There are a lot of takes about Ken Griffin donating $300 million to Harvard. People are mad! The outrage is confusing and a little funny, because the reason is so clear: he bought his three kids spots at Harvard.
The kids are minors, and this isn’t their fault, so let’s leave them alone.
Harvard gives donors’ relatives big advantages in admission. Let’s look through a bit of quantitative evidence, some snippets from deposition and trial testimony, and then an instance of blatant spot-buying.
Regression results
Harvard marks applicants related to major donors by putting them on the “Dean’s list.” How much does that matter?
Here are the coefficients that Peter Arcidiacono, a Duke economist and the expert witness for Students for Fair Admissions, found:
So, being a donor’s relative isn’t quite as powerful as, say, being the national debate champion (which would merit an extracurricular rating of 1) or being the best mathematician in a generation (which would get you an academic 1). But it’s close! Being a donor’s relative carries more weight than a test score in the top 5 percent or being student body president (academic and extracurricular ratings of 2, respectively).
Testimony
Here are some skin-crawly excerpts from the deposition and trial testimony of William Fitzsimmons, Harvard’s dean of admissions, in the Students for Fair Admissions lawsuit.
Q: Is the amount that the donor has given … the amount of contribution that’s been made, is that a factor that is considered in the rating?
A: It would be one factor.
Q: So does that mean that the larger the size of the relative financial contribution, the more in a particular individual case it might affect the ultimate rating?
A: It would tend to go that way.
Q: So is admitting the children and relatives of large donors important to you and others at Harvard?
A: It is important for the long-term strength of the institution that we have the resources we need to.
(NB: Harvard’s endowment is about $50 billion.)
Here’s an ice-cold email from someone in Harvard’s fundraising office to Fitzsimmons in 2013. The fundraising guy is telling the admissions office that the grandson of a donor doesn’t need to be a priority for admission, because grandpa is dead.
“[Redacted] was a devoted chair and a generous donor. His later years were quite challenging based on having [redacted]. Going forward, I don’t see a significant opportunity for further major gifts. Had an art collection which conceivably could come our way, more probably it will go to the [redacted] museum.”
A tale from the Dean’s List
Here’s an email from the dean of the Kennedy School to Fitzsimmons in June 2013:
“Once again you have done wonders. I am simply thrilled about all the folks you were able to admit…Those are big wins, all big wins, and [redacted] has already committed to a building, and other names have committed major money for fellowships.”
What building was promised, we wonder?
Apropos of nothing: Idan Ofer, a billionaire, started making “generous” donations in 2013, including a building for the Kennedy School. His son, Gil Ofer, graduated from Harvard in 2017 – four years after the Kennedy School dean sent the email, and four years after the donations started.
I don’t like it any more than you do
Let’s keep the is/ought distinction clear in our minds here. I’m not arguing that it is good for plutocrats to buy their kids Harvard diplomas. But this is the way the world is. Diagnosing a fact isn’t the same as supporting it.
In fact, I think that reserving slots for donors’ kids is wrong! I’m pro-meritocracy. I wish academic merit alone sorted American high schoolers into colleges. I think the Arab system—in which all high schoolers take a standardized test (with rampant cheating, I know) and then are divvied up among colleges according to their scores—is a better approach than our sports-obsessed admissions mess.
Advantages for donors’ kids are doubly pernicious because college admission is zero-sum (unless colleges expand supply). Every heir who gets in takes one bed away from a normal kid.
If you want a clear-eyed guide to college admissions, so your kid has the fairest shot possible against the super-rich, hire me. I’m eager to work with your family!
$300 million is a lot of money, even for three kids. Couldn't he have guaranteed them spots with like $10 million?