Universidad Teologica del Caribe
Trujillo Alto, PR · official site ↗
Private nonprofitSpecial Focus: Faith-RelatedVery small
18
Fin. Resilience
Universidad Teologica del Caribe is a private nonprofit institution in Trujillo Alto, PR, classified by Carnegie as “Special Focus: Faith-Related.”
It enrolls about 173 undergraduates and is benchmarked here against 233 peer institutions (Special Focus: Faith-Related · Private nonprofit).
On Ibex's Financial Resilience score it rates 18 out of 100 within that peer group, a transparent composite of endowment per undergraduate, net tuition revenue per student, and instructional spend per student.
Its strongest standing relative to peers is median debt (did not complete) ($4,500, 2nd percentile).
Its weakest is avg monthly faculty salary ($1,110).
Ibex's cross-metric scan flags: Undergrad enrollment down 33% since 2016.
Peer group
Special Focus: Faith-Related · Private nonprofit
233 institutions
Undergrad enrollment down 33% since 2016
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
Direct Loan volume
▲ +105%
$312,077 → $638,220
2017→2024
Gifts and grants received
▲ +86%
$932,263 → $1.7M
2023→2024
Graduation rate (6-yr · first-time, full-time)
▲ +85%
21.1% → 38.9%
2023→2024
Audit findings
▼ -75%
4 → 1
2017→2024
Pell recipient share
▲ +68%
58.4% → 97.9%
2023→2024
Pell Grant dollars
▼ -32%
$1M → $707,725
2017→2024
Most recent single-year change in each tracked metric. Green = moved in this metric’s favorable direction, red = unfavorable, grey = size or context, not scored. Each row uses the latest pair of years that metric has, and federal collections release on different schedules, so the years differ from row to row: read the years on the row, not just the ranking. A single year is also not a trend, the multi-year series is on each metric’s card below.
Policy & demographic exposure
How exposed Universidad Teologica del Caribe 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.
21
LowIndicative 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.
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 35% of this institution’s revenue, and it runs a 15.4% operating margin. It could lose about 44.1% of its enrollment before the surplus becomes a deficit, if nothing else changed.
12.3%
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
$2.3M total revenue · IPEDS FY2022-23
Other revenue is the largest single source at 38% of revenue.
Other revenue37.6%
Tuition & fees34.9%
Government grants & contracts24.2%
Private gifts & grants3.3%
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.
$696,789 obligated · FY2024
Education alone accounts for 100% of it.
Education100.0%
Federal dollars each agency committed to this institution in FY2024, as a share of its total positive obligations (USAspending.gov). Obligations are money committed, not money spent, so this total will not match the audited “Federal awards expended” figure elsewhere on this page. Amounts an agency reclaimed during the year are excluded.
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
$6,308
28th percentile in peer grouppeer median $9,319
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)233 peers
Instructional spend / FTESpending on instruction per FTE student, how much of the budget reaches the classroom.Calculated from filings
Below peers
$2,880
8th percentile in peer grouppeer median $10,785
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)233 peers
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
$6,660
5th percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,320
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)141 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
$6,660
5th percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,320
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)141 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
$11,510
0th percentile in peer grouppeer median $22,598
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)114 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
$1,110
1st percentile in peer grouppeer median $5,681
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)223 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
Strong
$9,045
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,838
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)114 peers
Net price, low-income families (under $30K)What students actually pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning under ~$30,000. Lower is better.As filed
Strong
$9,045
32nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,164
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)93 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.
Operating marginNet surplus as a share of total revenue, whether the institution runs in the black.Calculated from filings
Strong
15.4%
66th percentile in peer grouppeer median 8.1%
higher is better
FY2022-23230 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
34.9%
63rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 25.2%
context, not scored
FY2022-23230 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
41%
68th percentile in peer grouppeer median 27.4%
context, not scored
FY2022-23232 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%
50th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
FY2022-23230 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
29.6%
52nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 28.8%
context, not scored
FY2022-23231 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.
Spent on instructionInstruction as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
19.6%
18th percentile in peer grouppeer median 31.4%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)232 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
9%
47th percentile in peer grouppeer median 9.4%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)232 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
21.6%
92nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 7%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)232 peers
Academic-support spending (libraries, academic computing, deans' offices) divided by total functional expenses (IPEDS Finance, FY2022-23 (FASB)). Private-nonprofit (FASB) institutions only. Context, not a quality measure.
Spent on researchResearch as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
0%
44th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)232 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.
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
$21,718
6th percentile in peer grouppeer median $64,573
higher is better
2023-24148 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
81st percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.6
higher is better
FY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid)208 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.
Heightened Cash MonitoringOn ED's Heightened Cash Monitoring list (HCM1 documentation, HCM2 reimbursement).Regulator / auditor finding
HCM1
Mar 2026 (Federal Student Aid)
The U.S. Department of Education places schools with financial-responsibility or compliance concerns on Heightened Cash Monitoring. HCM1 requires extra documentation before drawing federal aid; HCM2 is the more severe tier, paying the school only by reimbursement after it has disbursed its own funds. Shown only for currently flagged schools; most institutions are not on the list. A red flag for closure or solvency risk.
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
Low
21
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
$1.3M
45th percentile in peer grouppeer median $1.5M
context, not scored
AY2024 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)37 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
$1.3M
50th percentile in peer grouppeer median $1.3M
context, not scored
AY2024 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)37 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
$707,725
47th percentile in peer grouppeer median $876,710
context, not scored
AY2024 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)18 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
$638,220
12th percentile in peer grouppeer median $1.3M
context, not scored
AY2024 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)29 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
Some findings
1
82nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0
lower is better
AY2024 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)37 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.
Repeat findingsShare of findings across the last three audits that repeat a prior year's finding.Calculated from filings
Some repeats
20%
38th percentile in peer grouppeer median 26.1%
lower is better
AY2024 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)12 peers
Of every finding raised across the institution's three most recent Single Audits, the share that repeats a finding from a prior year. A one-off finding is an error; a finding that recurs after the school promised a corrective action plan points to a governance or management problem the institution has not fixed. Shown only where the school had at least three findings across those audits, so the ratio means something. 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
AY2024 (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
AY2024 (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
Noncompliance
Yes
AY2024 (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
AY2024 (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
Not low-risk
No
AY2024 (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
Average
$1.7M
40th percentile in peer grouppeer median $2.4M
higher is better
FY2024 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))36 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
$0
49th percentile in peer grouppeer median $0
context, not scored
FY2024 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))36 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
Low leverage
0%
49th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
lower is better
FY2024 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))36 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
11.2%
84th percentile in peer grouppeer median 5.3%
context, not scored
FY2024 (IRS Form 990 (ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer))29 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
$696,789
77th percentile in peer grouppeer median $295,768
context, not scored
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)82 peers
Obligations reported to USAspending.gov for FY2024 (Oct 2023 to Sep 2024), summed across every awarding agency. This is money committed, not money spent, so it will not equal the audited 'Federal awards expended' figure and the two should not be subtracted from one another. Negative amounts (agencies reclaiming prior commitments) are excluded.
Federal funding agenciesHow many distinct federal agencies committed money to this institution in FY2024.As filed
1
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)
A count of awarding agencies with positive FY2024 obligations. Neither high nor low is inherently better: a community college funded solely by the Department of Education is behaving normally, while a research university typically draws on ten or more agencies.
Largest funder's shareShare of federal funding that comes from the single largest awarding agency.Calculated from filings
100%
FY2024 (USAspending.gov)
The largest agency's FY2024 obligations as a share of the institution's total positive federal obligations. Read it as concentration, not risk: most teaching colleges sit near 100% because nearly all their federal money is Department of Education student aid.
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
Strong
5.1 yrs
27th percentile in peer grouppeer median 7.7 yrs
lower is better
2020-21 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)28 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
44.1%
67th percentile in peer grouppeer median 18.8%
higher is better
FY2022-23205 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
12.3%
65th percentile in peer grouppeer median 3.9%
higher is better
FY2022-23230 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
25.0
84th percentile in peer grouppeer median 7.0
lower is better
ED composite FY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid) + Single Audit AY2024 (Federal Audit Clearinghouse)210 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
38.9%
38.9% graduate within 6 years (150% of normal time)
6.1% 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
25.5%
25.5% 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
173
74th percentile in peer grouppeer median 93
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)148 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
Strong
100%
89th percentile in peer grouppeer median 82.8%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)120 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
Average
38.9%
39th percentile in peer grouppeer median 45.2%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard) · cohort of 3640 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
Average
6.1%
53rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.8%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard) · cohort of 3339 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
97.9%
100th percentile in peer grouppeer median 41.1%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)145 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
25.5%
20th percentile in peer grouppeer median 43.7%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)142 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.
First-generation studentsShare of undergraduates who are the first in their family to attend college.As filed
54.9%
81st percentile in peer grouppeer median 36%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)24 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
94.4%
95th percentile in peer grouppeer median 27.3%
context, not scored
2023-24 (Scorecard)105 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
87.9%
93rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)144 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
$9,084
2nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $29,639
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)107 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
83.8%
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median 50%
context, not scored
2016-17 (Scorecard)63 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
46.8%
83rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)148 peers
Share of undergraduates who are women (College Scorecard, 2024-25). Reported as context on the student mix, not a measure of quality.
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%
15th percentile in peer grouppeer median 18.5%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)126 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.
12-month FTE enrollmentFull-time-equivalent enrollment over the full year, the denominator for per-student finance measures.As filed
134
58th percentile in peer grouppeer median 113
context, not scored
2023-24 (IPEDS)233 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
3:1
5th percentile in peer grouppeer median 11:1
context, not scored
Fall 2023148 peers
Students per instructional faculty member (IPEDS, fall 2023). Lower generally means smaller classes and more faculty contact, though the measure mixes undergraduate and graduate teaching and is institution-reported.
Fully online studentsShare of students enrolled exclusively in distance-education (online) courses.As filed
16%
56th percentile in peer grouppeer median 6%
context, not scored
Fall 2023 (IPEDS)233 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.
Hybrid (some online) enrollmentShare of students enrolled in some but not all courses online (hybrid), Fall 2023.As filed
9%
63rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
Fall 2023233 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
10.3%
58th percentile in peer grouppeer median 7.7%
context, not scored
Fall 2023148 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
35.2%
47th percentile in peer grouppeer median 42%
context, not scored
Fall 2023233 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
39.3%
73rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 18.3%
context, not scored
Fall 2023232 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
100%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 7.1%
context, not scored
Fall 2023232 peers
Instructional staff who are American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or two-or-more races, as a share of all instructional staff (IPEDS Human Resources, Fall 2023). Nonresident and race-unknown staff are excluded from the numerator. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Direct competitors within 100 miCount of other institutions within 100 miles. Scored as lower-is-better because it is used here as a competitive-pressure signal for the institution, not as a benefit to students.Number of same-type institutions (same Carnegie class and control) within 100 miles.Calculated from filings
Strong
2
18th percentile in peer grouppeer median 8
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard universe)233 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.
Metro-area unemployment rateUnemployment rate in the school's metro area, ACS 2019-23.As filed
Below peers
11.5%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 5.9%
lower is better
ACS 2019-23231 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
Average
0 per 1k
43rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0 per 1k
lower is better
2024 (Clery)143 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.
Enrollment momentum (CAGR)Enrollment momentum (CAGR).Modelled by Ibex
Below peers
-5%
25th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.5%
higher is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)144 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
Below peers
25.6%
99th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.4%
lower is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)223 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.
Enrollment forecast (5-yr)Projected change in undergraduate enrollment about five years out, from the school's own trend.Modelled by Ibex
Below peers
-21.2%
27th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.8%
higher is better
2024-2029 projection127 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.
Competing enrollment nearbyUndergraduates enrolled at same-type institutions within 100 miles, per one of this school's own undergraduates.Calculated from filings
Strong
0.79×
20th percentile in peer grouppeer median 43.73×
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard universe)68 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
3+ years down
5 yrs
98th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0 yrs
lower is better
2016-17 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)147 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.
Completion equity
Six-year graduation rate by group
First-time, full-time bachelor’s cohort · Scorecard 2024-25
Hispanic/Latino39% n=36
Pell recipients44% n=32
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: 39% (n=36).
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. | 30%n=81 | – | – |
| Entered as first-timeStudents with no prior college enrollment. | 31%n=55 | – | – |
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
Hispanic/Latino100.0%
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
Below peers
$23,536
8th percentile in peer grouppeer median $39,245
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)60 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
Strong
$12,050
11th percentile in peer grouppeer median $24,625
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)22 peers
From the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying it. Median debt pools the borrowers who left in that award year and the one before it.
3-yr cohort default rateShare of borrowers defaulting within three years. Lower is better, but values covering 2020 to 2023 are depressed for every school by the federal payment pause, so the level means less than the comparison.Share of borrowers who default within three years of entering repayment. Lower is better.As filed
Below peers
14.2%
93rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 4.5%
lower is better
FY2017 cohort147 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
67.4%
97th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)145 peers
Full-time faculty shareShare of faculty employed full-time, higher generally means more availability and continuity.As filed
Below peers
29%
11th percentile in peer grouppeer median 79.3%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)136 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
Average
0.51×
43rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.56×
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)20 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.
Working 10 years after entryShare of the no-longer-enrolled cohort who are working ten years after entering.As filed
Average
63.6%
44th percentile in peer grouppeer median 72.8%
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)60 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
Below peers
53.5%
83rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 33.1%
lower is better
2019-20 (Scorecard)32 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.
Median earnings (6 yr)Median earnings of working former students six years after they first enrolled.As filed
Below peers
$24,867
20th percentile in peer grouppeer median $30,634
higher is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)53 peers
Median earnings of former students who are working and were federally aided, measured six years after they first enrolled (College Scorecard, 2020-21). A shorter-horizon companion to the ten-year earnings figure; early-career pay tends to run below the ten-year mark, so read the two together rather than in isolation. From the College Scorecard 2020-21 data file, the last release carrying it. Earnings measured about six years after entry, so the cohort behind it entered in the mid-2010s.
Earn more than a HS grad (10-yr)Share earning more than $28,000 (about a high-school graduate's wage) ten years after entry.Calculated from filings
Below peers
27.5%
19th percentile in peer grouppeer median 50.8%
higher is better
2014-15 (Scorecard)35 peers
Share of students earning more than $28,000 a year, roughly what a typical high-school graduate earns, ten years after entering this institution (College Scorecard, 2014-15). The long-horizon companion to the six-year figure and the closest public analogue to the 2025 budget law's program-level earnings-premium test. Share of former students earning more than $28,000, the Department's benchmark for the median earnings of a high-school graduate. From the College Scorecard 2014-15 data file, the last release carrying it; the threshold is not inflation-adjusted.
Median debt (did not complete)Median federal loan debt of students who left without completing. Lower is better.As filed
Strong
$4,500
2nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $8,125
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)24 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.
Pell completion gapOverall 6-year graduation rate minus the Pell-recipient graduation rate.Calculated from filings
Strong
-4.9 pts
16th percentile in peer grouppeer median -2.6 pts
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)16 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.
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
0.51×
82nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0.36×
higher is better
2020-21 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)52 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.
Net-value indexComposite 0-100 of earnings, completion, net price and debt vs peers.Blended index
Average
54.0
55th percentile in peer grouppeer median 53.0
higher is better
2020-21 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)122 peers
A 0-100 composite of student value relative to the peer group: the average of peer percentile ranks for median earnings ten years out, graduation rate, net price (lower counts as better value) and median debt (lower is better). Built only where at least two components are reported. Higher means more outcome per dollar. Banded against the school's peer group.
Loan payment vs earningsMonthly payment on the median federal debt, as a share of median monthly earnings ten years after entry.Calculated from filings
Manageable
6.9%
43rd percentile in peer grouppeer median 7.6%
lower is better
2020-21 (Scorecard)20 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.
Earnings spread
Earnings 10 years after entry: the middle 50%
Working, federally-aided former students · Scorecard 2024-25
25th percentile$12,813
Median$23,536
75th percentile$34,310
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.
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)
Universidad Teologica del Caribe’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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theology & Religious Vocations | 57 | – | – | – | Low · 0 |
Earnings-premium status is an indicative estimate: median graduate earnings four years out vs the PR 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)
Theology & Religious Vocations – 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theological and Ministerial StudiesCIP 3906 › | 34 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Pastoral Counseling and Specialized MinistriesCIP 3907 › | 16 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Bible/Biblical StudiesCIP 3902 › | 4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Religious EducationCIP 3904 › | 3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
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.
See the interactive dashboard for all fields and credential levels (associate through doctoral). Source: College Scorecard Field of Study.
Frequently asked
What is Universidad Teologica del Caribe's student-faculty ratio?
Universidad Teologica del Caribe reports a student-faculty ratio of 3:1 (IPEDS, fall 2023) – that is, about 3 students for every instructional faculty member.
How much does Universidad Teologica del Caribe cost?
The average published cost of attendance is $11,510 and the average net price after aid is $9,045 (College Scorecard).
How much do Universidad Teologica del Caribe graduates earn?
Median earnings ten years after entry are $23,536 (College Scorecard), measured across students who received federal aid.
Which schools are Universidad Teologica del Caribe's peers?
Universidad Teologica del Caribe is benchmarked against 233 institutions in the Special Focus: Faith-Related · Private nonprofit peer group; all percentiles and medians on this page are computed within that group.
Compare with peers
Explore Universidad Teologica del Caribe interactively
Open the full dashboard to switch peer views, hover trends, and compare head-to-head.
Want a custom dashboard for Universidad Teologica del Caribe?
We build tailored intelligence dashboards – Universidad Teologica del Caribe 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.