The year in which demographics and higher education enrollment operations will begin to intersect in very disruptive (to put it mildly) ways is just about upon us. While it has been talked about since at least 2018, the Demographic Cliff will begin in some regions in Fall 2025 and more broadly in Fall 2026.

While at RNL, I authored a paper that lays out 12 strategies that institutions can use to build alternative revenue (student) streams. Unfortunately, new data from the Census Bureau makes the development of these strategies even more critical. Why? Because these new revised population estimates, the first to be built on the 2020 (rather than the 2010) census data—indicate a second demographic cliff in the number of 18-year-olds will almost immediately follow the first one.

Two cliffs?

In the visualization below, you will see the original 2010 projection of 18-year-olds (dotted line) upon which Grawe and others began writing about an oncoming Demographic Cliff. You will also see, however, a revised line (dashed line) reflecting updated data from the 2020 census that projects a second decline almost immediately following the first. So, after an initial loss of nearly 330,000 fewer target undergraduates, we will see temporary growth as a result of a post-Great Recession baby boom (+55,000), but the second cliff will see additional contraction of 375,000 more target undergraduates. By the end of that decade, institutions will have nearly two-thirds of a million fewer target undergraduates than they did this fall.

U.S. Census data on actual and projected numbers of 18-year olds in the U.S.

Uneven change

Nathan Grawe’s 2018 book, Demographics and the Demand for Higher Education, provides a comprehensive analysis of what is on the horizon. Among dozens of informative charts and tables, his state level projections of change among “college-going” students (calculated using data on 18-year-olds and the other hypotheses laid out in the book) are among the most important. He states, “When population figures are adjusted for the probability of college-going, the situation looks a bit worse (than just the 18-year old data) in two-thirds of the locations.”

Nathan Grawe's Projections of Forecasted growth of 18-year-olds in U.S. (2012-2029)

Twenty-seven states are projected to contract by more than 15 percent in college-going students (9 west and 15 east of the Mississippi) while 3 more will see as much as 15 percent. Eleven states will see lesser contraction. Only nine states will growth, indicating that for most of the country, enrollment stability (or growth) will require institutions to rethink how they attract and enroll students – or lower their entrance requirements in order to fill their classes. In what follows, we offer a way forward.

What should institutions do to meet the challenge of two demographic cliffs?

Institutions should clearly take steps to maximize enrollment among their traditional undergraduates, but perhaps more importantly they must take steps to diversify and strengthen alternative student audiences. With this in mind, the RNL paper presents two sets of action steps for consideration - one to diversify student audiences, and one to shore up the traditional undergraduate foundation. Here are the first three recommendations:

1. Expand online programming. On which programs should institution focus? Among the 15 most popular online programs at both levels are: business administration, computer science, accounting, psychology, nursing, and healthcare administration. Institutions seeking to differentiate their programs should not look for niche topics but should ensure that high demand programs offer features and specializations that do the work to distinguish programs in a crowded market.

2. Focus on master’s programs that will advance careers. Institutions need to ensure that the curriculum for their master’s programs is infused with career-relevant skills, strategies, and practical, career-related simulations. They must also ensure that messaging leads with these career preparation aspects. Institutions that resist the idea that the primary mission of graduate education (or, increasingly, undergraduate) is to prepare students for successful careers—with the skills needed to succeed—will lose to programs that embrace this mission.

3. Align graduate and online programs with student expectations and behaviors. How do institutions “win” the student under current conditions? Align programs with the expectations and needs of students – as stated by them, rather than by your instinct about what they need. RNL’s four national studies of online students and graduate students since 2021 provide in-depth insights into what students expect in their program. The most important factors are: programs that prepare students for careers – including applicable skills; programs that respond quickly to inquiries, subsequent questions, and applications; programs that maximize affordability through tuition, aid, credit transfer policies, and reasonable credit requirements; and, programs in which the student can “customize” their content to match their interests through concentrations, electives, and options in culminating experiences.

Download the report I wrote while at RNL to read more about the other strategies that will help you plan for a healthy enrollment future, which includes detailed strategies concerning:

1. Developing meaningful strategies to attract those with some college, no degree.

2. Bringing graduate and online marketing, recruitment, and admissions in from the cold.

3. Bringing AI into your programs.

4. Infusing AI into your operations in order to maximize conversion – and enrollment.

5. Expanding undergraduate access to individual online courses.

6. Applying digital marketing techniques used among other populations to your undergraduate strategy.

7. Increasing the focus on undergraduate retention and success – including career preparation.

This article is based on a blog post I contributed to the RNL Blog in September 2024.