Web Only

Hardly a day goes by without a college announcing jobs, programs, or spending cuts. You would think with all the brainpower at our colleges and universities they would be able to come up with better solutions than lopping off people, sections and services to students. But they don’t seem to. Why not?

Current college enrollment statistics have reached record-breaking levels, thanks to the approximately 4.2 million echo boomers who enter institutions of higher education every year. Fully 78 million strong, echo boomers are the children of the baby boomer generation, born between 1982 and 1995, according to U.S.

Today’s economic conditions are monopolizing discussions among leadership teams and boards of trustees at many colleges and universities. It is a nerve-wracking time, to say the least. Financial stresses now loom very large in pending decisions about enrollment, tuition increases, net revenue, financial aid policies, and discount rates.

Here are four immediate strategies to consider how to manage these challenges in ways that do not compromise an institution’s long-term strategy and sustainability:

Over the last two years, tax-exempt colleges and universities have become targets of increased scrutiny by the Secretary of Education, the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") and the Senate Finance Committee. With the looming budget crisis and an ever-increasing deficit, regulators are taking a hard look at whether these institutions are providing the public benefits commensurate with the tax breaks they receive as a result of their tax-exempt status.

The downward slope of a stock market graph is an image that parallels how quickly traditional college dynamics can submerge and alter a familiar status quo. Tradition is rooted deep in higher education, but these economic times call for emerging change.

Forget the labels and discussions targeting non-traditional student versus incoming freshman. Financial security is the buzz phrase now. Institutions across the country and non-traditional students by the masses both want the same financial fix.

For decades, the G.I. Bill has been a primary motivator for young men and women to enlist in the U.S. military, and Veterans Administration statistics show an increasing number of veterans are taking advantage of educational benefits. For many young people not necessarily able to afford college immediately out of high school, the promise of a free education is an opportunity too good to pass up. Yet, there is a large disparity between the educational benefits provided to veterans through the G.I. Bill and the full cost of attaining a four-year degree.

With more than 50 percent of all identity-related security breaches occurring on college campuses(1) and high profile cases making headlines nationwide, security and identity management are top concerns for higher education institutions. Breaches carry grim consequences—including potential loss of thousands or even millions of dollars, not to mention negative publicity, which can result in lost funding or decreased enrollment.

If your institution is swimming in appealing candidates for admission each year, more than you could possibly desire, then this article may not be for you.

For all other colleges and universities, the bedrock of a healthy applicant pool usually involves large-scale marketing outreach, often with the assistance of high-volume name buys--known generically as “search.”

As colleges and universities face the sobering realities of the economic crisis, one has to wonder: Is higher education approaching the perfect storm?

For many universities, funding allocations are at maximum levels, while some legislatures are already instituting significant budget cuts. Endowment levels for public and private institutions are questionable as economic woes curtail benefactors’ ability to give. And costs on everything from fuel to health insurance continue to increase with no end in sight.

Of all the fallout from the new IRS 403(b) regulations, probably the most important and pressing decision the regulations created for not-for-profit plan sponsors is how many active service provider relationships they want to have. The argument has been framed as a choice between exclusive single vendor relationships versus multiple vendor relationships. While plan sponsors struggle over this decision and examine the relative merits of both arrangements, plan providers are actively lobbying for an outcome that aligns best with their own solutions.