Key Takeaways
- COVID-19 caused unprecedented drops in college and university enrollment numbers, but not all schools were affected similarly.
- Public universities fared better than private universities, on average, in fall 2020.
- Many schools will admit more students for fall 2021 to ensure their freshmen class, but the most selective schools will admit fewer and remain very competitive.
- The increased rate of vaccinations will reduce the spread of COVID, which will help enrollments.
- Credit quality disparity between higher rated and lower rated institutions continues to grow.
Enrollments Declined At Two-Thirds Of Our Rated Schools
The pandemic has tested colleges and universities in unparalleled ways, and there is no doubt we will see the impacts for a long time to come. Back in March 2020, concerns around health and safety caused schools across the country to close campuses, which was the beginning of a year of academics taught predominantly online. As the school year comes to a close, we reflect on an unprecedented year. Leading up to the fall 2020 semester, schools were very concerned about enrollment figures and news reports predicted huge enrollment declines across the sector. While there were indeed some material declines, on average, enrollments were not as bad as expected. Now that we have assessed the final fall 2020 enrollment data for our rated universe, we wanted to share those figures to provide some additional clarity around what actually did happen to schools' enrollment and demand at the height of the pandemic.
Chart 1
The charts and tables in this report represent enrollment and demand data from the 439 four-year colleges and universities that S&P Global Ratings rates. As the chart above and tables in this report depict, enrollment impacts varied widely across the sector, with differences by type of school, geographic location and overall credit quality. Over two-thirds of our rated universe experienced a decline in enrollment last fall--68% of our rated private institutions and 64% of public universities. However, only 32 schools (27 private universities and five public universities) experienced very material enrollment declines (defined as 10% or greater). At the same time, about the same number of schools grew enrollment by more than 5% (24 private universities and 7 public universities). The vast majority (178) of schools that we rate experienced a decrease in enrollment of up to 5%, and 76 more declined between 5% and 10%. On the positive side of enrollment changes, 111 institutions grew FTE enrollment up to 5%. There was much disparity across the sector.
Table 1
Average FTE Enrollment Change By Rating Category, Fall 2019 To Fall 2020 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
% change | |||||
AAA | AA | A | BBB | BB+ and below | |
Private colleges and universities | (8.0) | (1.7) | (3.4) | (1.6) | (3.5) |
Public colleges and universities | (0.1) | (0.3) | (2.9) | (1.5) | (3.9) |
All rated colleges and universities | (4.9) | (1.0) | (3.2) | (1.6) | (3.5) |
Bifurcation between higher and lower rated schools
While many schools were having difficulty meeting enrollment and revenue targets pre-COVID, the pandemic exacerbated those pressures, by forcing a fundamental shift in business models for all. As the table above indicates, higher rated institutions fared better, on average, than their lower rated counterparts from an enrollment standpoint. On average, non-investment grade institutions experienced about a 3% enrollment decline. Public universities enjoyed stronger enrollment stability, on average, than private universities, and higher rated public schools, including many flagship universities, experienced minimal declines. Generally, lower rated institutions experienced greater enrollment declines--many of which had been facing enrollment pressure already. Our rated universe represents a diverse community of schools and many with strong demand profiles are doing fine, relatively speaking.
Table 2
Average Change In Various Private University Metrics, Fall 2019 To Fall 2020 | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
% change | ||||||||||||||||
FTE enrollment | Undergraduate FTE enrollment | Graduate FTE enrollment | Selectivity | Retention | Matriculation | Graduation | ||||||||||
Ivy League universities (8 schools) | (5.8) | (9.1) | (1.6) | (0.6) | (10.0) | (6.9) | (0.1) | |||||||||
Smaller institutions (<1400 undergraduate FTE; 69 schools) | (4.1) | (5.1) | 16.3 | (1.9) | (0.5) | (0.9) | (1.0) | |||||||||
All rated private universities | (2.7) | (3.7) | 5.8 | (2.5) | (1.4) | (2.0) | 0.0 | |||||||||
The Ivy League is a collegiate athletic conference comprising eight private research universities in the Northeastern United States. Its members are Brown University, Columbia University, Cornell University, Dartmouth College, Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, Princeton University and Yale University. The decline in selectivity rate indicates a weakening in acceptance rates. |
The Private University 'Phenomenon'
While, on average, total private university FTE enrollment declined 2.7% in fall 2020, we note several nuances across the space, from type of student/program to type and size of institution. As table 1 depicts, the majority of enrollment declines were at the undergraduate level, which is not surprising, given that the majority of the undergrad experience is typically on campus and in person. The swift move to remote learning was not palatable for many students, especially those freshmen embarking on their first year of college. For the most part, graduate enrollment grew during the pandemic (5.8% on average). In our opinion, this was largely driven by a weaker economy (i.e., a stop-and-start recession) and the fact that most graduate programs were already offered online to some extent and the transition was more natural. We rate 69 private institutions which we define as "smaller," meaning they enroll fewer than 1,400 undergraduate FTE students, and annual fluctuations in enrollment can be more impactful given their size. On average, while undergraduates declined, graduate FTE enrollment grew 16.3% for these schools in fall 2020.
Chart 2
We also saw a material, and perhaps surprising, decrease in applications, matriculants, and total enrollment at most Ivy League institutions. These schools are some of the most selective institutions in higher education, with acceptance rates hovering around 5% or lower. Most of them maintain premier undergraduate and graduate offerings and substantial endowments, and many of them opted not to take any emergency federal funding during the pandemic. While these specific declines in demand were unexpected, we view them as attributable to pandemic-related anomalies and not a long-term shift in demand. Many of these institutions were among the first to announce largely online fall semesters, which led to a higher number of deferrals and leave of absences. Other schools announced their plans much later in the enrollment cycle. For example, we understand that a significant number of admitted freshmen deferred their enrollment due to COVID, as deferral policies were generous at many of these schools. In addition, many students took a leave of absence if their class was not on-campus for fall 2020, affecting retention rates. Finally, many of these schools have a significant number of international students, which population declined this past year, especially at the undergraduate level, given limitations on international travel. We believe, however, that these institutions' exceptional market position and balance sheet strength will help them offset the enrollment and demand oscillations that have arisen due to the pandemic. We expect they will rebound back to their impressive demand and enrollment profiles in the fall.
Public Universities Remained Fairly Steady
The enrollment changes we saw for public universities was not as dramatic, on average, as what we noted in the private university figures. The average change in total enrollment was a 1.7% decline, and flagships experienced a better 1.2% decline. As we look across the figures, we see a notable mix in the demand metrics; while flagship universities had stronger enrollment and matriculation than regional public institutions last year, the second category of schools had stronger retention and graduation rates. Anecdotally, we heard from many schools with highly regional student draws that parents and students wanted to stay closer to home last year, which explains the solid average retention rates at public regional colleges in fall 2020. The same stark differential between undergraduate and graduate enrollment numbers exists for public schools; the higher undergraduate declines in some part due to international student declines.
Table 3
Average Change In Various Public University Metrics, Fall 2019 To Fall 2020 | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
% change | ||||||||||||||||
FTE enrollment | Undergraduate FTE enrollment | Graduate FTE enrollment | Selectivity | Retention | Matriculation | Graduation | ||||||||||
Flagship universities | (1.2) | (1.5) | 1.5 | (2.8) | 0.7 | (2.0) | (2.1) | |||||||||
Regional public universities | (2.0) | (3.3) | 4.2 | (2.8) | 1.2 | (2.8) | 1.4 | |||||||||
All rated public universities | (1.7) | (2.7) | 3.4 | (2.8) | 1.0 | (2.6) | 0.3 | |||||||||
The decline in selectivity rate indicates a weakening in acceptance rates. For example, a change from 60% acceptance rate to 65% acceptance rate is viewed as a negative 8.3% weakening in selectivity. |
From a financial standpoint, federal stimulus helped colleges and universities offset some of the revenue loss and resulting operating pressure brought on by the pandemic. The American Rescue Plan Act (ARP) represented the third round of federal money that was provided for colleges through emergency aid legislation, which combined totaled more than $80 billion. For public universities and colleges, ARP's $204 billion for states was significant as it alleviated potential cuts to higher education funding, which has been a key risk for this group.
Enrollment Impacts Across The Country
S&P Global Ratings began 2021 with 40% of our higher education ratings on negative outlook. As of May 26, this has declined to 31% negative, 68% stable, and 1% positive. S&P Global Ratings lowered 34 ratings and raised four ratings on U.S. colleges and universities in 2020, and year to date, there have been 12 downgrades, four upgrades, and three new ratings. Health-related measures--such as social distancing, COVID infection rates, and now vaccine distribution--have varied geographically and have had much influence on student demand across the country. With vaccine eligibility expanded to all individuals age 16 and older in April 2021, many schools have put vaccination requirements in place for students returning to campus in fall 2021 or have strongly encouraged vaccines. The increased vaccination rate in the U.S. and the current declining COVID infection rate could positively affect enrollment. We took a look at the enrollment figures by region to determine if some areas of the country experienced better enrollments last fall.
Table 4
Average FTE Enrollment Change By Region, Fall 2019 To Fall 2020 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
% change | ||||||
Northeast | Midwest | Southeast | West | Southwest | Puerto Rico | |
Private colleges and universities | (3.3) | (3.2) | (1.0) | (4.3) | 3.4 | (9.3) |
Number of schools | 131 | 54 | 62 | 24 | 11 | 4 |
Public colleges and universities | (2.4) | (3.2) | 0.6 | (3.1) | 0.4 | (21.2) |
Number of schools | 20 | 50 | 42 | 15 | 14 | 1 |
All rated colleges and universities | (3.2) | (3.2) | (0.4) | (3.8) | 1.7 | (11.6) |
Number of schools | 151 | 104 | 104 | 39 | 25 | 5 |
Notably, Puerto Rico's average enrollment declines are material (but this represents a relatively much smaller sample size of five schools). Enrollments in Puerto Rico have been pressured, on average, in the last few years by the weak economy and challenging demographics. A series of hurricanes, severe earthquakes, and the pandemic have exacerbated these challenges.
The majority of our ratings are located in the Northeast (151), home to the most colleges and universities in the country. We note that the average decline in enrollment of 3.2% in the Northeast is almost double the 1.7% average for the entire rated sector. The Midwest and West regions also experienced larger declines.
Regional factors will likely continue to influence student demand, as demographic pressures resulting from declining numbers of high school graduates are expected to continue, with institutions across the country preparing to face more enrollment stress post-pandemic.
Table 5
Average Tuition Change By Rating Category, Fall 2019 To Fall 2020 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
% change | ||||||
All ratings | AAA | AA | A | BBB | BB+ and below | |
Private colleges and universities | 1.8 | 1.3 | 2.9 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 0.7 |
Public colleges and universities | 0.9 | 1.5 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 3.4 | 3.8 |
All rated colleges and universities | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 | 1.2 | 2.1 | 1.3 |
On Average, Gross Tuition Increased--But So Did Financial Aid
In a "normal" year, many colleges and universities raise tuition at the rate of inflation, or in the past few years, 3% to 4%. As table 5 indicates, most public schools either froze tuition rates or increased rates very minimally in fiscal 2021. The average tuition rate increases for private universities were higher--1.8%, or double the 0.9% rate increase for public universities. With most schools experiencing weakened enrollments, net tuition revenues will likely be materially lower in fiscal 2021.
While tuition discount rates (institutional financial aid) have been rising for years, the average tuition discount rate for first-time undergraduate students at private universities reached an all-time high of 53.9% in fiscal 2021, according to the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) 2020 Tuition Discounting Study. NACUBO also reported that most students received grant aid in fiscal 2021 and were awarded larger grants and scholarships than in prior years. Average net tuition and fee revenue reported in the NACUBO study declined again and year-over-year, falling the most it has in a decade.
Environmental, Social, And Governance
Although many institutions pivoted to remote or hybrid instruction, modified resident hall accommodations to reduce occupancy, and implemented robust contact tracing and testing programs, enrollment dropped in fall 2020 as economic uncertainty impaired access and affordability.
At the onset of the pandemic, S&P Global Ratings took rating actions driven by health and safety risks, which we consider a social factor within environmental, social, and governance (ESG), when a substantial drop in service demand negatively affected an issuer's financial operations or--in the case of student housing projects--lower debt service coverage or draws on reserves to meet obligations while facing revenue loss. In the higher education sector, health and safety social risks stemming from the pandemic resulted in declining lease-up rates in student housing projects, calls for room and board refunds, the potential for state aid cuts for public universities and colleges as state budgets were pressured, and headline risk generated by an institution's inability to mitigate and contain campus outbreaks. These risks translated to credit pressure for higher education entities. Over the past year, S&P Global Ratings' revised outlooks and lowered ratings directly because of elevated social risks.
Vaccination availability and reducing COVID infection rates could help stabilize higher education enrollment. With vaccine eligibility expanded to all individuals age 16 and older in April, it is likely that higher vaccination rates and reduced COVID positivity will encourage students returning to campus in fall 2021 and will alleviate health and safety risks weighing on the sector. We believe these trends will help bolster:
- Enrollment through reinstatement of full-time, in-class instruction, collegiate sports, and extracurricular activities,
- Occupancy in student housing and use of facilities that generate auxiliary income, and
- Fundraising activities through scheduling large social events once the full easing of restrictions occurs with the potential achievement of herd immunity later this year.
Is Fall 2021 Going To Be The 'New Normal'?
High school seniors applying for fall 2021 have faced many challenges from the pandemic, from canceled college entrance exams to limited ability to visit and explore new campuses in person. Colleges ranging from the Ivy League institutions to state college systems postponed the requirement for SAT or ACT scores during the pandemic, which in turn encouraged more students to apply to more schools, and perhaps more "reach" schools. As a result, numerous schools have reported a surge in applications for fall 2021. This increase in applications is a positive indicator, but many schools are not increasing their acceptance numbers due to high deferrals from last fall, which has resulted in some record low admissions rates for fall 2021. We expect that application data, selectivity rates, and matriculation rates will be skewed this fall, but that perhaps by fall 2022, demand metrics will start to "normalize."
Related Research
- The ESG Pulse: 2020 Lookback, Feb. 15, 2021
- U.S. Higher Education Rating Actions, 2020, Jan. 28, 2021
- U.S. Higher Education Rating Actions, First-Quarter 2021, April 13, 2021
- A New Dawn For Shuttered U.S. Nonprofits In 2021, May 13, 2021
- A Tumultuous Year Presents A Major Test For U.S. Privatized Student Housing, March 8, 2021
- Outlook For Global Not-For-Profit Higher Education: Empty Chairs At Empty Tables, Jan. 20, 2021
This report does not constitute a rating action.
Primary Credit Analyst: | Jessica L Wood, Chicago + 1 (312) 233 7004; jessica.wood@spglobal.com |
Secondary Contacts: | Laura A Kuffler-Macdonald, New York + 1 (212) 438 2519; laura.kuffler.macdonald@spglobal.com |
Nicholas K Fortin, Boston + 1 (312) 914 9629; Nicholas.Fortin@spglobal.com | |
Nora G Wittstruck, New York + (212) 438-8589; nora.wittstruck@spglobal.com | |
Research Contributor: | Connie Zhong, New York; connie.zhong@spglobal.com |
No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.
Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. Rating-related publications may be published for a variety of reasons that are not necessarily dependent on action by rating committees, including, but not limited to, the publication of a periodic update on a credit rating and related analyses.
To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw or suspend such acknowledgment at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.
S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain non-public information received in connection with each analytical process.
S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees.
Any Passwords/user IDs issued by S&P to users are single user-dedicated and may ONLY be used by the individual to whom they have been assigned. No sharing of passwords/user IDs and no simultaneous access via the same password/user ID is permitted. To reprint, translate, or use the data or information other than as provided herein, contact S&P Global Ratings, Client Services, 55 Water Street, New York, NY 10041; (1) 212-438-7280 or by e-mail to: research_request@spglobal.com.