Skip to main content

Higher Ed's Hedgefunds

OK, I got your attention.  That title is admittedly a bit harsh.

But before I talk about the data, there are lots of caveats here, and some background will help.  Last week, NACUBO released its 2021 Study of Endowments, along with lots of data for the public, and more if you are a member.  I used the free data here.  The last person you want to get angry at you is the business officers.  So the first caveat is that NACUBO is much quicker than IPEDS in getting data out, and the IPEDS data I'll use here is a year older, and generally, less rosy than the 2021 FY stuff from NACUBO.

However, the IPEDS data is more granular.  When talking about endowments, that's important.  The university endowment is not just a big pot of money you can spend, nor is the income always available to you to do whatever you want.  Much of the investment return is restricted, that is, the income can only be used for certain things (an endowed chair in the physical sciences, or a center for the study of South American politics, or student scholarships, for instance.)  I've known restricted endowments that cost a university money, by requiring some sort of contribution to the thing that's endowed.  This is the second caveat.

The third caveat is complexity: Some universities have good returns on restricted endowments, and losses on unrestricted.  Others are the opposite.  Some lose money on everything.    Even if you're an accountant, this can get complex.   And, of course, while the fund may have increased by $100M, for example, you generally don't spend it in the same year because it would be almost impossible to.

The fourth caveat is that not all growth is from investment growth.  Some of it is from new money coming in.

The final caveat is volatility.  While investments can go way up, they can also go way down.  An endowment is intended to exist for the university in perpetuity, which can be a long time.

So, with that in mind, I wondered: When does a college or university stop being an institution of higher education, and start being considered an investment firm that runs educational enterprises on the side?  I asked in a tweet what a list of colleges had in common.  I offered a hint that I had been playing with NACUBO and IPEDS data.  And I got some good guesses.  And some bad ones, including things you couldn't tell from IPEDS or NACUBO.

The answer is that all 19 of the institutions listed in the tweet, and on the visualization below, had unrestricted endowment earnings that exceeded the total amount of tuition they collected in the same year.  And, as I indicated, the numbers in FY 21 appear to be mostly higher (by a lot) than in FY 20 (the years shown here.)  Harvard, for instance, had a total return of almost $11B in FY 21. (That should put them on the list easily next year, but for FY 20 they have to settle for a paltry ratio of 0.9).

The column on the left shows the ratio: Princeton, for instance, collected about $133M in tuition in the same year its endowment returned almost $1.5B, or just about eleven times as much.  For Grinnell, it was 1.9, for Stanford, 4.3.

I'll probably dig in a little deeper later, but because the data are reported differently across platforms, and the timing is not great, it may be a while.  And perhaps this will all be less relevant if the market goes down or levels off this year.

What would you like to see?  Let me know, and I'll consider it.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

On Rankings, 1911, and Economic Mobility

If you're alive today, you have lived your whole life with college rankings.  Yes, even you.  You may not have knows you were living in the time of college rankings, but indeed, you have been, unless you were born before 1911 (or maybe earlier.)  If you're interested, you can read this Twitter thread from 2020 where I discuss them and include snippets of those 1911 rankings as well as those from 1957, written by Chesley Manly. You can read for yourself, or you can trust me, that in fact the rankings as we know them have been surprisingly consistent over time, and most people would have only minor quibbles with the ratings from 1911.  Perhaps that's because they have always tended to measure the same thing. But what if we did different rankings?  No, not like the Princeton Review where they make an attempt to measure best party school, or best cafeteria food, or worst social life.  Something more quantifiable and concrete, although still, admittedly, a hard thing to get rig

Freshman Migration, 1986 to 2020

(Note: I discovered that in IPEDS, Penn State Main Campus now reports with "The Pennsylvania State University" as one system.  So when you'd look at things over time, Penn State would have data until 2018, and then The Penn....etc would show up in 2020.  I found out Penn State main campus still reports its own data on the website, so I went there, and edited the IPEDS data by hand.  So if you noticed that error, it should be corrected now, but I'm not sure what I'll do in years going forward.) Freshman migration to and from the states is always a favorite visualization of mine, both because I find it a compelling and interesting topic, and because I had a few breakthroughs with calculated variables the first time I tried to do it. If you're a loyal reader, you know what this shows: The number of freshman and their movement between the states.  And if you're a loyal viewer and you use this for your work in your business, please consider supporting the costs