{shortcode-d82fe80d0e1035db96e69f5a75263f56cfbdebd8}

In its ongoing crusade against academia, the Trump administration keeps hitting universities where it hurts: their pockets.

Though the past few months have brought huge wins for higher education — seven of nine universities rejected priority funding in return for political compliance and a federal judge ruled in favor of Harvard’s legal challenge against federal funding cuts — Harvard hasn’t escaped unscathed.

Facing a hostile White House, the University has taken difficult but necessary steps to cut spending. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences cut Ph.D. seats by more than half, the School of Engineering and Applied Science made cuts impacting about 15 percent of staff, and Harvard halted funding for over 500 research subawards at affiliated institutions, including hospitals.

Our current financial strategy is laudable, but it isn’t sustainable long term. To survive both the remaining years of Trump’s presidency, and the possibility of a future with little or no federal funding, it's time for Harvard to put serious thought into restructuring our endowment. In particular, scaling up recruitment for unrestricted donations and changing investments are vital to build self-sufficiency.

Currently, Harvard receives significant funding for its research from the federal government. In fiscal year 2025, two-thirds of research expenditure came from federal sources. In 2025, the University reported $629 million in federal revenue, not including the multi-year contracts and grants that were canceled and restored throughout the year.

But, over the last ten years, the percentage of Harvard’s revenue that comes from federal funding has steadily declined, even before significant changes to the funding landscape this year by the Trump administration. It is time to prepare for a financial future with significantly less of this crucial sponsorship.

Our endowment currently boasts nearly $60 billion, but most of it is tied up in funds that are earmarked for particular purposes. Donors direct funds to specific departments, schools, or uses, preventing the University from using the money indiscriminately.

Instead of relying heavily on these targeted donations, Harvard should conduct robust solicitation for unrestricted donations, building funds that can be pivoted for different uses in response to sudden federal or political changes. This year, Harvard received $1.14 million in donations over a span of two days, demonstrating the nation’s — and our alumni’s — appetite for supporting the University in times of need. Harvard stands to gain much from aggressive recruitment in pursuit of long-term financial stability, not just as a stop gap in tumultuous years like 2025.

Requesting donations isn’t all we can do to protect ourselves financially — endowment strategy also plays a vital role. Harvard Management Company does an exceptional job maintaining our endowment, with returns of 11.9 percent in fiscal year 2025. This is a strong recovery from the many years of low return rates, sometimes below the University’s 8 percent long-term target, that the endowment has seen in the last decade.

Operationally, however, our finances weren’t as productive. Budget cuts spread across the University, and we ran an operating deficit for the first time since the pandemic. Our current strategy rightly prioritizes longevity, but doesn’t account for a world in which a huge amount of our operational revenue is uncertain.

HMC typically invests a large portion of the returns back into the endowment, often making less than 5 percent of returns available for operations each year. Moreover, the Company tends to prioritize illiquid investments like private equity.

Now, in the face of an uncertain funding landscape, HMC must consider restructuring its investments to allow for faster mobilization of funds. Increasing the endowment’s liquidity diversification — i.e. holding investments with varied rates of maturity — could prove vital in times of crisis.

Over the next few years of Trump’s presidency, we will likely face further funding cuts, lawsuits, or other unprecedented challenges. Harvard must prioritize academic freedom and institutional independence, even if that comes at the cost of federal support.

This year was a strong reminder of just how disruptive financial challenges can be to our research. Grants from the Department of Health and Human Services began to trickle back to Harvard in September after United States District Judge Allison D. Burroughs ruled the funding cuts unconstitutional, four months after funds were first frozen. While researchers can now access these funds, the temporary break forced many to scale back or stop work, threatening entire labs’ work for years to come.

Harvard has been pummeled financially, threatened and punished more than nearly any other institution. Our visibility as one of the nation’s premier universities and our promotion of diverse perspectives and scholarship — including those that aren’t politically popular at the moment — make us a prime target in the culture war. Long-term financial freedom, though difficult to achieve, is necessary to preserve our independence and ensure the success of our core mission.

Talk is cheap, and in our case, inaction far too expensive. It’s time to put our money where our mouth is — that starts with the endowment.

Ira Sharma ’28, a Crimson Editorial Editor, is an Economics concentrator in Mather House.