Prospective students tour Georgetown University’s campus in Washington in 2013. AP Photo/Jacquelyn MartinTodd L. Ely, University of Colorado DenverWith the Trump administration seeking to cut federal funding for colleges and universities, you might be wondering whether the endowments of these institutions of higher education might be able to fill those gaps. Todd L. Ely, a professor of public administration at the University of Colorado Denver, explains what endowments are and the constraints placed on them.
What’s an endowment?
Endowments are pools of financial investments that belong to a nonprofit. These assets produce a revenue stream, typically from dividends, interest and realized capital gains. The funds endowments hold usually originate as charitable donations made to support an institution’s mission. In most cases with higher education endowments, this wealth, which helps buoy a nonprofit’s budget, is supposed to last forever. Contributions to endowments are tax-deductible for donors who itemize their tax returns. Once these funds are invested, they grow generally tax-free. But beginning in 2018, the federal government imposed a 1.4% excise tax on dozens of higher education institutions with relatively large endowments. Few colleges or universities have a single endowment fund. That’s because the donors who provide gifts large and small to the school over the years direct their donations to different funds reserved for specific purposes. Harvard University’s endowment, worth $53.2 billion at the end of its 2024 fiscal year, for example, consists of roughly 14,600 distinct funds. All told, money distributed from endowments covered more than 15%, on average, of college and university operating expenses in 2024. Some of America’s institutions of higher education, however, lean much more heavily than that on their endowments to pay their bills.People pose for photos in front of the iconic Tommy Trojan statue on the campus of the University of Southern California in Los Angeles in 2019.AP Photo/Reed Saxon
How do endowments influence higher education?
Endowments can serve multiple purposes. In 2024, nearly half of all higher education spending paid for with endowment revenue funded scholarships and other kinds of aid for students, while almost 18% supported academic programs. Just under 11% paid for professors’ compensation, and almost 7% helped pay for running and maintaining campus facilities. More broadly, endowments can help shield schools from financial hardships and maintain their long-term reputations. When they’re set up to carry on in perpetuity, endowments must benefit both current and future generations. So when donors give to an endowment, they are arguably investing in the long-term viability of the institution. This long-term focus suggests that endowments aren’t just rainy-day funds or financial reserves.
Why can’t endowment funds be spent freely?
At the end of the 2023 fiscal year, U.S. higher education endowments held a total of more than $907 billion. That is a lot of money, but it’s still less than the combined wealth of America’s five richest people. Like individual wealth, endowment assets are heavily concentrated in the U.S. Many colleges and universities have small or no endowments. Nearly 60% of them total less than $50 million. The top 25, which includes several public universities in states such as Michigan and Texas, account for more than half of all endowment assets. And even when schools have large endowments, the individual funds that compose them are bound by a wide array of restrictions. Some of that money can be spent however the school would like. Other funds are dedicated to a clearly defined purpose. When endowment funds are restricted, the school gets little discretion in how to spend them. At Harvard, for example, there’s a Hollis Professorship of Divinity at Harvard University. It was established in 1721 through a gift from a London merchant. Based on the terms of that long-ago donation, the earnings and growth of the donated funds continue to honor the donor’s intent by supporting the position, regardless of what the university needs. Alternatively, endowments may receive donations that are temporarily restricted. Known as “term” endowments, the assets they hold can be used once donor-imposed conditions are fulfilled. Institutions frequently designate some of their unrestricted funds as “quasi” endowments, usually earmarked for specific strategic purposes. This board-designated quasi-endowment does not carry legal restrictions and can be spent more freely. About 40% of higher education endowment assets are subject to permanent restrictions, 30% are temporarily restricted, and 29% are reserved for quasi-endowment use.People walk past the Ray and Maria Stata Center on the campus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2019.AP Photo/Steven Senne
How are decisions over endowment funds made?
The decision-making authority over endowments typically rests with a college or university’s governing board. Those boards establish endowment payout policies that guide how much of the endowment and its earnings can be spent each year, while attempting to preserve the purchasing power of the investments over the long term. The policies take expectations regarding investment earnings and inflation into account, while smoothing annual payouts by using a percentage of the value of the endowment over multiple years as opposed to a single point in time. This payout tends to amount to about 5% of all assets. That share averaged 4.8% in 2024. U.S. institutions of higher education spent nearly $35.5 billion derived from their endowments in the 2023 fiscal year. Colleges and universities that depend more heavily on their endowment funds to cover their current obligations may choose to invest more conservatively. In recent years, many higher education endowments have obtained more complex investments, such as private equity, real assets and stakes in hedge funds. Endowments of nonprofit colleges and universities are also governed in most states by a state law known as the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act. This law encourages cautious investments and restrained spending. These restrictions mean that annual payouts are generally modest. That leaves endowments ill-equipped to respond to abrupt and large shifts in their funding needs. The John F. Kennedy School of Government, commonly referred to as Harvard Kennedy School, is a member of The Conversation U.S.Todd L. Ely, Associate Professor of Public Administration; Director, Center for Local Government, University of Colorado Denver This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Century City: From Hollywood Backlot to Business Hub
Century City, originally part of 20th Century Fox’s backlot, transformed into a prominent business district in Los Angeles during the 1950s amid the decline of cinema. Developer William Zeckendorf envisioned a mixed-use urban center, leading to iconic skyscrapers and establishing the area as a hub for law, finance, and media, blending Hollywood history with modern business.
Before Century City became one of Los Angeles’ premier business districts, it was part of 20th Century Fox’s sprawling backlot, used for filming movies and housing studio operations. By the 1950s, as television rose and movie attendance declined, 20th Century Fox faced financial challenges and decided to sell a portion of its land.
Traffic On 405 Freeway In LA With Century City In The Background
Developer William Zeckendorf envisioned a “city within a city”—a modern, mixed-use urban center with office towers, hotels, and entertainment facilities. Branded Century City, the name paid homage to its studio roots while symbolizing LA’s vision for the future.
The first skyscrapers, including the Gateway West Building, set the tone for the district’s sleek, futuristic skyline. Architects like Welton Becket and Minoru Yamasaki helped shape Century City’s iconic look. Over time, it evolved from Hollywood’s backlot to a corporate and legal hub, attracting law firms, financial institutions, and media companies.
Today, Century City stands as a testament to Los Angeles’ postwar optimism, westward expansion, and multi-centered urban growth—a unique blend of Hollywood history and modern business.
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
Local governments provide proof that polarization is not inevitable
Local politics help mitigate national polarization by focusing on concrete issues like infrastructure and community needs rather than divisive symbolic debates. A survey indicates that local officials experience less partisanship, as interpersonal connections foster recognition of shared interests. This suggests that reducing polarization is possible through collaboration and changes in election laws.
Local officials get to participate in events such as ribbon cuttings, celebrating projects they may have helped make happen. NHLI/Eliot J. Schechter via Getty Images
But things are much less heated at the local level. A survey of more than 1,400 local officials by the Carnegie Corporation and CivicPulse found that local governments are “largely insulated from the harshest effects of polarization.” Communities with fewer than 50,000 residents proved especially resilient to partisan dysfunction.
Why this difference? As a political scientist, I believe that lessons from the local level not only open a window onto how polarization works but also the dynamics and tools that can help reduce it.
Problems are more concrete
Local governments deal with concrete issues – sometimes literally, when it comes to paving roads and fixing potholes. In general, cities and counties handle day-to-day functions, such as garbage pickup, running schools and enforcing zoning rules. Addressing tangible needs keeps local leaders’ attention fixed on specific problems that call out for specific solutions, not lengthy ideological debates.
By contrast, a lot of national political conflict in the U.S. involves symbolic issues, such as debates about identity and values on topics such as race, abortion and transgender rights. These battles are often divisive, even more so than purely ideological disagreements, because they can activate tribal differences and prove more resistant to compromise.When mayors come together, they often find they face common problems in their cities. Gathered here, from left, are Jerry Dyer of Fresno, Calif., John Ewing Jr. of Omaha, Neb., and David Holt of Oklahoma City. AP Photo/Kevin Wolf
Such arguments at the national level, or on social media, can lead to wildly inaccurate stereotypes about people with opposing views. Today’s partisans often perceive their opponents as far more extreme than they actually are, or they may stereotype them – imagining that all Republicans are wealthy, evangelical culture warriors, for instance, or conversely being convinced that all Democrats are radical urban activists. In terms of ideology, the median members of both parties, in fact, look similar.
These kinds of misperceptions can fuel hostility.
Local officials, however, live among the human beings they represent, whose complexity defies caricature. Living and interacting in the same communities leads to greater recognition of shared interests and values, according to the Carnegie/CivicPulse survey.
Meaningful interaction with others, including partisans of the opposing party, reduces prejudice about them. Local government provides a natural space where identities overlap.
People are complicated
In national U.S. politics today, large groups of individuals are divided not only by party but a variety of other factors, including race, religion, geography and social networks. When these differences align with ideology, political disagreement can feel like an existential threat.
Such differences are not always as pronounced at the local level. A neighbor who disagrees about property taxes could be the coach of your child’s soccer team. Your fellow school board member might share your concerns about curriculum but vote differently in presidential elections.
Advertisement
Mayors can find themselves caught up in national debates, as did Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies in his city. AP Photo/Kevin Wolf
These cross-cutting connections remind us that political opponents are not a monolithic enemy but complex individuals. When people discover they have commonalities outside of politics with others holding opposing views, polarization can decrease significantly.
Finally, most local elections are technically nonpartisan. Keeping party labels off ballots allows voters to judge candidates as individuals and not merely as Republicans or Democrats.
Nevertheless, the relative partisan calm of local governance suggests that polarization is not inevitable. It emerges from specific conditions that can be altered.
Polarization might be reduced by creating more opportunities for cross-partisan collaboration around concrete problems. Philanthropists and even states might invest in local journalism that covers pragmatic governance rather than partisan conflict. More cities and counties could adopt changes in election law that would de-emphasize party labels where they add little information for voters.
Aside from structural changes, individual Americans can strive to recognize that their neighbors are not the cardboard cutouts they might imagine when thinking about “the other side.” Instead, Americans can recognize that even political opponents are navigating similar landscapes of community, personal challenges and time constraints, with often similar desires to see their roads paved and their children well educated.
The conditions shaping our interactions matter enormously. If conditions change, perhaps less partisan rancor will be the result.
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
Why Christian clergy see risk as part of their moral calling
As clergy join protests against harsh immigration enforcement, a religious ethics scholar explains why many Christian Clergy view personal risk—arrest, backlash, even violence—as part of their vocation to protect vulnerable neighbors.
A large group of protesters, including clergy, gathered outside St. Paul International Airport in St. Paul, Minn., on Jan. 23, 2026, to demonstrate against the immigration crackdown. Elizabeth Flores/The Minnesota Star Tribune via Getty Image
As Christian clergy across the United States participate in ongoing protests against harsh immigration enforcement actions and further funding for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, many are still pondering the words of Rob Hirschfeld. On Jan. 18, 2026, Hirschfeld, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire, encouraged clergy in his diocese to “prepare for a new era of martyrdom” and put their wills and affairs in order.
He asserted that “it may be that now is no longer the time for statements, but for us with our bodies to stand between the powers of this world and the most vulnerable.”
Hirschfeld’s words attracted a lot of attention, with clergy generally responding positively, though at least one priest argued that he “did not sign up to be a martyr” and had a family and church relying on him.
Other clergy have willingly facedarrest for their advocacy on behalf of immigrants, seeing it as a moral calling. Rev. Karen Larson was arrested while protesting at the Minneapolis airport. She stated that when people are being separated from their families and taken to unknown detention centers, “this is our call” to protest on their behalf.
As a scholar of religious ethics, I am interested in how Christian clergy and thinkers consider personal risk when they feel called to engage in social action.
Most data on the risks that clergy face in their roles as religious leaders comes from studies of religious leaders in institutional settings, such as hospitals or prisons.
Questions about professional risks became particularly acute during the early years of the HIV/AIDS crisis, when researchers were uncertain exactly how the disease was spread and caregivers feared they might acquire HIV through their bedside work.
In her memoir about chaplaincy with HIV patients, Audrey Elisa Kerr notes that Riverside Church in New York continued to organize funerals, ministries and support groups for HIV/AIDS patients despite “terror” in the wider community about contagion.
As a chaplain herself, Kerr says this story of “radical hospitality” inspired her to set aside her own fears and embrace her professional role caring for people who were ill and dying.
Advertisement
Priests and nuns of the Catholic Church who cared for HIV/AIDS patients in the 1980s risked both the fear of contagion and the disapproval of their bishops and communities, since many of the people they cared for were men who had sex with men.
Some felt, however, that they must care for those at the margins as part of their role in the church or their monastic order. Sister Carol of the Hospital Sisters of Saint Francis felt that it was simply her moral duty as a sister to “go where she was needed,” despite potential risk.
Examination of the ethical obligations of chaplains and clergy ramped up during the COVID-19 pandemic when at least some priest, pastors and hospital chaplains felt an obligation to continue visiting patients for spiritual care.
Risks in other institutional settings are not such a matter of life and death. Because of their professional preaching function, however, clergy in church settings do accept the risk of alienating church members when they feel religiously called to speak about social issues. Rev. Teri McDowell Ott has written about taking risks when discussing LGBTQ+ inclusion and starting a prison ministry.
Risk-taking during social protest
For many clergy, religious and ethical obligations extend beyond their work in institutions like churches and hospitals and include their witness in public life.
Many feel an obligation to preach on issues of moral importance, even topics that are considered controversial and might elicit strong disagreement. It is common for priests and pastors in conservative churches to include messages against legalized abortion in their sermons.
Tom Ascol of the Center for Baptist Leadership urged Baptist pastors to preach about abortion in the lead-up to the 2024 presidential election.
Rev. Leah Schade, a Lutheran minister and scholar, has argued that since 2017, mainline pastors have preached more often on issues like racism, environmental justice or gun violence. Schade says pastors are inspired to speak more bluntly about social issues because of their religious concern for people who are at risk of harm from injustice or government policies.
Some clergy view their moral obligations as going beyond preaching and leading them to on-the-ground advocacy and protest. Rev. Brandy Daniels of the Disciples of Christ denomination examines these obligations in an article on her participation in a group of interfaith clergy in Portland, Oregon. The group was convened by a local rabbi and supported protesters for racial justice in Portland in 2017. In Daniels’ analysis, clergy took on the risk of staying in the middle of protests and facing a violent police response in order to “bear moral witness,” something they were both empowered and obligated to do as religious leaders.
Advertisement
Risking their lives
There are more extreme cases in which clergy who challenged government leaders or policies were killed for their words and actions of protest.The official portrait of Archbishop Oscar Romero, displayed in the Metropolitan Cathedral for a memorial service in San Salvador, El Salvador, on March 24, 2018. AP Photo/Salvador Melendez
In a well-known historical example, Bishop Oscar Romero, canonized as a martyred saint by the Roman Catholic Church in 2018, was assassinated in 1980 after speaking out against human rights violations against poor and Indigenous communities committed by the government of El Salvador. Romero viewed himself, in his priestly role, as a representative of God who was obliged to “give voice to the voiceless.”
During recent protests against ICE in Minneapolis and elsewhere, many clergy risked arrest and bodily harm. Rev. Kenny Callaghan, a Metropolitan Community Church pastor, who says that ICE agents in Minneapolis pointed a gun in his face and handcuffed him as he tried to help a woman they were questioning, said, “It’s in my DNA; I have to speak up for marginalized people.”
On Jan. 23, 2026, over 100 clergy were arrested at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport as they protested and prayed against ICE actions. Rev. Mariah Furness Tollgaard said that she and others accepted being arrested as a way of demonstrating public support for migrants who are afraid to leave their homes.
In Chicago, ministers have been hit with projectiles and violently arrested. Presbyterian pastor David Black was shot in the head with a pepper spray projectile while protesting outside an immigration detention center in October 2025.
As I see it, for these and many Christian clergy and ethicists, the call to ministry includes an obligation to express their values of care for vulnerable neighbors precisely through a public willingness to accept personal risk.
STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.
Todd L. Ely, Associate Professor of Public Administration; Director, Center for Local Government, University of Colorado Denver This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
