Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg

Brooklyn, NY · official site ↗

Private nonprofitFour-year institution (not classified by Carnegie)
52
Fin. Resilience
Resilience score

vs. 37 peers in its group

How is this calculated?

Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg is a private nonprofit institution in Brooklyn, NY, classified by Carnegie as “Four-year institution (not classified by Carnegie).”

It enrolls about 98 undergraduates and is benchmarked here against 37 peer institutions (Four-year · Private nonprofit).

On Ibex's Financial Resilience score it rates 52 out of 100 within that peer group, a transparent composite of endowment per undergraduate, net tuition revenue per student, and instructional spend per student.

That score and the financial health index below are not the same measure and can disagree: the resilience score ranks per-student resource levels against this peer group, while the financial health index scores the institution's own balance sheet and operating result on the CFI scale, independent of peers. A school with modest resources per student can still run a sound balance sheet, and a wealthy one can still post an operating loss.

Its strongest standing relative to peers is return on net assets (61.5%, 94th percentile).

Its weakest is direct competitors within 100 mi (6).

Peer group

Four-year · Private nonprofit

37 institutions

No cross-metric risk flags triggered.
Percentile profileoutward = stronger vs peers

Each spoke is this institution’s peer-group standing (0–100) on a headline metric, oriented so outward always means stronger (lower net price scores higher). A balanced large shape signals broad strength. A spiky shape flags specific weak spots.

What changedlargest year-over-year moves
Instructional spend / FTE ▼ -25% $12,531 → $9,429 2023→2024
Net tuition revenue / FTE ▲ +14% $12,911 → $14,765 2023→2024
Undergraduate enrollment ▼ -8% 107 → 98 2023→2024
Pell recipient share ▲ +3.9 pts 74.8% → 78.7% 2023→2024

Most recent single-year change in each tracked metric (rates in percentage points). 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.

How exposed Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg 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.
49
Elevated
Enrollment cliff (home state)Projected change in the institution's home-state high-school graduates from 2025 to 2041 (WICHE). The U.S. total falls about 13%. This is a directional feeder-market signal, not an enrollment forecast.
-27%
Severe decline

Indicative 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 exposed, and “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, and the rest are working mockups we build to your institution’s data.

4.5
on a −4 to 10 scale
Financial Health IndexStable

NACUBO Composite Financial Index, the balance-sheet health score accreditors and institutional boards use to gauge financial health. Bond-rating agencies track similar ratios. 72nd percentile of 37 peers.

Primary reserve 35%4.2 mo
Reserves vs. debt 35%0.65×
Return on net assets 20%61.5%
Operating result 10%22.6%

Composite of four ratios on a strength-factor scale (−4 weak → 10 strong): below 3 falls short of the threshold for financial health, below 1 signals acute stress, and above 6 is strong. Computed from IPEDS FY2022-23, the most recent finance release (it lags the current year by 2–3 years). Branch campuses that report finances at a parent/system level can show distorted ratios. For informational benchmarking, not a credit rating or financial advice.

What an enrollment loss would do to the budgetTuition revenue falls with the students. Every other revenue line and the entire cost base stay 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 56% of this institution’s operating revenue, and it runs a 22.6% operating margin. It could lose about 40.3% of its enrollment before the surplus becomes a deficit, if nothing else changed.

18.0% 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.

Where the money comes from $2.4M total revenue · IPEDS FY2022-23

Tuition & fees is the largest single source at 56% of revenue.

Tuition & fees56.0%
Private gifts & grants35.4%
Auxiliary enterprises4.3%
Other revenue4.3%

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.

Which agencies fund this schoolThe share of this school's federal funding that comes from each awarding agency in FY2025. 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. $833,926 obligated · FY2025

Education alone accounts for 100% of it.

Education100.0%

Federal dollars each agency committed to this institution in FY2025, 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.

Average net price by family income After grant & scholarship aid · Scorecard 2024-25
$0–30K$9,765
$30–48K$9,778
$48–75K$11,442
$75–110K$14,055

Average annual net price (total cost minus grant and scholarship aid) paid by federal-aid recipients in each family-income band. Lower-income bands often pay less where need-based aid is strong.

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 nets.Calculated from filings
Average
$14,765
63rd percentile in peer grouppeer median $6,537
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)23 peers
Instructional spend / FTESpending on instruction per FTE student, how much of the budget reaches the classroom.Calculated from filings
Average
$9,429
41st percentile in peer grouppeer median $10,185
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)23 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
$14,000
78th percentile in peer grouppeer median $9,275
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)18 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
$14,000
72nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $9,900
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)18 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
$22,355
50th percentile in peer grouppeer median $22,355
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)9 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
$2,794
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $4,170
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)16 peers
Average monthly salary of full-time faculty, as reported to IPEDS.
Average net priceWhat students 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 pay after grants and scholarships.As filed
Strong
$10,071
32nd percentile in peer grouppeer median $15,962
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)11 peers
Net price, low-income families (under $30K)What students pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning under ~$30,000. Lower is better.As filed
Average
$9,765
35th percentile in peer grouppeer median $14,013
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)10 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 pay, often far below the sticker price. Read it beside the overall net price and the high-income net price: a low figure here signals strong need-based aid. Lower is better.
Net price, middle-income families ($30K-$48K)What students pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning roughly $30,000 to $48,000. Lower is better.As filed
$9,778
2024-25 (Scorecard)
Average annual net price (cost of attendance minus all grant and scholarship aid) paid by students whose families earn roughly $30,000 to $48,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25). It is the middle rung of the income net-price ladder: read it together with the low-income (under ~$30K) and high-income (over ~$110K) net prices to see how steeply the school discounts as family income rises. Lower is better.
Net price, upper-middle families ($48K-$75K)What students pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning roughly $48,000 to $75,000. Lower is better.As filed
Average
$11,442
50th percentile in peer grouppeer median $11,442
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)9 peers
Average annual net price (cost of attendance minus all grant and scholarship aid) paid by students whose families earn roughly $48,000 to $75,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25). It is the fourth rung of the five-rung income net-price ladder: read it with the low, middle, upper and high-income net prices to see how steeply the school discounts as family income rises. Lower is better.
Net price, upper-income families ($75K-$110K)What students pay after all grant and scholarship aid, averaged over the students in that income band. This is the one price figure that is scored: lower is genuinely better for the family paying it. It still averages over very different aid packages, so treat it as a band, not a quote.Average yearly cost after all grant and scholarship aid for students from families earning roughly $75,000 to $110,000. Lower is better.As filed
$14,055
2024-25 (Scorecard)
Average annual net price (cost of attendance minus all grant and scholarship aid) paid by students whose families earn roughly $75,000 to $110,000 a year (College Scorecard, 2024-25). It is the fifth rung of the income net-price ladder, just below the full-pay tier: read it with the lower rungs and the high-income net price to see the full cost gradient by family income. Lower is better.
Operating marginOperating 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
Strong
22.6%
85th percentile in peer grouppeer median 6.4%
higher is better
FY2022-2310 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.
Tuition dependencyNet tuition as a share of operating revenue, how exposed the budget is to enrollment swings.Calculated from filings
56%
95th percentile in peer grouppeer median 24.8%
context, not scored
FY2022-2310 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 rateInstitutional 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
10.4%
32nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 21.3%
context, not scored
FY2022-2314 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 shareState 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 shareInstitutional 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
4.9%
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 17.2%
context, not scored
FY2022-2316 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 cushionMonths of operating expenses covered by expendable reserves, the institution's cash cushion.Calculated from filings
Adequate
4.2 mo
72nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0 mo
higher is better
FY2022-239 peers
How many months of operating expenses the institution could cover from expendable reserves (IPEDS FY2022-23 primary reserve ratio × 12). About 5 months, one semester, is the accreditor benchmark for solid footing. Below ~3 months is thin. A negative figure means expendable reserves are themselves negative.
Reserves vs. debtExpendable reserves divided by long-term debt, whether reserves could cover the debt.Calculated from filings
Adequate
0.65×
FY2022-23
Expendable reserves ÷ plant-related debt (IPEDS FY2022-23 viability ratio). At or above 1.25×, reserves fully cover long-term debt. Shown blank when the institution carries little or no plant debt.
Return on net assetsChange in net assets over the year, whether the institution grew wealthier.Calculated from filings
Strong
61.5%
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median 6.5%
higher is better
FY2022-239 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.
Spent on instructionInstruction as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
70.2%
79th percentile in peer grouppeer median 34.5%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)17 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 servicesStudent services as a share of total functional expenses (private-nonprofit reporting).Calculated from filings
9.9%
50th percentile in peer grouppeer median 9.9%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)17 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
0.3%
26th percentile in peer grouppeer median 3%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)17 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%
47th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
FY2022-23 (IPEDS)17 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.
Room & board (on-campus)Published price before any aid. Shown as context, not as good or bad: at most private colleges almost nobody pays it, and a high sticker often sits on top of deep discounting, so a cheaper-looking school can cost a given family more. Compare schools on net price instead. Sticker price is here because it is what gets quoted.Published annual room charge plus board (meal-plan) charge for on-campus residents.As filed
$3,600
2023-24
The school's published annual charge for on-campus housing plus its standard meal plan (IPEDS, 2023-24). This is the largest cost of attendance after tuition and the part families compare most directly across residential offers. Reported only for schools that publish both a housing and a meal-plan charge, or one combined charge. A published charge before any aid, so it is shown as context rather than scored: see the sticker-price note.
Full-professor average salaryWhat the institution pays its faculty. Scored as higher-is-better because it tracks an institution's ability to attract and hold teaching staff. It also tracks local cost of living, so compare within a region before drawing a conclusion.Average salary of full (tenured-rank) professors, 9-month equated, 2023-24.As filed
$17,663
2023-24
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
Below peers
2.0
15th percentile in peer grouppeer median 2.4
higher is better
AY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid)13 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.
Structural risk indexAn indicative 0–100 structural-risk index (higher = more pressure) blending operating margin, months of cash cushion, tuition dependency and the home-state enrollment cliff. Screens for the financial and demographic strain that precedes closures and mergers, directional, not a prediction.Blended index
Elevated
49
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 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 FY2025, across grants, contracts, and student aid.As filed
$833,926
69th percentile in peer grouppeer median $478,182
context, not scored
FY2025 (USAspending.gov)8 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 agenciesHow many distinct federal agencies committed money to this institution in FY2025.As filed
1
44th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1
context, not scored
FY2025 (USAspending.gov)8 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 shareShare of federal funding that comes from the single largest awarding agency.Calculated from filings
100%
56th percentile in peer grouppeer median 100%
context, not scored
FY2025 (USAspending.gov)8 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 deficitHow much of its enrollment the institution could lose before running an operating deficit, if it changed nothing else.Modelled by Ibex
Wide cushion
40.3%
81st percentile in peer grouppeer median 8.4%
higher is better
FY2022-238 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 lossWhat the operating margin becomes if a tenth of the students go and nothing else changes.Modelled by Ibex
Still in surplus
18%
75th percentile in peer grouppeer median 3.7%
higher is better
FY2022-2310 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 said about this institution. Higher means more official concern.Blended index
Clean
13.0
85th percentile in peer grouppeer median 8.0
lower is better
ED composite AY2022-23 (Federal Student Aid)13 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.

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
98
55th percentile in peer grouppeer median 96
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)21 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%
94th percentile in peer grouppeer median 67.6%
higher is better
2024-25 (Scorecard)8 peers
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
78.7%
92nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 37.5%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)19 peers
Part-time undergraduatesShare of undergraduates enrolled part-time.As filed
0%
26th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)21 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.
Women (share of undergraduates)Share of undergraduates who are women.As filed
0%
14th percentile in peer grouppeer median 33.6%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)21 peers
Share of undergraduates who are women (College Scorecard, 2024-25). Reported as context on the student mix, not a measure of quality.
12-month FTE enrollmentFull-time-equivalent enrollment over the full year, the denominator for per-student finance measures.As filed
108
69th percentile in peer grouppeer median 68
context, not scored
2023-24 (IPEDS)24 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
4:1
25th percentile in peer grouppeer median 7:1
context, not scored
Fall 202316 peers
Students per instructional faculty member (IPEDS, fall 2023). Lower generally means smaller classes and more faculty contact, though the measure mixes undergraduate and graduate teaching and is institution-reported.
Fully online studentsShare of students enrolled exclusively in distance-education (online) courses.As filed
0%
42nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
Fall 2023 (IPEDS)19 peers
Share of students enrolled exclusively in distance-education courses (IPEDS, Fall 2023). Describes delivery model, not quality. Online-heavy institutions look different on residential measures.
Applicant-pool diversity shiftProjected change in the non-white share of the home state's public high-school graduating class, class of 2025 to 2037.Modelled by Ibex
+0.9 pts
WICHE 2024 (11th ed.)
Percentage-point change in the non-white share of the institution's home-state public high-school graduating class between the class of 2025 (the national peak) and 2037 (WICHE, Knocking at the College Door, 11th ed., public-school race detail). A forward look at who the future applicant pool will be: a positive value means the state's graduating class is projected to grow more racially diverse. Strategic recruiting context, not a forecast of any one school's enrollment, and a college recruits from many states.
Hybrid (some online) enrollmentShare of students enrolled in some but not all courses online (hybrid), Fall 2023.As filed
0%
37th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
Fall 202319 peers
Share of all students taking some, but not all, of their courses at a distance (IPEDS, Fall 2023). This is the hybrid middle ground between the fully online share and the fully in-person share, and it signals how far a school has moved coursework online without going exclusively remote. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Transfer-in share (undergraduate)Transfer-in students as a share of undergraduate enrollment, Fall 2023.As filed
0.9%
47th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.1%
context, not scored
Fall 202316 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
0%
24th percentile in peer grouppeer median 1.1%
context, not scored
Fall 202319 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
0%
17th percentile in peer grouppeer median 35.8%
context, not scored
Fall 202318 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
0%
22nd percentile in peer grouppeer median 14.6%
context, not scored
Fall 202318 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 institutions in the same peer group within 100 miles.Calculated from filings
Below peers
6
86th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0
lower is better
2024-25 (Scorecard universe)25 peers
How many institutions in the same Ibex peer group, the schools most likely to compete for the same students, sit within roughly 100 miles. For most schools the peer group is the same Carnegie classification and control. Schools in small classes sit in broader fallback groups by level, sector or region (see Peer groups in the methodology), and for them the count is looser. 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 power.
Metro-area unemployment rateUnemployment rate in the school's metro area, ACS 2020-24.As filed
Below peers
6.8%
78th percentile in peer grouppeer median 5.7%
lower is better
ACS 2020-2425 peers
The civilian unemployment rate in the school's metropolitan or micropolitan area (US Census ACS 2020-24, 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.
Enrollment cliff (home state)Projected change in the institution's home-state high-school graduates from 2025 to 2041 (WICHE). The U.S. total falls about 13%. This is a directional feeder-market signal, not an enrollment forecast.External projection
Severe decline
-27%
WICHE 2024 (11th ed.) projection
Projected change in the number of high-school graduates in the institution's HOME STATE from the class of 2025 (the national peak) to 2041, per WICHE's Knocking at the College Door, 11th Edition (Dec 2024). The 'enrollment cliff' is the post-2008 birth decline reaching college age. The U.S. total is projected to fall about 13% over this window. A college recruits from many states, so its home-state projection is an indicative directional signal of feeder-market pressure, not a forecast of that institution's own enrollment. A projection, not a measurement: WICHE's state-level forecast of high-school graduates. It describes the pool a school recruits from, not the school's own enrollment.
Shown exactly as the institution filed it. The value falls outside the normal range for this measure, which usually means a reporting quirk rather than a real figure, so read it with care.
In-state HS graduatesPublic + private high-school graduates in the school's state, class of 2025.External projection
206,184
69th percentile in peer grouppeer median 140,304
context, not scored
Class of 2025 (WICHE)36 peers
The size of the school's home-state high-school graduating class in 2025 (WICHE Knocking at the College Door, public and private combined). It is the near-term in-state feeder market, the complement to the enrollment-cliff projection, which shows the direction that market is heading. Context metric, not better or worse. Shown as a position within the peer group, not as a score.
Consecutive years of enrollment declineHow many years in a row undergraduate enrollment has fallen, counting back from the most recent year.Modelled by Ibex
Declining
1 yr
75th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0 yrs
lower is better
2023-24 to 2024-25 (Scorecard)16 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.
Undergraduate race & ethnicity IPEDS 2024-25
White100.0%

Undergraduate enrollment by race and ethnicity, as reported to IPEDS (College Scorecard). “International” denotes nonresident students. “Unknown” means race/ethnicity was not reported.

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.

Share taking federal loansShare of students taking out federal loans, a borrowing-reliance signal.As filed
0%
34th percentile in peer grouppeer median 0%
context, not scored
2024-25 (Scorecard)19 peers
Full-time faculty shareShare of faculty employed full-time, higher generally means more availability and continuity.As filed
66.7%
2024-25 (Scorecard)

Every figure on this page carries one of these labels. They are not degrees of confidence: a projection is not a worse number than a filing, it is a different kind of claim, and the distinction is invisible when both are set in the same grey card.

As filedThis is the institution's own figure as filed with a federal collection, or a federal agency's own published figure about it. Ibex has not adjusted it.
Calculated from filingsCalculated by Ibex from figures in the same federal filing, using nothing but arithmetic: a share, a ratio, or an amount per student. It is exactly as sound as the filed numbers it divides.
Blended indexA blend of several other measures on this page, combined by Ibex. The components and how they are weighted are listed in this metric's description. Reasonable people could weight them differently and get a different score.
Modelled by IbexFitted or extrapolated by Ibex from the institution's reported history. This number appears in no federal file: it is a summary of a trend, and it inherits every irregularity in the years it was fitted through.
External projectionBuilt on an external projection about the future, published by a research body rather than measured. Projections are revised as the underlying assumptions change, and this one describes a scenario, not a fact.
Regulator / auditor findingA finding published by a regulator or an independent auditor about this institution. It is a statement someone made in writing, not a measurement Ibex or the school took.
How financially healthy is Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg?
On the NACUBO Composite Financial Index (the −4 to 10 balance-sheet score accreditors and institutional boards use), Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg scores 4.5 (Stable), computed from its IPEDS FY2022-23 finances. This is informational benchmarking, not a credit rating.
What is Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg's student-faculty ratio?
Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg reports a student-faculty ratio of 4:1 (IPEDS, fall 2023), that is, about 4 students for every instructional faculty member.
How much does Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg cost?
The average published cost of attendance is $22,355 and the average net price after aid is $10,071 (College Scorecard).
Which schools are Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg's peers?
Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg is benchmarked against 37 institutions in the Four-year · Private nonprofit peer group. All percentiles and medians on this page are computed within that group.

Explore Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg interactively

Open the full dashboard to switch peer views, hover trends, and compare head-to-head.

Open in dashboard

Want a custom dashboard for Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg?

We build tailored intelligence dashboards: Yeshivas Sanz Klauzenburg 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). Most figures lag the current academic year by two to three years; earnings and debt come from the 2020-21 file and a few measures from older files, and each card states its own data year. 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.