One particular strength of ALL the SMCs is their alumni network (Citadel, Norwich, VMI, TAMU, in particular). Part and parcel to this strength is the exceptionally robust record of alumni giving to their alma mater that tends to accompany the virility of those alumni networks. Basically, SMC grads give lots of money to their alma mater. In fact, they are almost "notorious" for it. As the president of a public college, I would be thrilled to have a 10% giving rate for all alumni. For instance, the strongest percentage for all ten University of California campuses is 12%--12, man, 12--which is at UC Berkeley (UCLA, UC Merced, UC Santa Barbara, and UCSD were near, but did not quite reach, that 12% number and are also considered to have excellent rates of alumni giving). Simultaneously, SMCs boast rates triple what the best civilian colleges post. 35% to 50% participation rates are not out of the ordinary in good years for SMCs--and near 80% for reunion classes in the 20/30/40/50 year anniversary celebrations.
Why does this matter? Since I am intimately familiar with Norwich, let me use it as an example and thus answer the question about why Norwich has the money it does. Norwich has done a tremendous job of cultivating alumni relations and yielding both broad alumni giving and high-dollar gifts (corporate and alumni). Their president for nearly 30 years (he recently retired) was a USCG Rear Admiral named Richard Schneider (full disclosure, Rich and I are friends and email each other fairly regularly, something which may skew my assessment--however, I know of not a single person in higher education who does not have the utmost personal respect for him and professional admiration for his deft ability in the field of "Institutional Development," as fundraising is known in the business). Because of Rich's (and his development staff) effective work in bringing hundreds of millions of dollars (perhaps nearing $1B) in alumni, independent benefactor, and corporate gifts to the university over the roughly 28 years he was at the helm (had to use a nautical term, given he is a Coastie) of America's oldest SMC, Norwich is able to fund the lion's share of the EFC for a high number of its Cadets (thereby avoiding reliance upon federal loans, grants, and subsidies), and the cost--in its entirety--for a meaningful portion of those Cadets. At the same time, Rich was able to appropriately position Norwich's financial portfolio so that it was both secure and grew at a rate which ensured annual withdrawal replication, but nearly always resulted in high yield ROI. What's that mean in non-college president BS speak? It means the funds Norwich has in liquid assets (unobligated cash in the bank or invested) is safe from catastrophic loss due to markets tanking, is ensured growth figures which exceed the withdrawn funds used to provide Cadet financial aid, and in nearly every year has actually earned a notably better return than the average of investment earnings for America's most prominent colleges. This is why he was there for 28 years.
As I tell folks all the time when they ask me what it takes to be successful as a college president: "it takes two things: good instincts; and, the ability to remember that no president was ever fired for bad curriculum. But I have never known a president to survive two consecutive years of budget shortfalls."
Ok, so, why do I say all of this? Norwich has a ridiculous amount of money in its institutional endowment, and an equally impressive stash in its unrestricted student aid fund. Norwich has and will increasingly have a deep well to draw financial aid from.
***A word to the wise parent(s) of a college-bound student: no matter what type of school your DD and/or DS are considering attending, the best schools have three things: 1) strong alumni AND corporate giving; 2) good aid packages; and 3) a disproportionately high ROI for their education in the 20 to 50 year post-graduation range (between 0 to 20 years the data is both fairly meager/inconsistent, and most grads are building their families, lives, and careers during those years--and professional success and enduring personal happiness will come for them later. Remember how it was when you were between 21 and 41? Exactly!). Look for these things with an eagle-eye. As an industry insider, I assure you these indicators are perhaps the most effective in correlating quality of education provided, that institution's alumni perception of their experience and value of what they received (and, hence, how confident they eventually become in the job market), and how the rest of the world perceives said institution (this relates most directly to corporate giving). Institutions that tend to perform well in these areas tend to have the most successful graduates. SMCs and SAs tend to blow the competition out of the water in these regards, across the board. While these are Heuristics, they have proven to be good indicators, nonetheless.***
Very respectfully,
