A data story about higher education philanthropy and institutional complexity

The Money That Doesn't Move

Universities hold billions of dollars intended for students, scholarships, research, faculty, and public impact.

Some of that money quietly sits unused for years.

The core problem

The issue is not always a lack of money. Often, it is a lack of visibility, interpretation, ownership, and follow-through.

Act I · The scale

Higher education philanthropy is massive.

In FY25, participating institutions reported roughly $944.3 billion in endowment assets and withdrew $33.4 billion. Public reporting on CASE's Voluntary Support of Education survey estimated about $78 billion in annual higher-ed giving.

Endowment assets $944.3B

Reported by participating institutions in FY25.

Annual giving $78B

Estimated through public reporting on CASE VSE.

Endowment withdrawals $33.4B

Money moved from endowments into institutional use.

This money is meant to move into scholarships, laboratories, faculty work, student support, and public benefit.

The structure

But donor money is rarely one big pool.

Many philanthropic funds are restricted to a specific purpose: a scholarship, a research area, a department, a faculty role, a student population, or a program.

That structure protects donor intent. It also creates thousands of small operational decisions.

657 institutions in the FY25 NACUBO/Commonfund study
Permanently restricted
Temporarily restricted
Quasi-endowment

Higher-ed philanthropy is a portfolio of purpose-specific commitments, not one unrestricted account.

Act II · The freeze

Available money can still become inactive money.

When visibility is low, rules are unclear, and ownership is fragmented, impact can stall even when money is available.

What a fund really is

The balance is the easy part.

A donor fund is not just a number in an account. It carries purpose language, donor intent, restrictions, history, financial activity, institutional interpretation, and approval pathways.

A balance can be visible while the fund itself remains hard to use.

Example fund

Scholarship Support Fund

Balance$250K
PurposeStudent support
RestrictionEligibility rules
InterpretationUnclear
OwnerMultiple stakeholders
StatusNeeds plan

The interpretation problem

Would you know how to spend this?

Imagine you are responsible for using a donor fund. You are not an attorney. You are not a donor-intent specialist. But before spending, you are expected to interpret language like this correctly.

The Fund shall be used to provide support for undergraduate students enrolled full-time at the University who demonstrate academic promise and whose educational pursuits are consistent with the charitable intent expressed by the Donor.

Preference shall be given to students with demonstrated financial need, as determined by applicable institutional methodology, provided that such preference shall not be interpreted to exclude students otherwise eligible under University policy.

Awards may be made to students pursuing programs of study within disciplines aligned with the Donor’s stated interest in expanding access to educational opportunity, civic leadership, scientific inquiry, and community benefit.

If, in the judgment of the University, the original purpose of the Fund becomes impracticable, impossible to administer, or inconsistent with applicable law or institutional policy, the University may apply the Fund to a purpose that most nearly approximates the Donor’s original charitable intent.

Expenditures shall be consistent with the Fund’s purpose, University policy, applicable foundation procedures, and any relevant stewardship or reporting obligations associated with the gift.

Pause

Give up yet?

People with roughly your same level of training in donor-intent interpretation are often asked to decide whether money can be spent from language like this.

The Fund may also support related educational costs, provided such costs are reasonably connected to student success and do not conflict with the donor’s expressed preference for direct student benefit.

The University shall retain reasonable discretion to determine award timing, recipient selection procedures, and coordination with other forms of institutional aid, provided that such administration remains consistent with the Fund’s stated purpose.

Any unused distributable balance may be carried forward for future use consistent with the Fund purpose unless otherwise required by applicable law, institutional policy, or the terms of a separate written agreement.

The hidden failure mode

“I didn’t know this money existed.”
“And even if it does, I’m not sure what it can pay for.”

How inactivity hides

Funds rarely announce that they are stuck.

Some were used years ago and quietly stopped. Some receive annual endowment distributions, but spending never catches up. Others have existed for years without ever being activated.

Used, then dormant 3+ years inactive
Annual distribution, low spend Recurring underspend
Created, never activated No activity since inception

Act III · The intervention

The fix was operational, not financial.

The work was to identify underspent funds, review historical activity, interpret purpose language, contact the people closest to the money, diagnose the barrier, and stay with the issue until a plan existed.

Before intervention

Trial-and-error becomes the process.

A department submits an expense and hopes it qualifies. If the answer is unclear, emails circulate. Someone answers part of the question. Ownership shifts.

Everyone touches the problem. No one owns the outcome.

Expense submitted
Purpose unclear
Emails circulate
Partial answer
Funding remains unused

After intervention

A facilitator turns ambiguity into action.

Departments and fund managers were asked: What is preventing use? What information is missing? What would make you confident acting?

This is not about making the problem more complex. It is about giving it sustained attention.

Identify
Review
Interpret
Engage
Resolve
Activate

A real-world consequence

A scholarship fund existed for decades.

Students qualified every year. The criteria were broad enough for the fund to support many of them. But responsibility for awarding was unclear, and no consistent process existed to move the money from available balance to student aid.

Once stakeholders aligned and ownership was clarified, students received support without needing to do anything differently.

Scholarship fund exists
Students qualify
Ownership unclear
No consistent awarding process
Stakeholders aligned
Students receive aid

Act IV · Impact

Money that had been stuck in ambiguity became money with a path.

Identified as spendable $13M+
Committed to plans $10M+
Activation after structured review

The strongest lever

Scholarships moved when ownership was shared.

Previously underspent scholarship funds were awarded far more consistently once financial aid and departments shared responsibility.

The difference was not funding availability. It was structure, expertise, and follow-through.

Shared ownership changed outcomes

Department-only 13% awarded
Co-managed with financial aid 87% awarded

The reframe

Donor funds are living commitments.

They are not static balances waiting passively to be spent. They require interpretation, ownership, operational systems, and sustained follow-through.

When institutions manage donor funds as active portfolios of impact, money begins to move.