Talk:List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Education  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Universities (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject United States  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Lists  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Stanford University[edit]

An IP editor continues to change the figure for Stanford from the NACUBO-sourced one to one that includes non-endowment funds such as expendable funds and capital reserves per their reference here. The IP editor has been asked to discuss the edit but has not yet done so. Here is another opportunity on this talk page for them to discuss why they think their edit is more appropriate in this article. 72Dino (talk) 20:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Syracuse University[edit]

Should be on the list as per the wikipedia page on Syracuse University lists its endowment at $1.01 billion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.24.6.168 (talk) 22:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Change the criteria for listing?[edit]

With the new NACUBO rankings, there are now 70 universities with $1 billion or more in endowment. This criteria ($1 billion minimum endowment) that is currently used for listing a university is untenable to maintain as the number of schools qualifying will continue to grow. Therefore, I think we need to rethink the criteria for inclusion. How about the "Top 50 largest endowments". That way, the criteria is scalable no matter how large endowment values grow with time. CrazyPaco (talk) 02:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Limiting the list to universities with endowments over $1bn makes this extremely selective, and ignores the vast majority of institutions. I would much rather see a list of the top 200 or 300. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrcheatham (talkcontribs) 17:17, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Also, when it comes to the "Endowment per Student" section, I would like to see a much more complete list. It's not really helpful to see just 50 schools. I would think the relevant list should be the top 300+ schools sorted automatically by endowment per student. That's what the "Endowment by Student" section is supposed to be about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrcheatham (talkcontribs) 17:20, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Why only NACUBO figures for the table?[edit]

Why is the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO), which has a membership of 2,500 colleges and universities, the only source for endowment market value calculations used in the table?....for several reasons. Primarily, for matters of consistency and thus comparability from one institution to another, including comparisons over time.

The NACUBO-Commonfund Study of Endowments is the only third party WP:SOURCE available for the consistent calculation, and thus comparison, of the market value of most higher education endowments. It is the most thorough endowment report, represents the industry standard for such comparison, and is an organization whose credibility is beyond reproach. The consistency of this annual reporting, not only between institutions but also from year-to-year, allows for the best possible, although sometimes inherently imperfect, comparisons of endowments between different institutions. On the other hand, any one institution's own financial reports may not necessarily calculate endowment market value in the same manner as required by NACUBO, or they may vary in the inclusion of different components such as including or not including real estate valuations or non-liquid assets. Thus other reports of endowment market values from other sources may not necessarily be directly comparable to NACUBO figures, and in fact, endowment market values reported the NACUBO study reports and those seen in official annual financial reports published by individual institutions (easily found by googling for any particular school's financial report) are often inconsistent. Furthermore, universities that comprise systems or have branch/regional/satellite campuses may or may not include endowments restricted to individual campuses in a manner different than the figures reported to the NACUBO study, thus making the relative comparability between NACUBO and non-NACUBO sources less clear. And perhaps most obviously, the date of individual institution's market value calculation may not be done on the same date as those in the NACUBO study thus making them inherently incomparable. Therefore, to ensure endowment market values are as comparable and consistent as possible from one institution to the next, and from one year to the next, only the values from this third-party source, NACUBO, are included in the article's table. CrazyPaco (talk) 07:23, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I moved the page per WP:CrazyPaco to List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment according to NACUBO. --Heisenberg, Ph.D. (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Was not per CrazyPaco. Was solely per Heisenberg, Ph.D. If you have a have suggestion to incorporate endowment market value figures from elsewhere that make sense, then please discuss it here. CrazyPaco (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I didn't mind the move very much but I'm also happy keeping the article at this title, too. Whatever its title, it seems quite important to keep the criteria the same not because NACUBO is perfect or we have a special liking of NACUBO but because it is important to try to ensure our data are comparable in a listing like this and using NACUBO's data seems to be the best way to do this. I would be amenable to adding additional sources of information in additional columns if there is significant support for doing that, too. ElKevbo (talk) 20:32, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
The article move was actually reversed by another editor on MOS grounds. I didn't suggest the move, but I also didn't have an issue with it either. I also don't have an issue with a new section for alternative endowment values (particularly combined systems or what not). What has been a problem in the past is people adding alternative numbers or mid year numbers to the table. As you mentioned, and with which I agree completely, the comparability between numbers can be destroyed by such additions. I know of no other way to make numbers comparable than to use a single source of calculations such as the NACUBO's numbers.
Separately, do you have any suggestions for table cutoffs. The table is going to grow infinitely big if the cutoff of the list remains at $1 billion. At a 8% annual rate of growth, there will be over 150 entries by the end of the decade. I'm weary of arbitrary cut-offs, but equally worried about the sustainability of such a table. CrazyPaco (talk) 00:19, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
"Then, let's sit around and see who else if 'worthy' of joining this wonderful group". Do as you please with the article sir. In fact, I'd support moving it to: List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment according to CrazyPaco --Heisenberg, Ph.D. (talk) 01:59, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Heisenberg, please review the following Wikipedia policies: WP:NPA, WP:TALK, WP:CON, WP:AGF. Your participation with constructive comments, if you have any, about the issues of this article are welcome. CrazyPaco (talk) 17:36, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Agree with CrazyPaco. In addition to violating an alphabet soup of policies, Heisenberg Ph.D. is violating Wikipedia:Dick.--GrapedApe (talk) 13:12, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

If we are going to use NACUBO as the sole source, the article should be renamed to indicate that the numbers are NACUBO's. The numbers disagree with many numbers directly reported by the universities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.52.160.127 (talk) 04:45, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Universities report the numbers directly to NACUBO, so they should be the same except for some timing differences. Bahooka (talk) 05:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
It's pretty clear from the sourcing that NACUBO is the source.--GrapedApe (talk) 12:01, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

System-wide[edit]

I don't think system-wide endowments should be listed in a list comparing those system-wide endowments to endowments of specific individual universities. In many cases, these system-wide endowments include endowments from several independent university campuses, health science centers, research centers, law schools, agriculture center, and other institutions that are not part of the flagship university. It is comparing apples to oranges. Those system-wide endowments create a false view of the flagship university's actual endowment. Treydavis3 (talk) 20:41, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree that is there are less than ideal comparisons, but I'm not sure, given the above mentioned differences in sources how to make them comparable. Some universities don't release numbers for individual schools or campuses. Penn State, for instance, has 19 campuses, including separate campuses for law and medicine, and there are no publicly available break downs of those numbers. Other schools in the table, such as Kansas and Purdue have a few campus and have been noted as "systems", even though they aren't listed as such on NACUBO's report which makes me wonder about the appropriateness of such notation per WP:OR. However, such schools aren't anywhere near the equivalent to systems to those of, say, the UC system or the University of Texas system, that include multiple full fledged national-level research universities. I'm not sure, how in the existing table, numbers calculated in variety of manners can be introduced and still have those numbers be comparable to the degree of the unified presentation that the NACUBO study provides. However, perhaps a new section could be added to address such discrepancies. It could include breakdowns of system or campus endowments if available, while noting market value calculations may differ from the NACUBO study. CrazyPaco (talk) 18:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
What about making two separate tables, one for university endowments and another for system-wide endowments? I don't think they should be in the same comparison tables because they are comparing two different endowments. Treydavis3 (talk) 03:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
You first have to define what is a system vs a single university. I don't think that is as easy as it seems, especially without original research. And then you have the problem of the availability of a system's individual university endowments that aren't necessarily publicly available, or vice versa, making for the likely possibility that such a split couldn't be consistently applied for each system or school. It also isn't necessarily clear in every case what exactly is reported for each individual school, when they part of a system, particularly in the school's own reports. There are a lot of potential assumptions to be made trying to split the table apart. Therefore, I think the first table needs to stay as is for consistency just because the NACUBO study knows a lot more about the numbers that it collects than we do. The existing table thus reflects NACUBO's report of endowment comparability, and it is noted as such, and thus also avoids introducing the editorializing or bias of Wikipedia editors. That said, I'd have no problem with adding a second, separate table that could contain information of system or university unit breakdowns or combinations that are known from other sources and not necessarily included in the NACUBO table. Such a table could include, for example, both the breakdowns of the UT system endowment, if available, or the combination of the Cal State system endowment that was removed from the NACUBO table. While I support adding such a table, and encourage you pursue it if you like, my guess is that the multiple sources and inherent complexities of that table will likely result in it becoming outdate and poorly maintained over time, and it will inherently be perpetually incomplete. None of those reasons are ones to prevent it from being created though. CrazyPaco (talk) 08:56, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

University of Iowa[edit]

Should be on the list as per the wikipedia page on University of Iowa lists its endowment at $1.06 billion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.158.101.11 (talk) 19:18, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

The NACUBO references shows it at $981 million most recently, so it does not make the cut off. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 20:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Alumni success tables[edit]

I will be adding tables depicting universities producing most millionaires and billionaires. Financial endowments are mostly comprised of donations to the institution. In the recent years, alumni giving has become even more crucial as tuition puts strain on undergraduate students and un-funded graduate students. Though, those are rarer at better universities with large endowments(as listed in this article). Furthermore, alumni contribution has picked up as public universities face budget cuts from their representative governmental agencies. Social stratification has also been a new trend in higher education that relates to financial standings of universities. This is old news, but it's no big news that the best and most selective universities also have the largest endowments. Higher ed scholars believe that the recent stratification is partially due to a divide between university haves and haves-nots.

The reader of the encyclopedia will gain valuable information comparing the institutions producing the most financial successful alumni relative to their endowment. The source is a legitimate source(BusinessInsider) which is frequently used by higher education publications such as higher Ed Today and the Chronicle of Higher Education.

Let me know what you all think, DMB112 (talk) 18:40, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

University of Cincinnati[edit]

Over 1 billion as of November 2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.140.86.63 (talk) 08:03, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

2013[edit]

The new NECSE tables are out. I don't have time, but someone should add the 2013. Keep 2005. It's interesting to see the trend. EDIT: Never mind...I'll do it. DMB112 (talk) 14:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Sort by Endowment?[edit]

Is this possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.69.232.127 (talk) 20:33, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorting by enrollment is broken[edit]

On the second table, if you try to sort by enrollment, it sorts alphabetically, rather than numerically, so you get 1,000; 1,500; 1,980; 10,450; 15,000; 19,000; 2,000; etc. I know there's a template that can be added to numbers to they sort right, but not sure what and don't have time right now to track it down. Matchups 23:12, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

California State University system[edit]

I know this article only cites NACUBO, but the CSU system in California has a $1.4 billion endowment system-wide. Can we include that here? --Eustressmeister (talk) 15:43, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Rutgers University[edit]

Rutgers reached 1 billion in December 2015. [1] Itsnotmyfault1 (talk) 20:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)