At the Edge of a Cliff, Some Colleges Are Teaming Up to Survive

As the higher education sector confronts historic enrollment declines, rising costs, and mounting financial pressure, a growing number of small colleges are forming strategic alliances, sharing services, or fully merging with other institutions in a bid to stay afloat and preserve opportunity for students. Experts describe this trend as a lifeline for institutions on the brink, offering a chance to consolidate operations, reduce overhead, and maintain academic programs in the face of potential collapse. Declining enrollment is the primary driver behind this shift.

Demographic changes, decreased trust in higher education, and concerns about return on investment have led many potential students to rethink the value of a traditional degree. Surveys now show that nearly two‑thirds of high school seniors question whether a college degree is worth its cost . Meanwhile, public skepticism over rising tuition and student debt has farther diminished demand, and institutions increasingly compete with online and career‑focused education providers offering quicker, cheaper alternatives .

The financial consequences have been dire. In the U.S., nonprofit four‑year institutions are closing at a rate of nearly one per week. Since 2015, more than 95 such colleges have shut their doors, impacting tens of thousands of students—most of whom do not complete their education after transferring .

For many institutions, operating deficits have become chronic. According to a report by EY Parthenon, up to ten percent of four‑year colleges are considered at risk of imminent collapse . The result has sparked hard choices: raise tuition to unsustainable levels, cut academic offerings, or explore major structural change.

Against this bleak backdrop, institutional leaders and policy experts are increasingly advocating for collaborative models that range from resource-sharing to outright mergers. A consolidation consultant has noted that colleges often exhaust internal fixes before recognizing that only external partnership or merger may avert failure . Mergers and acquisitions have become a prominent strategy.

Schools enter formal agreements whereby one institution absorbs another’s campus, faculty, or programs—effectively preserving student enrollment while defraying administrative costs . Northeastern University, for example, has pursued a chain‑buying model, merging with numerous private schools facing closure to keep their doors open . Public systems have also consolidated branches: in Wisconsin, the University of Wisconsin System merged two‑year colleges with larger campuses to save money and avoid shuttering campuses outright—even as enrollment halved at branch sites by 2023 .

In the arts sector, Seattle University and Cornish College of the Arts announced a merger agreement: Cornish becomes part of Seattle U while preserving its campus, allowing students to access broader academic offerings including graduate programs and facilities like athletics and libraries . The benefits of such partnerships are clear: expanded course offerings, shared infrastructure, and a stronger academic brand without total institutional collapse. At Adrian College, students can take courses from flagship institutions such as Michigan or Harvard through a shared curriculum network—preserving the Adrian experience while widening opportunity .

Similarly, the University of Highlands and Islands in Scotland consolidated constituent colleges and services to maintain financial viability, merging three of its colleges to optimize governance and staffing amid falling funding per student of nearly 19 percent since 2013‑14 . Nationally, Universities UK has convened a task force led by mergers expert Sir Nigel Carrington to study radical options—including federations, shared services, and mergers—to help financially unstable universities survive without direct bailouts . In the U.S., experts like Ricardo Azziz encourage colleges to accept external help and explore merger options early, pointing out that waiting too long dramatically increases the risk that a hurried consolidation will fail and harm student experience .

Administrators are cautioned to recognize long downward trends—such as decade‑long drops in enrollment of over 35 percent—and act decisively, guided by strong boards and leadership willing to pursue bold structural change . Critics of merging note that consolidation is not a cure‑all and carries risks. Mergers often require two‑year lead times to agree terms, seek accreditation approvals, and coordinate financial systems—a process that may be untenable for struggling institutions racing toward fiscal failure .

Sir Nigel acknowledged that mergers can fail as often as they succeed, particularly if both merging schools are in poor financial health without restructuring support . Still, many see consolidation as a preferable alternative to closure. Without intervention, closures inflict lasting harm on students: fewer than half of those attending defunct colleges transfer to another institution, and many lose credits or end their studies entirely, contributing to a growing number of Americans who leave college without degrees .

For remaining colleges, the pressure to innovate or collaborate has never been greater. Financial models rooted in international student revenue have also frayed; immigration policy shifts and geopolitical dynamics have driven down enrollments, making institutions vulnerable . Even in states such as New York, authorities are considering regulatory amendments to ease out‑of‑state mergers for private colleges facing closure, signaling a broader policy shift toward consolidation .

The trend is crossing into international terrain: Scottish universities outside major cities have merged or shared services to maintain solvency amid shrinking budgets and dependence on tuition, while retaining academic identity through federated governance . As institutions prepare for future risk, leaders point to three critical success factors: governing boards committed to change, strong leadership willing to accept external consultancy support, and early recognition of irreversible decline trends . For students, these partnerships offer continuity: degrees may still be completed with minimal disruption, and campuses may retain local character even as they become part of wider networks.

Yet challenges remain: protecting academic quality, navigating accreditation, merging faculty cultures, and ensuring student services are not diminished amid cost cuts. The consolidation movement has intensified amid growing urgency: a structural transformation of higher education is underway, as institutions at the edge of collapse turn to cooperation rather than competition to survive. Their choices may well reshape the landscape of American and global higher education in the years ahead, preserving access for students and safeguarding institutions that would otherwise vanish..