[82lsju]

13% admit rate for legacies doesn't strike me as egregious. You're dealing with a different socioeconomic background than the applicant pool as a whole with many non-legacy specific advantages (access to educational resources for one) that make an applicant more likely to get admitted than a random applicant in the pool. I would be curious to see what the admit rate is for various tiers of household income as I imagine there would be a similar disparity.

For applicants with the same SAT or ACT score, children from families in the top 1 percent were 34 percent more likely to be admitted than the average applicant, and those from the top 0.1 percent were more than twice as likely to get in.
...
The largest advantage for the 1 percent was the preference for legacies. The study showed — for the first time at this scale — that legacies were more qualified overall than the average applicant. But even when comparing applicants who were similar in every other way, legacies still had an advantage.
...
One in eight admitted students from the top 1 percent was a recruited athlete. For the bottom 60 percent, that figure was one in 20. That’s largely because children from rich families are more likely to play sports, especially more exclusive sports played at certain colleges, like rowing and fencing. The study estimated that athletes were admitted at four times the rate of nonathletes with the same qualifications.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023...4Z6cLv1mic

the study is here

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-conte..._Paper.pdf

[82lsju]

13% admit rate for legacies doesn't strike me as egregious. You're dealing with a different socioeconomic background than the applicant pool as a whole with many non-legacy specific advantages (access to educational resources for one) that make an applicant more likely to get admitted than a random applicant in the pool. I would be curious to see what the admit rate is for various tiers of household income as I imagine there would be a similar disparity.

For applicants with the same SAT or ACT score, children from families in the top 1 percent were 34 percent more likely to be admitted than the average applicant, and those from the top 0.1 percent were more than twice as likely to get in.
...
The largest advantage for the 1 percent was the preference for legacies. The study showed — for the first time at this scale — that legacies were more qualified overall than the average applicant. But even when comparing applicants who were similar in every other way, legacies still had an advantage.
...
One in eight admitted students from the top 1 percent was a recruited athlete. For the bottom 60 percent, that figure was one in 20. That’s largely because children from rich families are more likely to play sports, especially more exclusive sports played at certain colleges, like rowing and fencing. The study estimated that athletes were admitted at four times the rate of nonathletes with the same qualifications.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023...4Z6cLv1mic

the study is here

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-conte..._Paper.pdf