WSJ: Colleges Spend Like There’s No Tomorrow. ‘These Places Are Just Devouring Money.’

[1NJParent]

The nation’s best-known public universities have been on an unfettered spending spree. Over the past two decades, they erected new skylines comprising snazzy academic buildings and dorms. They poured money into big-time sports programs and hired layers of administrators.

Then they passed the bill along to students.

The University of Kentucky upgraded its campus to the tune of $805,000 a day for more than a decade. Its freshmen, who come from one of America’s poorest states, paid an average $18,693 to attend in 2021-22.

Pennsylvania State University spent so much money that it now has a budget crisis—even though it’s among the most expensive public universities in the U.S.

The University of Oklahoma hit students with some of the biggest tuition increases, while spending millions on projects including acquiring and renovating a 32,000-square-foot Italian monastery for its study-abroad program.

The spending is inextricably tied to the nation’s $1.6 trillion federal student debt crisis. Colleges poured out money in part by raising tuition prices, leaving many students with few options but to take on more debt. That means student loans served as easy financing for university projects.

“Students do not have the resources right now to continue to foot the bill for all of the things that the university wants to do,” said Crispin South, a 2023 Oklahoma graduate. “You can’t just continue to raise revenue by turning to students.”

It has long been clear to American families that the cost of college has gone up, even at public schools designed to be affordable for state residents. To get at the root cause, The Wall Street Journal examined financial statements since 2002 from 50 universities known as flagships, typically the oldest public school in each state, and adjusted for inflation.

At the median flagship university, spending rose 38% between 2002 and 2022.

Only one school in the Journal’s analysis—the University of Idaho—spent less.

The schools paid for it in part by pulling in tuition dollars. The median flagship received more than double the revenue from undergraduate and graduate tuition and fees it did 20 years prior. Even accounting for enrollment gains, that amounted to a 64% price increase for the average student, far outpacing the growth in most big household expenses.

More tuition revenue
Public university leaders often blame stingier state funding for the need to raise tuition revenue. And three-fourths of states did cut their support, undermining a longstanding principle that schools educated the populace with government backing. But universities generally didn’t tighten their belts as a result. Rather, they raised prices far beyond what was needed to fill the hole.

For every $1 lost in state support at those universities over the two decades, the median school increased tuition and fee revenue by nearly $2.40, more than covering the cuts, the Journal found.

Through it all, schools operated in a culture that valued unrelenting growth and prioritized raising revenue over cutting costs. Administrators established ambitious strategic plans and tried to lure wealthy students with luxurious amenities. Influential college rankings rewarded those that spent more.

Many university officials struggled to understand their own budgets and simply increased spending every year. Trustees demanded little accountability and often rubber-stamped what came before them. And schools inconsistently disclose what they spend, making it nearly impossible for the public to review how their tuition and tax dollars are being used.

“These places are just devouring money,” said Holden Thorp, who was chancellor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill from 2008 to 2013 and is now editor in chief of Science. Offering everything to everyone all at once is unsustainable, he said. “Universities need to focus on what their true priorities are and what they were created to do,” he said.

Colleges invested money inside and outside the classroom, including to improve technology, expand counseling and intramural sports, and build facilities such as modern dorms and new stadiums.

To examine public university spending, the Journal collected data from audits, archived budget websites and documents received through public-records requests covering expenses in fiscal 2002, 2012 and 2022.

Much of the increase in outlays showed up in the hiring process, for administrators, faculty, coaches and finance experts, the Journal’s analysis found. Salaries and benefits, which usually eat up more than half of operating budgets, rose by roughly 40% at the median flagship since 2002.

The University of Florida in 2022 had more than 50 employees with titles of director, associate director or assistant director of communications, roughly double the number it had in 2017. The school also employed more than 160 assistant, associate, executive and other types of deans last year, up from about 130 in 2017.

Spokesman Steve Orlando said the university is decentralized and different departments have the freedom to hire as they need.

Inflation-adjusted spending on athletic coaches rose by about half between 2010 and 2022 at the median flagship, the Journal’s analysis of data from the Knight-Newhouse College Athletics Database found. The Journal used data from the period with the most complete figures.

Though a handful of powerhouse sports departments pay for themselves, most can break even only with student fees and university subsidies.

Across all flagships with available data, that additional funding totaled $632 million in 2022. That’s a jump of 27% from 12 years prior.

The University of Connecticut won the national championship this spring in men’s basketball, and its women’s team has been a near-constant presence in the Final Four. Yet since 2016, Connecticut’s athletic department has received more than $35 million annually in student fees and university subsidies to stay afloat. In 2022, it took in $55 million in such funds, making up more than half its total athletics budget.

The school said more than $13 million of that subsidy covered a payout to a former men’s basketball coach as part of a legal settlement over his employment contract, and that it faces unique challenges in having to pay rent and other fees for basketball and hockey games, which are played off campus.

Overall, the University of Connecticut’s spending rose by 73% between 2002 and 2022, far faster than enrollment grew. Much of that was driven by personnel costs, with spending on benefits more than tripling.

Reka Wrynn, associate vice president of budget, planning and institutional research, said that was in part because the school was on the hook for a growing share of the state’s unfunded pension liability. Connecticut was also obligated to pay for raises that unionized employees negotiated with the state, she said.

Little accountability

Colleges have faced little accountability over their budgets in part because they aren’t required to track expenses in a uniform way. And Education Department data on college finances often contain errors and don’t match audited figures.

Schools use their own discretion to categorize spending on audited financial statements, making precise comparisons at a single school over time, or among different schools, extremely difficult. Colleges, for example, sometimes classify professors’ salaries as instructional spending one year and as research expenses the next.

Universities view audits “more as a requirement than a tool for the public,” said Robert Kelchen, an education professor at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville who researches university finance.

The growth in schools’ spending was particularly aggressive between 2002 and 2012, with total operating expenses rising a median 30%. Some schools began to pull back on spending in the subsequent decade, under the dual financial pressures of a recession and pandemic. Amid national outcry about student debt, they also slowed the rate at which they increased tuition.

But spending still climbed. Total operating expenses rose nearly 10% from 2012 to 2022 at the median university.

In some cases, colleges spent more as the student body grew, with the typical flagship increasing enrollment by about 20% over the past two decades. Adding students may in some cases be expensive—requiring new dorms and classroom space—or relatively inexpensive, especially for online students. Nonetheless, spending per student rose, by a median 15% over the past two decades.

The schools have passed the tab on to students even in the nation’s poorest states. Most of these schools increased financial aid for low-income students, but that hasn’t fully offset rising tuition for many families.

Kentucky has among the country’s lowest median household income. What in-state students paid in 2021-22 put Kentucky in the top half of flagship schools ranked by cost. Those figures, from the Education Department, cover what the average freshman paid in tuition, fees, room and board after scholarships.

Kentucky on its website touts the total of $3.66 billion spent on its Lexington campus overhaul over the past dozen years. That included new homes for the law, business and visual-arts schools, state-of-the-art hospital facilities, a student center, a 900-spot parking garage, a theater for videogame competitions and dorms sporting full-size Tempur-Pedic mattresses, granite countertops and in-unit washer-dryers.

Private developers were involved in some projects but more than half of the total construction costs were paid for with university funds.

“Our residence halls meet student and family needs and expectations, while emphasizing learning and connectedness,” university spokesman Jay Blanton said. He said that some features in the dorms, such as the countertops, lower maintenance expenses, and that the Tempur-Pedic mattresses were purchased at a comparable cost to traditional ones.

The school set out decades ago to become one of the best universities in the country. Specifically, it targeted a spot among the top 20 public schools that conduct research and offer doctoral degrees, according to a 1997 state mandate. Despite the directive, the legislature began reducing its funding. Over 20 years, appropriations fell by nearly half.

“We will not trim our aspirations,” President Eli Capilouto said in 2016. “But we do have to find more creative ways to power our progress.” Kentucky boosted research funding and faculty salaries, which helped it attract talent.

Some college rankings, including U.S. News & World Report, reward spending in those categories as well as student services such as clubs and cultural events. They don’t necessarily credit moves that make schools more efficient. The Journal’s college rankings also took spending into consideration, though it is dropping that measure in coming reports.

For all Kentucky’s effort, U.S. News ranked the school No. 64 among public universities in 2022, actually dropping a few spots from where it had been a decade earlier.

But the bill for students grew. Kentucky took in about 70% more in tuition and fee revenue per student than it did 20 years ago.

In 2017, Rowan Reid was Kentucky’s student government president and held a seat on the university board. When asked to vote for a 4% increase on tuition for in-state undergraduates, she urged her fellow board members to hold the school more accountable.

“We address efficiencies only to a point where we can pass on the remaining deficit to students,” Reid said at the time. “To me this feels wrong.”

The tuition increase passed 16 to one, with Reid as the only “no” vote. Looking back this spring on her time with the board, Reid said she had a mandate to look out for students’ interests but was torn as to how she could reconcile that with what was best for the university.

The school said it has decelerated the rate of increase for tuition and fees over the past several years, and students from the lowest-income families receive scholarship support.

Blanton said Kentucky continues to grow and aspire to be recognized as one of the best public research institutions in the country but has shifted to a broader focus of advancing the state.

Battle for the best students

Schools loaded their campuses with state-of-the-art recreation centers and dorms to appeal to students with top test scores and minimal need for financial aid. The price for these amenities was then baked into the bills for all students, including with fees students paid to cover construction debt.

Tuition and fee revenue per student climbed by double digits in the past 20 years at every school in the Journal’s analysis. The average student paid more because many schools both upped prices and increased the percentage of higher-paying students from out of state.

At the University of Oklahoma, per-student tuition and fees rose 166%, the most of any flagship. The school also borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars to perform building upgrades and erect new dormitories.

“We levered up the balance sheet to avoid dealing with [financial] reality,” said Oklahoma President Joseph Harroz Jr., who took the helm in 2019. Across higher education, he said, “there was an arms race.”

Beginning in 2009, the university spent $14.3 million to buy and renovate a monastery in Arezzo, Italy, to house a new study-abroad program. The monastery has a landscaped garden, faculty apartment and classrooms featuring painted frescoes.

The school said it was paid for by a mix of private gifts and university funds.

“Would I go and do one of those right now? No,” Harroz said. “It wouldn’t be the best use of capital dollars.”

Harroz said that under some of his predecessors, the school didn’t maintain long-term budget plans or prioritize its needs over its wishes. Oklahoma has since changed course, he said, and the university cut $143 million in expenses at the main campus in Norman since 2018.

The increase in tuition at Oklahoma came after the state legislature gave school regents tuition-setting authority in the early 2000s, a move designed to allow the school to catch up with its peers’ rates, said University of Oklahoma spokeswoman April Sandefer. She said its increases have slowed in recent years, and more than half of Oklahoma undergraduates leave school debt-free thanks to a growing financial-aid budget.

License to spend

Research by James V. Koch, an economist who studies college spending and a former president at Old Dominion University in Virginia, found that public-university trustees approved 98% of the cost-increasing proposals they reviewed, often unanimously. In most states, he said, there hasn’t been anyone to say, “No, you can’t do that.”

Back in 2005, a Hawaii state audit called out the University of Hawaii System board for approving a budget that gave the flagship Manoa campus $200 million when, auditors said, all but $13 million went to vague or unnecessary requests.

Honolulu attorney Benjamin Kudo, who joined the university’s board in 2011, said he was stunned by the lack of information he was given during the budget process. He said he received a packet of pie charts and a PowerPoint presentation with general information on how the university planned to divide up its funds for areas including teaching, libraries, athletics and facilities across 10 campuses.

Kudo said administrators weren’t initially receptive to requests that he and another new board member, Jan Sullivan, made for more detail, including a comparison of projected versus actual spending. Kudo, who served on the board until 2022, recalled being accused of trying to micromanage the $1 billion budget.

School officials expected him to follow the lead of prior trustees, Kudo said: “It’s basically an automatic approval of whatever the administration wants.”

Sullivan also said such rubber stamping was typical early in her tenure. After a few years of nagging, Sullivan and Kudo said, the board received more detailed financial information, and it stopped greenlighting so many requests.

University of Hawaii President David Lassner said the university has changed. He decried a time around a decade ago, shortly after he was named interim president, when the board found out about depleted reserves by reviewing audited financial statements that had been produced six months after the fiscal year closed.

“That is no way to understand the financial health of something as big and complicated as this,” he said. “We’re certainly not budgeting by pie charts anymore.”

‘Knee-jerk reaction’

Penn State, like many schools, long relied on a simple approach to budgeting, in which each department generally received the same amount of money it got the prior year plus a little more to cover inflation. Dollars were rarely tied to enrollment shifts or demonstrated need.

The school’s spending rose 36% since 2002. That number excludes the university’s health system, which the Journal removed from its analysis where possible. Total tuition and fee revenue from both undergraduate and graduate students increased 72% over the past two decades, far faster than enrollment grew.

Penn State’s University Park campus was the country’s most expensive state flagship in the 2021-22 school year for in-state freshmen after scholarships. Those students paid an average $26,747 in tuition, fees, room and board, according to the Education Department data.

The school said it offers students the option of starting at one of its less expensive regional campuses and finishing at University Park, and has increased financial aid significantly.

Penn State cut spending nearly 3% between 2012 and 2022. Still, the university’s 2022-23 budget forecast spending that was $140 million more than its revenue.

It’s not the first time expenditures were projected to outpace revenue, and Penn State determined last year it was on track to blow through its $350 million reserve funds in the next few years if it didn’t change course. Trustees gave the administration until 2025 to balance the budget.

Trustee Barry Fenchak criticized his fellow board members at the meeting when they voted last summer to increase tuition and fees by 5% for in-state students at the University Park campus after the state held funding flat.

“I think the knee-jerk reaction was, ‘OK, we’ve got to raise tuition,’ and I think perhaps the knee-jerk reaction should have been, ‘We need to get to work on the things we should’ve been doing for the last 10 years and light a bit of a fire underneath our behinds’ ” to address costs, he said.

Several trustees at the meeting said the decision was based on thorough analysis.

At meeting after meeting for decades, Penn State board members complained of the state’s anemic support while they simultaneously approved hundreds of millions of dollars in new construction, according to board minutes.

The university’s state appropriation fell 39% over the past 20 years, and the school receives among the lowest state support per student of U.S. flagships.

Growth in tuition revenue has more than made up for declining state funding. On a per-student basis, Penn State received nearly $2.25 in additional tuition revenue for every $1 lost in state support, compared with $1.25 in tuition revenue added at the median school.

“We acknowledge that tuition has increased quite a bit over the past 20 years, which is a large stretch of time for such a comparison when taking into account growth in student needs, services, technology, stem fields, academic support, mental health services etc. and considering our stagnant state funding,” said Lisa Powers, a school spokeswoman.

Mary Isaacson, a Democrat and chair of the subcommittee on higher education in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, said that while public funding declined, the school’s aggressive physical growth and lengthy wish list also helped put it on its path to financial insecurity.

Penn State said much of the construction was necessary to replace aging facilities, and that factors such as inflation and the pandemic drove up costs, too.

The university said last year it would revise the way it sets its operating budget. The new model, it said, will take into account enrollment changes and available resources, and be data-driven.

Colleges Spend Like There’s No Tomorrow. ‘These Places Are Just Devouring Money.’ - WSJ

[momofboiler1]

A similar article with some graphs and also private school spending in the last 20 years: https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/see-20-years-of-tuition-growth-at-national-universities

[DadOfJerseyGirl]

As the article points out, rankings are a factor behind this crazy over-spending. USNews rankings assign a 10% weight on spending per student.

[tsbna44]

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Students want the best, many into aesthetics or modern facilities, etc so it makes sense. Some families can pay, some will pay even if they can’t afford to. Some just can’t.

While some states have enacted programs for the lowest income students, the reality is college takes a huge bite. But no matter the cost, many see it as the only way toward a prosperous future.

What if a Kentucky or Oklahoma or tons of others didn’t spend ? Their facilities would languish or be obsolete. Who would go ?

Today, public or private, everyone wants a nice dorm, cafeteria, etc. and top notch facilities.

Families power this by paying.

The schools are in a tough boat.

They have to spend to have a chance. But if it backfires and students leave, who will pay the bills ?

Many schools have seen their public debt ratings crumble to barely investment grade or below.

In the case of public schools, it will be interesting to see if the states step in if the schools can’t pay their bills.

Pennsylvania is already taking steps to mitigate its crisis by merging multiple universities into one structure, looking to save money. Actually they’re doing it a few times- with their many publics across the state. Privates are closing.

But the cycle will likely continue - there are no shortage of families who take tours and get excited at the modern and sophisticated facilities they see.

How the Northern Illinois (junk rated BA2) of the world keep up remains to be seen.

Very interesting article and I suspect things won’t change in the next few decades. Colleges will remain in an arms race and parents will give up their left arm to ensure their kids can take part.

Merger of six Pennsylvania state universities gets OK, the biggest change in...

[Knowsstuff]

Thx for ’posting. I think we all knew this. But what are schools doing right that don’t have to increase like crazy yearly?

[NiceUnparticularMan]

@1NJParent

spending per student rose, by a median 15% over the past two decades.

Huh. That does not sound like all that much to me. Apparently a lot of the numbers they led with had a large component of student body expansion incorporated.

@1NJParent

Tuition and fee revenue per student climbed by double digits in the past 20 years at every school in the Journal’s analysis. The average student paid more because many schools both upped prices and increased the percentage of higher-paying students from out of state.

So that’s interesting too. Apparently many of these colleges expanded, and it further appears often one of the consequences of expansion is it allowed them to take in higher percentages of out-of-state students paying higher tuition. Not sure that is obviously a bad strategy for the in-state students, as long as expansion means the out-of-state students are not crowding them out.

It doesn’t look like the WSJ broke down the financial implications for in-state versus out-of-state students. But the US News article another poster linked is maybe a little helpful–it shows from 2003 to 2023, at publics which count as “national universities”, average in-state tuition increased by $7,339, average out-of-state tuition by $16,428. So it does seem like in gross terms, this strategy could have been helpful. In percentage terms, that was a higher in-state increase when looking only at tuition, but of course usually in-state and out-of-state pay the same room and board and other fees.

The final thing that leapt out to me was this:

@1NJParent

Growth in tuition revenue has more than made up for declining state funding. On a per-student basis . . . tuition revenue for every $1 lost in state support, compared with $1.25 in tuition revenue added at the median school.

OK, so apparently including this increasing percentage of higher-paying out-of-state students, these universities netted more in increased tuition revenue per student than they lost in state funding. But what if we looked just at in-state tuition revenue per student? It appears to me in marginal terms, the increases were much bigger among out-of-state tuition revenues per student. So it seems to me possible, likely in fact, that the increase in tuition revenue per in-state student was less than the decrease in state support per in-state student.

But these colleges were then able to make up for that decline in state support per in-state student, and more, with this out-of-state strategy.

Interesting.

[circuitrider]

Substituting xeriscaping and permaculture for expensive landscaping (Pitzer and Wesleyan University.)

[NiceUnparticularMan]

@Knowsstuff

But what are schools doing right that don’t have to increase like crazy yearly?

Interestingly, that is in part a time period question.

There is a lot packed into these paragraphs in the middle of the article, but it is worth teasing out a bit:

@1NJParent

The growth in schools’ spending was particularly aggressive between 2002 and 2012, with total operating expenses rising a median 30%. Some schools began to pull back on spending in the subsequent decade, under the dual financial pressures of a recession and pandemic. Amid national outcry about student debt, they also slowed the rate at which they increased tuition.

But spending still climbed. Total operating expenses rose nearly 10% from 2012 to 2022 at the median university.

In some cases, colleges spent more as the student body grew, with the typical flagship increasing enrollment by about 20% over the past two decades. Adding students may in some cases be expensive—requiring new dorms and classroom space—or relatively inexpensive, especially for online students. Nonetheless, spending per student rose, by a median 15% over the past two decades.

OK, so first observation, in gross terms the annual increase in operating expenses dropped by like 2/3rds from the first decade to the second decade. The WSJ quickly attributes this to “the dual financial pressures of a recession and pandemic”, but I think this seems like a fertile area for a much more serious investigation into what was different.

Second observation, these gross operating expense numbers are apparently not controlling for student body expansions, which averaged out to about 20% in this period. Overall, the WSJ reports spending per student at the median school only rose 15% over both decades, much less than the gross increase.

So what would happen if we combined these observations? The WSJ doesn’t report that, but what was the change in spending per student over the first decade, versus the change in spending per student in the second decade?

I don’t know, but it is at least plausible it was quite a bit lower in the second decade. Indeed, off hand it seems like it could have been very close to zero, or indeed negative, per student over the last decade.

Or not. We don’t know because the WSJ did not break it down for us.

[circuitrider]

That’s a 15% rise in spending per student during a period of virtually negative inflation.

[momofboiler1]

Purdue definitely has leveraged their OOS and international students to keep instate tuition low (going on year 12 of a COA freeze). Only 60% of students are instate at Purdue. That’s pretty low in comparison to the schools that have high instate mandates like TX and GA. There is quite a difference between in and out of state tuition - $9,992 vs $28,794 (and $31,104 for international). If Indiana suddenly mandated that Purdue accept 80% or more for instate, I think we’d see a rise in tuition.

There are lots of articles about the university keeping costs fixed (and some here will point out that they did increase the COA substantially in the years prior to the freeze in 2010) but not a lot of detail as to how they’ve done it. From a family perspective, what I’ve seen is that they are fundraising like crazy and hit new highs last year with philanthropic giving and research awards. Also lots of partnerships with industry not just to build labs, but also dorms. They’ve also increased enrollment and they have a huge online education presence. A healthy endowment (for a public university) doesn’t hurt either.

[NiceUnparticularMan]

@circuitrider

That’s a 15% rise in spending per student during a period of virtually negative inflation.

Between September 2002 and September 2022, CPI inflation totaled about 64%.

But I believe the WSJ is reporting these numbers inflation-adjusted, so it is true spending per student rose more than general inflation. Of course, colleges have changed over those 20 years as well. So that’s lacking what are sometimes called hedonic quality adjustments:

Quality Adjustment in the CPI : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

The hedonic quality adjustment method removes any price differential attributed to a change in quality by adding or subtracting the estimated value of that change from the price of the old item.

I don’t know how the spending increase per student would compare to general inflation if we implemented such hedonic quality adjustments. I note that is very hard to do in a rigorous way with what is known as a differentiated product market, as opposed to a commodity product market. And you can see at that link the BLS does not attempt any sort of hedonic quality adjustment for college tuition and fees.

[NiceUnparticularMan]

@momofboiler1

They’ve also increased enrollment and they have a huge online education presence.

I note the WSJ has a brief reference to online but they don’t go into it in detail. But that sure seems like a promising way for public colleges to get increases in marginal revenue higher than corresponding increases in marginal costs.

[circuitrider]

One can hypothesize that “hedonic” quality increases tend to follow the upper-middle-class wherever they go.

[NiceUnparticularMan]

One can hypothesize that “hedonic” quality increases tend to follow the upper-middle-class wherever they go.

Indeed, in the period we are talking, household income at the 80th percentile adjusted for inflation had gone up about 16%. At the 90th percentile, it had gone up about 21%.

Given this, it does in fact make sense that over the same period, inflation-adjusted spending per student at the sorts of colleges that these families use a lot would have gone up a similar percentage.

[NiceUnparticularMan]

By the way, inflation-adjusted household income went up about 4.7% over that period at the 25th percentile. At the 50th, it was about 8.9%.

And I continue to think this is really the main social issue with the cost of public college.

State-supported colleges competing for upper-middle-class students with pricey quality increases in line with those families’ increasing financial resources could make sense if that state was then willing to provide enough in terms of offsetting subsidies for its lower-income-to-middle-middle-income families.

And some states have kinda done that, but some not so much.

And in states where they have not done a good job with that, I think that is a serious problem.

[Knowsstuff]

But many schools with huge endowments still yearly increase tuition (Looking at you Michigan). What Purdue has been doing should at least be the start of a role model for the rest.

[circuitrider]

[Colleges your child crossed off the list after visiting, schools that moved up on the list. Why? - Parents Forum - College Confidential Forums](http://talk.qa.collegeconfidential.com/t/colleges-your-child-crossed-off-the-list-after-visiting-schools-that-moved-up-on-the-list-why/

[roycroftmom]

Devouring money. That is a good summary. Spending as if everything is a priority and no tradeoffs need to be made.

[EyeVeee]

What’s missing in the copy/paste are the graphics/charts.

Here is a link to the article without the paywall

The big issue (IMO) is that states allow their flagship to spend, and then don’t support that spending with financial support. Taxes are a dirty word, so better to fund “state education” with individual student loans than it is to raise revenue to support education.

[NiceUnparticularMan]

Indeed. I also think tsbna44 did a nice job laying it out above. Public colleges competing for those lucrative full-pay out-of-state students and such are going to fall behind if they don’t address the sorts of things parents discuss in threads like that. And they are competing with each other but also privates which may be offering need-based aid up to higher income levels, merit scholarships, and so on.

And I know some would say public colleges just shouldn’t be in that game at all, but I do think this WSJ study, while not quite making this explicit, actually laid out the case for why so many public colleges felt the need to compete for those lucrative out-of-state students in order to make up for declining state support.