I've been about the same thing.
I think this whole merit-based award doesn't make too much sense. I mean I understand for anybody who's made a huge effort to get a 3.9 it's an achievement that should be recognized for sure. But don't they, the public health people, the trainers of future public health leaders, realize that many other things could heavily affect your GPA? Poverty, health issues, life circumstances, race, gender, geographic location, just to name a few, can contribute to your GPA and immediately disqualify you from getting those merit-based scholarships. And then you're again in the broken loop: poverty - struggle to afford school - low GPA - not getting awards - struggle to afford school - low GPA - struggle to pay back loans - struggle to lead a decent life - more public health issues - their kids in poverty - .... over and over and over.
For public health programs to set a GPA line for the "merit" and only reward those who might just be more privileged is really unfair.
I mean I'm definitely not implying that all those who got merit awards are "just privileged." I admire you for making all the efforts you could to achieve a stellar GPA. I'm just thinking if as public health trainers these programs are not even considering this as a public health issue and not considering awarding the obviously less-privileged, it's kind of ridiculous.