NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. (/thread-25456.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. (/thread-25456.html)
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - BostonCard - 05-25-2025
Let’s please refocus this thread on Stanford impact, and avoid editorializing what other universities, both foreign and domestic, are doing.
BC
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Canalejas - 05-28-2025
Stanford faculty react to Harvard international student ban, foresee long-term damage
https://stanforddaily.com/2025/05/26/stanford-faculty-react-to-harvard-international-student-ban-foresee-long-term-damage/
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - chrisk - 05-28-2025
US embassies and consulates have shut down student visa interviews and will be vetting social media when they resume.
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - 82lsju - 05-28-2025
an effort has apparently been started by Harvard alums to to reach as many of the alums as possible to encourage political action and donations.
https://www.crimsoncourage.com/
does anyone know if there is a similar effort by Stanford alums?
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Canalejas - 05-28-2025
From the Community | Stanford professors respond to political interference in the governance of U.S. universities
https://stanforddaily.com/2025/05/22/from-the-community-stanford-professors-respond-to-political-interference-in-the-governance-of-u-s-universities/
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - chrisk - 05-28-2025
Per the AP, Marco Rubio made this statement tonight:
“Under President Trump’s leadership, the U.S. State Department will work with the Department of Homeland Security to aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields,” Rubio wrote.
Edit to add link to new NYT article on this
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/28/us/politics/china-student-visas-revoke.html
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - PalmTree - 05-29-2025
To update an earlier mention in this thread, Stanford and other schools with large endowments are now staring a 20 fold increase in federal taxes on endowment returns in the face. The current rate for schools with larger income amounts is now 1.4% - the proposed rate would be 21%. IIRC, total endowment income a year or two ago was ~ $1.8B, so net inpact would be ~ -$350M. The provision's written into the new spending bill.
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - BostonCard - 05-31-2025
I wonder how much tolerance there will be for continued athletic department deficits (last numbers I saw, which was in 2022, before the demise of the PAC-12, was that the AD had expenses were $145.6 million, against a revenue of $134.1 million for a deficit of 11 million. Given the reduced payouts from the ACC, the increased cost in trans-continental travel, the impending arrival of the House settlement and the like, it is very hard to see how the AD budget gets any semblance of balance. Now, that’s fine when the university is rolling in money and academic departments have stable or increasing budgets, but…
Stanford’s full R&D budget was about $2.2 billion, of which about 75% is federally funded. Whether through reduced indirect cost calculations, or cuts to grant-funding agencies (NIH and NSF specifically, plus DOE, which funds SLAC), with subsequent reductions in grants generally, and whether it is done by executive order or through spending legislation, Stanford would be a fool not to prepare itself for a reduction in federal funds over the next few years. If you add in the contemplated tax on endowments, we are looking at a potential financial catastrophe for Stanford. With an overall budget coming close to $10 Billion, it is easy to see a reduction in revenue and increase in taxes that affects about 10 - 20% to the top line.
In this context, I expect two things to happen. The first is that the fight for private donations to at partially mitigate the reduction to be epic. Fundraising is going to go on steroids. And while donations to the AD and lifetime cardinal are different than donations to the University, there is overlap and it is hard to believe that a school whose underlying mission is the University won’t steer donors towards efforts to preserve its academic mission (that is, to avoid having to lay off faculty, and to keep the graduate students and post docs who are the lifeblood of research going).
Secondly, I doubt that there will be much of a tolerance for subsidizing the athletics department going forward. I think the AD is going to be asked to self-support because I find it hard to believe that the faculty senate is going to stand up and sat “sure, let’s give the AD an extra $5 million a year to hire a top name football coach while we slash the Classics department in half.”
Lots can happen between now and then. There could be a groundswell of support to continue federal funding for universities. We could see a massive groundswell of support from donors. The medical center, which cross-subsidizes everyone, could have another banner year, and cushion the blow.
But my expectation is that over the next three plus years, Stanford and a lot of other Universities, are looking at a much more difficult financial picture, and that is going to have substantial downstream consequences on the Athletics Department. I would expect a major retrenchment of expenditures, including a re-examination of how many varsity sports the university supports. I wouldn’t get my hopes up for a splashy coaching hire after Frank Reich’s year is up. Unless donors step up, I wouldn’t expect Stanford to be a major House payments player.
BC
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - 82lsju - 06-01-2025
(05-31-2025, 02:40 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I wonder how much tolerance there will be for continued athletic department deficits (last numbers I saw, which was in 2022, before the demise of the PAC-12, was that the AD had expenses were $145.6 million, against a revenue of $134.1 million for a deficit of 11 million. Given the reduced payouts from the ACC, the increased cost in trans-continental travel, the impending arrival of the House settlement and the like, it is very hard to see how the AD budget gets any semblance of balance. Now, that’s fine when the university is rolling in money and academic departments have stable or increasing budgets, but…
Stanford’s full R&D budget was about $2.2 billion, of which about 75% is federally funded. Whether through reduced indirect cost calculations, or cuts to grant-funding agencies (NIH and NSF specifically, plus DOE, which funds SLAC), with subsequent reductions in grants generally, and whether it is done by executive order or through spending legislation, Stanford would be a fool not to prepare itself for a reduction in federal funds over the next few years. If you add in the contemplated tax on endowments, we are looking at a potential financial catastrophe for Stanford. With an overall budget coming close to $10 Billion, it is easy to see a reduction in revenue and increase in taxes that affects about 10 - 20% to the top line.
In this context, I expect two things to happen. The first is that the fight for private donations to at partially mitigate the reduction to be epic. Fundraising is going to go on steroids. And while donations to the AD and lifetime cardinal are different than donations to the University, there is overlap and it is hard to believe that a school whose underlying mission is the University won’t steer donors towards efforts to preserve its academic mission (that is, to avoid having to lay off faculty, and to keep the graduate students and post docs who are the lifeblood of research going).
Secondly, I doubt that there will be much of a tolerance for subsidizing the athletics department going forward. I think the AD is going to be asked to self-support because I find it hard to believe that the faculty senate is going to stand up and sat “sure, let’s give the AD an extra $5 million a year to hire a top name football coach while we slash the Classics department in half.”
Lots can happen between now and then. There could be a groundswell of support to continue federal funding for universities. We could see a massive groundswell of support from donors. The medical center, which cross-subsidizes everyone, could have another banner year, and cushion the blow.
But my expectation is that over the next three plus years, Stanford and a lot of other Universities, are looking at a much more difficult financial picture, and that is going to have substantial downstream consequences on the Athletics Department. I would expect a major retrenchment of expenditures, including a re-examination of how many varsity sports the university supports. I wouldn’t get my hopes up for a splashy coaching hire after Frank Reich’s year is up. Unless donors step up, I wouldn’t expect Stanford to be a major House payments player.
BC
from the 23/24 AD annual report
Quote:FY24 FINANCES
In FY24, the Department of Athletics, Physical Education, and Recreation (DAPER) had $143.7M in operating revenues and expenses related to Varsity Athletics. In addition, the department’s restricted, athletics scholarship endowments contributed $32.5M to cover the costs of Stanford student-athletes’ tuition, room and board. As displayed in the exhibit above, 38 percent of Varsity Athletics-related revenues in FY24 came from philanthropic gifts. Consistent support from annual donors remains critical for our long-term success and growth, particularly as the costs our programs face to compete nationally at the highest level continue to rise.
the pie chart and table show 33% of revenue came from "University Support" (which I would guess will be going up) and broadcast revenue accounted for 14% of revenue (which I assume will be going down). Previously there had a couple of line items for $$ from the University
from 2022/23
f.) UNIV. SUPPORT FOR COMBINED VARSITY & RECREATION SERVICES $10.30 M
g.) UNIV. SUPPORT FOR VARSITY SPORTS $12.30 M
so I would guess the 33% above includes both of these, assuming f.) is about the same in 2023/24 then g.) was on the order of $36m
the 2023/24 report is here
https://gostanford.com/documents/35853ce8-e05e-435c-a19f-12a2c2da16d1.pdf
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - BostonCard - 06-01-2025
The big question is what the numbers are from this last season, when we were in the ACC and has substantially higher costs from travel and reduced revenue due to our desperation to get into the ACC. And, more importantly, how much will the university be willing to front going forward.
BC
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - 82lsju - 06-01-2025
(06-01-2025, 09:28 AM)BostonCard Wrote: The big question is what the numbers are from this last season, when we were in the ACC and has substantially higher costs from travel and reduced revenue due to our desperation to get into the ACC. And, more importantly, how much will the university be willing to front going forward.
BC
I would guess broadcast $ is down $10m, football gate down by ~$1m, additional OPEX (including travel) for being in the ACC ~$2m (10% Y/Y increase in OPEX) so in addition to the ~$36m in 2023/24 I'd add on another ~$13m so for 2024/25 I'd predict ~$50m
the biggest expense item in 2023/24 was Tuition, Room & Board + Alston (~$31m) the AD appears to pay full tuition for all the scholarships, I'm not sure this is fair and reasonable given the average student pays far less that full tuition, maybe a more reasonable amount for the AD to pay might be either the average student tuition or the calculated amount each scholarship recipient would have paid if they were a regular student
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Spiny_Norman - 06-01-2025
Howard Wolf told us at an alumni event that the Board of Trustees had agreed to subsidize Athletics to cover the Tier 1 Media rights that Stanford was giving up. The subsidy will continue until Stanford qualifies for a full share. The subsidy could be as much as $300M. This was done to facilitate Stanford's transition to the ACC and to allow for continued support of a broad-based Athletic program.
It's a huuuuuge commitment. Whomever is hired to be the new AD will have a lot to deal with, including financial stress from NIL and House payments. But it could be a lot worse without BoT support.
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - BostonCard - 06-01-2025
That was before the university came face with a potentially apocalyptic funding reduction from federal grants and tax expenditures on the endowment. The BoT giveth and the BoT can taketh away, and just because the Board endorsed a subsidy when things were going well doesn’t mean it couldn’t rescind the subsidy if the University is facing financial distress.
Remember the BoT also approved acquiring the Belmont campus until it decided that in light of the funding uncertainty it may be best not to undertake large funding commitments.
BC
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Treebound - 06-01-2025
Did anyone here attend Levin's Open Minds event in Chicago? If so, was there any discussion of Athletics in the Fireside Chat with Levin and Lilly? I expect that we will be hearing more this coming Saturday up at Open Minds SF.
Unrelated - I also heard Andrew held a tailgate in CTG before last night's Cold Play concert - good for him! Rumor has it that most of those proceeds are going to the AD. That's great news, if true. My youngest son (current student) went to the concert and said "it was Epic!"
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - M T - 06-01-2025
(06-01-2025, 04:41 PM)Treebound Wrote: Unrelated - I also heard Andrew held a tailgate in CTG before last night's Cold Play concert - good for him! Rumor has it that most of those proceeds are going to the AD. That's great news, if true. My youngest son (current student) went to the concert and said "it was Epic!"
That's little consolation to the softball team.
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - chrisk - 06-01-2025
Although the football coach reports to Luck, would he hire a coach without an AD in place?
Given the university's financial uncertainty, they might to look for a retired alum with high-level management experience who is willing to do the job on the cheap. Somebody who is strongly committed to the university may be
more willing to deal with the fiscal uncertainty and be more comfortable with the internal dynamics at Stanford.
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Canalejas - 06-11-2025
21 state attorneys general, multiple universities, alumni to back Harvard in court battle against Trump
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/06/09/metro/universities-back-harvard-in-court-battle-with-trump-administration/
Quote:On Monday, six more schools — Stanford University, American University, Georgetown University, University of Delaware, University of Denver, and University of Maryland Baltimore — filed a motion asking to join the amicus brief.
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Canalejas - 06-19-2025
Provost presents preliminary 2025-26 budget plan, says cuts are likely
https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2025/06/provost-presents-preliminary-2025-26-budget-plan-says-cuts-are-likely
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - BostonCard - 06-19-2025
Quote:Martinez explained the principles guiding the Budget Group’s decision-making. The university will prioritize support for the core mission of research and education; look for ways to be leaner and more efficient; and position the university to be resilient in a variety of scenarios depending on how federal policy evolves.
As I’ve said, in this environment, if the worst comes to pass and the University is looking at a severe shortfall, the subsidy it passes to the Athletics Department may be a tempting target.
BC
RE: NIH funding cuts- Stanford to lose ~168 million/year. - Canalejas - 06-20-2025
(06-19-2025, 06:40 PM)BostonCard Wrote:Quote:Martinez explained the principles guiding the Budget Group’s decision-making. The university will prioritize support for the core mission of research and education; look for ways to be leaner and more efficient; and position the university to be resilient in a variety of scenarios depending on how federal policy evolves.
As I’ve said, in this environment, if the worst comes to pass and the University is looking at a severe shortfall, the subsidy it passes to the Athletics Department may be a tempting target.
BC
USA Today asked a bunch of college administrators if they share your concerns about athletics funding being in jeopardy and essentially got no answers.
Quote:USA TODAY Sports contacted more than 25 universities and college leadership organizations to ask them about concerns that athletics could be affected at least indirectly by this federal funding uncertainty. Almost all of them dodged the question by not responding at all, or by providing vague, undetailed answers, or by saying they didn’t want to talk about it on the record.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2025/06/20/president-trump-cuts-universities-college-sports/84253465007/