Skip to main content

Private colleges and discount, 2020

Note: A reader pointed out that there are two years of data in this set (Fall 2021 enrolling data and Fall 2020 Financial Aid data).  In all probability, this will cause discount rates to be a bit lower on this view than in reality.  As always, don't take or make any important decisions based on information on a free website.

Discount rate is a hot topic among private college leaders, and although it's an interesting measure, it's not as helpful as some people might think it is.  And it's a little hard to grasp and hard to explain.  But I'm going to try.

Discount rate can be helpful when measuring yourself against yourself over time; and it can be helpful when measuring yourself against similar peers.  But as a thing unto itself?  Pretty worthless, actually.  Here's why.

First some definitions: Discount rate measures the amount of institutional aid you award as a function of how much gross tuition you charge.  If you collect $10,000,000 in tuition, and award $4,000,000 in your own, institutional aid, your discount rate is 4,000,000 / 10,000,000, or 40%.  Here's where it gets a little tricky.

If your aid is unfunded (most of it is), you simply forego that $4,000,000, and collect $6,000,000.  The scholarship or aid is just an accounting transaction. That $6,000,000 is how much you have in cash to pay professors, heat the buildings, and cut the grass.  And that cash can come from the student, state or federal grants, or student loans; it's all cash, and you don't care about the source for these accounting purposes, even if you do care for other reasons. 

In the case of discounted aid, it's not real money.  So you can't "re-distribute it" away from students in one group to students in the other, because doing so will change the amount of gross revenue; and without the gross revenue, there is nothing to discount.  And nothing left to spend.

If it's funded (that is, some source is providing you the scholarship money, like a funded award), you get the $6M from the student and the $4M from the scholarship source, or the full $10M.  This is rare.

So the amount of actual cash revenue, divided by the number of students, is an important measure.  If you had $6M in net revenue and 400 students, your net revenue per student is about $15,000.  If you collect that $6M and have 600 students, your net revenue per student is about $10,000.  That is a real difference.

So let's look at four colleges, all enrolling 400 new students.  


You can see that the first three institutions, with three very different discount rates, generate about the same amount of cash for operations.  And you can see the two that have the most similar discount rates at right are the farthest apart on net revenue per student.  TLDR: Discount rate is a function of a numerator and a denominator. You shouldn't use it to compare colleges with very different tuition rates, or substantially different enrollment numbers.

So, let's take a look at private college discount rates for 2020.  I don't look at public universities because doing so is only meaningful within a state because of funding models that vary from one state to another. You can't compare public universities on discount in Alabama, Arizona, and Arkansas in a meaningful way without a lot deeper dive on the data.

If you work in EM or financial aid and you want to use this with your cabinet or board of trustees, I'd appreciate your support for my time and costs for webhosting and software costs by buying me a coffee

Below is the data, in several views, using the tabs across the top.  Summary shows the raw data: Counts, revenue, and aid.  Filter to specific types of institutions at the right.

The next three views break things out by Region, Religious Affiliation, and Campus Location.  The filters help you drill down some more.  This might be useful if you want to get a set of your peers or competitors or just similar institutions.

The final view shows Detail for the 1,000 or so colleges in the data set.  You can see net revenue per student (measured two ways) and discount rate.  The filters help you narrow down the group to a set that you might consider your peers.

Note that I've taken our seminaries and yeshivas and other institutions that are designed to train people for the clergy.  Their funding models are often very different, and they make the view very noisy.

Use this data carefully and in context, and as always with IPEDs Data (especially from a COVID year) don't rush to judgment on what this all means unless you have some background.  And as always, let me know what you notice here.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

First-year student (freshman) migration, 2022

A new approach to freshman migration, which is always a popular post on Higher Ed Data Stories. If you're a regular reader, you can go right to the visualization and start interacting with it.  And I can't stress enough: You need to use the controls and click away to get the most from these visualizations. If you're new, this post focuses on one of the most interesting data elements in IPEDS: The geographic origins of first-year (freshman) students over time.  My data set includes institutions in the 50 states and DC.  It includes four-year public and four-year, private not-for-profits that participate in Title IV programs; and it includes traditional institutions using the Carnegie classification (Doctoral, Masters, Baccalaureate, and Special Focus Schools in business, engineering, and art/design. Data from other institutions is noisy and often unreliable, or (in the case of colleges in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and other territories, often shows close to 100% of enro...

Educational Attainment and the Presidential Elections

I've been fascinated for a while by the connection between political leanings and education: The correlation is so strong that I once suggested that perhaps Republicans were so anti-education because, in general, places with a higher percentage of bachelor's degree recipients were more likely to vote for Democrats. The 2024 presidential election puzzled a lot of us in higher education, and perhaps these charts will show you why: We work and probably hang around mostly people with college degrees (or higher).  Our perception is limited. With the 2024 election data just out , I thought I'd take a look at the last three elections and see if the pattern I noticed in 2016 and 2020 held.  Spoiler: It did, mostly. Before you dive into this, a couple of tips: Alaska's data is always reported in a funky way, so just ignore it here.  It's a small state (in population, that is) and it's very red.  It doesn't change the overall trends even if I could figure out how to c...

Education Levels in the US, by State and Attainment

Attainment has always been an interesting topic for me, every since I first got stunned into disbelief when I looked at the data over time.  Even looking at shorter periods can lead to some revelations that many don't make sense at first. Here is the latest data from NCES, published in the Digest of Education Statistics . Please note that this is for informational purposes only, and I've not even attempted to visualize the standard errors in this data, which vary from state-to-state.  There are four views year, all looking at educational attainment by state in 2012 and 2022.   The first shows data on a map: Choose the year, and choose the level of attainment.  Note that the top three categories can be confusing: BA means a Bachelor's degree only; Grad degree means at least a Master's (or higher, of course); and BA or more presumably combines those two.  Again, standard errors might mean the numbers don't always add up perfectly. The second shows the data o...