Skip to main content

Looking at Discount, 2016

If you want to strike fear into the hearts of enrollment managers everywhere, just say, "The trustees want to talk about the discount rate."

If you don't know, the discount rate is a simple calculation: Institutional financial aid as a percentage of tuition (or tuition and fees) revenue.  If your university billed $100 million in tuition and fees, and awarded $45 million in aid, your discount is 45%.  In that instance, you'd have $55 million in hard cash to run the organization.

Discount used to be a reporting function, something you would look at when the year was over to see where you stood.  Now, it's become a management target. And that's a problem.  If you want to know why, read this quick little explanation of Campbell's Law. The short explanation is this: If you want to lower discount--if that's really the thing you are after--you can do it very easily.  Just shrink your enrollment.  Or lower your quality, as measured by things like GPA and test scores. Easy.

Of course, this is generally not what people mean when they say they want to decrease the discount rate.  They usually mean "decrease the discount and keep everything else the same, or better yet, improve those measures."  That's not so easy.  The simple reason is that decreasing your discount means you're raising price.  And we all know what happens when you raise price, unless you turn your college into a Giffen good which you can't do, of course.

What people really want is more net revenue: that $55 million in the example above.  You'd probably like to have it be $57 million, which would mean you lower your discount rate to 43%.  That happens because you either charge students more, or enroll more students who bring external aid, like Pell or state grants.  You don't care, really.  Cash is cash.

The absurdity of discount was demonstrated to me by a finance professor friend, who said back in the late 90's, "If we generate $12,000 in average net revenue on an $18,000 tuition (a 33% discount), let's propose raising tuition to $100,000 and the discount to 80%."  Yes, believe it or not, the denominator is important when calculating percentages, which is why it's hard to compare discounts in a meaningful way for competitors who charge more.)

If you're interested, here's a little presentation I did on why colleges have tended to increase discount and net revenue at the same time.  This exercise is probably close to the breaking point, however.

Now that you understand a little more about discount, on to the data. This is from the IPEDS data for Fall, 2016, the most recent available showing both aid and admissions data.  There are four views, using the tabs across the top.

View 1: Discount overview

No interactivity: Just average discount rates by Carnegie type, Region, and Urbanicity.  I think the bottom one is the most fascinating discovery I've come across yet.  Just by playing with the data.

View 2: Discount by Market Category

This one combines the three categories above: Carnegie, Region, and Urbanicity into a single category to see how discounts play out.  In order to be included in this, there had to be at least ten colleges in the category.  You can see that the highest discount, on average, is Baccalaureate institutions in distant towns in the South Central region of the US.  You can color this by any of the three individual categories using the little control at the top right.

View 3: Individual Colleges

This lists all the private colleges for which I could calculate a freshman discount rate and net revenue per freshman.  The controls at the top allow you to look at schools like yours, if you want.  Note the slider at top right: I started showing freshman classes of at least 200, as some small college data gets a bit funky.  You can expand or narrow that by pulling the sliders to your heart's content.

Sort by any column by hovering over the little icon in the x-axis label.  If you get in trouble, you can always reset using the arrow control at lower right.

View 4: Multidimensional

Each college in this view is a bubble, arrayed on the chart in two dimensions: Freshman Discount and Average net revenue per freshman.  The size of the bubble shows freshman selectivity (bigger is more selective).  The color of the bubble shows the percentage of freshmen with institutional aid.  Note that the highest net revenue institutions are also the most selective, suggesting people will pay for prestige (or prestige and wealth pave the way to admissions). And the lowest net revenue institutions are dark blue, showing almost everyone getting institutional aid (either "merit" or "need-based" although those distinctions are silly.)

Use the filters to limit the colleges on the view, and use the highlight function (just start typing) to highlight the institution of your choice.  Note especially what happens when you limit the view to colleges with higher tuition.  Go ahead.  You won't break anything.

As always, let me know what you see.


  1. Jon - this is great. I can't get the download for some reason. Shows up it crazy unreadable format.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Baccalaureate origins of doctoral recipients

Here's a little data for you: 61 years of it, to be precise.  The National Science Foundation publishes its data on US doctoral recipients sliced a variety of ways, including some non-restricted public use files that are aggregated at a high level to protect privacy. The interface is a little quirky, and if you're doing large sets, you need to break it into pieces (this was three extracts of about 20 years each), but it may be worth your time to dive in. I merged the data set with my mega table of IPEDS data, which allows you to look at institutions on a more granular level:  It's not surprising to find that University of Washington graduates have earned more degrees than graduates of Whitman College, for instance.  So, you can filter the data by Carnegie type, region or state, or control, for instance; or you can look at all 61 years, or any range of years between 1958 and 2018 and combine it with broad or specific academic fields using the controls. High school and indep

The Highly Rejective Colleges

If you're not following Akil Bello on Twitter, you should be.  His timeline is filled with great insights about standardized testing, and he takes great effort to point out racism (both subtle and not-so-subtle) in higher education, all while throwing in references to the Knicks and his daughter Enid, making the experience interesting, compelling, and sometimes, fun. Recently, he created the term " highly rejective colleges " as a more apt description for what are otherwise called "highly selective colleges."  As I've said before, a college that admits 15% of applicants really has a rejections office, not an admissions office.  The term appears to have taken off on Twitter, and I hope it will stick. So I took a look at the highly rejectives (really, that's all I'm going to call them from now on) and found some interesting patterns in the data. Take a look:  The 1,132 four-year, private colleges and universities with admissions data in IPEDS are incl

So you think you're going back to the SAT and ACT?

Now that almost every university in the nation has gone test-optional for the 2021 cycle out of necessity, a nagging question remains: How many will go back to requiring tests as soon as it's possible?  No one knows, but some of the announcements some colleges made sounded like the kid who only ate his green beans to get his screen time: They did it, but they sure were not happy about it.  So we have some suspicions about the usual suspects. I don't object to colleges requiring tests, of course, even though I think they're not very helpful, intrinsically biased against certain groups, and a tool of the vain.  You be you, though, and don't let me stop you. However, there is a wild card in all of this: The recent court ruling prohibiting the University of California system from even using--let alone requiring--the SAT or ACT in admissions decisions next fall.  If you remember, the Cal State system had already decided to go test blind, and of course community colleges in