Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Troy, NY · official site ↗
Private nonprofitR1: Doctoral, Very High ResearchMedium
11
Fin. Resilience
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is a private nonprofit institution in Troy, NY, classified by Carnegie as “R1: Doctoral, Very High Research.”
It enrolls about 5,714 undergraduates and is benchmarked here against 39 peer institutions (R1: Doctoral, Very High Research · Private nonprofit).
On Ibex's Financial Resilience score it rates 11 out of 100 within that peer group, a transparent composite of endowment per undergraduate, net tuition revenue per student, and instructional spend per student.
That score and the financial health index below are not the same measure and can disagree: the resilience score ranks per-student resource levels against this peer group, while the financial health index scores the institution's own balance sheet and operating result on the CFI scale, independent of peers. A school with modest resources per student can still run a sound balance sheet, and a wealthy one can still post an operating loss.
Its strongest standing relative to peers is loan repayment rate, completers (3-yr) (95.4%, 99th percentile).
Its weakest is bond debt vs net assets (43.8%).
Peer group
R1: Doctoral, Very High Research · Private nonprofit
39 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
Audit findings
▼ -100%
1 → 0
2023→2025
Pell Grant dollars
▲ +24%
$6.2M → $7.7M
2023→2025
Gifts and grants received
▲ +15%
$37.6M → $43.2M
2022→2023
Admission rate
▲ +9%
58.5% → 63.5%
2023→2024
Federal research funding
▲ +8%
$56.3M → $60.7M
2023→2025
Endowment (end of year)
▲ +7%
$860.8M → $920.8M
2022→2023
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 Rensselaer Polytechnic 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.
Structural risk indexAn indicative 0–100 structural-risk index (higher = more pressure) blending operating margin, months of cash cushion, tuition dependency and the home-state enrollment cliff. Screens for the financial and demographic strain that precedes closures and mergers, directional, not a prediction.
37
ElevatedGrad PLUS exposureShare of the school's graduate federal loan dollars that came from Grad PLUS, the program the 2025 budget law eliminates for new borrowers from July 2026 (FSA Direct Loan data). Higher = more graduate borrowing that will disappear above the new caps.
28.1%
Moderate exposureHigher than 62% of schools nationally
AY2025-26 YTD (through Q2, Dec 2025)
Avg Grad PLUS loanAverage Grad PLUS loan per borrower (FSA). The 2025 law caps unsubsidized grad borrowing at $20,500/yr and ends Grad PLUS, this is the average per-student amount that vanishes above the cap. The depth half of the Grad PLUS shock; pair with Grad PLUS exposure (the reliance share).
$33,728
Above the capHigher than 85% of schools nationally
AY2025-26 YTD (through Q2, Dec 2025)
Parent PLUS cap gapHow far the average Parent PLUS loan at this school exceeds the new $20,000/yr Parent PLUS borrowing cap the 2025 budget law imposes from July 2026 (FSA Direct Loan data). A positive gap is per-borrower financing that must shift to private loans, savings, or institutional aid; shown only where the average already tops the cap.
$7,810
Above capHigher than 59% of schools nationally
AY2025-26 YTD (through Q2, Dec 2025)
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.
-27%
Severe declineIndicative 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.
Financial Health Index
3.7
on a −4 to 10 scale
Primary reserve 35%6.1 mo
Reserves vs. debt 35%0.46×
Return on net assets 20%12.2%
Operating result 10%9.5%
Composite of four ratios on a strength-factor scale (−4 weak → 10 strong): below 3 falls short of the threshold for financial health, below 1 signals acute stress, and above 6 is strong. Computed from IPEDS FY2022-23, the most recent finance release (it lags the current year by 2–3 years). Branch campuses that report finances at a parent/system level can show distorted ratios. For informational benchmarking, not a credit rating or financial advice.
Enrollment shock
What an enrollment loss would do to the budgetTuition revenue falls with the students; every other revenue line and the entire cost base are held where they are. It measures the size of the hole a decline would open, not what the institution would end up reporting after it responded.
Tuition and fees fund 42% of this institution’s revenue, and it runs a 11.7% operating margin. It could lose about 27.6% of its enrollment before the surplus becomes a deficit, if nothing else changed.
7.8%
operating margin after the loss, with costs unchanged
A deliberately simple counterfactual: net tuition per student and total costs stay where the latest IPEDS finance filing put them, so only the tuition line moves. No institution facing this would hold costs flat, which is the point, the figure is the gap that would have to be closed, not a forecast of the margin it would report. A school that responds by discounting harder to hold headcount converts the same problem into a net-price one, and it does not show up here.
Revenue composition
Where the money comes from
$504.4M total revenue · IPEDS FY2022-23
Tuition & fees is the largest single source at 42% of revenue.
Tuition & fees42.3%
Investment return19.0%
Government grants & contracts13.0%
Auxiliary enterprises12.7%
Private gifts & grants11.3%
Other revenue1.7%
Government appropriations0.1%
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.
$46.1M obligated · FY2024
Education is the largest single funder at 25%.
Education25.1%
Health & Human Services20.3%
Defense16.3%
NSF14.2%
Energy13.6%
NASA6.4%
Other agencies (4)4.1%
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$24,078
$30–48K$26,289
$48–75K$28,212
$75–110K$36,230
$110K+$42,541
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
Below peers
$26,714
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median $33,887
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Instructional spend / FTESpending on instruction per FTE student, how much of the budget reaches the classroom.Calculated from filings
Below peers
$20,696
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median $38,658
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Endowment (end of year)Total endowment value at year end, long-term invested wealth that funds operations and cushions shocks.As filed
Below peers
$920.8M
1st percentile in peer grouppeer median $6.2B
higher is better
FY2022-2339 peers
Value of endowment assets at the end of the fiscal year (IPEDS finance, FY2022-23: FASB F2H02 / GASB F1H02), co-vintage with the other finance-year metrics on this page. Usually filed at the parent campus: most branch and online sub-units show the parent's endowment as a clearly labeled inherited value, and a few report a small endowment of their own alongside it. Multi-year trend from College Scorecard, shown only where it matches the IPEDS filing.
In-state tuition & feesPublished price before any aid. Shown as context, not as good or bad: at most private colleges almost nobody pays it, and a high sticker often sits on top of deep discounting, so a cheaper-looking school can cost a given family more. Compare schools on net price instead; sticker price is here because it is what gets quoted.Published in-state tuition and fees before aid (sticker price).As filed
$64,081
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $66,608
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Out-of-state tuition & feesPublished price before any aid. Shown as context, not as good or bad: at most private colleges almost nobody pays it, and a high sticker often sits on top of deep discounting, so a cheaper-looking school can cost a given family more. Compare schools on net price instead; sticker price is here because it is what gets quoted.Published out-of-state tuition and fees before aid (sticker price).As filed
$64,081
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $66,608
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Avg annual cost of attendancePublished price before any aid. Shown as context, not as good or bad: at most private colleges almost nobody pays it, and a high sticker often sits on top of deep discounting, so a cheaper-looking school can cost a given family more. Compare schools on net price instead; sticker price is here because it is what gets quoted.Average total annual cost, tuition, fees and living costs, before aid.As filed
$82,404
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median $86,285
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Avg monthly faculty salaryWhat the institution pays its faculty. Scored as higher-is-better because it tracks an institution's ability to attract and hold teaching staff. It also tracks local cost of living, so compare within a region before drawing a conclusion.Average monthly salary of full-time faculty (IPEDS) – a proxy for faculty investment.As filed
Below peers
$13,820
17th percentile in peer grouppeer median $17,839
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Average monthly salary of full-time faculty, as reported to IPEDS.
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
Below peers
$36,228
71st percentile in peer grouppeer median $29,278
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Endowment per undergradEndowment divided by undergraduate headcount. The two numbers come from different collections and different years, so read it as an order of magnitude rather than a precise figure.Endowment divided by undergraduate headcount, endowment wealth behind each undergrad.Calculated from filings
Below peers
$161,152
14th percentile in peer grouppeer median $597,267
higher is better
FY2022-23 endowment / 2024-25 enrollment39 peers
Two collections, two dates: IPEDS reports the endowment for fiscal 2022-23 and the College Scorecard reports the 2024-25 headcount it is divided by. Treat it as an order-of-magnitude comparison, not a to-the-dollar figure.
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
Below peers
$24,078
95th percentile in peer grouppeer median $9,097
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)33 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, high-income families (over $110K)Net price for families earning over about $110,000, which is close to the unsubsidized cost. Deliberately not scored: a low figure can mean a genuinely inexpensive school, or a school discounting even its wealthiest applicants to fill seats. Its distance from the low-income net price is the informative part, and that gap is what the aid-gradient reading is built on.Average yearly cost after grant aid for students from families earning over ~$110,000. Shown as context, not quality.As filed
$42,541
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median $50,352
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Average annual net price paid by students whose families earn more than about $110,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25), close to the full-pay cost since little need-based aid applies. Reported as context: the gap between this and the low-income net price shows how steeply the school discounts by family income. Not a measure of quality.
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
$26,289
96th percentile in peer grouppeer median $9,220
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)35 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
$28,212
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,432
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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
Below peers
$36,230
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median $18,753
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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.
Operating marginNet surplus as a share of total revenue, whether the institution runs in the black.Calculated from filings
Strong
11.7%
78th percentile in peer grouppeer median 4.9%
higher is better
FY2022-2339 peers
Net surplus as a share of total revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23): (total revenues − total expenses) ÷ total revenues. A surplus above 4% is strong; a thin surplus near 0% leaves little margin for shocks.
Tuition dependencyTuition's share of total revenue, how exposed the budget is to enrollment swings.Calculated from filings
42.3%
71st percentile in peer grouppeer median 27.5%
context, not scored
FY2022-2339 peers
Tuition & fees as a share of total revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23). Higher = more exposed to enrollment swings.
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
49.4%
86th percentile in peer grouppeer median 38.2%
context, not scored
FY2022-2339 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.
State appropriations shareState appropriations' share of total revenue, material for public institutions, near zero for private.Calculated from filings
0.1%
79th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
FY2022-2339 peers
State appropriations as a share of total revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23). Material for public institutions; ~0 for private.
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
13.6%
63rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 12%
context, not scored
FY2022-2339 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.
Months of operating cushionMonths of operating expenses covered by expendable reserves, the institution's cash cushion.Calculated from filings
Strong
6.1 mo
14th percentile in peer grouppeer median 16.1 mo
higher is better
FY2022-2339 peers
How many months of operating expenses the institution could cover from expendable reserves (IPEDS FY2022-23 primary reserve ratio × 12). About 5 months, one semester, is the accreditor benchmark for solid footing; below ~3 months is thin. A negative figure means expendable reserves are themselves negative.
Reserves vs. debtExpendable reserves divided by long-term debt, whether reserves could cover the debt.Calculated from filings
Thin
0.46×
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.31×
higher is better
FY2022-2339 peers
Expendable reserves ÷ plant-related debt (IPEDS FY2022-23 viability ratio). At or above 1.25×, reserves fully cover long-term debt. Shown blank when the institution carries little or no plant debt.
Return on net assetsChange in net assets over the year, whether the institution grew wealthier.Calculated from filings
Strong
12.2%
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.1%
higher is better
FY2022-2339 peers
Change in total net assets ÷ net assets (IPEDS FY2022-23) – whether the institution grew wealthier over the year. 2–4% is adequate; above 4% is strong.
Endowment per FTE studentEndowment per full-time-equivalent student, the FTE-correct measure of endowment wealth per student.Calculated from filings
Below peers
$122,434
24th percentile in peer grouppeer median $335,038
higher is better
FY2022-2339 peers
End-of-year endowment ÷ 12-month FTE enrollment, endowment wealth per full-time-equivalent student. The FTE-correct companion to endowment-per-undergraduate; FTE counts graduate and part-time load, so research universities look less wealthy on this basis than on a headcount basis. Both sides are FY2022-23: the denominator is the FTE count from the endowment's own year (2022-23), not the newer FTE figure shown in the enrollment section, so dividing the two numbers on this page will not reproduce this one.
Avg Parent PLUS loanAverage Parent PLUS loan originated per recipient family.As filed
$27,810
4th percentile in peer grouppeer median $40,874
context, not scored
AY2025-26 YTD (Federal Student Aid)38 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
33.5%
60th percentile in peer grouppeer median 32.2%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)39 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
6.8%
55th percentile in peer grouppeer median 5%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)39 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
6%
35th percentile in peer grouppeer median 10%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)39 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
24.3%
91st percentile in peer grouppeer median 15%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)39 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.
Room & board (on-campus)Published price before any aid. Shown as context, not as good or bad: at most private colleges almost nobody pays it, and a high sticker often sits on top of deep discounting, so a cheaper-looking school can cost a given family more. Compare schools on net price instead; sticker price is here because it is what gets quoted.Published annual room charge plus board (meal-plan) charge for on-campus residents.As filed
$17,530
20th percentile in peer grouppeer median $18,504
context, not scored
2023-2437 peers
The school's published annual charge for on-campus housing plus its standard meal plan (IPEDS, 2023-24). This is the largest cost of attendance after tuition and the part families compare most directly across residential offers. Reported only for schools that publish on-campus housing charges. A published charge before any aid, so it is shown as context rather than scored: see the sticker-price note.
Full-professor average salaryWhat the institution pays its faculty. Scored as higher-is-better because it tracks an institution's ability to attract and hold teaching staff. It also tracks local cost of living, so compare within a region before drawing a conclusion.Average salary of full (tenured-rank) professors, 9-month equated, 2023-24.As filed
Below peers
$163,722
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median $209,416
higher is better
2023-2439 peers
Average salary paid to full professors, the most senior instructional rank (IPEDS Human Resources, 2023-24, 9-month equated). It reflects both the school's pay scale and the seniority of its faculty, and it is a sizeable share of academic cost. Banded against the school's peer group.
Financial responsibility scoreED financial-responsibility composite score (-1.0 to 3.0; >=1.5 is passing).Regulator / auditor finding
Strong
3.0
80th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.8
higher is better
FY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid)33 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.
Grad PLUS exposureShare of the school's graduate federal loan dollars that came from Grad PLUS, the program the 2025 budget law eliminates for new borrowers from July 2026 (FSA Direct Loan data). Higher = more graduate borrowing that will disappear above the new caps.Calculated from filings
Moderate exposure
28.1%
AY2025-26 YTD (through Q2, Dec 2025)
Share of the institution's graduate federal loan dollars (Grad Unsubsidized + Grad PLUS) that came from Grad PLUS, the program the 2025 budget law eliminates for new borrowers from July 1, 2026, alongside new caps on graduate borrowing. A higher share means more of the school's graduate students rely on borrowing that will no longer exist above the unsubsidized cap. Source: U.S. Dept. of Education / Federal Student Aid Direct Loan Dashboard, primarily award year 2025-26 (year-to-date through Q2, December 2025), the most current federal data; schools not yet reporting Grad PLUS in 2025-26 retain their most recent complete year (2024-25), shown per school. The reliance share is stable across the two vintages. Shown only for schools with Grad PLUS originations; an exposure signal, not a forecast of revenue loss. Federal Student Aid publishes this dashboard quarterly and schools report on different schedules, so each school is shown at its own most recent reported period. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Avg Grad PLUS loanAverage Grad PLUS loan per borrower (FSA). The 2025 law caps unsubsidized grad borrowing at $20,500/yr and ends Grad PLUS, this is the average per-student amount that vanishes above the cap. The depth half of the Grad PLUS shock; pair with Grad PLUS exposure (the reliance share).As filed
Above the cap
$33,728
AY2025-26 YTD (through Q2, Dec 2025)
Average Grad PLUS loan per recipient (FSA Direct Loan Dashboard, award year 2025-26 year-to-date through Q2, with 2024-25 full-year retained where 2025-26 is not yet reported). The 2025 budget law eliminates Grad PLUS for new borrowers from July 1, 2026 and caps unsubsidized graduate borrowing at $20,500/year, so this is the average per-borrower amount that will no longer be available above that cap. Paired with Grad PLUS exposure (the institution's reliance share), it is the depth axis of the Grad PLUS shock: how much each affected borrower stands to lose. Shown only where Grad PLUS was originated. Federal Student Aid publishes this dashboard quarterly and schools report on different schedules, so each school is shown at its own most recent reported period. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Parent PLUS cap gapHow far the average Parent PLUS loan at this school exceeds the new $20,000/yr Parent PLUS borrowing cap the 2025 budget law imposes from July 2026 (FSA Direct Loan data). A positive gap is per-borrower financing that must shift to private loans, savings, or institutional aid; shown only where the average already tops the cap.Calculated from filings
Above cap
$7,810
AY2025-26 YTD (through Q2, Dec 2025)
How far the AVERAGE Parent PLUS loan at this institution exceeds the new $20,000 annual Parent PLUS borrowing cap the 2025 budget law imposes from July 1, 2026 (the law also sets a $65,000 per-student aggregate Parent PLUS limit). A positive gap means the typical parent borrowing here currently takes more in a year than the new cap will allow, financing that must shift to private loans, savings, or institutional aid. Average annual loan per Parent PLUS recipient from the U.S. Dept. of Education / Federal Student Aid Direct Loan Dashboard, primarily award year 2025-26 (year-to-date through Q2, December 2025), with 2024-25 full-year retained where 2025-26 is not yet reported (labelled per school). Shown only where the average already exceeds the new cap; an exposure signal, not a forecast. Federal Student Aid publishes this dashboard quarterly and schools report on different schedules, so each school is shown at its own most recent reported period. Each school is shown at its own most recent filing, so the peer comparison spans a few filing years rather than a single one.
Structural risk indexAn indicative 0–100 structural-risk index (higher = more pressure) blending operating margin, months of cash cushion, tuition dependency and the home-state enrollment cliff. Screens for the financial and demographic strain that precedes closures and mergers, directional, not a prediction.Blended index
Elevated
37
FY2022-23 (IPEDS) with WICHE 2024 projections
An indicative 0–100 structural-risk index (higher = more pressure), an equal-weight blend of the stress signals we measure: thin or negative operating margin, low months of operating cushion, high tuition dependency, and a shrinking home-state high-school-graduate pipeline (enrollment cliff). Averaged over whichever signals are available (at least two required). It screens for the financial and demographic pressures that precede closures and mergers, a directional indicator, NOT a prediction that any institution will close, and not a credit rating. Built from the FY2022-23 IPEDS finance filing, the most recent one published, combined with WICHE's high-school-graduate projections. The finance side is two to three years old, so a school that has since raised money, cut costs or lost enrollment will not be reflected here. It is a structural signal, not a current diagnosis, and it is not a prediction that any named institution will close.
Federal awards expendedTotal federal award dollars expended in the audited fiscal year (SEFA total).As filed
$106.6M
4th percentile in peer grouppeer median $565.8M
context, not scored
AY2025 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)34 peers
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
$45.4M
16th percentile in peer grouppeer median $160.5M
context, not scored
AY2025 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)34 peers
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
$7.7M
26th percentile in peer grouppeer median $9.4M
context, not scored
AY2025 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)33 peers
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
$31.1M
13th percentile in peer grouppeer median $138.4M
context, not scored
AY2025 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)34 peers
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
34th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0
lower is better
AY2025 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)34 peers
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
AY2025 (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
AY2025 (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
AY2025 (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
AY2025 (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
AY2025 (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. Note the periods it covers: the rule judges the two audit years BEFORE the one being filed, so this status can read Yes on a filing that also carries a going-concern disclosure or a material weakness raised for the first time this year. That is the rule working as written, not a contradiction, but it means a lone Yes is 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.
Gifts and grants receivedTotal contributions, gifts, and grants received in the filing year (Form 990).As filed
Below peers
$43.2M
7th percentile in peer grouppeer median $677.2M
higher is better
FY2023 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))34 peers
Total contributions, gifts, and grants the institution received in the filing year, from its Form 990. This is the broadest available measure of philanthropic and grant support reaching the institution, covering alumni giving, foundation grants, and government grants recorded as contributions. Read it against enrollment: strong giving at a small school is a real cushion against tuition dependence. Higher 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.
Tax-exempt bond debtTax-exempt bond liabilities outstanding at year end (Form 990).As filed
$369.3M
31st percentile in peer grouppeer median $641.6M
context, not scored
FY2023 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))34 peers
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
Moderate leverage
43.8%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 9.1%
lower is better
FY2023 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))34 peers
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
1.5%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.5%
context, not scored
FY2023 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))34 peers
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
$46.1M
7th percentile in peer grouppeer median $314.2M
context, not scored
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)35 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
10
23rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 14
context, not scored
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)35 peers
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
25.1%
1st percentile in peer grouppeer median 62.4%
context, not scored
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)35 peers
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.
Net-cost payback periodEstimated years to recoup the four-year net cost from the annual earnings premium over a high-school graduate in this state.Blended index
Average
2.3 yrs
54th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.2 yrs
lower is better
2020-21 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Four-year net price divided by the median 10-year earnings premium over a typical high-school graduate in the institution's state (College Scorecard earnings and net price; U.S. Census Bureau ACS state baselines). A simple value-for-cost gauge: fewer years is stronger. Shown only where net price and earnings are both reported, where earnings exceed the state high-school baseline, and where the resulting period is inside a working lifetime (past about 40 years the figure is only reporting that the premium is near zero, so no number is shown); it ignores aid timing, debt and non-completion, so read it as a directional comparison, not a financial projection.
Enrollment loss before deficitHow much of its enrollment the institution could lose before running an operating deficit, if it changed nothing else.Modelled by Ibex
Wide cushion
27.6%
62nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 16.5%
higher is better
FY2022-2338 peers
The share of its students an institution could lose before its operating surplus becomes a deficit, assuming net tuition per student and total costs stay where they are. It comes straight from two figures in the same IPEDS finance filing: the operating margin, and tuition's share of total revenue. A school with a 3% surplus that funds 85% of itself from tuition can absorb about a 3.5% enrollment loss; the same 3% surplus at a school funding a quarter of itself from tuition absorbs about 12%. Zero means the institution is already running a deficit. It is not a prediction: no institution facing that loss would hold costs flat, and the number is the size of the hole that would have to be closed, not the outcome. Banded against the school's peer group. Higher is better.
Operating margin after a 10% enrollment lossWhat the operating margin becomes if a tenth of the students go and nothing else changes.Modelled by Ibex
Still in surplus
7.8%
78th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.3%
higher is better
FY2022-2339 peers
The institution's operating margin recomputed after losing one student in ten, holding net tuition per student and total costs constant. Tuition revenue falls with the students; every other revenue line and the whole cost base stay put. A tenth is the scale of decline the demographic projections already put on several states' high-school graduating classes, so it is a scenario rather than a worst case. Not a forecast: a real institution would cut costs, and this measures the gap it would have to cut, not what it would end up reporting. Built from the operating margin and tuition dependency in the same IPEDS filing. Banded against the school's peer group. Higher is better.
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
0.0
20th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.0
lower is better
ED composite FY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid) + Single Audit AY2025 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)37 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.
Graduation & completion
Graduation rate · first-time, full-time
83.6%
83.6% graduate within 6 years (150% of normal time)
71.7% on-time, within 4 years (100%)
Counts only students who entered full-time as first-time freshmen and earned a bachelor's here, the conventional headline rate. Excludes part-time entrants and transfer-ins.
Completion rate · all students
84.5%
84.5% earned a degree or certificate within 8 years (IPEDS Outcome Measures)
The broader cohort, also counts part-time entrants and transfer-ins, and any credential. More inclusive, so it can run higher than the graduation rate.
Why two numbers? They measure different students over different windows, so they are not directly comparable. The graduation rate is the standard federal headline but tracks only first-time, full-time students through a bachelor's; the all-students completion rate adds the part-time and transfer students it leaves out, over a longer window. Read each for what it covers. Source: U.S. Department of Education, IPEDS Graduation Rates & Outcome Measures, via College Scorecard.
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
5,714
19th percentile in peer grouppeer median 7,569
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Admission rateShare of applicants admitted. Not scored: a low admit rate measures demand and application volume, not teaching, and it is easy to manufacture by soliciting applications the school intends to reject.Share of applicants offered admission. Lower means more selective; open-admission schools report none.As filed
63.5%
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median 9.8%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
First-year retentionShare of first-time, full-time freshmen who return for a second year, an early signal of student fit and support.As filed
Below peers
90.7%
14th percentile in peer grouppeer median 96.8%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Graduation rate (6-yr · first-time, full-time)Of first-time, full-time freshmen, the share who earn a bachelor's at this institution within six years (150% of normal time) – the conventional headline graduation rate. It counts only first-time, full-time students and excludes part-time entrants and transfer-ins, who are captured instead by the all-students completion rate.As filed
Below peers
83.6%
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median 93.5%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard) · cohort of 1,77739 peers
Share of first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen who earned a bachelor's at this institution within six years (150% of normal time), per College Scorecard. The number of students in the entering cohort is shown under the figure. Where that cohort is smaller than 30 students no rate is published: a graduation rate over a handful of students moves by whole percentage points per student and is not a result.
Graduation rate (4-yr on-time · first-time, full-time)Of first-time, full-time freshmen, the share who earn a bachelor's within four years (100% of normal time) – the 'on-time' rate. It usually runs below the six-year rate, because many students take a fifth or sixth year. The two are not the same students: the on-time rate is measured on a class that entered two years after the one behind the six-year rate, so at a school whose outcomes are moving the newer class can post the higher figure.As filed
Below peers
71.7%
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 77.1%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard) · cohort of 1,77739 peers
Share of first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen who earned a bachelor's within four years (100% of normal time), per College Scorecard. The number of students in the entering cohort is shown under the figure, and no rate is published on a cohort smaller than 30. This rate and the six-year rate are measured on classes that entered two years apart, so at a school whose outcomes are moving they will not always fall in the order you would expect.
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
19.9%
86th percentile in peer grouppeer median 17.1%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Completion rate (all students · 8-yr)Of ALL entering degree-seeking undergraduates, full- and part-time, first-time and transfer-in, the share who earned a degree or certificate at this institution within eight years (IPEDS Outcome Measures). Broader than the graduation rate, which counts only first-time, full-time students, so the two are measured on different students and are not directly comparable.As filed
Below peers
84.5%
17th percentile in peer grouppeer median 93.3%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Share of ALL entering degree-seeking undergraduates, full- and part-time, first-time and transfer-in, who earned a degree or certificate at this institution within eight years (IPEDS Outcome Measures, via College Scorecard). Broader and more inclusive than the graduation-rate figures, which count only first-time, full-time students entering a bachelor's program, so the two are measured on different groups of students and are not directly comparable.
Average SAT scoreAs filed
1,456
20th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1,520
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)38 peers
Average SAT score of enrolled students who submitted scores (College Scorecard, 2024-25). A selectivity and incoming-class signal, not a measure of institutional quality, and reported by fewer than half of institutions in the test-optional era. Schools that are test-optional or open-admission show none.
First-generation studentsShare of undergraduates who are the first in their family to attend college.As filed
13.8%
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 17.1%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)38 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
0.7%
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.7%
context, not scored
2023-24 (Scorecard)39 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
0.9%
37th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.6%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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
$96,976
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median $65,041
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)39 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
16.9%
6th percentile in peer grouppeer median 25.6%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)39 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
31.1%
1st percentile in peer grouppeer median 53.7%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Share of undergraduates who are women (College Scorecard, 2024-25). Reported as context on the student mix, not a measure of quality.
Middle-income students ($30K-$75K)Share of students from families earning roughly $30,000 to $75,000 a year.As filed
21.7%
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median 25.8%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)38 peers
Share of students whose families earn roughly $30,000 to $75,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2016-17), the two middle income bands combined. Reported as context on the student mix: together with the low-income (under ~$30K) and upper-income (over ~$75K) shares it sketches the full family-income picture, and the three bands sum to about 100%. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file, built from aid-applicant records rather than the full student body, and not republished since.
Upper-income students (over $75K)Share of students from families earning more than about $75,000 a year.As filed
61.4%
91st percentile in peer grouppeer median 47.7%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)38 peers
Share of students whose families earn more than roughly $75,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2016-17), the two upper income bands combined. Reported as context on the student mix, not a measure of quality: together with the low-income (under ~$30K) and middle-income (~$30K-$75K) shares it sketches the full family-income picture, and the three bands sum to about 100%. From the College Scorecard 2016-17 data file, built from aid-applicant records rather than the full student body, and not republished since.
Transfer-out rateShare of students who transfer out. Not scored: it runs high at access-oriented and two-year feeder schools whose students are supposed to move on to a four-year program.Share of students who transfer to a different school within the tracking window. Shown as context, not quality.As filed
0%
31st percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Share of students who transfer OUT to a different institution within the tracking window (College Scorecard, 2024-25). Reported as context, not a quality measure: it runs high at access-oriented schools and two-year feeders whose students routinely move on to a four-year program, and it should be read together with the completion and retention figures rather than on its own.
Admission yieldAs filed
Below peers
16.3%
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median 48.2%
higher is better
Fall 202339 peers
Share of admitted students who enrolled (IPEDS Admissions, Fall 2023): students who enrolled ÷ students admitted. A demand signal, how many accepted offers the institution converts to enrollment. Higher yield generally reflects stronger demand, though binding early-decision programs and price positioning can inflate it. Open-admission institutions do not report admissions and show none.
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
2,589
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
7,938
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median 16,634
context, not scored
2023-24 (IPEDS)39 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
14:1
91st percentile in peer grouppeer median 8:1
context, not scored
Fall 202339 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.
SAT 25th percentile (total)25th-percentile SAT total of enrolled students (sum of section 25th percentiles).As filed
1,375
17th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1,470
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)38 peers
Sum of the 25th-percentile SAT reading and math section scores of enrolled students (College Scorecard, 2024-25). With the 75th-percentile figure it shows the middle-50% SAT range. Selectivity context, not a quality measure; reported only where enough students submit SAT scores.
SAT 75th percentile (total)75th-percentile SAT total of enrolled students (sum of section 75th percentiles).As filed
1,510
17th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1,560
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)38 peers
Sum of the 75th-percentile SAT reading and math section scores of enrolled students (College Scorecard, 2024-25). With the 25th-percentile figure it brackets the middle-50% SAT range. Selectivity context, not a quality measure.
ACT 25th percentile25th-percentile ACT composite of enrolled students.As filed
30
13th percentile in peer grouppeer median 33
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)38 peers
25th-percentile ACT composite score of enrolled students (College Scorecard, 2024-25); with the 75th percentile it shows the middle-50% ACT range. Selectivity context, not a quality measure.
ACT 75th percentile75th-percentile ACT composite of enrolled students.As filed
34
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 35
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)38 peers
75th-percentile ACT composite score of enrolled students (College Scorecard, 2024-25). Selectivity context, not a quality measure.
Submitted SAT scoresShare of enrolled first-time students who submitted SAT scores.As filed
57%
92nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 39%
context, not scored
Fall 2023 (IPEDS)38 peers
Share of enrolled first-time degree-seeking students who submitted SAT scores (IPEDS, Fall 2023). A low share usually signals a test-optional or ACT-dominant institution, not a weakness; read alongside the score bands.
Submitted ACT scoresShare of enrolled first-time students who submitted ACT scores.As filed
13%
25th percentile in peer grouppeer median 19.5%
context, not scored
Fall 2023 (IPEDS)38 peers
Share of enrolled first-time degree-seeking students who submitted ACT scores (IPEDS, Fall 2023). A low share usually signals a test-optional or SAT-dominant institution, not a weakness.
Fully online studentsShare of students enrolled exclusively in distance-education (online) courses.As filed
0%
6th percentile in peer grouppeer median 5%
context, not scored
Fall 2023 (IPEDS)39 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
+0.9 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%
6th percentile in peer grouppeer median 7%
context, not scored
Fall 202339 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
1.1%
40th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.6%
context, not scored
Fall 202339 peers
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
15.2%
1st percentile in peer grouppeer median 49.1%
context, not scored
Fall 202339 peers
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
28.5%
3rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 44.5%
context, not scored
Fall 202339 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
34.2%
96th percentile in peer grouppeer median 24.1%
context, not scored
Fall 202339 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.
Women in applicant poolWomen as a share of all first-time degree-seeking applicants.Calculated from filings
33.7%
6th percentile in peer grouppeer median 54.7%
context, not scored
Fall 202339 peers
Women as a share of the school's first-time degree-seeking applicant pool (IPEDS Admissions, 2023-24). A read on the funnel's composition, useful for targeting and a proxy for program mix: nursing- and education-heavy schools skew female, engineering- and trade-heavy schools skew male. Neither skew is inherently better. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Varsity athlete shareVarsity athletes as a share of total enrollment (EADA, 2024-25).As filed
15.1%
81st percentile in peer grouppeer median 10.3%
context, not scored
2024-25 (EADA)39 peers
Student-athletes on varsity rosters as a share of total enrollment, from the federal Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act filing (2024-25). At small athletics-driven schools this share is large and athletics recruiting is a core part of the enrollment funnel; at big universities it is small. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Athletics revenue (total)Total intercollegiate-athletics revenue reported under EADA, 2024-25.As filed
$13.6M
29th percentile in peer grouppeer median $44M
context, not scored
2024-25 (EADA)39 peers
Total revenue attributed to the school's intercollegiate-athletics program, from the federal Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act filing (2024-25). It indicates the scale of the athletics enterprise, which at some schools is a major brand and enrollment driver. 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
Average
1
36th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard universe)39 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
Below peers
47
32nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 48
higher is better
Fall 202239 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
5.9%
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median 12.2%
context, not scored
Fall 202239 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
4.8%
37th percentile in peer grouppeer median 5%
lower is better
ACS 2019-2339 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
Strong
1.1 per 1k
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median 3.8 per 1k
lower is better
2024 (Clery)39 peers
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.
Research & development spendingHow 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 academic R&D expenditures, FY2023 (NSF HERD).As filed
$121.7M
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median $510M
context, not scored
FY2023 (NSF HERD)37 peers
Total research and development expenditures in FY2023, from the National Science Foundation's Higher Education R&D (HERD) survey. It separates research-intensive universities from teaching-focused peers and indicates grant capacity. Reported only for the institutions HERD surveys (those with at least $150,000 in R&D), matched to this tool by name. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
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
Severe decline
-27%
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.
Shown exactly as the institution filed it. The value falls outside the normal range for this measure, which usually means a reporting quirk rather than a real figure, so read it with care.
Federal research fundingHow 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.Research and Development cluster dollars expended, all federal agencies.As filed
$60.7M
16th percentile in peer grouppeer median $418.8M
context, not scored
AY2025 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)34 peers
Federal research dollars the institution expended in the audited fiscal year, across the whole Research and Development cluster. Unlike the NIH funding figure on this page, it counts every federal agency: NSF, NIH, the Department of Defense, NASA, the Department of Energy and the rest. It is the broadest available measure of federal research capacity. 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.
Scholarly works publishedHow 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.Lifetime indexed scholarly works (OpenAlex).As filed
63,275
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median 171,460
context, not scored
2024 (OpenAlex)37 peers
From OpenAlex, an open catalog of the world's scholarly works. Counts the institution's lifetime indexed research works (papers, datasets, books and other outputs). It separates research-intensive universities from teaching-focused peers and signals scholarly capacity; reported only where OpenAlex has a confident match to this school. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Research citationsHow 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.Lifetime citations to the institution's works (OpenAlex).As filed
4,126,756
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median 16,811,043
context, not scored
2024 (OpenAlex)37 peers
From OpenAlex, an open catalog of the world's scholarly works. Counts the institution's lifetime indexed citations received by its scholarly works. It separates research-intensive universities from teaching-focused peers and signals scholarly capacity; reported only where OpenAlex has a confident match to this school. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Institutional h-indexHow 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.Institutional h-index (OpenAlex): h works each cited ≥ h times.As filed
576
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1,104
context, not scored
2024 (OpenAlex)37 peers
From OpenAlex. The institution has an h-index of h when h of its works have each been cited at least h times: a single figure blending output and impact. Reported only where OpenAlex has a confident match. Context metric, not better or worse. Banded against peers.
NIH research fundingHow 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 NIH award dollars, FY2024 (NIH RePORTER).As filed
$9.4M
5th percentile in peer grouppeer median $113.3M
context, not scored
FY2024 (NIH RePORTER)33 peers
Total National Institutes of Health award dollars the institution received in fiscal year 2024, from NIH RePORTER. It signals biomedical research strength and federal grant capacity; reported only for schools NIH funds and that match this tool by name and state. Dollars from multiple campuses or centers are summed. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Wikipedia pageviews (monthly)Average monthly English-Wikipedia pageviews, trailing 12 months.As filed
18,952
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median 45,612
context, not scored
trailing 12 mo (Wikipedia)37 peers
Average monthly views of the institution's English-Wikipedia article over the trailing 12 months (Wikimedia REST API). A top-of-funnel public-attention proxy: how often people look the school up. Reported only where a matching Wikipedia article exists. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Year foundedYear the institution was founded (Wikidata).As filed
1824
18th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1853
context, not scored
Wikidata14 peers
The year the institution was founded, from Wikidata (the structured-data sister project of Wikipedia). An establishment and legacy signal; reported only where Wikidata records a founding date for a matched institution. Context, not better or worse. Banded against the school's peer group, so an earlier year ranks as more established.
In-state HS graduatesPublic + private high-school graduates in the school's state, class of 2025.External projection
206,184
77th percentile in peer grouppeer median 121,741
context, not scored
Class of 2025 (WICHE)39 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
Below peers
-1%
4th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.9%
higher is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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.
Shown exactly as the institution filed it. The value falls outside the normal range for this measure, which usually means a reporting quirk rather than a real figure, so read it with care.
Net-price momentum (CAGR)Net-price momentum (CAGR).Modelled by Ibex
Strong
-0.5%
1st percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.3%
lower is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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.
Shown exactly as the institution filed it. The value falls outside the normal range for this measure, which usually means a reporting quirk rather than a real figure, so read it with care.
Selectivity momentum (CAGR)Selectivity momentum (CAGR).Modelled by Ibex
Below peers
4.6%
96th percentile in peer grouppeer median -6.4%
lower is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Compound annual growth rate of the admission rate over the tracked years. A negative value means the school is admitting a smaller share of applicants over time (getting more selective); a positive value means its admit rate is rising (getting less selective), often a sign of softening demand. 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.
Enrollment forecast (5-yr)Projected change in undergraduate enrollment about five years out, from the school's own trend.Modelled by Ibex
Below peers
-6.9%
4th percentile in peer grouppeer median 4.2%
higher is better
2024-2029 projection39 peers
Projected cumulative change in degree-seeking undergraduate enrollment roughly five years out, modeled by a least-squares log-linear fit on the school's own undergraduate history (IPEDS fall headcount via College Scorecard, 2016-2024). It uses the full multi-year series, so a single shock year (such as 2020) does not drive the result. Where the reported count jumps by a merger or a campus consolidation brought under one institution, only the years after that jump are fitted; a sharp fall is fitted in full. This is a naive trend extrapolation, not a demographic model: where it projects a change beyond plus or minus 60 percent the fit is treated as out of range and no figure is shown. Banded against the school's peer group; higher means projected growth. 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.
Shown exactly as the institution filed it. The value falls outside the normal range for this measure, which usually means a reporting quirk rather than a real figure, so read it with care.
Enrollment-demand indexComposite 0-100 of admission yield, selectivity and enrollment trend vs peers.Blended index
Below peers
6.0
4th percentile in peer grouppeer median 51.0
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
A 0-100 composite of how much demand the school commands relative to its peer group: the average of its peer percentile ranks for admission yield, selectivity (a lower admit rate counts as stronger demand) and recent enrollment trend. Built only where at least two of those three are reported. Higher means stronger pull in the market. Banded against the school's peer group.
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
0.4%
65th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.3%
context, not scored
Fall 2022 (IPEDS) enrollment / class-of-2025 WICHE projection39 peers
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
Average
0.79×
35th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.78×
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard universe)39 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
Declining
1 yr
91st percentile in peer grouppeer median 0 yrs
lower is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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.
48 states and territories · Fall 2022
NY 36.4%NJ 10.2%MA 8.6%CT 6.7%CA 5.7%
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. 5.9% came from outside the United States. Shares are of the whole entering class, so they do not add to 100% where students came from abroad.
Admissions test policy
SAT / ACT requirement
IPEDS Fall 2023
Test-blind (not considered)
This school is test-blind: SAT or ACT scores are not considered in admission decisions. Reported to IPEDS for the most recent admissions cycle. Test policy is a live enrollment lever, so it is shown as the school's stated category rather than a peer rank.
Completion equity
Six-year graduation rate by group
First-time, full-time bachelor’s cohort · Scorecard 2024-25
White86% n=816
Black68% n=75
Hispanic/Latino83% n=167
Asian88% n=313
Two or more races81% n=88
International78% n=290
Pell recipients78% n=300
Six-year graduation rate (150% of normal time) for the first-time, full-time bachelor’s cohort, broken out by race and ethnicity and for Pell-grant recipients (College Scorecard). Each bar uses the same measure and the same single-year cohort as the headline graduation rate, so the gaps between groups are directly comparable. A group with fewer than 30 students in the cohort is not shown: a rate over a handful of students is noise, and n is printed beside every bar so the reader can judge the rest. School overall: 84% (n=1777).
Completion by income and entry path
Where the Pell gap actually sitsThe share of students who earned an award within eight years, split at the same time by whether they received a Pell Grant and by whether they arrived with no prior college. A gap that exists for one entry path and not the other points at a different problem from one that runs through both.
eight-year award rate · 2024-25
| Entering group | Pell recipients | Not Pell | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| All entering studentsEveryone who enrolled as a degree-seeking undergraduate, however they arrived. | 79%n=350 | 86%n=1,490 | +6.6 pts |
| Entered as first-timeStudents with no prior college enrollment. | 79%n=301 | 86%n=1,392 | +6.3 pts |
| Entered with prior collegeTransfer-in and returning students. | 78%n=49 | 87%n=98 | +9.2 pts |
Federal Outcome Measures: the share of entering degree-seeking undergraduates who had earned an award eight years later, counting part-time students and transfers that the headline graduation rate leaves out. A positive gap means Pell recipients finished less often. Rates are shown only where at least 30 students entered on that side, because a rate over a handful of students is arithmetic rather than a measurement, so a row can be blank on one side. Race crossed with Pell is not published by any federal collection and is deliberately not estimated here.
Student body
Undergraduate race & ethnicity
IPEDS 2024-25
White44.8%
Asian21.6%
Hispanic/Latino10.9%
International7.2%
Two or more races5.5%
Black5.0%
Unknown4.9%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander0.1%
American Indian/Alaska Native0.0%
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
Strong
$102,051
73rd percentile in peer grouppeer median $91,885
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)39 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
Below peers
$23,750
86th percentile in peer grouppeer median $17,750
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 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
Strong
0.5%
3rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.2%
lower is better
FY2017 cohort39 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
51%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 17.9%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Full-time faculty shareShare of faculty employed full-time, higher generally means more availability and continuity.As filed
Strong
89.3%
73rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 78.6%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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
0.23×
70th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.19×
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 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
Strong
91.7%
93rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 84.8%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)38 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
Strong
88.2%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 81%
higher is better
2014-15 (Scorecard)39 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
Below peers
52.3%
14th percentile in peer grouppeer median 77.8%
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)39 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.
Withdrew by year 2Share of entrants who had withdrawn by their second year. Lower is better.As filed
Average
5.9%
37th percentile in peer grouppeer median 6.3%
lower is better
2019-20 (Scorecard)38 peers
Share of students who had withdrawn from this institution by the end of their second year (College Scorecard, 2019-20). An early-attrition signal, where lower is better; high part-time or adult-learner enrollment can raise it without reflecting institutional quality. From the College Scorecard 2019-20 data file, the last release carrying it.
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
Strong
93.4%
93rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 87.5%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)38 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
Average
$83,054
63rd percentile in peer grouppeer median $79,131
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)39 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
Strong
92%
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median 87.8%
higher is better
2014-15 (Scorecard)39 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
Below peers
$10,313
75th percentile in peer grouppeer median $8,000
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 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
Strong
89%
91st percentile in peer grouppeer median 81.4%
higher is better
2014-15 (Scorecard)38 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
Strong
94.5%
93rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 90.5%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)38 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
Below peers
$22,869
93rd percentile in peer grouppeer median $15,500
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 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
Below peers
$23,250
92nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $16,590
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 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
95.4%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 88.5%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)37 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
76.9%
91st percentile in peer grouppeer median 69%
higher is better
2016-17 (Scorecard)37 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.
Median earnings, low-income students (10-yr)Median earnings 10 years after entry for students who came from families earning under ~$30,000. Higher is better.As filed
Strong
$99,768
88th percentile in peer grouppeer median $87,785
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 peers
Median earnings ten years after entering, measured only for students who came from the lowest family-income tier, under about $30,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2020-21). Read it beside the overall median earnings: a school whose low-income students go on to earn near the all-student figure is delivering real upward mobility, while a large gap signals the payoff is not reaching its neediest students. Higher is better. 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 earnings, middle-income students (10-yr)Median earnings 10 years after entry for students who came from families earning roughly $30,000 to $75,000. Higher is better.As filed
Strong
$96,782
75th percentile in peer grouppeer median $89,203
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 peers
Median earnings ten years after entering, measured only for students from middle-income families, roughly $30,000 to $75,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2020-21). It is the middle rung of the earnings-by-family-income ladder: read it beside the low-income (under ~$30K) and high-income (over ~$75K) figures to see whether the school's payoff is even across backgrounds or tracks who students were when they arrived. Higher is better. 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 earnings, high-income students (10-yr)Median earnings 10 years after entry for students who came from families earning over ~$75,000. Higher is better.As filed
Strong
$103,924
67th percentile in peer grouppeer median $95,892
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 peers
Median earnings ten years after entering, measured only for students from higher-income families, over about $75,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2020-21). It is the top rung of the earnings-by-family-income ladder: the gap between this and the low-income figure shows how much the school's earnings payoff depends on family background. A narrow gap signals strong upward mobility. Higher is better. 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.
Pell completion gapOverall 6-year graduation rate minus the Pell-recipient graduation rate.Calculated from filings
Below peers
+5.6 pts
93rd percentile in peer grouppeer median +2.6 pts
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)38 peers
The school's overall six-year graduation rate minus the graduation rate of its Pell Grant recipients (College Scorecard). A larger positive gap means lower-income students complete at a lower rate than the student body overall; a value near zero means the school graduates Pell and non-Pell students at similar rates. Both sides come from the same single-year cohort and each must have at least 30 students for the school to appear here. Banded against the school's peer group. Smaller is better.
Debt-to-earnings rateMedian program-level debt-to-earnings rate (annual loan payment / earnings).Calculated from filings
Strong
0.4%
15th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.6%
lower is better
Scorecard FoS (indicative)37 peers
The school's median program-level debt-to-earnings rate: the annual payment on graduates' median loan debt as a share of their median earnings, the core measure in the Department of Education's gainful-employment framework (a program is flagged above 8%). This is INDICATIVE: it applies ED's methodology to public College Scorecard field-of-study data because ED has not yet published its official determinations. Computed where the school has at least three evaluated programs. Lower means debt is smaller relative to earnings. Banded against peer group.
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
+7.6 pts
99th 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
89.3%
71st 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.
Return on credentialMedian 10-year earnings divided by the four-year cost of attendance (annual cost × 4) – a rough payback ratio for the degree.Calculated from filings
Strong
0.31×
83rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.27×
higher is better
2020-21 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
Median 10-year earnings divided by the four-year cost of attendance (average annual cost × 4). A rough payback ratio: 1.0× means a graduate's annual 10-year earnings roughly equal the full four-year sticker cost. Earnings reflect federally-aided students; cost of attendance is the published sticker price before aid, so this is conservative relative to what families net of aid pay.
Programs below earnings benchmarkShare of program completions in fields whose graduate earnings currently fall below the state earnings benchmark used by the 2025 budget law's earnings-premium test.Modelled by Ibex
Strong
0%
14th percentile in peer grouppeer median 3.4%
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard field of study)38 peers
Share of this school's measured program completions in programs whose median earnings four years after completion fall below the state benchmark (a high-school graduate's earnings for undergraduate credentials, a bachelor's for graduate credentials). This is the same early-warning screen behind our OBBBA Compliance Watchdog leaderboard, computed on public College Scorecard Field-of-Study data, not the official federal determination. Shown only where at least four programs report earnings. Lower is less exposure.
Grad rate vs predicted (access-adjusted)Actual 6-year graduation rate minus the rate predicted from the students the school enrolls.Modelled by Ibex
Average
+2.8 pts
38th percentile in peer grouppeer median +4.5 pts
higher is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)38 peers
Actual six-year graduation rate minus the rate predicted, by a regression across all four-year institutions, from the school's admission rate, Pell share, first-generation share, median family income and undergraduate size (College Scorecard, 2024-25). A positive value means the school graduates students at a higher rate than peers serving similar students at similar selectivity; a negative value means lower. This is a fairer cross-school comparison than the raw graduation rate, which penalizes access-oriented colleges. The figure is banded against a school's own peer group, so selective schools are compared with selective peers. The model uses no test-score input, so it under-predicts the most selective institutions, which therefore tend to show positive values. Reported for four-year institutions that publish an admission rate; an indicative model, not an official metric.
Net-value indexComposite 0-100 of earnings, completion, net price and debt vs peers.Blended index
Below peers
32.0
28th percentile in peer grouppeer median 54.0
higher is better
2020-21 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)39 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.
Pell completion gap (all entrants)Non-Pell minus Pell eight-year award rate, across every entering undergraduate rather than only the first-time full-time cohort.Calculated from filings
Below peers
+6.6 pts
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median +2.8 pts
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)39 peers
The eight-year award rate of students who did not receive a Pell Grant minus the rate of those who did, measured over every entering degree-seeking undergraduate: part-time students and transfers included. A larger positive number means lower-income students finish less often. This is a different measurement from the Pell completion gap beside it, not a correction of it: that one uses the six-year rate for students who arrived first-time AND full-time, which at many open-access institutions is under a fifth of everyone who enrolls. Both are the school's own federal reporting, over different cohorts and different clocks, and the completion cross-tab shows where the gap actually sits. Banded against the school's peer group. Smaller is better. Shown only where at least 30 students entered on each side, because a rate over a handful of students is arithmetic rather than a measurement.
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
3.2%
70th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.6%
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)38 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.
2,071 completions · BLS EP 2024-34
88% of completions are in fields projected to grow faster than the job market as a whole.
Faster than average87.8%
Growing, but slower10.5%
No coherent occupation mapping1.7%
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. The “Completions in growing fields” figure above is 89.3% because it is measured against the 98% of completions that could be classified at all, not against all 2,071. 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$71,488
Median$102,051
75th percentile$137,023
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 (bachelor's)
Rensselaer Polytechnic 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 709 | $96,281 18th pct · 31 peers | $24,304 78th pct · 30 peers | Above benchmark +153% | Low · 21 |
| Computer & Information Sciences | 330 | $137,844 24th pct · 39 peers | $23,758 85th pct · 36 peers | Above benchmark +262% | Low · 0 |
| Mathematics & Statistics | 83 | $105,768 38th pct · 28 peers | $23,250 81st pct · 29 peers | Above benchmark +178% | Low · 0 |
| Engineering Technologies | 80 | $125,531 (too few peers) | $23,582 (too few peers) | Above benchmark +230% | Low · 0 |
| Business, Management & Marketing | 68 | $99,713 21st pct · 26 peers | $25,000 79th pct · 26 peers | Above benchmark +162% | Low · 31 |
| Physical Sciences | 64 | $81,840 46th pct · 12 peers | $21,392 63rd pct · 26 peers | Above benchmark +115% | Low · 18 |
| Biological & Biomedical Sciences | 63 | – | $25,119 88th pct · 36 peers | – | Moderate · 50 |
| Architecture | 57 | $75,551 61st pct · 9 peers | $31,000 90th pct · 10 peers | Above benchmark +99% | Low · 16 |
| Visual & Performing Arts | 50 | $87,358 98th pct · 25 peers | $25,000 66th pct · 28 peers | Above benchmark +130% | Low · 0 |
| Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies | 26 | $83,958 50th pct · 23 peers | $26,500 94th pct · 27 peers | Above benchmark +121% | Low · 0 |
All 9 top fields shown clear the NY state earnings-premium benchmark (indicative).
Earnings-premium status is an indicative estimate: median graduate earnings four years out vs the NY 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)
Engineering – 10 CIP programs (4-digit), 9 with earnings
| Major (CIP 4-digit) | Compl./yr | Earn 4yr | Earn 1yr | % > threshold | Median debt | Debt/earn | Earnings premium | 2 of 3 yrs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanical EngineeringCIP 1419 › | 212 | $92,952 n=225 | – | 96.6% 5yr | $24,121 | 0.26× | Above benchmark +144% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Aerospace, Aeronautical, and Astronautical/Space EngineeringCIP 1402 › | 112 | $94,750 n=81 | – | 97.6% 5yr | $24,861 | 0.26× | Above benchmark +149% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Electrical, Electronics, and Communications EngineeringCIP 1410 › | 107 | $104,596 n=70 | – | 96.8% 5yr | $23,250 | 0.22× | Above benchmark +175% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Biomedical/Medical EngineeringCIP 1405 › | 70 | $103,306 n=75 | – | 98.7% 5yr | $26,000 | 0.25× | Above benchmark +172% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Chemical EngineeringCIP 1407 › | 63 | $98,679 n=111 | – | 95.5% 5yr | $24,985 | 0.25× | Above benchmark +159% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Industrial EngineeringCIP 1435 › | 56 | $98,509 n=43 | – | 98.2% 5yr | $22,500 | 0.23× | Above benchmark +159% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Civil EngineeringCIP 1408 › | 52 | $86,794 n=45 | – | 97.3% 5yr | $26,250 | 0.30× | Above benchmark +128% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Nuclear EngineeringCIP 1423 | 14 | $87,239 n=21 | – | 85.7% 5yr | $19,500 | 0.22× | Above benchmark +129% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Materials EngineeringCIP 1418 › | 12 | $82,947 n=24 | – | 93.8% 5yr | $23,250 | 0.28× | Above benchmark +118% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Environmental/Environmental Health EngineeringCIP 1414 › | 11 | – | – | 100% 5yr | $25,000 | – | – | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 9 of 10 majors show 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.
Computer & Information Sciences – 2 CIP programs (4-digit), 2 with earnings
| Major (CIP 4-digit) | Compl./yr | Earn 4yr | Earn 1yr | % > threshold | Median debt | Debt/earn | Earnings premium | 2 of 3 yrs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Computer ScienceCIP 1107 › | 284 | $141,528 n=242 | – | 96.3% 5yr | $23,233 | 0.16× | Above benchmark +272% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Computer and Information Sciences, GeneralCIP 1101 › | 46 | $115,100 n=23 | – | 100% 5yr | $27,000 | 0.23× | Above benchmark +203% | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 2 of 2 majors show 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.
Mathematics & Statistics – 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MathematicsCIP 2701 › | 83 | $105,768 n=35 | – | 97.7% 5yr | $23,250 | 0.22× | Above benchmark +178% | Clears all 2 yrs |
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.
Engineering Technologies – 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Computer Engineering Technologies/TechniciansCIP 1512 › | 80 | $125,531 n=73 | – | 98.5% 5yr | $23,582 | 0.19× | Above benchmark +230% | Clears all 2 yrs |
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.
Business, Management & Marketing – 2 CIP programs (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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business Administration, Management and OperationsCIP 5202 › | 56 | $99,713 n=67 | – | 88.6% 5yr | $25,000 | 0.25× | Above benchmark +162% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Management Sciences and Quantitative MethodsCIP 5213 › | 12 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 1 of 2 majors show 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.
Physical Sciences – 3 CIP programs (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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PhysicsCIP 4008 › | 50 | $81,840 n=26 | – | 92.7% 5yr | $20,270 | 0.25× | Above benchmark +115% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| ChemistryCIP 4005 › | 10 | – | – | – | $27,000 | – | – | – |
| Geological and Earth Sciences/GeosciencesCIP 4006 › | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 1 of 3 majors show 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.
Biological & Biomedical Sciences – 4 CIP programs (4-digit), 0 with earnings
| Major (CIP 4-digit) | Compl./yr | Earn 4yr | Earn 1yr | % > threshold | Median debt | Debt/earn | Earnings premium | 2 of 3 yrs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Biophysics and Molecular BiologyCIP 2602 › | 26 | – | – | – | $24,847 | – | – | – |
| Biology, GeneralCIP 2601 › | 21 | – | – | 75% 5yr | $25,455 | – | – | – |
| Biomathematics, Bioinformatics, and Computational BiologyCIP 2611 › | 11 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Neurobiology and NeurosciencesCIP 2615 › | 5 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 0 of 4 majors show 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.
Architecture – 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ArchitectureCIP 0402 › | 57 | $75,551 n=54 | – | 96.5% 5yr | $31,000 | 0.41× | Above benchmark +99% | Clears all 2 yrs |
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.
Visual & Performing Arts – 3 CIP programs (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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Design and Applied ArtsCIP 5004 › | 41 | $87,358 n=34 | – | – | $25,000 | 0.29× | Above benchmark +130% | Clears all 2 yrs |
| Visual and Performing Arts, GeneralCIP 5001 › | 5 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| MusicCIP 5009 › | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 1 of 3 majors show 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.
Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies – 4 CIP programs (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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies, OtherCIP 3099 › | 17 | $83,958 n=29 | – | – | $26,500 | 0.32× | Above benchmark +121% | – |
| Cognitive ScienceCIP 3025 › | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Science, Technology and SocietyCIP 3015 | 3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sustainability StudiesCIP 3033 › | 2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Major-level earnings, debt and threshold pass-rates are reported by College Scorecard only where enough graduates exist to protect privacy, so 1 of 4 majors show 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
How financially healthy is Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute?
On the NACUBO Composite Financial Index, the −4 to 10 balance-sheet score accreditors and institutional boards use – Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute scores 3.7 (Stable), computed from its IPEDS FY2022-23 finances. This is informational benchmarking, not a credit rating.
How selective is Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute?
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute admits about 63% of applicants, and roughly 91% of first-year students return for a second year.
What is Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's student-faculty ratio?
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute reports a student-faculty ratio of 14:1 (IPEDS, fall 2023) – that is, about 14 students for every instructional faculty member.
How much does Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute cost?
The average published cost of attendance is $82,404 and the average net price after aid is $36,228 (College Scorecard).
How much do Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute graduates earn?
Median earnings ten years after entry are $102,051 (College Scorecard), measured across students who received federal aid.
Are Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's programs at risk under the federal earnings-premium test?
Indicatively, all 9 of the largest fields with available earnings data at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute cleared the NY state earnings-premium benchmark on the latest reported cohort, as did all 18 of the individual majors within them, in each of the latest reported cohort-years. The 2025 federal test (effective July 1, 2026) can withdraw Title IV eligibility from a program whose graduates earn less than a typical worker without the credential for 2 of 3 years. 4 further fields with earnings data at this institution are not shown on this page and are not counted here. This is an estimate using College Scorecard field-of-study earnings against ACS state and national medians; the Department of Education's official determination uses its own cohort definition and may differ.
Which schools are Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's peers?
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is benchmarked against 39 institutions in the R1: Doctoral, Very High Research · Private nonprofit peer group; all percentiles and medians on this page are computed within that group.
Compare with peers
Explore Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute interactively
Open the full dashboard to switch peer views, hover trends, and compare head-to-head.
Want a custom dashboard for Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute?
We build tailored intelligence dashboards – Rensselaer Polytechnic 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.