4 ms·
Public universities are not profitable. Quite the opposite: tuition and fees cover only part of their operating costs; the rest comes from the government. In Ca
by jdale27 9y ago
Public universities are not profitable. Quite the opposite: tuition and fees cover only part of their operating costs; the rest comes from the government. In California, AFAIK, public universities don’t have endowments. Government funding of universities is seen as an investment in the state’s economy and in greater opportunity for all Californians. That’s the story at least.
Theoretically they should be self-sustaining on the large scale: education -> greater economic output -> higher tax revenue -> funding for education. Unfortunately that hasn’t really proven to be sustainable in California for a variety of reasons.
- ebikelaw 9y agoThe other way to look at it is that state universities are ludicrously profitable, but the boundaries are drawn in the wrong place.
- kccqzy 9y agoCan you explain what you mean? What kind of boundaries are you referring to?
- ebikelaw 9y agoWhat I meant was profit/loss and other systems of accounting are meant to sum up the quantities within and the flows across the boundaries of a given system. If you externalize all of the profit and internalize all of the cost then of course it's going to look like a university loses money.
- skosuri 9y agoUC's have an endowment (~$10B), and for UCLA (where I work), the state funds contribute to about 6% of revenues. Tuition is only about 10%.
- kenhwang 9y agoDidn't realize how close the UCs were to being essentially private universities these days. No wonder they're targeting higher percentages of out of state enrollments.
- kccqzy 9y agoBut still not as much as private ones. Even the highest, Berkeley and UCLA, have about 21-22% of OOS and international students. The remaining UCs have less than 20%.
- jdale27 9y agoThanks, I stand corrected.
- kccqzy 9y agoThanks for the numbers. I was a bit skeptical but I found sources: - student tuition and fees, 10.8% - state educational appropriations, 7.2% See page 37 of https://ucla.app.box.com/v/acct-pdf-AFR-15-16 https://ucla.app.box.com/v/acct-pdf-AFR-15-16
- ec109685 9y agoThat is misleading because they are counting their hospital’s revenue in the pie. That only matters if the hospitals are generating profits the rest of the university can use. Otherwise, the hospital is revenue coming in and costs being spent with no relation to the education arm of the system.
- amdavidson 9y agoThe hospital does account for ~33% of revenues[0], but the Med School and the Hospital also account for ~55% of total expenses[1] so it doesn't seem entirely unfair to include them in the revenue stream. 0: https://ucla.app.box.com/v/acct-pdf-AFR-15-16 https://ucla.app.box.com/v/acct-pdf-AFR-15-16 page 37 1: https://ucla.app.box.com/v/acct-pdf-AFR-15-16 https://ucla.app.box.com/v/acct-pdf-AFR-15-16 page 28