The 2026 Inside Higher Ed Survey of College and University Presidents captured the responses of 430 higher education leaders. And this data tells a story that goes beyond the enrollment cliff and fiscal challenges. From AI to Trump 2.0, the data exhibits the complex and intertwined risk landscape.
Let's jump into some of the key findings along with my two cents;
Fast-Growing Risks
The two fastest-growing institutional risks identified by presidents are financial volatility (45%) and political interference (43%), both of which have already materialized beyond earlier projections. By 2030, presidents predict AI (48%) and cost pressures (45%) will have the greatest impact on higher ed, though private nonprofit presidents identify cost pressures as most transformative.
What can be done?
Institutions must diversify their sources of revenue beyond tuition and federal funding. Regardless of which party is in control, political interference of any kind typically accelerates financial volatility. Now, with AI disrupting cost structures, institutions will be forced to innovate. All of these risks are intertwined, so viewing them through an enterprise risk management lens can also bolster institutional resilience.
Is the 10-year plan dead?
Presidential confidence in 10-year financial stability dropped 13 points in a single year. Institutions have quietly abandoned the decade-long strategic plan — 60% are now planning just 3–5 years out.
My thoughts:
This could be an opportunity. External disruption can support a more sustainable planning process, one that is more adaptive, with shorter-cycle elements (3-year rolling plans and annual strategic priorities), rather than a rigid document that cannot flex in challenging times. Institutions that can reallocate resources quickly, terminate underperforming programs, and respond to labor market signals will be best positioned to survive.
AI adoption is accelerating, but higher ed is not in the national conversation: 71% of campuses have formal AI strategies, up from 18% just two years ago. Yet, only 1% of presidents believe higher education has been effective in shaping AI policy and ethics. Institutions are implementing faster than they are leading.
What can be done? The mitigation is coordination: higher ed must speak with one voice on AI ethics before regulators, vendors, and public opinion make that decision for them.
Free speech and public trust: Only 2% of presidents believe higher education has been highly effective in rebuilding public confidence, even as 51% of institutions have launched trust initiatives. Campus speech climate ratings dropped from 85% to 76% in a single year, with only 29% rating the broader sector positively.
Going to be controversial here: The trust initiatives aren't working because they are largely internal — institutions are talking to themselves. I see a lot of confirmation bias and no real change. Public trust is earned, and that begins with ensuring students are career-ready. Invest in programs that meet labor market needs! Lastly, institutions need clear, consistently enforced speech policies that apply equally regardless of political direction.
Bottom Line: The risks identified in this survey are not isolated pressures but interconnected forces that require a more honest, adaptive, and accountable approach to institutional leadership. The good news is that 92% of presidents are committed to their work, and that resilience, paired with flexible frameworks, investment in building public trust by real action, not just words, and a visible posture on AI policy and governance, can help propel institutions forward. The institutions that will emerge strongest are not those that waited for stability to return, but those that harnessed disruption to innovate and lead differently.
Read the full report here: 2026 Inside Higher Ed Survey of College and University Presidents.