<p>Stanford</a> lays off hundreds as endowment shrinks</p>
<p>I wish Berkeley took the same route Stanford did with layoffs instead of across the board furloughs and salary cuts.</p>
<p>^ Berkeley did that as well, just not as many as Stanford’s number however: [08.27.2009</a> - As students return to classes, media meet with the chancellor](<a href=“http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2009/08/27_b2s.shtml]08.27.2009”>08.27.2009 - As students return to classes, media meet with the chancellor)</p>
<p>I wonder if USC hasn’t been affected by what seems to be a massive and serious crises that hit California’s higher education. </p>
<p>I remember one particular CC member by the name of hmom5 who constantly spreading rumors that the atmosphere at Berkeley is gloomy, and was energetically advising students to keep away from it and instead go for USC as USC hasn’t been affected by the crises. But if Stanford has felt the effects of the crises, what more has it caused to a significantly poorer, less prestigious university?</p>
<p>USC has indeed been hit by the economic crisis, but not as badly as many other schools have. Combination of smart(er) investing compared to many other private schools, as well as not being state funded like the UC system.</p>
<p>Gee, that’s too bad. ;-)</p>
<p>Meanwhile Wisconsin was able to hire away one of Penn’s top econ profs. Unthinkable two years ago.</p>
<p>[Five</a> New Faculty Members Join Wisconsin School of Business – Wisconsin School of Business Gazette](<a href=“http://www.bus.wisc.edu/gazette/2009/09/five-new-faculty-members-join-wisconsin-school-of-business/]Five”>http://www.bus.wisc.edu/gazette/2009/09/five-new-faculty-members-join-wisconsin-school-of-business/)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it’s because they’ve been not too vocal about it or there’s little money to lose in the first place.</p>
<p>Research expenditures, in millions:
$679M - Stanford<br>
$546M - Berkeley (without a medical school)<br>
$450M - USC </p>
<p>Faculty in national academies<br>
9.7% - Berkeley
8.9% - Stanford
1.2% - USC </p>
<p>Actual grad rate
95% - Stanford
88% - Berkeley
85% - USC</p>
<p>I fail to see how your second two statistics say anything about the amount of money USC has to spend. Would you please explain that?</p>
<p>And as for the first one, research expenditures are hardly a good representation of overall money available to a school. General funds budgets are a much better indicator, however I can’t seem to find this information in my very cursory search. Where did you get your statistics from?</p>
<p>^ He got the data off the Washington Monthly rankings posted on these boards today:
[Washington</a> Monthly](<a href=“http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings/national_university_rank.php]Washington”>http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings/national_university_rank.php)</p>
<p>And what a great source of statistics that rag is! :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, do not worry too much, RML, your beloved Berkeley will be fine. It will be business as usual. Just a bit more squeezing people where they need to be.</p>
<p>One question that begs for an answer is how Stanford ever survived 10-12 years ago … with a mere 5 billion dollars? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
It most certainly is!</p>
<p>Science & Engineering PhDs awarded:
Berkeley: 571 (1)
Stanford: 481 (4)</p>
<p>Faculty Receiving Significant Awards:
Berkeley: 1.9% (4)
Stanford: 1.5% (12)</p>
<p>Faculty in National Academies:
Berkeley: 9.7% (2)
Stanford: 8.9% (3)</p>
<p>Just what I said, UCB! Considering this is a forum dedicated to the UG world.</p>
<p>no to worry, stanford will be just fine. besides its endowment it owns most of palo alto and the surrounding areas.</p>
<p>“One question that begs for an answer is how Stanford ever survived 10-12 years ago … with a mere 5 billion dollars?”</p>
<p>Stanford is going to survive and prosper, but to answer that question…you have to look beyond then endowment and see what the school’s expenditures are. The assets and the liabilites have to be looked at to get a good picture of a school’s financial health.</p>
<p>AIG had quite a few assets, but it doesn’t look too good. Bear Stearns said it was a profitable company.</p>
<p>
Why does the forum have to be just UG focused? There is more to universities than just small class sizes and “great” undergrad teaching. I don’t think 'furd provides best in class for these categories either.</p>
<p>xiggi, you misunderstood my post. It wasn’t meant to rile up anyone from Stanford’s camp. It was supposed to show how significantly ahead Stanford and Berkeley are from USC despite the crises.</p>
<p>Dstark, the point of looking at older figures related to endowment and expenditures, is to show that schools that have vast resources respond the market value of their assets. With a bulging endowment, Stanford responded by expanding departments and spending. The massive correction of 2008-2009 will also result in severe contractions. </p>
<p>In the meantime, it will take several years to correctl ascertain the depth of the correction. Figures and valuations from December 2008 might be quite different from December 2009. </p>
<p>However, it is one thing for the really wealthy to reduce his or her expenses, and another for the person who has fueled his or her lifestyle on the availability of borrowed money or government largesse. </p>
<p>Fwiw, I think that Cal --and tons of other state schools-- would love to have to deal with the problem of dealing with an endowment of only 12 billion instead of hoping for the return of an economy that allows for vast government contributions.</p>
<p>Xiggi, you asked this question, "“One question that begs for an answer is how Stanford ever survived 10-12 years ago … with a mere 5 billion dollars?”, and I answered that question.</p>
<p>I’m sure Berkeley would love to have $12 billion. Most schools would. I think Stanford is one of the best schools in the world.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Humm - perhaps because it is called College Search & Selection and that there is another forum that deals with Graduate Schools. Isn’t that why the THES and Chinese rankings are always punted in that direction? :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Berkeley has an endowment and research money as well. I would be very surprised if Stanford wasn’t leveraged to about the same extent Berkeley is. </p>
<p>There is a back-stop to being a publicly funded institution, legislatures can always increase taxes - unfortunately.</p>
<p>
Umm, Stanford I’m sure is hoping for an economic rebound as well…it helps investment returns and donations.</p>