[Mick]

Fullerton is a commuter school, with only 6% living on campus. Seems like it's a lot easier for a commuter school, where kids are driving in from all over So Cal each day, to temporarily switch to online courses.

Looks like San Jose State is doing the same thing...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/arti...218878.php

The dominoes are about to fall. With west coast universities pulling the trigger it seems reasonable to believe that Stanford would do so before peer schools on the east coast. Also easier for Stanford to do it with the quarter system than it is for schools stuck with the semester system.

Great point. Perhaps Stanford, if they act quickly, can aspire to become the University of Phoenix. As they've be doing quality online college education for a decade, they're the ones to beat. Red socks, er Cardinal socks for all!

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes. Paraphrased, she said:

1) We still have a brobdingnagian physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2) We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3) We ain't reducing sxxt. Or words to that effect.

[Mick]

Fullerton is a commuter school, with only 6% living on campus. Seems like it's a lot easier for a commuter school, where kids are driving in from all over So Cal each day, to temporarily switch to online courses.

Looks like San Jose State is doing the same thing...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/arti...218878.php

The dominoes are about to fall. With west coast universities pulling the trigger it seems reasonable to believe that Stanford would do so before peer schools on the east coast. Also easier for Stanford to do it with the quarter system than it is for schools stuck with the semester system.

Great point. Perhaps Stanford, if they act quickly, can aspire to become the University of Phoenix. As they've be doing quality online college education for a decade, they're the ones to beat. Red socks, er Cardinal socks for all!

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes. Paraphrased, she said:

1) We still have a brobdingnagian physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2) We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3) We ain't reducing sxxt. Or words to that effect.

[Farm93]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

[Farm93]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

[BostonCard]

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/20/833254570...en-in-fall

Colleges will be in a world of a hurt.  Things were problematic even before the virus, due to demographics and fewer visas.



BC

[BostonCard]

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/20/833254570...en-in-fall

Colleges will be in a world of a hurt.  Things were problematic even before the virus, due to demographics and fewer visas.



BC

[needle]

FWIW, a large midwestern university has said it plans on having an open campus this fall:

 Purdue University, for its part, intends to accept students on campus in typical numbers this fall, sober about the certain problems that the COVID-19 virus represents, but determined not to surrender helplessly to those difficulties but to tackle and manage them aggressively and creatively.

 

The university's president, former politico Mitch Daniels, basically argues that young people can get covid-19 and be OK, so the challenge--while big--is about taking steps to protect the over 35 crowd.

Link: https://www.purdue.edu/president/message...essage.php

My opinion is that it's a bit too early to make a prediction for the fall. If the daily new case counts drop by, say, half a month from now, I think schools will try to open with students in dorms and smaller-than-typical classes. But the decisions by several states make such a reduction in cases seemingly unlikely.

[needle]

FWIW, a large midwestern university has said it plans on having an open campus this fall:

 Purdue University, for its part, intends to accept students on campus in typical numbers this fall, sober about the certain problems that the COVID-19 virus represents, but determined not to surrender helplessly to those difficulties but to tackle and manage them aggressively and creatively.

 

The university's president, former politico Mitch Daniels, basically argues that young people can get covid-19 and be OK, so the challenge--while big--is about taking steps to protect the over 35 crowd.

Link: https://www.purdue.edu/president/message...essage.php

My opinion is that it's a bit too early to make a prediction for the fall. If the daily new case counts drop by, say, half a month from now, I think schools will try to open with students in dorms and smaller-than-typical classes. But the decisions by several states make such a reduction in cases seemingly unlikely.

[BostonCard]

This is interesting, and mathematically probably the right call.  However, if your denominator is large enough, even a small percentage means some cases will be serious, and you may even see a fatal case.  Again, mathematically this is probably the right call, but I don't want to be the University President having to call the parents of a college kid who died due to COVID-19 that they got while on campus.

BC

[BostonCard]

This is interesting, and mathematically probably the right call.  However, if your denominator is large enough, even a small percentage means some cases will be serious, and you may even see a fatal case.  Again, mathematically this is probably the right call, but I don't want to be the University President having to call the parents of a college kid who died due to COVID-19 that they got while on campus.

BC

[Farm93]

This is interesting, and mathematically probably the right call.  However, if your denominator is large enough, even a small percentage means some cases will be serious, and you may even see a fatal case.  Again, mathematically this is probably the right call, but I don't want to be the University President having to call the parents of a college kid who died due to COVID-19 that they got while on campus.

BC

The kids are close to invincible.   My concern for the kids would be that they are likely away from their primary care physician and they likely can't isolate or quarantine alone.   It would be pretty awful to get sick with COVID while away from home.   I am guessing they will use some process to put COVID positive students into special isolation housing, but from those that have suffered with COVID it does not sound like one can just be along working through it.    Will Purdue hire health care workers for that stay at home phase?  Guess they can figure it out.

I am not sure that is better than the Zoom U approach.   I think if I had a child in that situation I might really encourage them to stop out as I would hate to hear they had COVID while at school and are now living alone.

That noted my bigger concern for the university would be the faculty members and food service staff members.   If one of them gets sick I sure hope the school will have done all it could to protect its workers.  I can only imagine there will be COVID chasing lawyers if university employees get sick teaching students the school knew should have been in isolation or quarantine.

[Farm93]

This is interesting, and mathematically probably the right call.  However, if your denominator is large enough, even a small percentage means some cases will be serious, and you may even see a fatal case.  Again, mathematically this is probably the right call, but I don't want to be the University President having to call the parents of a college kid who died due to COVID-19 that they got while on campus.

BC

The kids are close to invincible.   My concern for the kids would be that they are likely away from their primary care physician and they likely can't isolate or quarantine alone.   It would be pretty awful to get sick with COVID while away from home.   I am guessing they will use some process to put COVID positive students into special isolation housing, but from those that have suffered with COVID it does not sound like one can just be along working through it.    Will Purdue hire health care workers for that stay at home phase?  Guess they can figure it out.

I am not sure that is better than the Zoom U approach.   I think if I had a child in that situation I might really encourage them to stop out as I would hate to hear they had COVID while at school and are now living alone.

That noted my bigger concern for the university would be the faculty members and food service staff members.   If one of them gets sick I sure hope the school will have done all it could to protect its workers.  I can only imagine there will be COVID chasing lawyers if university employees get sick teaching students the school knew should have been in isolation or quarantine.

[Mick]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

Understood.  My alma mater's (Santa Clara) endowment is over $1 billion.  I had hoped that an online class regimen would be less expensive for the students.

[Mick]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

Understood.  My alma mater's (Santa Clara) endowment is over $1 billion.  I had hoped that an online class regimen would be less expensive for the students.

[Farm93]

Understood.  My alma mater's (Santa Clara) endowment is over $1 billion.  I had hoped that an online class regimen would be less expensive for the students.

$1 Billion is probably enough to make it through, but it would be a lot easier if students still pay the full rate, especially since for those on financial aid the full rate is not really the rate they would pay in 2020.   

I suspect the Director person understands how much of the endowment can or cannot be easily liquified.  My guess is a lot of it has a lot of restrictions or would be very difficult to convert to cash at the 2019 valuation.   Santa Clara will be better off than many, but $1 billion is only 2X the annual operating budget. 

Tough times, but I think most schools will need to work hard to fight for their revenue and get creative cutting expenses.  I just can't imagine most schools work on scenario planning that includes having an unexpectedly large block of students opting for gap years, stopping out, or dropping out.  Every school has a attrition rate, but 2020-2021 will likely be way beyond their expectations.

[Farm93]

Understood.  My alma mater's (Santa Clara) endowment is over $1 billion.  I had hoped that an online class regimen would be less expensive for the students.

$1 Billion is probably enough to make it through, but it would be a lot easier if students still pay the full rate, especially since for those on financial aid the full rate is not really the rate they would pay in 2020.   

I suspect the Director person understands how much of the endowment can or cannot be easily liquified.  My guess is a lot of it has a lot of restrictions or would be very difficult to convert to cash at the 2019 valuation.   Santa Clara will be better off than many, but $1 billion is only 2X the annual operating budget. 

Tough times, but I think most schools will need to work hard to fight for their revenue and get creative cutting expenses.  I just can't imagine most schools work on scenario planning that includes having an unexpectedly large block of students opting for gap years, stopping out, or dropping out.  Every school has a attrition rate, but 2020-2021 will likely be way beyond their expectations.

[chrisk]

I assume Santa Clara and SJ State will keep the Federal money, unlike Harvard and Stanford.

[chrisk]

I assume Santa Clara and SJ State will keep the Federal money, unlike Harvard and Stanford.

[stupac2]

This is interesting, and mathematically probably the right call.  However, if your denominator is large enough, even a small percentage means some cases will be serious, and you may even see a fatal case.  Again, mathematically this is probably the right call, but I don't want to be the University President having to call the parents of a college kid who died due to COVID-19 that they got while on campus.

BC

The kids are close to invincible.   My concern for the kids would be that they are likely away from their primary care physician and they likely can't isolate or quarantine alone.   It would be pretty awful to get sick with COVID while away from home.   I am guessing they will use some process to put COVID positive students into special isolation housing, but from those that have suffered with COVID it does not sound like one can just be along working through it.    Will Purdue hire health care workers for that stay at home phase?  Guess they can figure it out.

I am not sure that is better than the Zoom U approach.   I think if I had a child in that situation I might really encourage them to stop out as I would hate to hear they had COVID while at school and are now living alone.

That noted my bigger concern for the university would be the faculty members and food service staff members.   If one of them gets sick I sure hope the school will have done all it could to protect its workers.  I can only imagine there will be COVID chasing lawyers if university employees get sick teaching students the school knew should have been in isolation or quarantine.

Not sure about anyone else here, but I never had a dorm room where I could possibly self-isolate. It would be a disaster.

On the general topic of universities being screwed, here's a friend of mine (I think class of '07, maybe '08) on the topic:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/troysteinmetz/status/1253606304310067200[/tweet]

[stupac2]

This is interesting, and mathematically probably the right call.  However, if your denominator is large enough, even a small percentage means some cases will be serious, and you may even see a fatal case.  Again, mathematically this is probably the right call, but I don't want to be the University President having to call the parents of a college kid who died due to COVID-19 that they got while on campus.

BC

The kids are close to invincible.   My concern for the kids would be that they are likely away from their primary care physician and they likely can't isolate or quarantine alone.   It would be pretty awful to get sick with COVID while away from home.   I am guessing they will use some process to put COVID positive students into special isolation housing, but from those that have suffered with COVID it does not sound like one can just be along working through it.    Will Purdue hire health care workers for that stay at home phase?  Guess they can figure it out.

I am not sure that is better than the Zoom U approach.   I think if I had a child in that situation I might really encourage them to stop out as I would hate to hear they had COVID while at school and are now living alone.

That noted my bigger concern for the university would be the faculty members and food service staff members.   If one of them gets sick I sure hope the school will have done all it could to protect its workers.  I can only imagine there will be COVID chasing lawyers if university employees get sick teaching students the school knew should have been in isolation or quarantine.

Not sure about anyone else here, but I never had a dorm room where I could possibly self-isolate. It would be a disaster.

On the general topic of universities being screwed, here's a friend of mine (I think class of '07, maybe '08) on the topic:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/troysteinmetz/status/1253606304310067200[/tweet]

[Mick]

I assume Santa Clara and SJ State will keep the Federal money, unlike Harvard and Stanford.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/arti...215865.php

SCU's allocation was $3.5 mms., about 1/10th that of UCB, SJSU and SFSU.  I would imagine the public schools won't return the funds.  Harvard initially said they wouldn't return it, then relented after the outcry.  No idea about whether SCU will keep it, but I wouldn't bet against it.

---

I assume Santa Clara and SJ State will keep the Federal money, unlike Harvard and Stanford.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/arti...215865.php

SCU's allocation was $3.5 mms., about 1/10th that of UCB, SJSU and SFSU.  I would imagine the public schools won't return the funds.  Harvard initially said they wouldn't return it, then relented after the outcry.  No idea about whether SCU will keep it, but I wouldn't bet against it.

[Mick]

I assume Santa Clara and SJ State will keep the Federal money, unlike Harvard and Stanford.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/arti...215865.php

SCU's allocation was $3.5 mms., about 1/10th that of UCB, SJSU and SFSU.  I would imagine the public schools won't return the funds.  Harvard initially said they wouldn't return it, then relented after the outcry.  No idea about whether SCU will keep it, but I wouldn't bet against it.

---

I assume Santa Clara and SJ State will keep the Federal money, unlike Harvard and Stanford.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/arti...215865.php

SCU's allocation was $3.5 mms., about 1/10th that of UCB, SJSU and SFSU.  I would imagine the public schools won't return the funds.  Harvard initially said they wouldn't return it, then relented after the outcry.  No idea about whether SCU will keep it, but I wouldn't bet against it.

[needle]

The president of Brown, Christina Paxson, argues that universities can and should re-open in the fall:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/26/opini...QVE13UdvE5

Testing is an absolute prerequisite. All campuses must be able to conduct rapid testing for the coronavirus for all students, when they first arrive on campus and at regular intervals throughout the year. Testing only those with symptoms will not be sufficient. We now know that many people who have the disease are asymptomatic.

[needle]

The president of Brown, Christina Paxson, argues that universities can and should re-open in the fall:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/26/opini...QVE13UdvE5

Testing is an absolute prerequisite. All campuses must be able to conduct rapid testing for the coronavirus for all students, when they first arrive on campus and at regular intervals throughout the year. Testing only those with symptoms will not be sufficient. We now know that many people who have the disease are asymptomatic.

[Farm93]

The president of Brown, Christina Paxson, argues that universities can and should re-open in the fall:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/26/opini...QVE13UdvE5

Testing is an absolute prerequisite. All campuses must be able to conduct rapid testing for the coronavirus for all students, when they first arrive on campus and at regular intervals throughout the year. Testing only those with symptoms will not be sufficient. We now know that many people who have the disease are asymptomatic.

If I had seen planning for any of the things noted in the opinion I would be more confident.

It would only take a few anti-restriction protesters to ruin the multi-million dollar plans of a school.  
Opening is the easier part.  What happens if a school has an outbreak or becomes a hot spot?   How hot does the hot spot need to get for a school to close? 

That's the trick as it is likely much more expensive to start on-campus and then rush to virtual instruction mid-term.   Every school will need to make their own risk assessment, but unlike Brown with its assets few schools can afford to be wrong and ultimately do both in the same term AGAIN.   If they pick on campus and then stubbornly stay with that a bit too long they may become the Tyson's or Smithfield of education.

At least for academic aspects schools can decide their own fate.  Athletics requires a full conference or even the entire NCAA to agree on a path.  I can see how an Ivy league school might think sports without fans will be viable, but that's not going to work for a lot of schools since their expenses are only offset if they can get game day football revenue (tickets, parking, concessions).

Tough calls are coming, but the fear of the second way hitting in November likely will force some schools to cancel on-campus classes and intercollegiate athletics because few schools have an endowment safety net and relatively low costs athletics like Brown University.

[Farm93]

The president of Brown, Christina Paxson, argues that universities can and should re-open in the fall:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/26/opini...QVE13UdvE5

Testing is an absolute prerequisite. All campuses must be able to conduct rapid testing for the coronavirus for all students, when they first arrive on campus and at regular intervals throughout the year. Testing only those with symptoms will not be sufficient. We now know that many people who have the disease are asymptomatic.

If I had seen planning for any of the things noted in the opinion I would be more confident.

It would only take a few anti-restriction protesters to ruin the multi-million dollar plans of a school.  
Opening is the easier part.  What happens if a school has an outbreak or becomes a hot spot?   How hot does the hot spot need to get for a school to close? 

That's the trick as it is likely much more expensive to start on-campus and then rush to virtual instruction mid-term.   Every school will need to make their own risk assessment, but unlike Brown with its assets few schools can afford to be wrong and ultimately do both in the same term AGAIN.   If they pick on campus and then stubbornly stay with that a bit too long they may become the Tyson's or Smithfield of education.

At least for academic aspects schools can decide their own fate.  Athletics requires a full conference or even the entire NCAA to agree on a path.  I can see how an Ivy league school might think sports without fans will be viable, but that's not going to work for a lot of schools since their expenses are only offset if they can get game day football revenue (tickets, parking, concessions).

Tough calls are coming, but the fear of the second way hitting in November likely will force some schools to cancel on-campus classes and intercollegiate athletics because few schools have an endowment safety net and relatively low costs athletics like Brown University.

[ChicagoCard]

U of Arizona plans to have students back on campus in the fall.

[ChicagoCard]

U of Arizona plans to have students back on campus in the fall.

[PalmTree]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

[PalmTree]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

[JustAnotherFan]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

Two questions:

1. Does anyone know what percentage of the Stanford endowment is unrestricted?
2. Does the percentage that is restricted stay constant as a percentage of the total at the time of donation, or do investment officers have the ability to allocate certain investments to certain portions of the endowment, creating a potentially confusing shifting of restricted vs. unrestricted allocations. For example, would an investment officer have the ability to roll the dice on unrestricted donations (say let it ride on a startup venture fund) vs. restricted donations (perhaps bonds for endowed faculty chair)? Or do they need to smooth out returns across their entire endowment? I assume the latter.

[JustAnotherFan]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

Two questions:

1. Does anyone know what percentage of the Stanford endowment is unrestricted?
2. Does the percentage that is restricted stay constant as a percentage of the total at the time of donation, or do investment officers have the ability to allocate certain investments to certain portions of the endowment, creating a potentially confusing shifting of restricted vs. unrestricted allocations. For example, would an investment officer have the ability to roll the dice on unrestricted donations (say let it ride on a startup venture fund) vs. restricted donations (perhaps bonds for endowed faculty chair)? Or do they need to smooth out returns across their entire endowment? I assume the latter.

[chrisk]

U of Arizona plans to have students back on campus in the fall.

The UA president also said he was concerned whether football could be played in the fall.

[chrisk]

U of Arizona plans to have students back on campus in the fall.

The UA president also said he was concerned whether football could be played in the fall.

[Farm93]

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

Yes, that's true.   It is easier to find a few hundred million out of ~$30 billion than a few hundred million out of $1 billion.

Harvard and Stanford both returned their CARES funds presumably because they understand most people struggling to find money to pay for rent or food would not look fondly on seeing a the wealthiest universities in the world and a bunch of children of upper middle class families getting aid while they wonder what happened to their $1,200 government check.

[Farm93]

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

Yes, that's true.   It is easier to find a few hundred million out of ~$30 billion than a few hundred million out of $1 billion.

Harvard and Stanford both returned their CARES funds presumably because they understand most people struggling to find money to pay for rent or food would not look fondly on seeing a the wealthiest universities in the world and a bunch of children of upper middle class families getting aid while they wonder what happened to their $1,200 government check.

[ChicagoCard]

U of Arizona plans to have students back on campus in the fall.

The UA president also said he was concerned whether football could be played in the fall.

Right, and to expand he also said he hadn't heard anything from the Conference yet.

[ChicagoCard]

U of Arizona plans to have students back on campus in the fall.

The UA president also said he was concerned whether football could be played in the fall.

Right, and to expand he also said he hadn't heard anything from the Conference yet.

[chrisk]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

Two questions:

1. Does anyone know what percentage of the Stanford endowment is unrestricted?
2. Does the percentage that is restricted stay constant as a percentage of the total at the time of donation, or do investment officers have the ability to allocate certain investments to certain portions of the endowment, creating a potentially confusing shifting of restricted vs. unrestricted allocations. For example, would an investment officer have the ability to roll the dice on unrestricted donations (say let it ride on a startup venture fund) vs. restricted donations (perhaps bonds for endowed faculty chair)? Or do they need to smooth out returns across their entire endowment? I assume the latter.

The Stanford website (facts.stanford.edu) states that 79% of the endowment is restricted. It also states that there are 8100 separate funds in the endowment. I would assume that the investment profile applied to each is the same or similar, but there could be reasons that separate funds could have a different asset allocation, possibly if it was a limited-term fund vs. perpetual.

[chrisk]

I asked the Director of Finance at my alma mater if they were going to reduce tuition in light of the online classes.  Paraphrased, she said:

1)  We still have a of immense proportions physical plant, and profs and staffs to pay.
2)  We incurred LOTS of costs putting everything on line.
3)  We ain't reducing sxxt.  Or words to that effect.

This is the problem really.   For Stanford and other private national elite schools with substantial endowments the pain of using the endowment to pay bills will be painful but possible.  UofTexas and the UCs have a healthy bit of assets in endowments, but many other state schools across the USA rely almost exclusively on tuition and state funds.   And they need those tuition dollars to pay the bills.

Beyond a select group of schools this could get ugly quickly.

To pick a quick example....
Middle Tennessee State
21,000 students
$58.9 million endowment
And has an operating budget of ~$350 million
Revenue - 60% of the revenue coming from tuition and 30% coming from state aid
Expenses - 50% allocated to instruction with the other 50% spread across student support

The school can't give discounts without immediately impacting faculty salaries or student resources.   
Doesn't look like the budget really could even absorb the expenses related to modifying the support systems for virtual learning.

If students do not register (gap year, stop out, drop out) then the university needs to ask the state for funds.
And yet, every state in the USA will see massive budget problems because of their expensive battles against COVID coupled with their reduced sales tax and income tax revenue.

The MTSU endowment really is not large enough to replace a tuition downturn or a potential drop in state funding even for a semester.   

SJSU is in a better place, but not that much better.
Endowment is $150 million against a operating budget of $375 million.

I know on news channels they mention that a lot of schools may not be around for the 2021-2022 academic year if operations are impacted for the upcoming year and that's really rather sad.

I doubt many of them will tell the parents of students how dire their situation will be without registered students, but in light of their financial reality I get why a parent would get #1, #2 and even #3 from your list.

It's a bit simplistic to think that universities like Stanford are able to draw on the endowment to support operations. Most of the university's endowments are restricted as to how income can be used due to donor specifications - most of the endowment is specifically restricted to be used for grad aid, faculty salaries and department/program support. Even the later can be restricted by donor specification to use for specific types of expenses (research/instruction support, etc).  The bottom line is that these are legally binding requirements and that and only a small portion of the endowment has loose enough restrictions that allow use for operational/facilities support or administrative costs. It would take a boatload of effort to try to get donors to change/loosen restrictions on endowment use.

Two questions:

1. Does anyone know what percentage of the Stanford endowment is unrestricted?
2. Does the percentage that is restricted stay constant as a percentage of the total at the time of donation, or do investment officers have the ability to allocate certain investments to certain portions of the endowment, creating a potentially confusing shifting of restricted vs. unrestricted allocations. For example, would an investment officer have the ability to roll the dice on unrestricted donations (say let it ride on a startup venture fund) vs. restricted donations (perhaps bonds for endowed faculty chair)? Or do they need to smooth out returns across their entire endowment? I assume the latter.

The Stanford website (facts.stanford.edu) states that 79% of the endowment is restricted. It also states that there are 8100 separate funds in the endowment. I would assume that the investment profile applied to each is the same or similar, but there could be reasons that separate funds could have a different asset allocation, possibly if it was a limited-term fund vs. perpetual.