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 / FTE
Tuition revenue per full-time-equivalent student after institutional aid/discounts, what tuition nets.Calculated from filings
Average
$17,905
36th percentile in peer grouppeer median $23,263
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)49 peers
▲ +28% steady
Instructional spend / FTE
Spending on instruction per FTE student, how much of the budget reaches the classroom.Calculated from filings
Below peers
$7,556
21st percentile in peer grouppeer median $10,557
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)49 peers
▲ +17% choppy
Endowment (end of year)
Total endowment value at year end, long-term invested wealth that funds operations and cushions shocks.As filed
Average
$2.2M
50th percentile in peer grouppeer median $2.2M
higher is better
FY2022-2327 peers
▲ +49% steady
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.
Avg monthly faculty salary
What 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
Average
$7,265
52nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $7,239
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)45 peers
Average monthly salary of full-time faculty, as reported to IPEDS.
Operating margin
Operating surplus or deficit as a share of operating revenue, leaving out investment swings and capital gifts: whether day-to-day operations run in the black.Calculated from filings
Deficit
-4.1%
20th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.5%
higher is better
FY2022-2332 peers
Operating result as a share of operating revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23): the IPEDS net operating revenue ratio, the same figure the Financial Health Index uses. It leaves out capital appropriations, capital gifts and additions to endowment, and for private nonprofits counts only unrestricted revenue, so a one-year swing in investment markets or a building grant does not read as an operating surplus or deficit. For-profit institutions: (revenue excluding investment return − total expenses) ÷ that revenue. A surplus above 4% is strong. A thin surplus near 0% leaves little margin for shocks. Values beyond ±100% are not shown.
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.
Tuition dependency
Net tuition as a share of operating revenue, how exposed the budget is to enrollment swings.Calculated from filings
62.8%
39th percentile in peer grouppeer median 72.4%
context, not scored
FY2022-2332 peers
Tuition and fees as a share of operating revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23), the same revenue base as the operating margin, so the two combine correctly in the enrollment-loss scenario. Operating revenue leaves out capital appropriations, capital gifts and endowment additions, and for private nonprofits counts unrestricted revenue only, so this share can run a few points above the tuition slice of the revenue-mix chart, which divides by every revenue source. For public institutions the base is the IPEDS consolidated figure, which can include component units such as foundations and university health systems, so a public with a large hospital shows lower dependency than its campus budget alone would. Not shown where the operating margin is not shown. Higher = more exposed to enrollment swings.
Tuition discount rate
Institutional grant aid as a share of gross tuition (IPEDS, private nonprofits only), the tuition-discount rate. This is the share of sticker tuition handed back as aid. A high rate signals heavy price competition for students.Calculated from filings
3.7%
34th percentile in peer grouppeer median 8.8%
context, not scored
FY2022-2334 peers
Institutional grant aid as a share of gross tuition and fee revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23, FASB): tuition allowances funded by the school itself (endowment, gifts and other institutional money) ÷ (net tuition revenue + all allowances applied to tuition). Pell, other federal, state and local grants are left out of the numerator because they are not the school's discount. Private nonprofit institutions only. Public (GASB) institutions report tuition differently and are not shown. Also not shown where a school books most of its own aid as scholarship expense instead of as a tuition allowance, because this measure cannot see that aid. The rate covers all students, undergraduate and graduate, so it runs well below NACUBO's widely quoted average, which covers first-time, full-time freshmen only.
State appropriations share
State appropriations' share of total revenue, material for public institutions, near zero for private.Calculated from filings
0%
FY2022-23
State appropriations as a share of total revenue (IPEDS FY2022-23). Material for public institutions, ~0 for private.
Administrative cost share
Institutional support (central administration, governance, general administration, fundraising, and under FASB the operation and 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
17.3%
24th percentile in peer grouppeer median 30.5%
context, not scored
FY2022-2339 peers
Institutional support, central administration, executive management, governance, general administration, fundraising and (under FASB rules) operation and 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 cushion
Months of operating expenses covered by expendable reserves, the institution's cash cushion.Calculated from filings
Thin
0 mo
11th percentile in peer grouppeer median 6.6 mo
higher is better
FY2022-2331 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.
Return on net assets
Change in net assets over the year, whether the institution grew wealthier.Calculated from filings
Adequate
3.3%
53rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 3%
higher is better
FY2022-2331 peers
Change in total net assets ÷ net assets (IPEDS FY2022-23), whether the institution grew wealthier over the year. 2–4% is adequate, and above 4% is strong.
Endowment per FTE student
Endowment per full-time-equivalent student, the FTE-correct measure of endowment wealth per student.Calculated from filings
Average
$7,143
39th percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,946
higher is better
FY2022-2327 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. Where one campus files finance for sister campuses that share its federal ID, the endowment covers all of them, so their FTE is counted too.
Spent on instruction
Instruction as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
26.5%
24th percentile in peer grouppeer median 37.9%
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. It is 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 services
Student services as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
7.4%
40th percentile in peer grouppeer median 9.2%
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 support
Academic support as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
8.2%
47th percentile in peer grouppeer median 9.3%
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 research
Research as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
0.2%
78th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
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. It runs near zero at teaching-focused colleges and sizeable at research universities. Spending-mix context, not a quality measure.
Full-professor average salary
What 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
$70,042
27th percentile in peer grouppeer median $86,872
higher is better
2023-2431 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.
1.9
9th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.2
higher is better
AY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid)32 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, and 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 exposure
Share 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
28.6%
AY2025-26 (Federal Student Aid)
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, award year 2025-26, the complete year (July 2025 to June 2026). Shown only for schools with Grad PLUS originations. It is an exposure signal, not a forecast of revenue loss. Not shown where fewer than 10 students (or parents) borrowed. From the Federal Student Aid Direct Loan dashboard for award year 2025-26, the complete year (July 2025 to June 2026).
Avg Grad PLUS loan
Average 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 it with Grad PLUS exposure (the reliance share).As filed
Above the cap
$21,549
AY2025-26 (Federal Student Aid)
Average Grad PLUS loan per recipient (FSA Direct Loan Dashboard, award year 2025-26, full year). The 2025 budget law eliminates Grad PLUS for new borrowers from July 1, 2026 and caps unsubsidized graduate borrowing at $20,500/year ($50,000/year for professional-degree students such as medicine and law), so for a graduate program 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. Not shown where fewer than 10 students (or parents) borrowed. From the Federal Student Aid Direct Loan dashboard for award year 2025-26, the complete year (July 2025 to June 2026).
Structural risk index
An 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
High
67
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. For-profit institutions report no operating-cushion figure and nearly all of them run close to 100% tuition dependency, so their index rests on at most three signals and reads higher than a nonprofit's; compare a for-profit with other for-profits. 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 funding obligated
How 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 FY2025, across grants, contracts, and student aid.As filed
$49,442
7th percentile in peer grouppeer median $567,196
context, not scored
FY2025 (USAspending.gov)22 peers
Obligations reported to USAspending.gov for FY2025 (Oct 2024 to Sep 2025), 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. A school with no figure here is one we could not match to a federal recipient (UEI) record, not one that received nothing; several large research universities are still unmatched.
Federal funding agencies
How many distinct federal agencies committed money to this institution in FY2025.As filed
1
36th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1
context, not scored
FY2025 (USAspending.gov)22 peers
A count of awarding agencies with positive FY2025 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 share
Share of federal funding that comes from the single largest awarding agency.Calculated from filings
100%
64th percentile in peer grouppeer median 100%
context, not scored
FY2025 (USAspending.gov)22 peers
The largest agency's FY2025 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.
Enrollment loss before deficit
How much of its enrollment the institution could lose before running an operating deficit, if it changed nothing else.Modelled by Ibex
No cushion
0%
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 2%
higher is better
FY2022-2330 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 the same operating 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. Where the surplus is larger than all tuition revenue, no enrollment loss alone produces a deficit and no figure is shown. 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 loss
What the operating margin becomes if a tenth of the students go and nothing else changes.Modelled by Ibex
Into deficit
-11.1%
30th percentile in peer grouppeer median -5.3%
higher is better
FY2022-2332 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.
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.
Operational-risk index (official findings)
0-100 severity of what federal regulators and auditors have said about this institution. Higher means more official concern.Blended index
Clean
15.0
86th percentile in peer grouppeer median 6.0
lower is better
ED composite AY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid)33 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.