Barnard people, welcome to the real world!
Seen on a parent facebook page: “Anyone familiar with Catholic University of America? They recently sent a letter out to students regarding their unfortunate financial situation. I was wondering if anyone with a student there has any further insight. I have a senior in highschool and this school is on her list….but it’s definitely concerning to hear that they may be closing their doors.”
All I’m finding when I search is this: Catholic University of America facing $30 million deficit
Has anyone received the letter referenced in the fb post?
Working paper from the Federal Reserve about college closures talking a lot about the causes and stressors involved. Maybe I’m reading it too rosey…but if we assume the demographic cliff isn’t a sudden 1 year thing but instead takes several years, it seems to say that closure rates do not increase much…some close, but not that many…and I would not want to be in the for-profit side of things. Makes me feel slightly better?
The problem is that for a huge U, the “fall off” is cushioned by the size, complexity, sheer number of revenue-generating activities they have.
At a small college, even one which appears to be healthy right now, there are very few hedges to one bad admissions season. They don’t have hundreds of patents-- technologies developed by their faculty where the U gets part of the revenue stream. They likely have not developed a vacant lot into a mixed use center with retail at the bottom and market rate or luxury apartments on the top, as many big U’s have done. And they don’t have the dozens of revenue paying programs for non-enrolled students (i.e. a four day seminar on Risk Management, a one week "leadership cohort) which charge huge amounts of money to the corporations which send their employees there.
There are big U’s which essentially run 52 week a year Event Planning businesses… the chapel is booked a year ahead of time for weddings, the faculty club hosts outside fundraising galas, the dorms are filled in the summer with HS soccer clinics and archery tournaments, the gyms are filled in the summer with the gymnastics semi-finals, and the attendees (and their guests) are eating in the dining halls, sleeping in otherwise empty beds, and paying big bucks for the privilege.
And research contracts- corporate skunk works, NSF…
I love small colleges. But we can’t pretend they aren’t tuition dependent which means that unexpected increases in the costs of health insurance or utilities or whatever doesn’t mean a shock to the system. Remains to be seen, right?
To be clear though, the very wealthy LACs are not tuition dependent. Though of course your larger point remains – many if not most small schools are tuition dependent.
Yup, tuition dependency is the driver, not size. Nothing like a well managed endowment to smooth out bumps!
Columbia College (Chicago) cutting some programs and laying off profs, consolidating other programs. These changes were recommended by a provost’s committee in late summer. I would not be surprised if ultimately Columbia doesn’t make it.
They have been doing cost cutting for a number of years, and I agree that they seem to be teetering toward closure. I recall when they consolidated all MFA programs into an MFA in Fine Arts. Schools typically have individual programs within the MFA (graphic design, painting, etc). I figured that their MFA programs were hurting when that happened. Even if there is crossover between disciplines, there isn’t so much crossover that consolidation of the entire program makes sense for prospective students. It’s too bad that they are struggling - I know several grads of their programs who had a great experience & have really good jobs in their fields.
I also know several grads who have done well! I think DePaul is probably kicking their behinds competitively speaking. And DePaul offers more of a traditional college experience, with big sports.
That’s what’s sad. A lot of kids don’t want big sports. Columbia’s culture was what they were actively seeking…
True, but it’s also easy to avoid at DePaul.
We visited both Columbia and DePaul this past spring for my music kid. The cultures are very different. Columbia’s hands on - flexible curriculum and warm, supportive environment seemed a great fit for him. Also the location in the heart of the city was preferable. Oh! and the dorms are amazing! He doesn’t care about sports. This is sad news, but expected, since I have been following their financial woes.
Yeah, if my fine arts-adjacent C23 hadn’t needed a daily sunlight filter for her SAD, Columbia Chicago would have been high on the list of possibilities save for their financial instability. They’ve got something meaningful there, and this one would make me very sad if it were to fail.
Schools need something to bring in funds, and for many schools that is sports. Offering the small experience is great, but someone has to pay for it. If the schools don’t have the alums to donate the big bucks or an industry like auto manufacturing to support specialty programs, then tuition is going to be high, and for many art schools that’s becoming too high for students to handle.
Those amazing dorms also cost money.
Schools need to have alternative revenue streams, which don’t necessarily need to include sports. But it’s not exactly simple for every college to implement revenue streams. I worked at a school that struggled with this, and they still haven’t figured it out. In the past, there were reliable groups of people who donated to the arts. Corporate donations dropped off years ago, and personal donations are dropping off … many of the younger wealthy donors are leaning toward donating to battle food insecurity and fund health care related programs, among other non-arts related initiatives.
No to mention that sports is actually a revenue drain at the vast majority of colleges.
A revenue drain directly but for many a marketing tool.
I’m seeing a trend in the colleges on this list, and others that I suspect are in financial trouble, in that D2/3 sports are becoming the new “pay to play”, much like club sports over the past decade.
Some of these colleges reached out to my athlete although he showed no interest. He’s a high-stats kid (both academically and athletically) so that makes sense. However, we have seen a number of his lower/low stats, non-starter teammates “recruited” to these teams through a lot of contact and pressure from coaches. Many have taken the offers only to end up not even dressing for games as team roosters are over 40 kids. (He plays 2 different sports and this is over 50% higher than selective schools). If you look at some of these small schools and wonder how they are hanging on financially, look at the percentage of athletes. Then look at the non-talented members of your local club teams or the non-starters on varsity and where they are playing and it will all make sense. I also have an inkling there is pressure on the coaches to bring in kids to keep the lights on (or at least to keep their jobs).
The Chronicle of Higher Education has a playbook for athletics as part of a schools programing to help colleges do exactly this. I do think that athletics is becoming a core “value” proposition for many smaller schools looking to stay viable. They focus on kids who want a team as part of their college experience. I think that this can work for many kids but they need to do their research into exactly what they are getting.
My kid heard from many small schools during her that were neither an academic or athletic fit during the fall of her senior year. It was as if these schools were casting a wide net in search of kids who might want to play in college but hadn’t landed.