The increased competition for admission to top universities has resulted in student bodies that are not reflective of the United States population. Admissions officials report making judgments based on ascriptive status (e.g., if an applicant identifies as a part of a racially minoritized group), extracurricular activities, and sorting (e.g., gpa, standardized exams) factors. We classified three types of universities according to the admission standards they profess to prioritize using latent class analysis. The majority of public institutions used a "coarse sieve" strategy that depended on sorting standards. Ascriptional status criteria and carefully nurtured admissions were the focal points of "fine sieve" admissions practices used by some private colleges. A small number of privates used a "double sieve," which combined sorting with deliberately developed criteria. Findings provide light on the structure of the admissions sieve and pinpoint the institutional settings that influence the purportedly elite universities' admissions procedures.