 9 months or more full time. “Tuition” 

includes all tuition and fees. The “total price” includes tuition and 

fees, books and supplies, housing, meals, transportation, and 

other miscellaneous, or personal, expenses. “For-profit” includes 

less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year institutions. “Other, or more 

than one institution” includes those attending private nonprofit 

less-than-4-year, public less-than-2-year, and multiple institutions. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV eligible postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, 

and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student Aid 

Study (NPSAS:08).

TABLE 2.

FINANCIAL AID

for all undergraduates and full-time undergraduates, 

by type of institution attended: 2007–08 

Any grants Any loans Any work-study Any aid 

Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average Percent Average

 received amount received amount received amount received amount

All undergraduates 51.7 $4,900 38.5 $7,100 7.4 $2,400 65.6 $9,100 

 

Type of institution 

Public 2-year 39.6 2,200 13.2 4,100 3.3 3,000 47.6 3,400 

Public 4-year 52.9 5,200 46.2 6,600 7.7 2,500 71.3 9,400 

Private nonprofit 4-year 73.6 10,200 58.9 9,100 23.2 2,100 84.7 17,400 

For-profit 70.4 3,200 91.6 8,100 2.0 3,500 96.3 10,800 

 

Full-time 65.3 7,200 53.1 8,000 13.7 2,300 80.1 12,900 

 

Type of institution 

Public 2-year 55.7 3,700 22.5 4,900 6.9 2,600 65.7 5,400 

Public 4-year 60.4 6,100 52.7 7,100 10.5 2,400 78.3 11,000 

Private nonprofit 4-year 81.2 12,300 65.0 9,800 31.5 2,100 89.4 21,100 

For-profit 71.9 4,000 91.6 9,600 2.0 3,600 96.7 13,100 

NOTE: “Any grants” include scholarships and tuition waivers. “Any loans” 

include federal, state, institutional, or 

private student loans, excluding Parent PLUS loans. “Anyaid” includes 

grants, loans, job training, veterans 

benefits, employer aid, and Parent 

PLUS loans. The total for “All undergraduates” includes students attending full time, part time, or more than 

one institution.“Full-time” is defined 

as having been enrolled in one postsecondary institution for 9 months or 

more full time.“For-profit” includes 

less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year 

institutions. Average aid amounts are 

calculated only for students receiving 

a particular type of aid. Those not 

receiving a specific type of aid (i.e., 

zero values) are not included in the 

average for that aid. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV 

eligible postsecondary institutions in 

the 50states, the District of Columbia, 

and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables 

are available at http://nces.ed.gov/

das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, 

National Center for Education Statistics, 

2007–08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08).
5 

1 What are the average prices paid by full-time 

undergraduate students and how do these 

prices vary by the type of institution attended?

This Brief discusses three different 

measures of the price of an undergraduate education: the total price of attendance, the net price after grants, 

and the out-of-pocket net price. 

Total Price of Attendance 

The total price of an undergraduate 

education includes tuition13 and all 

other nontuition and living expenses 

such as books, supplies, and housing.

14

The total price varied widely by the 

type of institution attended in 2007–

08, ranging from an average of $12,600 

among undergraduates enrolled full 

time at public 2-year institutions, to 

$18,900 at public 4-year institutions, 

$28,600 at for-profit institutions, and 

$35,500 at private nonprofit 4-year institutions (figure 1). 

13 In this report, the term “tuition” includes both tuition and 

fees. Sometimes institutions treat tuition and fees as a single 

charge, and sometimes as separate charges. Tuition is defined 

as the price of instruction and fees as the price of other services 

provided by the school. The tuition amounts shown here include those charged to all undergraduates: both in-state and 

out-of-statestudents enrolled in public 4-year institutions, and 

both in-district and out-of-district students enrolled in public 2-

year institutions. 14 “Housing” can be on campus, off campus, or with parents or 

relatives. In the case of dependent students, this includes housing for themselves only; for independent students, it can include housing for themselves as well as their spouse and/or any 

dependents.

FIGURE 1.

THE PRICE OF AN UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION

for full-time undergraduates, 

by type of institution attended: 2007–08 

NOTE: The ”total price” includes tuition, books and supplies, housing, meals, transportation, and other miscellaneous, or 

personal, expenses. The “net price” is the price that must be paid after receiving grants. The “out-of-pocket net price” subtracts from the total price all forms of financial aid, including grants, student loans, Parent PLUS loans, work-study, employer aid, job training benefits, veterans benefits, and any other financial aid received. Both the net price after grants and 

the out-of-pocket net price are calculated for all full-time students, regardless of whether or not they received any financial aid. “Full-time” is defined as having been enrolled in one postsecondary institution for 9 months or more full time. 

“For-profit” includes less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year institutions. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV eligible postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:08).

12,60018,900

28,60035,500

10,60015,200

25,80025,500

9,100

10,300

16,00016,600

Public 2-year Public 4-year For-profit Private nonprofit 

4-year

Type of institution

Average total

price

Average net price

after grants

Average out-ofpocket net price 

0 

10,000 

20,000 

30,000 

40,000 

Price

$
6 

Of the total price of attendance, the 

portion that can be attributed to tuition varies widely by institution type. 

For some institutions (private nonprofit 

4-year institutions, in particular), the 

tuition is a large component of the total price. In 2007–08, average tuition 

was $2,400 at public 2-year institutions, 

$7,100 at public 4-year institutions, 

$11,900 at for-profit institutions, and 

$23,400 at private nonprofit 4-year institutions (figure 2). 

Nontuition expenses, which include 

books and supplies, housing and 

meals, transportation, and personal 

(or miscellaneous) expenses, also can 

vary by institution type. College or university financial aid officers usually develop an estimate of the total price, 

known in financial aid parlance as the 

“student budget.” Student budgets 

vary according to students’ attendance

and dependency status, family responsibilities, and residence (e.g., living at 

home with parents, in an on-campus 

dormitory, or in off-campus housing)

(Wei 2010, table 2.1-A). 

In 2007–08, students enrolled full time 

in for-profit institutions had the highest average nontuition expenses 

($16,700), when compared with those 

at other types of institutions (where 

average nontuition expenses ranged 

from $10,200 to $12,100). Many students at for-profit institutions are financially independent and are 

supporting their own families (Wei 

2010, table 5.1-A). This raises their 

nontuition expenses as compared with 

students who have no family responsibilities, because costs such as housing, 

food, and other necessities that are associated with supporting one or more 

dependents are included in a student’s 

budget. 

Students attending public 2-year institutions—mostly community colleges—

had the lowest nontuition expenses. A 

larger proportion lived at home with 

their parents, which reduces costs for 

room and board, as compared with 

students at for-profit institutions (many 

of whom are supporting themselves or 

their own families) and those at 4-year 

institutions (where a larger proportion 

lived on campus or in off-campus housing) (Wei 2010, table 5.1-C).

FIGURE 2.

TUITION AND NONTUITION EXPENSES

for full-time undergraduates, 

by type of institution attended: 2007–08 

NOTE: “Full-time” is defined as having been enrolled in one postsecondary institution for 9 months or more full time. “Tuition” includes all tuition and fees. “Nontuition expenses” include books, supplies, housing, meals, transportation, and 

miscellaneous or personal expenses. “For-profit” includes less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year institutions. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV eligible postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto 

Rico. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:08).

2,400 7,100 

11,900 

23,400 

10,200

11,800

16,700

12,100

0 

Public 2-year Public 4-year For-profit Private 

nonprofit 

4-year Type of institution

Average 

nontuition 

expenses

Average 

tuition

$

10,000 

20,000 

30,000 

40,000 

Price

In-state vs. out-of-state tuition

At most public 4-year 

institutions, tuition charges are 

generally higher for out-of-state 

students than for in-state 

residents, reflecting the state 

subsidies public institutions 

receive. In 2007–08, the average 

in-state tuition was $6,200 and 

the average out-of-state tuition 

was $15,100 for full-time 

undergraduates enrolled in 

public 4-year institutions.* 

* NPSAS:08 Data Analysis System (data not shown).
7 

Net Price After Grants 

Policymakers and researchers generally 

subtract grants from the total price 

when discussing the net price of attending a postsecondary institution.

For example, Congress recently required institutions to make public both 

the total price and the average net 

price of attendance, calculated as the 

total price of attendance minus all 

grants received (see the 2008 Higher 

Education Opportunity Act). In this 

Brief, two measures of net price are 

discussed: the “net price after grants” 

and the “out-of-pocket net price,” 

which is the price after all financial aid 

(including loans, which must be repaid) 

is taken into account.15

Grant aid helped to lower the average 

total price among full-time undergraduates at public 2-year institutions 

from $12,600 to an average net price 

after grants of $10,600 (figure 1). For 

15

those at public 4-year institutions, 

grant aid to full-time undergraduates 

lowered the average total price of 

$18,900 to an average net price after 

grants of $15,200. 

For those at private institutions (both 

for-profit and nonprofit), the average 

net price after grants was about 

$25,700. For those attending for-profit 

institutions, the difference between 

the average total price and the net 

price after grants was about $2,800. At 

private nonprofit 4-year institutions, 

however, that difference was $10,000.

Out-of-Pocket Net Price 

The “out-of-pocket net price,” defined 

as the total price less all financial aid 

received, takes into account all forms 

of financial aid, including grants, loans, 

work-study, and other aid (as well as 

Parent PLUS loans).16 The out-of-pocket 

net price represents the amount that 

must be paid immediately by the student or family to enroll in a postsecondary institution for that academic year.

Because the out-of-pocket net price

subtracts loans from the total price, it 

measures the net price only in the 

short term. Loans offset immediate 

costs to students and their families, but 

they must be repaid over time.

Full-time undergraduates enrolled at 

public 2-year institutions had the lowest average out-of-pocket net price 

($9,100), reflecting the already lower 

total price at these institutions (figure 

1). Those at public 4-year institutions 

had a slightly higher average out-ofpocket net price ($10,300). Students at 

private institutions had the highest average out-of-pocket net prices ($16,000 

at for-profit institutions and $16,600 at 

private nonprofit 4-year institutions). 

Both net price and out-of-pocket net price averages are calculated for all students, regardless of whether they received 

any financial aid. This method of calculating net price averages 

for all students differs from that used to calculate average aid 

amounts in this report (see table 2). Average aid amounts are 

calculated only for students receiving a particular type of aid. 

Those not receiving a specific type of aid (i.e., zero values) are 

not included in the average for that aid. The average grant, 

therefore, will be greater than the difference between the total

price and the net price after grants.

16 Since 1998, the federal government has also provided postsecondary students and their families with various federal tax 

benefits. These are not included in the definition of financial aid 

and are not used in the calculation of net price in this study.
8 

2 How do the average total price 

of attendance and net prices 

vary by institution type? 

Prices vary by institution type for several reasons. Institutions charge different levels of tuition (based on whether 

they are public or private and the 

amount of state and local subsidies

received); the demographic characteristics of students (and thus their nontuition expenses and eligibility for 

federal and state grant aid) vary by 

type of institution; and institutional 

policies for awarding institutional aid 

differ. This section discusses the major 

differences in prices by institution type.

As noted previously, the amount of 

tuition charged by institutions is a primary factor in the total price of attendance, but students also incur different 

nontuition expenses depending on 

their family responsibilities and living 

arrangements. 

Average net prices are further affected 

by differences in the proportion of aid

recipients at each type of institution. 

For example, the number of students 

eligible for federal Pell Grants or statefunded grant aid at a particular school 

will affect the average net price after 

grants, as will a school’s policies for 

awarding grants from institutional 

funds. The out-of-pocket net price further depends on the level of borrowing 

among students and their parents and 

other types of aid received, such as 

work-study. 

Public 2-Year Institutions

Full-time students attending public 2-

year institutions had the lowest average total price ($12,600), net price after 

grants ($10,600), and out-of-pocket net 

price ($9,100) compared with full-time 

undergraduates attending other types 

of institutions (figure 1). 

Because students at public 2-year institutions had a lower average total price 

initially, their average net prices also 

were lower—even though they had 

the smallest proportions of grant recipients (56 percent) and students who 

borrowed (23 percent took out a student loan) (table 2). 

Public 4-Year Institutions

Tuition at public 4-year institutions was

higher than at public 2-year institutions, but not as high as at the private 

institutions (figure 2). Students at these 

institutions also have slightly higher

nontuition expenses than those at 

public 2-year institutions, with a larger 

proportion living on campus or away 

from home (see Wei 2010, table 5.1-C). 

Among those enrolled full time at public 4-year institutions, 60 percent received grant aid, about one-half (53 

percent) took out student loans, and 10 

percent received work-study support 

(table 2). Grant aid helped to lower the 

net price after grants to an average of 

$15,200, and the addition of loans, 

work-study, and other aid resulted in 

an average out-of-pocket net price of 

$10,300 (figure 1). This compares to an 

average out-of-pocket net price of 

$9,100 at public 2-year institutions—a 

difference of $1,200 in the average outof-pocket net price, even though the 

difference in the average total price 

was $6,300. 
9 

For-Profit Institutions

For-profit institutions are privately 

owned and operated and the profits 

they generate benefit individual owners and shareholders. The programs 

can range from less than 1 year to 4-

year bachelor’s and graduate degrees. 

Most undergraduates enrolled in lessthan-4-year for-profit institutions are 

pursuing certificates or associate’s degrees in occupational training programs (73 percent) (Staklis 2010, table 

2.1). Compared with undergraduates 

enrolled at other types of institutions, 

those at for-profit institutions tend to 

be older, financially independent, and 

have family responsibilities. This increases their nontuition expenses and 

hence, their total price of attendance. 

More undergraduates at for-profit institutions received federal grants (62 percent) than did students in any other 

type of institution in our analysis (figure 3). However, a smaller percentage 

of for-profit students received state, institutional, or private grants than students in other sectors. On average, 

these students had a net price after 

grants of $25,800—not measurably different than that of private nonprofit 4-

year institutions, and higher than that 

of public institutions (figure 1). 

Student loans were critical to reducing 

the average out-of-pocket net price for 

all undergraduates, but particularly for 

those at for-profit institutions. Forprofit institutions had the largest proportion of full-time undergraduates 

FIGURE 3.

SOURCES OF GRANT AID

for full-time undergraduates, 

by type of institution attended: 2007–08 

37

29

62

28 25

30

8

30

17

30

7

67

6

12

2

14

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Public 2-year Public 4-year For-profit Private nonprofit 

4-year

Type of institution

Federal grants State grants Institutional grants Private source grants

NOTE: “Grants” include scholarships and tuition waivers. “Full-time” is defined as having been enrolled in one postsecondary institution for 9 months or more full time. “For-profit” includes less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year institutions. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV eligible postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia,

and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:08).
10

with at least one loan in their financial 

aid package: 9 out of 10 (91 percent) received an aid package containing a loan 

(figure 4), compared with 65 percent of 

those at private nonprofit 4-year institutions, 53 percent at public 4-year institutions, and 23 percent at public 2-year 

institutions. The high level of student 

borrowing at for-profit institutions contributed to an average out-of-pocket 

net price of $16,000 (figure 1).

Private Nonprofit 4-Year Institutions

Even though they had the highest average total price ($35,500) of the four 

major sectors, financial aid recipients at 

private nonprofit 4-year institutions also received the largest average amount

of total aid ($21,100), when compared 

with those at for-profit institutions 

($13,100), public 4-year institutions 

($11,000), and public 2-year institutions 

($5,400) (table 2). 

In fact, aid received by undergraduates 

at private nonprofit 4-year institutions 

resulted in an average net price of 

$25,500 and an average out-of-pocket 

net price of $16,600, both of which 

were not measurably different from 

undergraduates at schools with the 

next highest total price: for-profit institutions ($25,800 and $16,000, respectively) (figure 1). 

The receipt of institutional grants, in 

particular, was critical in lowering the 

price for those attending private nonprofit 4-year colleges and universities. 

About two-thirds (67 percent) of students in private nonprofit 4-year 

schools received institutional grants or 

tuition waivers, a larger proportion 

than at any other type of institution (30 

percent at public 4-year institutions, 17 

percent at public 2-year institutions, 

and 7 percent at for-profit institutions) 

(figure 3). The average institutional 

grant received by those attending private nonprofit 4-year institutions was 

$10,400,17

Work-study was also an important 

source of aid to those at private 

nonprofit 4-year institutions. Nearly 

one-third (31 percent) of all full-time 

undergraduates at private nonprofit 

4-year institutions received work-study 

aid, the highest percentage among all 

full-time undergraduates (between 2 

and 10 percent of undergraduates at 

other types of institutions received 

work-study aid) (table 2). With the aid 

of student loans, work-study, and other 

types of support, full-time undergraduates at private nonprofit 4-year institutions had an average out-of-pocket 

net price of $16,600—not measurably 

different from those attending forprofit institutions ($16,000) (figure 1). 

which helped reduce the average total price to an average net 

price after grants of $25,500 (figure 1). 

17 NPSAS:08 Data Analysis System (data not shown). 

FIGURE 4.

TYPE OF AID PACKAGE

for full-time undergraduates, by aid package received 

and type of institution attended: 2007–08 

34

22

3 11

43

26

5

24

7

12

20

5

16

41

71

60

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent Percent distribution receiving aid

Grants, workstudy, or other 

aid, with loans

Loans only

Grants, workstudy, or other 

aid, without loans

No aid received

Aid package

Type of institution

Public 2-year Public 4-year For-profit Private 

nonprofit 

4-year

NOTE: “Grants” include scholarships and tuition waivers. “Loans” include federal, state, institutional, or private student 

loans, excluding Parent PLUS loans. “Other” aid includes job training, veterans benefits, employer aid, and Parent PLUS 

loans. “Full-time” is defined as having been enrolled in one postsecondary institution for 9 months or more full time. “Forprofit” includes less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year institutions. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV eligible 

postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because 

of rounding. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:08).
11

3 How do the net prices 

paid by undergraduates 

vary by family income?

This section discusses both the net 

price after grants and the out-ofpocket net price by family income level 

among full-time dependent students 

only.18 Figure 5 shows the average net 

price after grants by both family 

income and type of institution attended. Among low-income and low 

middle-income dependent students, 

those with the highest average net 

price after grants were enrolled at forprofit institutions. In contrast, among 

high middle-income and high-income 

students, the average net price after 

grants for those at for-profit institutions was not measurably different 

from those at private nonprofit 4-year 

institutions.

18 Full-time dependent students constituted 76percent of all 

full-time undergraduates attending one institution in 2007–08 

(NPSAS:08 Data Analysis System). Independent students are 

not analyzed by income level in this Brief. Parental income for 

independent studentsis not available from NPSAS.

FIGURE 5. 

NET PRICE AFTER GRANTS BY INCOME

for full-time dependent undergraduates, by family income 

category and type of institution attended: 2007–08 7,800 10,600 11,600 

11,900 

10,400 14,300 

16,700 18,400 

21,300 27,300 

28,200 31,900 

17,900 22,700 

26,500 31,800 

0 

10,000 

20,000 

30,000 

40,000 

Price Average net price after grants

Public 2-year Public 4-year For-profit Private nonprofit 4-year

$

Low-income Low

middle-income

High

middle-income

High-income

NOTE: The “net price after grants” is the price of attending a postsecondary institution after all grants have been received. 

This amount is calculated by subtracting total grant aid from the total price of attendance. The total price of attendance 

includes tuition, books and supplies, housing, meals, transportation, and other miscellaneous, or personal, expenses. 

Grant aid includes grants, scholarships, tuition waivers, and other gift aid that does not need to be repaid. The net price 

after grants is calculated for all students, regardless of whether or not they received any grant aid. Family income categories were based upon parents’ annual income in 2006. Dollar cutoffs are based on the distribution among all dependent 

undergraduates: “Low-income” was the lowest 25th percentile (less than $36,100); “Low middle-income” was the 26th to 

50th percentile ($36,100–$66,600); “High middle-income” was the 51st to 75th percentile ($66,600–$104,600); and 

“High-income” was the highest 25th percentile ($104,600 or more). “Full-time” is defined as havingbeen enrolled in one 

postsecondary institution for 9 months or more full time. “For-profit” includes less-than-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year institutions. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV eligible postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:08).
12

The average out-of-pocket net price, 

on the other hand, shows a slightly different pattern (figure 6). After borrowing, low-income and low middleincome undergraduates enrolled at forprofit institutions continued to have 

the highest average out-of-pocket net 

price, when compared with those at 

other institutions. However, among 

those with incomes above the median 

(i.e., high middle-income and highincome students), the average out-ofpocket net price was highest for those 

enrolled at private nonprofit 4-year institutions. 

FIGURE 6.

OUT-OF-POCKET NET PRICE BY INCOME

for full-time dependent undergraduates, by family income

category and type of institution attended: 2007–08 6,700 9,300 10,400

11,200

6,000

9,000

11,60014,300

11,700

14,50013,90015,000

9,800

12,20016,60024,100

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

Price Average out-of-pocket net price

Public 2-year Public 4-year For-profit Private nonprofit 4-year

$

Low-income Low

middle-income

High

middle-income

High-income

NOTE: The “out-of-pocket net price” is the price of attending a postsecondary institution after allaid has been received. 

This amount is calculated by subtracting total financial aid from the total price of attendance. The total price of attendance 

includes tuition, books and supplies, housing, meals, transportation, and other miscellaneous, or personal, expenses. Financial aid includes grants, student loans, Parent PLUS loans, work-study, employer aid, job training benefits, veterans 

benefits, and any other type of aid. The out-of-pocket net price is calculated for all students, regardless of whether they 

received any aid. Family income categories were based upon parents’ annual income in 2006. Dollar cutoffs are based on 

the distribution among all dependent undergraduates: “Low-income” was the lowest 25th percentile (less than $36,100); 

“Low middle-income” was the 26th to 50th percentile ($36,100–$66,600); “High middle-income” was the 51st to 75th 

percentile ($66,600–$104,600); and “High-income” was the highest 25th percentile ($104,600 or more). “Full-time” is 

defined as having been enrolled in one postsecondary institution for 9 months or more full time. “For-profit” includes lessthan-2-year, 2-year, and 4-year institutions. Estimates include students enrolled in Title IV eligible postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:08).
13

FIND OUT MORE

For questions about content, ordering additional copies of this Statistics in Brief, 

or to view this report online, go to 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2011175

More detailed information on the price of undergraduate education and undergraduate financing can be 

found in Web Tables produced by the National Center 

for Education Statistics (NCES) using the 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08) 

data. These Web Tables are a comprehensive source of 

information on financial aid awarded to undergraduate students during the 2007–08 academic year. Included are estimates of tuition, price of attendance, 

and financial aid. Additional information on the demographic characteristics of 2007–08 undergraduates 

can be found in a second set of Web Tables.

Web Tables—Student Financing of Undergraduate Education: 2007–08 (NCES 2010-162). http://nces.ed.gov/

pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2010162

Web Tables—Profile of Undergraduate Students: 2007–

08 (NCES 2010-205). http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/

pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2010205

Readers may also be interested in the following 

NCES products related to the topic of this Statistics in 

Brief:

2007–08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:08): Student Financial Aid Estimates: First Look

(NCES 2009-166).

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009166.pdf

Undergraduate Financial Aid Estimates by Type of Institution in 2007–08 (NCES 2009-201). 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009201.pdf
14 

TECHNICAL NOTES 

Survey Methodology

The estimates provided in this Statistics in 

Brief are based on data collected through 

the 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:08). NPSAS covers 

broad topics concerning student enrollment in postsecondary education and 

how students and their families finance 

their education. In 2008, students provided data through instruments administered over the Internet or by telephone. 

In addition to student responses, data 

were collected from the institutions that 

sampled students attended and other relevant databases, including U.S. Department of Education records on student 

loan and grant programs and student financial aid applications.

NPSAS:08 is the seventh administration 

of NPSAS, which has been conducted 

every 3 to 4 years since 1986–87. The 

NPSAS:08 target population includes 

students enrolled in Title IV postsecondary institutions in the United States and 

Puerto Rico at any time between July 1, 

2007, and June 30, 2008.19

The institution sampling frame for 

NPSAS:08 was constructed from the 

2004–05 and 2005–06 Institutional 

Characteristics, Fall Enrollment, and 

Completions files of the Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System

This population included about 21 million undergraduates and 3 million graduate students 

enrolled in over 6,000 institutions.

19

(IPEDS). The sampling design consisted

of first selecting eligible institutions, 

then selecting students from these institutions. Institutions were selected 

with probabilities proportional to a 

composite measure of size based on 

expected 2007–08 enrollment. With 

approximately 1,700 institutions participating in the study, the weighted institution unit response rate was 90 

percent. Eligible sampled students 

were defined as study respondents if at 

least 11 key data elements were available from any data source. Approximately 114,000 undergraduates and 

14,000 graduate students were study 

respondents, and the weighted student unit response rate for both levels 

was 96 percent. Estimates were 

weighted to adjust for the unequal 

probability of selection into the sample

and for nonresponse.

In this Statistics in Brief, the analytical 

groups consisted of undergraduate students enrolled full time in one of the 

four major types of institutions in 2007-

08. Out of the total NPSAS:08 undergraduate sample, approximately 21,000 

were enrolled in public 4-year institutions, about 13,000 were enrolled in private nonprofit 4-year institutions, about 

7,000 were attending public 2-year institutions, and approximately 6,000 were 

enrolled in for-profit institutions.

The target population of students was limited to those 

enrolled in an academic program, at least one course for credit 

that could be applied toward an academic degree, or an occupational or vocational program requiring at least 3 months or 

300 clock hours of instruction to receive a degree, certificate, or 

other formal award. The target population excluded students 

who were also enrolled in high school or a high school completion (e.g., GED preparation) program.

VARIABLES USED

All estimates presented in this Statistics in Brief were produced using the 

Data Analysis System (DAS), a web-based software application that allows 

users to generate tables for many of the postsecondary surveys conducted 

by NCES. See “Run Your Own Analysis With DataLab” below for more information on PowerStats, the next generation of the DAS. The variables used 

in this Brief are listed below. Visit the NCES DataLab website (http://

nces.ed.gov/datalab) to view detailed information on how these variables 

were constructed and their sources. Under Detailed Information About PowerStats Variables, NPSAS Undergraduates: 2008, click by subject or by variable name. The program files that generated the statistics presented in this 

Brief can be found at http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=

2011175. 

Label Name

Attendance status ATTNSTAT

Family income for dependent students PCTDEP

Federal grants TFEDGRT

Institutional grants INGRTAMT

Net price after grants NETCST3

Non-tuition expenses BUDNONAJ

Out-of-pocket net price NETCST1

Private grants PRIVAID 

State grants STGTAMT

Total financial aid TOTAID

Total grants TOTGRT

Total price BUDGETAJ

Total student loans TOTLOAN

Tuition TUITION2

Type of aid package AIDTYPE

Type of institution SECTOR4

Work-study TOTWKST
15

Key variables used in this Brief include 

tuition (TUITION2), total price of attendance (BUDGETAJ), and various measures of net price (NETCST1, NETCST3). 

These composite variables are derived 

from multiple sources of data including

IPEDS, the Free Application for Federal 

Student Aid (FAFSA), the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS), institution records, and the student interview.

Two broad categories of error occur in 

estimates generated from surveys: 

sampling and nonsampling errors. 

Sampling errors occur when observations are based on samples rather than 

on entire populations. The standard error of a sample statistic is a measure of 

the variation due to sampling and indicates the precision of the statistic. The 

complex sampling design used in 

NPSAS:08 must be taken into account 

when calculating variance estimates 

such as standard errors. NCES’s online

Data Analysis System (DAS), which

generated the estimates in this report, 

uses the balanced repeated replication 

(BRR) method to adjust variance estimation for the complex sample design.

Nonsampling errors can be attributed 

to several sources: incomplete information about all respondents (e.g., some 

students or institutions refused to participate, or students participated but 

answered only certain items); differences among respondents in question 

interpretation; inability or unwillingness to give correct information; mistakes in recording or coding data; and 

other errors of collecting, processing, 

sampling, and imputing missing data.

For more information on NPSAS:08 methodology, see appendix B of 2007–08 

National Postsecondary Student Aid 

Study (NPSAS:08): Student Financial Aid 

Estimates for 2007–08: First Look (http://

nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009166.pdf).

Item Response Rates

NCES Statistical Standard 4-4-1 states 

that “[a]ny survey stage of data collection with a unit or item response rate 

less than 85 percent must be evaluated 

for the potential magnitude of nonresponse bias before the data or any analysis using the data may be released” 

(U.S. Department of Education 2002). In 

the case of NPSAS:08, this means that 

nonresponse bias analysis could be required at any of three levels: (1) institutions, (2) study respondents, or

(3) items. Because the institutional and 

study respondent response rates were 

90 percent and 96 percent, respectively, nonresponse bias analysis was not 

required at those levels.

The student interview response rate, 

however, was 71 percent, and therefore nonresponse bias analysis was required for those variables based in 

whole or in part on student interviews. 

In this report, seven variables required 

nonresponse bias analysis: AIDTYPE (60 

percent), NETCST1 (58 percent), 

NETCST3 (59 percent), PCTDEP (55 percent), TOTAID (60 percent), TOTGRT (61 

percent), and TOTLOAN (67 percent). 

For each of these variables, nonresponse bias analyses were conducted to 

determine whether respondents and 

nonrespondents differed on the following characteristics: institution sector, region, and total enrollment; 

student type, gender, and age group; 

whether the student had Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) 

data, was a federal aid recipient, was a 

Pell Grant recipient, or took out a Stafford Loan; and the amount, if any, of a 

student’s Pell Grant or Stafford Loan. 

Differences between respondents and 

nonrespondents on these variables 

were tested for statistical significance 

at the 5 percent level. All other variables used in this Brief had a preimputation response rate of 85 percent 

or higher.

Nonresponse bias analyses of the variables in this report with response 

rates less than 85 percent indicated 

that respondents differed from nonrespondents on 71 percent to 80 percent of the characteristics analyzed, 

indicating that there may be bias in 

these estimates. Any bias due to nonresponse, however, is based upon responses prior to stochastic imputation. 

The potential for bias in these estimates is tempered by two factors. 

First, potential bias may have been reduced due to imputation. Because imputation procedures are designed 

specifically to identify donors with 

similar characteristics to those with 

missing data, the imputation is assumed to reduce bias. While item-level 

bias before imputation is measurable, 

such bias after imputation is not, so 

whether the imputation affected the

bias cannot be directly evaluated. 

Therefore, the item estimates before 

and after imputation were compared

to determine whether the imputation 

changed the biased estimate, thus 

suggesting a reduction in bias.

For continuous variables, the difference between the mean before imputation and the mean after imputation 

was estimated. For categorical variables, the estimated difference was 

computed for each of the categories as 
16

the percentage of students in that category before imputation minus the 

percentage of students in that category after imputation. These estimated 

differences were tested for statistical

significance at the 5 percent level. A 

significant difference in the item 

means after imputation implies a reduction in bias due to imputation. A 

nonsignificant difference suggests that

imputation may not have reduced bias, 

that the sample size was too small to 

detect a significant difference, or that 

there was little bias to be reduced. Statistical tests of the differences between 

the means before and after imputation 

for these seven variables were significant, indicating that the nonresponse 

bias was reduced through imputation. 

Second, for some composite variables, 

the components of the variables from 

which the composites are constructed 

often constitute a very small proportion of the total variable, attenuating 

the potential bias introduced by nonresponse. For example, most of the 

components of TOTAID (total amount 

of all financial aid received) were obtained from federal databases and institutional records and have very high 

response rates. Some components of 

TOTAID, however, are types of financial

aid that are often disbursed directly to 

students and not through institutions

(e.g., employer aid and private loans). 

Because the primary source of information about such types of aid is the student interview, these variables were 

missing for interview nonrespondents. 

In the case of missing information from 

the student interview, values were stochastically imputed and the imputed 

values were used to construct the 

composite variables. In the example 

cited above, both employer aid and 

private loans were received by relatively few students and were small components of the total. For example, 52 

percent of all undergraduates received 

any grants (TOTGRT), a primary component of TOTAID, and the average 

among all undergraduates was $2,500. 

In comparison, 8 percent received any 

employer aid, with an average among 

all undergraduates of $200. Therefore, 

despite the low response rates of these 

components, any bias they contribute 

is likely to be minimal. 

For more detailed information on nonresponse bias analysis and an overview 

of the survey methodology, see appendix B of the report 2007–08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:08): Student Financial Aid Estimates for 2007–08: First Look (http://

nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009166.pdf).

Statistical Procedures

Comparisons of means and proportions were tested using Student’s t statistic. Differences between estimates 

were tested against the probability of a 

Type I error20or significance level. The 

statistical significance of each comparison was determined by calculating the 

Student’s t value for the difference between each pair of means or proportions and comparing the t value with 

published tables of significance levels 

for two-tailed hypothesis testing. Student’s t values were computed to test 

differences between independent estimates using the following formula:

20

− =

+

1 2

2 2

1 2

E E

t

se se

A Type I error occurs when one concludes that a difference 

observed in a sample reflects a true difference in the population 

from which the sample was drawn, when no such difference is 

present.

where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be 

compared and se1 and se2

There are hazards in reporting statistical tests for each comparison. First, 

comparisons based on large t statistics 

may appear to merit special attention. 

This can be misleading since the magnitude of the t statistic is related not 

only to the observed differences in 

means or percentages but also to the 

number of respondents in the specific 

categories used for comparison. Hence, 

a small difference compared across a 

large number of respondents would 

produce a large (and thus possibly statistically significant) t statistic.

are their corresponding standard errors.

A second hazard in reporting statistical 

tests is the possibility that one can report a “false positive” or Type I error. Statistical tests are designed to limit the risk 

of this type of error using a value denoted by alpha. The alpha level of .05 

was selected for findings in this report 

and ensures that a difference of a certain 

magnitude or larger would be produced 

when there was no actual difference between the quantities in the underlying 

population no more than 1 time out of 

20.21When analysts test hypotheses that 

show alpha values at the .05 level or 

smaller, they reject the null hypothesis 

that there is no difference between the 

two quantities. Failing to reject a null 

hypothesis, i.e., detect a difference, 

however, does not imply the values are 

the same or equivalent.

21 No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
17

REFERENCES

The College Board. (2008). Fulfilling the 

Commitment: Recommendations for 

Reforming Federal Student Aid: The Report from the Rethinking Student Aid 

Study Group. Retrieved January 15, 

2010, from http://

professionals.collegeboard.com/

profdownload/rethinking-stu-aidfulfilling-commitmentrecommendations.pdf. 

The College Board (2009). Trends in 

College Pricing 2009. Retrieved 

February 11, 2010, from 

http://www.trends-collegeboard.

com/college_pricing/pdf/

2009_Trends_College_Pricing.pdf. 

Higher Education Opportunity Act of 

2008, P.L. 110-315, 122 Stat. 3078 

(2008)

Immerwahr, J., Johnson, J., Gasbarra, P., 

Ott, A., and Rochkind, J. (2009). 

Squeeze Play 2009: The Public’s Views 

on College Costs Today. New York and 

San Jose, CA: Public Agenda and The 

National Center for Public Policy and 

Higher Education.

Lewin, T. (2009, October 20). College 

Costs Keep Rising, Report Says. The 

New York Times. 

Marchand, A. (2010, January 21). Cost of 

College Is a Big Worry of Freshmen in 

National Survey. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 

Pryor, J.H., Hurtado, S., DeAngelo, L., Palucki Blake, L., and Tran, S. (2009). The 

American Freshman: National Norms 

Fall 2009. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, University of 

California, Los Angeles.

Staklis, S. (2010). Web Tables—Profile of 

Undergraduate Students: 2007–08

(NCES 2010-205). National Center for 

Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC. 

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). 

NCES Statistical Standards (NCES 2003-

601). Washington, DC: National Center 

for Education Statistics. Retrieved November 19, 2010, from 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. 

Wei, C. (2010). Web Tables—Student Financing of Undergraduate Education: 

2007–08 (NCES 2010-162). National 

Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, 

DC.
18

RUN YOUR OWN ANALYSIS WITH DATALAB

You can replicate or expand upon the figures and tables in this report, or 

even create your own. DataLab has several different tools that allow you to 

customize and generate output from a variety of different survey datasets. 

Visit DataLab at 

http://nces.ed.gov/datalab 

Cover artwork © iStockphoto.com/centauria.