Brillare Beauty Institute
Cleveland, TN · official site ↗
Private nonprofitLess-than-two-year institution (not classified by Carnegie)
36
Fin. Resilience
Brillare Beauty Institute is a private nonprofit institution in Cleveland, TN, classified by Carnegie as “Less-than-two-year institution (not classified by Carnegie).”
It enrolls about 265 undergraduates and is benchmarked here against 52 peer institutions (Less-than-two-year · Private nonprofit).
On Ibex's Financial Resilience score it rates 36 out of 100 within that peer group, a transparent composite of endowment per undergraduate, net tuition revenue per student, and instructional spend per student.
Its strongest standing relative to peers is enrollment momentum (CAGR) (39%, 99th percentile).
Its weakest is median earnings (6 yr) ($16,588).
Peer group
Less-than-two-year · Private nonprofit
52 institutions
No cross-metric risk flags triggered.
Percentile profileoutward = stronger vs peers
Each spoke is this institution’s peer-group standing (0–100) on a headline metric, oriented so outward always means stronger (lower net price scores higher). A balanced large shape signals broad strength; a spiky shape flags specific weak spots.
What changedlargest year-over-year moves
Graduation rate (150% of normal time)
▲ +8%
77.2% → 83.7%
2023→2024
First-year retention
▲ +8%
84.4% → 91%
2023→2024
Net tuition revenue / FTE
▲ +6%
$9,298 → $9,894
2023→2024
Median debt at graduation
▼ -6%
$7,917 → $7,479
2019→2020
Instructional spend / FTE
▼ -6%
$5,986 → $5,655
2023→2024
Pell recipient share
▲ +5%
68.1% → 71.6%
2023→2024
Most recent single-year change in each tracked metric. Green = moved in this metric’s favorable direction, red = unfavorable, grey = size or context, not scored. Each row uses the latest pair of years that metric has, and federal collections release on different schedules, so the years differ from row to row: read the years on the row, not just the ranking. A single year is also not a trend, the multi-year series is on each metric’s card below.
Policy & demographic exposure
How exposed Brillare Beauty Institute is to the structural shifts reshaping higher ed: a composite structural-risk index plus the 2025 federal budget law’s endowment excise tax, Grad PLUS elimination, new Parent PLUS borrowing cap and new Workforce Pell short-term-credential opportunity, and the demographic enrollment cliff. Only signals that apply to this institution are shown.
Workforce Pell exposureShare of this school's measured credentials that are undergraduate certificates, the sub-associate tier the 2025 budget law's new Workforce Pell Grant makes Pell-eligible from July 2026 (short-term programs of 150–600 clock hours over 8–15 weeks). An opportunity signal: higher = more of what the school already produces could draw new federal grant aid. Source: College Scorecard Field-of-Study; an upper-bound proxy since the certificate tier spans varying lengths.
100%
Certificate-intensiveHigher than 78% of schools nationally
Enrollment cliff (home state)Projected change in the institution's home-state high-school graduates from 2025 to 2041 (WICHE). The U.S. total falls about 13%; a directional feeder-market signal, not an enrollment forecast.
7.5%
Stable or growingIndicative signals, not forecasts, see each metric’s definition and the methodology. Endowment-tax, Grad PLUS, Parent PLUS and Workforce Pell figures appear only where the institution is actually exposed; “nationally” compares against all schools that report each signal.
Turn these signals into action
Seeing exposure is step one. Ibex builds AI agents that monitor and act on exactly these pressures, explore an interactive demo. Live demos run real workflows; the rest are working mockups we build to your institution’s data.
Revenue composition
Where the money comes from
$2.9M total revenue · IPEDS FY2022-23
Tuition & fees is the largest single source at 79% of revenue.
Tuition & fees79.1%
Other revenue17.4%
Government grants & contracts3.5%
Where each dollar of revenue comes from, as a share of total positive revenue. Sources are standardized across public (GASB) and private (FASB) reporting; a net investment loss in a down market is shown as 0% and excluded from the mix.
Federal funding mix
Which agencies fund this schoolThe share of this school's federal funding that comes from each awarding agency in FY2024. These are dollars agencies committed (obligations), not dollars the school spent, so the total will not match the audited federal-awards-expended figure elsewhere on this page. Matched to the school by its own SAM.gov Unique Entity ID.
$1.2M obligated · FY2024
Education alone accounts for 100% of it.
Education100.0%
Federal dollars each agency committed to this institution in FY2024, as a share of its total positive obligations (USAspending.gov). Obligations are money committed, not money spent, so this total will not match the audited “Federal awards expended” figure elsewhere on this page. Amounts an agency reclaimed during the year are excluded.
Net price by income
Average net price by family income
After grant & scholarship aid · Scorecard 2024-25
$0–30K$17,344
$30–48K$18,633
$48–75K$21,075
$75–110K$21,460
Average annual net price (total cost minus grant and scholarship aid) paid by federal-aid recipients in each family-income band. Lower-income bands often pay less where need-based aid is strong.
Financial Health
The bar under each rank is the spread across the peer group: the shaded box is the middle half, the pale line is their median, and the gold marker is this institution. Hover for the figures.
Net tuition revenue / FTETuition revenue per full-time-equivalent student after institutional aid/discounts, what tuition actually nets.Calculated from filings
Average
$9,894
41st percentile in peer grouppeer median $12,945
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)52 peers
Instructional spend / FTESpending on instruction per FTE student, how much of the budget reaches the classroom.Calculated from filings
Below peers
$5,655
30th percentile in peer grouppeer median $9,529
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)52 peers
Average net priceWhat students actually pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly price families actually pay after grants and scholarships.As filed
Average
$17,894
64th percentile in peer grouppeer median $15,661
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)43 peers
Net price, low-income families (under $30K)What students actually pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning under ~$30,000. Lower is better.As filed
Average
$17,344
64th percentile in peer grouppeer median $15,508
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)40 peers
Average annual net price (cost of attendance minus all grant and scholarship aid) paid by students whose families earn under about $30,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25). This is what the neediest admitted students actually pay, often far below the sticker price. Read it beside the overall net price and the high-income net price: a low figure here signals strong need-based aid. Lower is better.
Net price, middle-income families ($30K-$48K)What students actually pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning roughly $30,000 to $48,000. Lower is better.As filed
Below peers
$18,633
69th percentile in peer grouppeer median $16,052
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)34 peers
Average annual net price (cost of attendance minus all grant and scholarship aid) paid by students whose families earn roughly $30,000 to $48,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25). It is the middle rung of the income net-price ladder: read it together with the low-income (under ~$30K) and high-income (over ~$110K) net prices to see how steeply the school discounts as family income rises. Lower is better.
Net price, upper-middle families ($48K-$75K)What students actually pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning roughly $48,000 to $75,000. Lower is better.As filed
Below peers
$21,075
72nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $15,438
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)30 peers
Average annual net price (cost of attendance minus all grant and scholarship aid) paid by students whose families earn roughly $48,000 to $75,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25). It is the fourth rung of the five-rung income net-price ladder: read it with the low, middle, upper and high-income net prices to see how steeply the school discounts as family income rises. Lower is better.
Net price, upper-income families ($75K-$110K)What students actually pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning roughly $75,000 to $110,000. Lower is better.As filed
Average
$21,460
66th percentile in peer grouppeer median $18,033
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)22 peers
Average annual net price (cost of attendance minus all grant and scholarship aid) paid by students whose families earn roughly $75,000 to $110,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25). It is the fifth rung of the income net-price ladder, just below the full-pay tier: read it with the lower rungs and the high-income net price to see the full cost gradient by family income. Lower is better.
Tuition discount rateInstitutional grant aid as a share of gross tuition (IPEDS, private nonprofits only) – the tuition-discount rate. The share of sticker tuition handed back as aid; a high rate (the national average is ~56%) signals heavy price competition for students.Calculated from filings
Moderate
0%
31st percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
FY2022-2347 peers
Institutional grant aid as a share of gross tuition & fee revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23, FASB): allowances applied to tuition ÷ (net tuition revenue + those allowances) – the tuition-discount rate enrollment leaders track, i.e. the share of sticker tuition handed back as institutional aid. Private nonprofit institutions only; public (GASB) institutions report tuition differently and are not shown. The national private-college average is roughly 56% (NACUBO); above ~60% signals heavy price competition.
Administrative cost shareInstitutional support (central administration, governance, general administration, fundraising, and under FASB the operation & maintenance of plant) as a share of total expenses, private nonprofit (FASB) institutions only, where the figure is comparable. An informational gauge of administrative intensity, not a measure of waste.Calculated from filings
25.1%
63rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 18%
context, not scored
FY2022-2342 peers
Institutional support, central administration, executive management, governance, general administration, fundraising and (under FASB rules) operation & maintenance of plant, as a share of total expenses (IPEDS FY2022-23, FASB). Private nonprofit institutions only: public (GASB) institutions report functional expenses on a different basis and frequently consolidate large hospital and auxiliary operations, which makes a comparable ratio unreliable, so they are not shown. Because FASB folds plant operations into institutional support, this runs higher than a narrow 'central-office' figure, and schools with sizable hospital or auxiliary operations show a lower ratio as those costs enlarge total expenses. An informational benchmark of administrative intensity, compared within the peer group, not a measure of waste or quality.
Avg Parent PLUS loanAverage Parent PLUS loan originated per recipient family.As filed
$13,711
69th percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,284
context, not scored
AY2025-26 YTD (Federal Student Aid)8 peers
Average federal Parent PLUS loan per recipient (U.S. Dept. of Education, FSA Direct Loan Dashboard, AY2025-26 YTD). Parent PLUS faces new aggregate borrowing caps under the 2025 budget law; a high average shows how far families currently borrow above other federal aid. Companion to the Grad PLUS and Parent PLUS cap-gap signals. Context, not a quality measure. From the Federal Student Aid Direct Loan dashboard for award year 2025-26, year-to-date through Q2. A partial year, so it is not comparable with a full-year total.
Spent on instructionInstruction as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
64.1%
55th percentile in peer grouppeer median 59%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)48 peers
Instruction spending divided by total functional expenses (IPEDS Finance, FY2022-23 (FASB)). 'Where the money goes' context, reported here for private-nonprofit (FASB) institutions only, where the functional split is comparable; not computed for public or for-profit institutions. Higher is not automatically better; research universities and those with hospitals or large auxiliaries spread spending across other functions.
Spent on student servicesStudent services as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
6.3%
72nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.4%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)48 peers
Student-services spending (admissions, registrar, student life, counseling) divided by total functional expenses (IPEDS Finance, FY2022-23 (FASB)). Private-nonprofit (FASB) institutions only. Spending-mix context, not a quality measure.
Spent on academic supportAcademic support as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
4.4%
53rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 3.4%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)48 peers
Academic-support spending (libraries, academic computing, deans' offices) divided by total functional expenses (IPEDS Finance, FY2022-23 (FASB)). Private-nonprofit (FASB) institutions only. Context, not a quality measure.
Spent on researchResearch as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
0%
49th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)48 peers
Research spending divided by total functional expenses (IPEDS Finance, FY2022-23 (FASB)). Private-nonprofit (FASB) institutions only; near zero at teaching-focused colleges and sizeable at research universities. Spending-mix context, not a quality measure.
Financial responsibility scoreED financial-responsibility composite score (-1.0 to 3.0; >=1.5 is passing).Regulator / auditor finding
Average
2.0
44th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.2
higher is better
FY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid)35 peers
The U.S. Department of Education's financial-responsibility composite score, a -1.0 to +3.0 measure of an institution's solvency built from its audited finances. 1.5 and above passes; 1.0-1.4 is a zone needing oversight; below 1.0 fails and can trigger letter-of-credit or cash-monitoring requirements. ED computes it only for private non-profit and proprietary schools, so it is reported only where scored. Higher is safer. Banded against the school's peer group.
Federal awards expendedTotal federal award dollars expended in the audited fiscal year (SEFA total).As filed
$2.8M
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Total federal award dollars the institution expended in the audited fiscal year, from the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards in its Single Audit. It combines student aid, research grants, and every other federal program, so it measures the institution's overall exposure to federal funding rather than its quality. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Title IV aid expendedFederal student aid dollars expended (Student Financial Assistance cluster).As filed
$2.8M
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Federal student financial aid the institution disbursed in the audited year: the Student Financial Assistance cluster, covering Pell, Direct Loans, Federal Work-Study, FSEOG and Perkins. It is the clearest single measure of how much Title IV money flows through the school. Context metric, not better or worse. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Pell Grant dollarsPell Grant dollars expended in the audited year (ALN 84.063).As filed
$1.2M
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Pell Grant dollars the institution disbursed in the audited fiscal year (federal assistance listing 84.063). Read alongside the school's Pell share of enrollment: high Pell dollars at a small school signals a low-income student body and heavy dependence on that appropriation. Context metric, not better or worse. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Direct Loan volumeWilliam D. Ford Direct Loan dollars expended (ALN 84.268).As filed
$1.6M
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Federal Direct Loan dollars originated for the institution's students in the audited fiscal year (federal assistance listing 84.268). Large loan volume relative to enrollment means students are borrowing heavily to attend. Context metric, not better or worse; pair it with the school's median debt and earnings figures. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Audit findingsDistinct findings raised in the most recent Single Audit. Lower is better.As filed
No findings
0
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Number of distinct audit findings the independent auditor raised in the institution's most recent Single Audit. A finding records a failure to comply with federal award rules or a breakdown in internal control, and can range from a late report to unallowable spending. Zero is common and is the clean result. Lower is better. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Going-concern disclosureThe auditor's report includes a going-concern disclosure.Regulator / auditor finding
None
No
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Whether the independent auditor included a going-concern disclosure in the institution's most recent Single Audit report. Auditors add one when there is substantial doubt about the organization's ability to continue operating for the next year, so it is the most serious signal an audit carries. Read it as a prompt to open the audit itself, not as a verdict: the flag is the checkbox the auditor ticked on the federal SF-SAC form, and the underlying disclosure may concern a subsidiary or a since-resolved condition. About 2% of audited institutions carry one. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Material weaknessAuditor disclosed a material weakness in internal control over financial reporting.Regulator / auditor finding
None reported
No
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Whether the auditor found a material weakness in internal control over financial reporting: a deficiency severe enough that a material misstatement of the financial statements could go undetected. It does not mean money was lost, but it means the controls that would have caught a loss were not working. Around 10% of audited institutions report one. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Material noncomplianceAuditor disclosed material noncompliance with federal award requirements.Regulator / auditor finding
None reported
No
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Whether the auditor found material noncompliance with the rules attached to the institution's federal awards, such as student eligibility, cash management, or allowable cost requirements. Material means the breach was large enough to matter to the federal agency funding the school. About 2% of audited institutions report it. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Program compliance opinionAuditor issued a qualified, adverse, or disclaimer opinion on a major federal program.Regulator / auditor finding
Unmodified
No
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Whether the auditor issued anything other than a clean (unmodified) compliance opinion on at least one of the institution's major federal programs. A qualified, adverse, or disclaimer opinion means the auditor could not conclude the school followed that program's rules. Roughly 3% of audited institutions receive one; for most schools the major program at issue is Title IV student aid. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Low-risk auditeeQualifies as a low-risk auditee under 2 CFR 200.520 (a clean recent audit history).Regulator / auditor finding
Low-risk
Yes
AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)
Whether the institution qualified as a low-risk auditee under federal rule 2 CFR 200.520. A school earns the status only by filing on time for two consecutive years with clean opinions, no material weaknesses, and no going-concern doubt. It is a compact summary of a clean recent audit history, and it reduces how much of the school's federal spending must be audited the next year. About 73% of audited institutions qualify. Yes is better. The value is the box the filer ticked on the federal SF-SAC form, and a minority of filings tick it alongside a condition that should disqualify them, so treat a lone Yes as weaker evidence than a clean set of the other audit flags on this page. Reported only for institutions that file their own Single Audit with the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; a school with no value did not file one, which is not the same as a clean result. Public universities audited inside a state or system report, for-profit institutions (exempt from the Single Audit), and schools under the federal expenditure threshold do not appear. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Tax-exempt bond debtTax-exempt bond liabilities outstanding at year end (Form 990).As filed
$0
FY2023 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))
Tax-exempt bond debt the institution still owed at the end of the filing year. Colleges borrow through municipal bonds to build dormitories, labs, and stadiums, so a large balance is not by itself a warning: it reflects a building programme. It becomes a risk when it is large relative to the institution's net assets, which is what the bond-debt-to-net-assets figure on this page measures. A zero here means the institution reported no tax-exempt bond debt outstanding, which is a genuine, debt-free result. Context metric, not better or worse. Sourced from the institution's IRS Form 990, matched on the Employer Identification Number it reported in its federal Single Audit. Only private nonprofit institutions file a Form 990: public universities are government units and file none, and for-profit institutions file none. A school with no value did not file, which is not the same as a value of zero. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Bond debt vs net assetsTax-exempt bond debt as a share of total net assets. Lower is better.Calculated from filings
Low leverage
0%
FY2023 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))
The institution's outstanding tax-exempt bond debt divided by its total net assets. It answers the question the raw debt figure cannot: how heavy is this borrowing relative to what the institution actually owns. A wealthy university with billions in net assets carries a large bond balance comfortably; a tuition-dependent college with thin reserves does not. Above roughly 50% the debt is a material claim on the institution's resources. Shown only where net assets are positive. Lower is better. Sourced from the institution's IRS Form 990, matched on the Employer Identification Number it reported in its federal Single Audit. Only private nonprofit institutions file a Form 990: public universities are government units and file none, and for-profit institutions file none. A school with no value did not file, which is not the same as a value of zero. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Officer pay, share of expensesCompensation of current officers and key employees as a share of total expenses.Calculated from filings
8.6%
FY2023 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))
What the institution paid its current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees, as a share of its total functional expenses. At almost every college this is a fraction of one percent, because the denominator includes all faculty and staff salaries. The figure is useful mainly at the extremes and at small institutions, where an unusually high share can indicate a top-heavy cost structure. It is not a measure of executive pay in absolute terms. Context metric, not better or worse. Sourced from the institution's IRS Form 990, matched on the Employer Identification Number it reported in its federal Single Audit. Only private nonprofit institutions file a Form 990: public universities are government units and file none, and for-profit institutions file none. A school with no value did not file, which is not the same as a value of zero. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Federal funding obligatedHow much externally funded research the institution does. Shown as scale, not quality: it reflects mission, and an institution that does no sponsored research is not thereby worse at teaching. Useful for finding peers of comparable research intensity.Total federal dollars all agencies committed to this institution in FY2024, across grants, contracts, and student aid.As filed
$1.2M
83rd percentile in peer grouppeer median $100,336
context, not scored
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)15 peers
Obligations reported to USAspending.gov for FY2024 (Oct 2023 to Sep 2024), summed across every awarding agency. This is money committed, not money spent, so it will not equal the audited 'Federal awards expended' figure and the two should not be subtracted from one another. Negative amounts (agencies reclaiming prior commitments) are excluded.
Federal funding agenciesHow many distinct federal agencies committed money to this institution in FY2024.As filed
1
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)
A count of awarding agencies with positive FY2024 obligations. Neither high nor low is inherently better: a community college funded solely by the Department of Education is behaving normally, while a research university typically draws on ten or more agencies.
Largest funder's shareShare of federal funding that comes from the single largest awarding agency.Calculated from filings
100%
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)
The largest agency's FY2024 obligations as a share of the institution's total positive federal obligations. Read it as concentration, not risk: most teaching colleges sit near 100% because nearly all their federal money is Department of Education student aid.
Operational-risk index (official findings)0-100 severity of what federal regulators and auditors have actually said about this institution. Higher means more official concern.Blended index
Clean
8.0
37th percentile in peer grouppeer median 11.0
lower is better
ED composite FY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid) + Single Audit AY2023 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)35 peers
A 0-100 severity score built only from published federal determinations: the Department of Education's financial-responsibility composite score, its Heightened Cash Monitoring list, and the going-concern, material-weakness, material-noncompliance, modified-opinion and repeat-finding results of the school's Single Audit. It is deliberately NOT a model: every component is something a regulator or an independent auditor put in writing. Components are scored only where they exist, and the score is their weighted average, so a school assessed on two signals sits on the same scale as one assessed on seven. Schools with neither a composite score nor a Single Audit on file are omitted rather than shown as clean: ED does not compute a composite score for public institutions, and no audit on file means nobody looked, not that nothing was found. Read it alongside the structural-risk index, which is the tool's own forward-looking model rather than a record of findings. Lower is better. The window shown is the one this school's own figure was measured over: it is shorter where the series starts late, ends early, or is cut at a reporting change, so peers are not all measured over identical years.
Enrollment & Pipeline
The bar under each rank is the spread across the peer group: the shaded box is the middle half, the pale line is their median, and the gold marker is this institution. Hover for the figures.
Undergraduate enrollmentNumber of degree-seeking undergraduates (IPEDS fall headcount). A size measure, not a quality signal.As filed
265
86th percentile in peer grouppeer median 85
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)52 peers
First-year retentionShare of first-time, full-time students who return for a second year, an early signal of student fit and support. Reported for two-year and less-than-two-year institutions.As filed
Average
91%
65th percentile in peer grouppeer median 79.5%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)42 peers
Graduation rate (150% of normal time)Of first-time, full-time degree- or certificate-seeking students, the share who completed within 150% of the program's normal time (about three years for a two-year program), per College Scorecard. This is the two-year analogue of the six-year graduation rate shown for four-year colleges.As filed
Average
83.7%
58th percentile in peer grouppeer median 80.6%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)46 peers
Share of first-time, full-time degree/certificate-seeking students who completed within 150% of the program's normal time (about three years for a two-year program), per College Scorecard. The two-year analogue of the six-year rate shown for four-year colleges.
Graduation rate (on-time)Of first-time, full-time degree- or certificate-seeking students, the share who completed within the program's normal time (100%, on-time), per College Scorecard. Reported for two-year and less-than-two-year institutions.As filed
Strong
83.7%
71st percentile in peer grouppeer median 22%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)46 peers
Share of first-time, full-time degree/certificate-seeking students who completed within the program's normal time (100%), per College Scorecard. Reported for two-year and less-than-two-year institutions.
Pell recipient shareShare of undergraduates receiving a Pell grant, the standard proxy for how many low-income students a school enrolls. Not scored in either direction: it is a measure of who a school serves, and both a high and a low share are defensible depending on the mission.Share of undergraduates on a federal Pell Grant, a proxy for the share from lower-income families.As filed
71.6%
82nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 55.8%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)52 peers
First-generation studentsShare of undergraduates who are the first in their family to attend college.As filed
37.7%
15th percentile in peer grouppeer median 65.5%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)30 peers
Share of undergraduates who are first-generation college students (College Scorecard, 2016-17). An access signal, not a measure of quality: a higher share often reflects a stronger commitment to serving students whose parents did not attend college. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file, built from aid-applicant records rather than the full student body, and not republished since.
Adult learners (25+)Share of undergraduates aged 25 or older.As filed
33.2%
19th percentile in peer grouppeer median 54.2%
context, not scored
2023-24 (Scorecard)50 peers
Share of undergraduates aged 25 or older (College Scorecard, 2023-24). Read as context on the student mix: schools serving many working adults look different on persistence and part-time measures than traditional-age campuses, and neither is inherently better. From the College Scorecard 2023-24 data file.
Part-time undergraduatesShare of undergraduates enrolled part-time.As filed
0%
44th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)52 peers
Share of undergraduates enrolled part-time (College Scorecard, 2024-25). Context, not quality: a high part-time share is common at community and commuter institutions and affects graduation-rate comparisons, which are based only on full-time, first-time students.
Median family incomeMedian family income of students at this institution.As filed
$17,924
61st percentile in peer grouppeer median $14,407
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)37 peers
Median family income of students at this institution (College Scorecard, 2016-17). An affordability and access signal, not a measure of quality: a lower figure typically means the school enrolls more students from modest-income families. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file, built from aid-applicant records rather than the full student body, and not republished since.
Low-income students (under $30K)Share of students from families earning under about $30,000 a year.As filed
66.7%
24th percentile in peer grouppeer median 80.1%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)35 peers
Share of students whose families earn under roughly $30,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2016-17). A direct low-income access signal: a higher share usually reflects a school enrolling more students from modest-income households, and pairs naturally with the Pell recipient share. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file, built from aid-applicant records rather than the full student body, and not republished since.
Women (share of undergraduates)Share of undergraduates who are women.As filed
98.1%
89th percentile in peer grouppeer median 69.9%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)52 peers
Share of undergraduates who are women (College Scorecard, 2024-25). Reported as context on the student mix, not a measure of quality.
Program concentration (HHI)How concentrated a school's annual completions are across academic fields, as a Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (10,000 = one field, lower = many). Higher means more reliance on a few fields; lower means a diversified program portfolio.Calculated from filings
Highly concentrated
10,000
2022-23
How concentrated the institution's degree and certificate output is across academic fields (CIP 2-digit families), as a Herfindahl-Hirschman Index on the latest year's completions: 10,000 means every completion is in one field; lower means output is spread across many. A higher value means the school leans on fewer fields and is more exposed to demand shifts in them; a lower value reflects a broad program portfolio. Shown for institutions reporting at least 100 annual completions. A structural-diversification signal, not a measure of quality.
12-month FTE enrollmentFull-time-equivalent enrollment over the full year, the denominator for per-student finance measures.As filed
272
88th percentile in peer grouppeer median 70
context, not scored
2023-24 (IPEDS)52 peers
Full-time-equivalent enrollment over the full 12-month year (IPEDS 12-month enrollment, 2023-24). Counts part-time students at their fractional load, so it runs above fall full-time headcount and is the denominator used for per-student finance measures.
Student-faculty ratioStudents per instructional faculty member, lower usually means smaller classes and more contact.As filed
18:1
67th percentile in peer grouppeer median 13:1
context, not scored
Fall 202351 peers
Students per instructional faculty member (IPEDS, fall 2023). Lower generally means smaller classes and more faculty contact, though the measure mixes undergraduate and graduate teaching and is institution-reported.
Fully online studentsShare of students enrolled exclusively in distance-education (online) courses.As filed
0%
45th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
Fall 2023 (IPEDS)51 peers
Share of students enrolled exclusively in distance-education courses (IPEDS, Fall 2023). Describes delivery model, not quality; online-heavy institutions look different on residential measures.
Applicant-pool diversity shiftProjected change in the non-white share of the home state's public high-school graduating class, class of 2025 to 2037.Modelled by Ibex
+5.3 pts
WICHE 2024 (11th ed.)
Percentage-point change in the non-white share of the institution's home-state public high-school graduating class between the class of 2025 (the national peak) and 2037 (WICHE, Knocking at the College Door, 11th ed., public-school race detail). A forward look at who the future applicant pool will be: a positive value means the state's graduating class is projected to grow more racially diverse. Strategic recruiting context, not a forecast of any one school's enrollment, and a college recruits from many states.
Hybrid (some online) enrollmentShare of students enrolled in some but not all courses online (hybrid), Fall 2023.As filed
0%
43rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
Fall 202351 peers
Share of all students taking some, but not all, of their courses at a distance (IPEDS, Fall 2023). This is the hybrid middle ground between the fully online share and the fully in-person share, and it signals how far a school has moved coursework online without going exclusively remote. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Transfer-in share (undergraduate)Transfer-in students as a share of undergraduate enrollment, Fall 2023.As filed
0%
Fall 2023
Transfer-in students as a share of all undergraduates (IPEDS, Fall 2023). A high share means the school depends on transfer pipelines rather than first-time freshmen, which changes both recruitment strategy and melt/retention risk. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Graduate share of enrollmentGraduate students as a share of total enrollment, Fall 2023.As filed
0%
Fall 2023
Graduate students as a share of total headcount enrollment (IPEDS, Fall 2023). It separates research-intensive universities with large graduate bodies from undergraduate-focused institutions. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Women share of facultyWomen as a share of instructional staff (full- and part-time), Fall 2023.As filed
100%
89th percentile in peer grouppeer median 62.7%
context, not scored
Fall 202350 peers
Women as a share of all instructional staff, full- and part-time combined (IPEDS Human Resources, Fall 2023). A gender-composition signal for the teaching workforce. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Faculty of color shareU.S. faculty of color as a share of instructional staff, Fall 2023.As filed
11.1%
27th percentile in peer grouppeer median 65.2%
context, not scored
Fall 202350 peers
Instructional staff who are American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or two-or-more races, as a share of all instructional staff (IPEDS Human Resources, Fall 2023). Nonresident and race-unknown staff are excluded from the numerator. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Direct competitors within 100 miCount of other institutions within 100 miles. Scored as lower-is-better because it is used here as a competitive-pressure signal for the institution, not as a benefit to students.Number of same-type institutions (same Carnegie class and control) within 100 miles.Calculated from filings
Strong
0
13th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard universe)52 peers
How many institutions of the same type (same Carnegie classification and control, i.e. the schools competing for the same students) sit within roughly 100 miles. A higher count means a more crowded local market and a harder yield fight, which matters most as the regional pool of high school graduates shrinks; a low count means the school has its catchment largely to itself. Distance is straight-line from campus coordinates. Banded against the school's peer group. Fewer is better for recruiting leverage.
States recruited fromNumber of distinct US states sending at least one first-time student.Calculated from filings
Strong
2
83rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 1
higher is better
Fall 202236 peers
How many distinct US states the school's first-time degree-seeking class is drawn from (IPEDS Residence & Migration, Fall 2022). A higher count signals broader geographic reach and less dependence on any single state's shrinking pool of high school graduates; a low count means the school recruits from a narrow region and is more exposed to that region's demographic decline. Banded against the school's peer group.
Foreign first-time shareShare of first-time students whose legal residence is a foreign country.As filed
0%
47th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
Fall 202237 peers
Share of the school's first-time degree-seeking class whose legal residence is outside the United States (IPEDS Residence & Migration, Fall 2022). A measure of international reach in the entering class. Neither high nor low is inherently better; it is context for tuition-revenue mix and exposure to visa and geopolitical risk. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Metro-area unemployment rateUnemployment rate in the school's metro area, ACS 2019-23.As filed
Average
5.7%
49th percentile in peer grouppeer median 5.7%
lower is better
ACS 2019-2351 peers
The civilian unemployment rate in the school's metropolitan or micropolitan area (US Census ACS 2019-23, mapped by the school's federal CBSA code). It is a proxy for local labor demand: a lower rate means a tighter job market, a stronger near-term destination for graduates and a smaller pool of working adults to recruit. It describes the local economy, not the school. Schools outside any metro area are not scored. Banded against the school's peer group.
On-campus crime rateOn-campus criminal offenses per 1,000 students, 2024 (Clery Act).As filed
0 per 1k
2024 (Clery)
Criminal offenses reported on campus in 2024 (murder, manslaughter, the four sex-offense categories, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor-vehicle theft and arson) per 1,000 students, from the school's federal Clery Act filing. Counts and enrollment are summed across the institution's campuses. A higher number does not always mean a more dangerous school: thorough reporting and dense residential campuses raise it. Lower is generally safer. Banded against the school's peer group.
Enrollment cliff (home state)Projected change in the institution's home-state high-school graduates from 2025 to 2041 (WICHE). The U.S. total falls about 13%; a directional feeder-market signal, not an enrollment forecast.External projection
Stable or growing
7.5%
WICHE 2024 (11th ed.) projection
Projected change in the number of high-school graduates in the institution's HOME STATE from the class of 2025 (the national peak) to 2041, per WICHE's Knocking at the College Door, 11th Edition (Dec 2024). The 'enrollment cliff' is the post-2008 birth decline reaching college age; the U.S. total is projected to fall about 13% over this window. A college recruits from many states, so its home-state projection is an indicative directional signal of feeder-market pressure, not a forecast of that institution's own enrollment. A projection, not a measurement: WICHE's state-level forecast of high-school graduates. It describes the pool a school recruits from, not the school's own enrollment.
Workforce Pell exposureShare of this school's measured credentials that are undergraduate certificates, the sub-associate tier the 2025 budget law's new Workforce Pell Grant makes Pell-eligible from July 2026 (short-term programs of 150–600 clock hours over 8–15 weeks). An opportunity signal: higher = more of what the school already produces could draw new federal grant aid. Source: College Scorecard Field-of-Study; an upper-bound proxy since the certificate tier spans varying lengths.Modelled by Ibex
Certificate-intensive
100%
2024-25 (Scorecard completions)
Share of the institution's measured credentials that are undergraduate certificates, the sub-associate tier that the 2025 budget law's new Workforce Pell Grant makes Pell-eligible from July 1, 2026. Workforce Pell extends the Pell Grant to short-term workforce programs of 150 to 600 clock hours offered over 8 to 15 weeks, subject to state-workforce-board and accreditor approval and to job-placement, completion and earnings-value guardrails. This is an opportunity signal: a higher share means more of what the school already produces could draw new federal grant aid, and the upside is greatest where Pell reliance (shown separately) is also high. Computed as undergraduate-certificate completions divided by all credential completions in the College Scorecard Field-of-Study file (most recent release). Scorecard's 'Undergraduate Certificate' level spans certificates of varying length, so the statutory 150-600 clock-hour window is a subset of this tier, read this as an upper-bound exposure proxy, not a count of qualifying programs. Shown only for institutions that confer such certificates above a minimum completions floor.
In-state HS graduatesPublic + private high-school graduates in the school's state, class of 2025.External projection
75,761
25th percentile in peer grouppeer median 206,184
context, not scored
Class of 2025 (WICHE)50 peers
The size of the school's home-state high-school graduating class in 2025 (WICHE Knocking at the College Door, public and private combined). It is the near-term in-state feeder market, the complement to the enrollment-cliff projection, which shows the direction that market is heading. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Enrollment momentum (CAGR)Enrollment momentum (CAGR).Modelled by Ibex
Strong
39%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median -0.7%
higher is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)43 peers
Compound annual growth rate of undergraduate enrollment over the years the tool tracks (College Scorecard, roughly 2016-2024). Positive means the school is growing; negative means it is shrinking, the leading indicator of demand stress ahead of the demographic cliff. Where the reported count jumps by a merger or a campus consolidation brought under one institution, only the years after that jump are measured, and where too little history follows it no rate is shown. A sharp fall is measured in full: a shrinking count is the signal this metric exists to carry, not an artifact to be cut away. No rate is shown where the enrolment never reaches 25 in the measured window: on a series that small one student is a double-digit annual rate, and a percentile computed from it would rank noise. Banded against the school's peer group. The window shown is the one this school's own figure was measured over: it is shorter where the series starts late, ends early, or is cut at a reporting change, so peers are not all measured over identical years.
Net-price momentum (CAGR)Net-price momentum (CAGR).Modelled by Ibex
Strong
1%
31st percentile in peer grouppeer median 4.8%
lower is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)44 peers
Compound annual growth rate of net tuition revenue per full-time-equivalent student over the tracked years. A high positive rate means the school's real net price is climbing faster than peers, which can strain affordability and yield. Banded against the school's peer group. Lower is better. The window shown is the one this school's own figure was measured over: it is shorter where the series starts late, ends early, or is cut at a reporting change, so peers are not all measured over identical years.
Share of home-state HS class enrolledFirst-time students from the home state, as a share of that state's projected graduating high-school class.External projection
0%
Fall 2022 (IPEDS) enrollment / class-of-2025 WICHE projection
Of every 100 students graduating from high school in this institution's own state, how many enroll here as first-time undergraduates. It sizes the school's local market penetration, and it is the number that turns the demographic cliff into an enrollment figure: a state projected to lose 12% of its graduating class costs a school roughly 12% of whatever this share represents. Shown as context rather than scored: a high share means strong local pull and concentrated exposure to one state's pipeline, while a low share can mean weak local demand or a deliberately national recruiting strategy, and the data cannot tell those apart. First-time enrollment by home state is IPEDS residence and migration; the graduating-class size is the WICHE projection, so the two sides carry different dates and the card shows both. Not shown for schools with fewer than 20 first-time students from their own state. Two collections and two clocks: the students are counted in an IPEDS residence and migration collection, and the graduating class they are a share of is a WICHE projection for the class of 2025. Read it as the scale of the school's local market position, not as a figure accurate to the student.
Competing enrollment nearbyUndergraduates enrolled at same-type institutions within 100 miles, per one of this school's own undergraduates.Calculated from filings
Strong
0.00×
5th percentile in peer grouppeer median 3.02×
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard universe)22 peers
For every undergraduate enrolled here, how many are enrolled at directly competing institutions (same Carnegie classification and control) within roughly 100 miles. It is the weight behind the competitor count on the neighbouring card: three tiny colleges nearby and one 40,000-student public are the same number of competitors and a completely different market. A value of 5x means the surrounding same-type market is five times this school's size, so a small shift in where those students choose to go moves this school's class far more than it moves theirs. Straight-line distance from campus coordinates, same 100-mile catchment as the competitor count. Banded against the school's peer group. Lower means more room to grow without taking students from a larger rival.
Consecutive years of enrollment declineHow many years in a row undergraduate enrollment has fallen, counting back from the most recent year.Modelled by Ibex
Not declining
0 yrs
26th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0 yrs
lower is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)51 peers
The number of consecutive years, ending with the most recent one, in which this school's undergraduate headcount fell. Zero means the latest year was flat or up. A single down year is ordinary; three or more in a row is the pattern that precedes program cuts and closures, and it is visible in the federal data years before it becomes public. A fall smaller than 2% counts as flat, because year-to-year reporting noise at that scale would otherwise manufacture streaks. Measured on the same window as enrollment momentum: where a merger or consolidation makes the earlier years a different institution, only the years after it are counted. Banded against the school's peer group. Lower is better. The window shown is the one this school's own figure was measured over: it is shorter where the series starts late, ends early, or is cut at a reporting change, so peers are not all measured over identical years.
Where students come from
Feeder statesThe home state of every first-time degree-seeking undergraduate in the entering class, as reported to IPEDS. Darker means a larger share of the class; the institution's own state is highlighted separately because at nearly every school it dwarfs the rest.
2 states and territories · Fall 2022
TN 70.2%GA 29.8%
Home state of first-time degree-seeking undergraduates (IPEDS residence and migration). Each state is one square of equal size, arranged in the rough shape of the country, so a small state sending many students is as visible as a large one. The institution’s own state is shown in gold and every other state is shaded against the largest of them, not against the home state, which otherwise flattens the rest of the map. Shares are of the whole entering class, so they do not add to 100% where students came from abroad.
Student body
Undergraduate race & ethnicity
IPEDS 2024-25
White74.7%
Black9.8%
Hispanic/Latino7.9%
Two or more races5.3%
Unknown1.5%
Asian0.4%
American Indian/Alaska Native0.4%
Undergraduate enrollment by race and ethnicity, as reported to IPEDS (College Scorecard). “International” denotes nonresident students; “Unknown” means race/ethnicity was not reported.
Student Outcomes & Risk
The bar under each rank is the spread across the peer group: the shaded box is the middle half, the pale line is their median, and the gold marker is this institution. Hover for the figures.
Median earnings (10 yr)Median earnings of former students ten years after first enrolling (working, federally-aided students).As filed
Below peers
$24,728
16th percentile in peer grouppeer median $32,986
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)34 peers
Taken from the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the most recent release in which the Department published this element; it is null in every release since. Earnings are measured in a single tax year for a cohort that first enrolled about a decade earlier, so this describes students who entered well before 2020.
Median debt at graduationMedian federal loan debt graduates carry at the point they complete.As filed
Average
$7,479
56th percentile in peer grouppeer median $7,041
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)24 peers
From the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying it. Median debt pools the borrowers who left in that award year and the one before it.
3-yr cohort default rateShare of borrowers defaulting within three years. Lower is better, but values covering 2020 to 2023 are depressed for every school by the federal payment pause, so the level means less than the comparison.Share of borrowers who default within three years of entering repayment. Lower is better.As filed
Below peers
18.7%
87th percentile in peer grouppeer median 15.1%
lower is better
FY2017 cohort34 peers
Share of borrowers who defaulted within three years of entering repayment (U.S. Dept. of Education official cohort default rate). Shown for the FY2017 borrower cohort, the most recent cohort whose full three-year default window closed before the 2020-23 federal student-loan payment pause. More recent cohorts are reported by the College Scorecard at essentially 0%, but that reflects the payment pause (no payments were due, so almost no one could default), not borrower health, so the pre-pause cohort is the last meaningful reading. Lower is better.
Share taking federal loansShare of students taking out federal loans, a borrowing-reliance signal.As filed
71.6%
84th percentile in peer grouppeer median 39.6%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)52 peers
Debt-to-earnings ratioMedian graduate debt divided by median earnings, how heavy the debt load is versus what graduates earn. Lower is better.Calculated from filings
Below peers
0.30×
89th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.21×
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)23 peers
Both sides of this ratio come from the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying either. It is co-vintage, but it is not current.
Loan repayment rate (3-yr)Share of borrowers paying down principal. Higher is better, with one honest caveat: a selective school can look worse than it is because many of its graduates postpone payments while in graduate or professional school. Read it beside median debt and earnings rather than alone.As filed
Average
43%
53rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 38.9%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)29 peers
Share of student-loan borrowers who had repaid at least $1 of their loan principal within three years of entering repayment (College Scorecard, 2016-17). Read it as context, not a simple good/bad score: a low rate can mean borrowers are struggling, but it can also mean many graduates have postponed payments while enrolled in graduate or professional school, which is common at selective schools and pushes their rate down. Unlike the cohort default rate, it is not distorted by the 2020-23 federal payment pause. Reported only where enough borrowers exist. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file. The Department has not published repayment rates since, so this is the most recent figure that exists, not a recent one: it follows borrowers who entered repayment in the early 2010s.
Earn more than a HS grad (6-yr)Share earning more than $28,000 (about a high-school graduate's wage) six years after entry.Calculated from filings
Below peers
14.3%
6th percentile in peer grouppeer median 32.8%
higher is better
2014-15 (Scorecard)27 peers
Share of students earning more than $28,000 a year, roughly what a typical high-school graduate earns, six years after entering this institution (College Scorecard, 2014-15). A direct read on whether attending beats not attending, and conceptually aligned with the 2025 budget law's program-level earnings-premium test. Share of former students earning more than $28,000, the Department's benchmark for the median earnings of a high-school graduate. From the College Scorecard 2014-15 data file, the last release carrying it; the threshold is not inflation-adjusted.
Working 10 years after entryShare of the no-longer-enrolled cohort who are working ten years after entering.As filed
Average
74.5%
34th percentile in peer grouppeer median 78.3%
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)34 peers
Share of students who are working (not still enrolled) ten years after entering this institution, of those whose employment status is known (College Scorecard, 2020-21). A coarse employment signal; it does not capture earnings level or job quality. Taken from the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the most recent release in which the Department published this element; it is null in every release since. Earnings are measured in a single tax year for a cohort that first enrolled about a decade earlier, so this describes students who entered well before 2020.
Loan repayment rate (5-yr)Share of borrowers paying down principal. Higher is better, with one honest caveat: a selective school can look worse than it is because many of its graduates postpone payments while in graduate or professional school. Read it beside median debt and earnings rather than alone.Share of borrowers who repaid at least $1 of principal within five years of entering repayment.As filed
Average
44.3%
59th percentile in peer grouppeer median 36.5%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)28 peers
Share of student-loan borrowers who had repaid at least $1 of their loan principal within five years of entering repayment (College Scorecard, 2016-17), a longer-horizon companion to the three-year repayment rate. As with the three-year figure, a low rate can reflect graduates deferring payments while in further schooling rather than financial distress. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file. The Department has not published repayment rates since, so this is the most recent figure that exists, not a recent one: it follows borrowers who entered repayment in the early 2010s.
Median earnings (6 yr)Median earnings of working former students six years after they first enrolled.As filed
Below peers
$16,588
1st percentile in peer grouppeer median $33,264
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)36 peers
Median earnings of former students who are working and were federally aided, measured six years after they first enrolled (College Scorecard, 2020-21). A shorter-horizon companion to the ten-year earnings figure; early-career pay tends to run below the ten-year mark, so read the two together rather than in isolation. From the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying it. Earnings measured about six years after entry, so the cohort behind it entered in the mid-2010s.
Earn more than a HS grad (10-yr)Share earning more than $28,000 (about a high-school graduate's wage) ten years after entry.Calculated from filings
Below peers
23.9%
6th percentile in peer grouppeer median 41.2%
higher is better
2014-15 (Scorecard)24 peers
Share of students earning more than $28,000 a year, roughly what a typical high-school graduate earns, ten years after entering this institution (College Scorecard, 2014-15). The long-horizon companion to the six-year figure and the closest public analogue to the 2025 budget law's program-level earnings-premium test. Share of former students earning more than $28,000, the Department's benchmark for the median earnings of a high-school graduate. From the College Scorecard 2014-15 data file, the last release carrying it; the threshold is not inflation-adjusted.
Median debt (did not complete)Median federal loan debt of students who left without completing. Lower is better.As filed
Strong
$4,700
11th percentile in peer grouppeer median $4,750
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)22 peers
Median federal loan debt carried by students who withdrew from this institution without completing a credential (College Scorecard, 2020-21). The counterpart to debt at graduation, and often the higher-risk group: borrowing with no degree to show for it. Lower is better, but compare it against the school's completion and withdrawal rates rather than on its own. From the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying it. Median debt pools the borrowers who left in that award year and the one before it.
Loan repayment rate (1-yr)Share of borrowers paying down principal. Higher is better, with one honest caveat: a selective school can look worse than it is because many of its graduates postpone payments while in graduate or professional school. Read it beside median debt and earnings rather than alone.Share of borrowers who repaid at least $1 of principal within one year of entering repayment.As filed
Average
46.2%
64th percentile in peer grouppeer median 29%
higher is better
2014-15 (Scorecard)29 peers
Share of student-loan borrowers who had repaid at least $1 of their loan principal within one year of entering repayment (College Scorecard, 2014-15), the earliest point on the repayment curve. As with the longer-horizon rates, a low figure can reflect borrowers deferring payments while in further schooling rather than financial distress. From the College Scorecard 2014-15 data file, the last release carrying the one-year repayment rate. A decade old, and shown because no newer federal figure exists.
Loan repayment rate (7-yr)Share of borrowers paying down principal. Higher is better, with one honest caveat: a selective school can look worse than it is because many of its graduates postpone payments while in graduate or professional school. Read it beside median debt and earnings rather than alone.Share of borrowers who repaid at least $1 of principal within seven years of entering repayment.As filed
Average
44.3%
54th percentile in peer grouppeer median 32.4%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)27 peers
Share of student-loan borrowers who had repaid at least $1 of their loan principal within seven years of entering repayment (College Scorecard, 2016-17), the longest horizon reported. Together with the one-, three-, and five-year rates it traces how repayment progresses over time. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file. The Department has not published repayment rates since, so this is the most recent figure that exists, not a recent one: it follows borrowers who entered repayment in the early 2010s.
Median debt (first-generation students)Median federal loan debt of students who are the first in their family to attend college. Lower is better.As filed
Strong
$5,112
3rd percentile in peer grouppeer median $6,729
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)17 peers
Median cumulative federal loan debt carried by first-generation students, those whose parents did not complete college (College Scorecard, 2020-21). Read it beside the all-students median debt: a gap between the two is an equity signal about who shoulders the borrowing. Lower is better, but weigh it against completion and earnings. From the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying it. Median debt pools the borrowers who left in that award year and the one before it.
Median debt (Pell recipients)Median federal loan debt of Pell Grant recipients, the lowest-income aided students. Lower is better.As filed
Strong
$5,500
5th percentile in peer grouppeer median $6,729
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)20 peers
Median cumulative federal loan debt carried by Pell Grant recipients (College Scorecard, 2020-21), the lowest-income federally-aided students at the school. Compare it with the all-students median debt and the Pell share: it shows how much the neediest students borrow to attend. Lower is better. From the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying it. Median debt pools the borrowers who left in that award year and the one before it.
Loan repayment rate, completers (3-yr)Share of borrowers paying down principal. Higher is better, with one honest caveat: a selective school can look worse than it is because many of its graduates postpone payments while in graduate or professional school. Read it beside median debt and earnings rather than alone.Share of borrowers who COMPLETED and had paid down at least $1 of principal within 3 years. Higher is better.As filed
Strong
47.3%
74th percentile in peer grouppeer median 34.4%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)21 peers
Three-year loan repayment rate among borrowers who completed their program (College Scorecard, 2016-17): the share who, three years after entering repayment, are not in default and have paid down at least a dollar of principal. Read it beside the all-borrower loan repayment rate and the non-completer rate: completers almost always repay at higher rates, so a low figure here is a strong warning sign. Higher is better. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file. The Department has not published repayment rates since, so this is the most recent figure that exists, not a recent one: it follows borrowers who entered repayment in the early 2010s.
Loan repayment rate, non-completers (3-yr)Share of borrowers paying down principal. Higher is better, with one honest caveat: a selective school can look worse than it is because many of its graduates postpone payments while in graduate or professional school. Read it beside median debt and earnings rather than alone.Share of borrowers who LEFT WITHOUT a credential and had paid down at least $1 of principal within 3 years. Higher is better.As filed
Strong
37.7%
79th percentile in peer grouppeer median 16.7%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)21 peers
Three-year loan repayment rate among borrowers who left WITHOUT completing (College Scorecard, 2016-17), the group at the highest risk of default since they carry debt without the credential. Pair it with the non-completer median debt: together they show how heavily a school's dropouts are burdened. Higher is better. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file. The Department has not published repayment rates since, so this is the most recent figure that exists, not a recent one: it follows borrowers who entered repayment in the early 2010s.
Field-demand outlook (10-yr)Employment-weighted 10-year BLS job-growth projection for the occupations this school's program mix feeds (U.S. all-occupations benchmark +3.1%). An indicative broad-field demand signal, not a program-specific or placement guarantee.External projection
Fast-growing field mix
+7.3 pts
95th percentile nationallynational median +4.7 pts
higher is better
BLS EP 2024-34
Projected 10-year (2024-34) change in U.S. employment for the occupations this institution's degrees and certificates feed, blended across its program mix. Built by mapping each CIP 2-digit field to its occupations via the NCES CIP-SOC crosswalk, taking the employment-weighted average of each occupation's BLS-projected percent change, then weighting fields by the institution's latest-year completions. The U.S. all-occupations benchmark is 3.1%, so a higher value means the school's graduates concentrate in faster-growing labor markets. An INDICATIVE field-level signal at broad-field granularity, not a program-specific or graduate-specific projection, and not a placement or earnings guarantee. Shown where at least 50% of completions fall in fields with a coherent occupational mapping and the school reports 100+ annual completions.
Completions in growing fieldsShare of completions in broad fields projected to grow faster than the all-occupations average (+3.1%).External projection
Mostly growth fields
100%
89th percentile nationallynational median 67.9%
higher is better
BLS EP 2024-34
The share of this institution's yearly completions that are in broad fields whose occupations the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects will grow FASTER than the all-occupations average of 3.1% over 2024-34. It answers a different question from the field-demand outlook beside it: that one averages the whole program mix into a single rate, which lets a fast-growing half cancel out a shrinking half. This says how much of the graduating class is on the growing side. The denominator is completions in fields with a coherent occupational mapping, not all completions, because three broad fields map to essentially the whole economy and carry no signal; the share of completions that could be classified at all is shown in the field-mix breakdown. Ranked against every institution in the file rather than against the peer group: what a program mix is worth is set by the national labour market, not by whichever schools happen to share a Carnegie class. An indicative field-level signal, not a placement rate.
Net-value indexComposite 0-100 of earnings, completion, net price and debt vs peers.Blended index
Below peers
39.0
25th percentile in peer grouppeer median 51.0
higher is better
2020-21 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)44 peers
A 0-100 composite of student value relative to the peer group: the average of peer percentile ranks for median earnings ten years out, graduation rate, net price (lower counts as better value) and median debt (lower is better). Built only where at least two components are reported. Higher means more outcome per dollar. Banded against the school's peer group.
Loan payment vs earningsMonthly payment on the median federal debt, as a share of median monthly earnings ten years after entry.Calculated from filings
Manageable
4.1%
89th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.9%
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)23 peers
What this school's median federal student debt would cost to repay each month on the ten-year Standard Repayment Plan, divided by the median graduate's monthly earnings ten years after entering. Both figures are the school's own reported medians from the same College Scorecard file year, so the ratio compares like with like, but they describe different people: the typical borrower and the typical earner are not necessarily the same student. The payment is calculated at the current published undergraduate Direct Loan interest rate (6.39% for 2025-26), not at the rates the debt was originally borrowed at, so it answers what the debt would cost a student starting now. Payments above roughly 8% of gross income are the widely used threshold for strain, and above 15% the standard plan is usually unaffordable without an income-driven alternative. Banded against the school's peer group. Lower is better.
Program mix vs the job market
Where this year’s graduates are headingEvery completion this institution awarded in the latest year, grouped by whether the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects the occupations that broad field feeds to grow faster than average, grow more slowly, or shrink over the next ten years.
140 completions · BLS EP 2024-34
100% of completions are in fields projected to grow faster than the job market as a whole.
Faster than average100.0%
Each completion is placed by the broad field of its program, then by whether that field’s occupations are projected to grow faster than the all-occupations average, grow more slowly, or decline. Three broad fields map to essentially the whole economy and carry no field signal, so their completions are shown separately as unclassified rather than being counted either way. Field-level and indicative: it describes the labour markets a program mix feeds, not what any individual graduate does.
Earnings spread
Earnings 10 years after entry: the middle 50%
Working, federally-aided former students · Scorecard 2024-25
25th percentile$9,325
Median$24,728
75th percentile$39,150
Annual earnings of working former students measured ten years after they first enrolled (College Scorecard), shown as a range rather than a single number. The middle half of this school’s graduates earn between the 25th- and 75th-percentile figures; the Median bar matches the headline earnings figure. A wider gap means more variation in how graduates fare. Bars are scaled to the highest value shown.
Where these numbers come from
Every figure on this page carries one of these labels. They are not degrees of confidence: a projection is not a worse number than a filing, it is a different kind of claim, and the distinction is invisible when both are set in the same grey card.
As filedThis is the institution's own figure as filed with a federal collection, or a federal agency's own published figure about it. Ibex has not adjusted it.
Calculated from filingsCalculated by Ibex from figures in the same federal filing, using nothing but arithmetic: a share, a ratio, or an amount per student. It is exactly as sound as the filed numbers it divides.
Blended indexA blend of several other measures on this page, combined by Ibex. The components and how they are weighted are listed in this metric's description. Reasonable people could weight them differently and get a different score.
Modelled by IbexFitted or extrapolated by Ibex from the institution's reported history. This number appears in no federal file: it is a summary of a trend, and it inherits every irregularity in the years it was fitted through.
External projectionBuilt on an external projection about the future, published by a research body rather than measured. Projections are revised as the underlying assumptions change, and this one describes a scenario, not a fact.
Regulator / auditor findingA finding published by a regulator or an independent auditor about this institution. It is a statement someone made in writing, not a measurement Ibex or the school took.
Top fields of study (all levels)
Brillare Beauty Institute’s largest fields by completions, with graduate earnings (4 years out) and debt benchmarked against the same field at its peer group. Sparklines show the 8-year completions trend.
| Field | Completions / yr | Median earnings, 4 yrs out | Median debt | Earnings premium | Risk score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personal & Culinary Services | 140 | $28,333 (too few peers) | $7,917 (too few peers) | Below benchmark -19% | Moderate · 49 |
1 of 1 top fields shown have median graduate earnings below the TN state earnings-premium benchmark, an indicative flag under the 2025 federal earnings-premium test (effective July 1, 2026).
Earnings-premium status is an indicative estimate: median graduate earnings four years out vs the TN state median earnings of a high-school graduate (undergraduate credentials) or a bachelor’s-degree holder (graduate credentials) from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (2022 ACS 5-year). The official U.S. Department of Education determination uses its own cohort definition and may differ.
The risk score (0–100) is an indicative blend of earnings-premium margin and the five-year completions trend, higher means a field pays closer to (or below) the benchmark and is shrinking. A directional screen, not an official determination.
Major-level detail (CIP 4-digit)
Personal & Culinary Services – 1 CIP program (4-digit), 1 with earnings
| Major (CIP 4-digit) | Compl./yr | Earn 4yr | Earn 1yr | % > threshold | Median debt | Debt/earn | Earnings premium | 2 of 3 yrs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cosmetology and Related Personal Grooming ServicesCIP 1204 › | 140 | $28,333 n=51 | – | – | $7,917 | 0.28× | Below benchmark -19% | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 1 of 1 major shows an earnings figure; the rest read “–”. % > threshold is ED’s own share of graduates out-earning the federal earnings threshold (the do-no-harm pass rate), drawn from the best available measurement window (4-, 5- or 1-year) pooled across all nine College Scorecard Field-of-Study releases; a small chip marks any figure not on the 4-year window, and hovering names the cohort size and source release. 2 of 3 yrs flags fields below the earnings-premium benchmark in two of the latest three reported cohort-years, the statutory trigger under the 2025 test (effective July 1, 2026). Indicative; the Department of Education’s official determination may differ. Source: U.S. Department of Education, College Scorecard Field of Study (2014–15 through 2022–23 cohorts + most-recent snapshot), accessed March 2026.
See the interactive dashboard for all fields and credential levels (associate through doctoral). Source: College Scorecard Field of Study.
Frequently asked
What is Brillare Beauty Institute's student-faculty ratio?
Brillare Beauty Institute reports a student-faculty ratio of 18:1 (IPEDS, fall 2023) – that is, about 18 students for every instructional faculty member.
How much does Brillare Beauty Institute cost?
The average net price after aid is $17,894 (College Scorecard).
How much do Brillare Beauty Institute graduates earn?
Median earnings ten years after entry are $24,728 (College Scorecard), measured across students who received federal aid.
Are Brillare Beauty Institute's programs at risk under the federal earnings-premium test?
Indicatively, at Brillare Beauty Institute, the single largest field with available earnings data has median graduate earnings (four years out) below the TN state earnings-premium benchmark used by the 2025 federal test (effective July 1, 2026), under which programs can lose Title IV eligibility if graduate earnings trail those of a typical worker without the credential for 2 of 3 years. This is an estimate using College Scorecard field-of-study earnings vs ACS state/national medians; the Department of Education's official determination uses its own cohort definition and may differ.
Which schools are Brillare Beauty Institute's peers?
Brillare Beauty Institute is benchmarked against 52 institutions in the Less-than-two-year · Private nonprofit peer group; all percentiles and medians on this page are computed within that group.
Compare with peers
Explore Brillare Beauty Institute interactively
Open the full dashboard to switch peer views, hover trends, and compare head-to-head.
Want a custom dashboard for Brillare Beauty Institute?
We build tailored intelligence dashboards – Brillare Beauty Institute and the peer set you choose, the metrics and risk signals your team cares about, kept current and delivered to you. Tell us what you’d want to track and a specialist will scope it with you.
Source: U.S. Department of Education, College Scorecard & IPEDS (most recent releases), with the U.S. Census Bureau (ACS), the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (Employment Projections, field-demand outlook) and WICHE (enrollment-cliff projections). Figures lag the current academic year by roughly two to three years. Percentiles and medians are computed within the institution's peer group. Financial Resilience is a transparent composite, see each component above. Compiled by Ibex Insights.